Official Journal C 297 Volume 42 of the European Communities 15 October 1999

ISSN 0378-6986 Official Journal C 297 Volume 42 of the European Communities 15 October 1999

English edition Information and Notices

Notice No Contents Page

I Information

European Parliament

Written Questions with answer

(1999/C 297/001) E-1263/98 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: Protection of the rights of animals under the Swiss civil code ...... 1 (1999/C 297/002) E-1652/98 by Angela Sierra González to the Commission Subject: Renewal of the EU-Morocco fisheries agreement ...... 2 (1999/C 297/003) E-2007/98 by Felipe Camisón Asensio to the Commission Subject: ‘Mediterranean ports’ pilot action (ERDF funds) ...... 2 (1999/C 297/004) E-2067/98 by Mair Morgan to the Commission Subject: Live exports ...... 3 (1999/C 297/005) E-2127/98 by José Pomés Ruiz to the Commission Subject: Aid for new company installations ...... 4 (1999/C 297/006) E-2138/98 by John Iversen to the Commission Subject: Animal welfare and the Belgian Blue breed of cattle ...... 4 (1999/C 297/007) E-2144/98 by Barry Seal to the Commission Subject: Review of eligible areas under RETEX Community initiative ...... 5 (1999/C 297/008) E-2149/98 by Honor Funk to the Commission Subject: Transport of live animals ...... 6 (1999/C 297/009) E-2167/98 by Vincenzo Viola to the Commission Subject: Granting of an extension of the deadlines for the admissibility of expenditure for the Ulixes programme .. 7 (1999/C 297/010) P-2206/98 by Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: Fisheries in the Netherlands Antilles ...... 8 (1999/C 297/011) E-2218/98 by Joan Vallvé to the Commission Subject: Stopping vessels’ fishing activities permanently ...... 8 EN Price: EUR 34,50 (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/012) P-2281/98 by Paul Lannoye to the Commission Subject: Pesticide residues in GM plants ...... 9 (1999/C 297/013) E-2293/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Lamb prices ...... 10 (1999/C 297/014) E-2295/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: EU beef exports to third countries ...... 11 (1999/C 297/015) E-2299/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström to the Commission Subject: Measures to prevent depopulation ...... 11 (1999/C 297/016) E-2307/98 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Cross-border cooperation on the treatment of urban waste ...... 12 (1999/C 297/017) E-2309/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Solid waste dumping in the Kouroupitos river bed at Hania ...... 13 (1999/C 297/018) E-2339/98 by Marie-Noëlle Lienemann to the Commission Subject: Rules on the labelling of genetically modified organisms ...... 14 (1999/C 297/019) E-2379/98 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Naples and the European Regional Development Fund ...... 15 (1999/C 297/020) E-2390/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Value of fish caught in Community waters ...... 16 (1999/C 297/021) E-2392/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Restrictions on movements of domestic pets ...... 16 (1999/C 297/022) E-2399/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström to the Commission Subject: Additional set-aside and sowing times in Finland ...... 17 (1999/C 297/023) E-2404/98 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten to the Commission Subject: European ban on the use of the pesticide Drione ...... 17 (1999/C 297/024) E-2513/98 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Expansion of the ‘Gardaland’ amusement park (Castelnuovo del Garda, Italy) ...... 18 (1999/C 297/025) E-2528/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: End-of-life vehicles/motorcycles ...... 19 (1999/C 297/026) E-2529/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Private imports of American cars to the UK ...... 20 (1999/C 297/027) E-2541/98 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Promotion of flower production ...... 20 (1999/C 297/028) E-2543/98 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Environmental impact assessment on a telephony station ...... 21 (1999/C 297/029) E-2545/98 by Kirsten Jensen and John Iversen to the Commission Subject: Pesticides ...... 22 (1999/C 297/030) E-2552/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso to the Commission Subject: Accidents at work in the EU ...... 23 (1999/C 297/031) E-2557/98 by Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: UK quarantine law ...... 24 (1999/C 297/032) E-2615/98 by Doeke Eisma to the Commission Subject: Quarantine laws in the United Kingdom ...... 24 Joint answer to Written Questions E-2557/98 and E-2615/98 ...... 24 (1999/C 297/033) P-2559/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Discrimination against the EU freezer-trawler fleet in Argentinian waters ...... 25 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/034) P-2560/98 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza to the Commission Subject: Future security at the Boliden company’s mine at Aznalcóllar (Doñana, Spain) ...... 26 (1999/C 297/035) E-2591/98 by Elisabeth Schroedter to the Commission Subject: Support for the ‘Friedrichshain Strategies, 1998-2000’ project in Friedrichshain, Berlin ...... 26 (1999/C 297/036) E-2630/98 by Arie Oostlander to the Commission Subject: Netherlands packaging requirements for milk products that qualify for subsidies under the EU school milk scheme ...... 27 (1999/C 297/037) E-2725/98 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Regulation No 258/97 on novel foods ...... 28 (1999/C 297/038) E-2764/98 by Armelle Guinebertière to the Commission Subject: Cessation of work on the proposal for a directive on the distance selling of financial services ...... 29 (1999/C 297/039) P-2862/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen to the Commission Subject: Distance selling of financial services ...... 29

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2764/98 and P-2862/98 ...... 29 (1999/C 297/040) E-2773/98 by Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: Subsidy for nature conservation areas in the Netherlands ...... 29 (1999/C 297/041) E-2793/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: LIFE programme ...... 30 (1999/C 297/042) E-2802/98 by Christof Tannert to the Commission Subject: Code of Conduct for European companies operating in third countries ...... 31 (1999/C 297/043) E-2812/98 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Evaluation of the packaging directive (94/62/EC) ...... 31 (1999/C 297/044) E-2852/98 by Umberto Bossi to the Commission Subject: Preservation of natural habitats ...... 33 (1999/C 297/045) E-2853/98 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Denmark and the Schengen agreement ...... 33 (1999/C 297/046) E-2854/98 by Ursula Schleicher to the Commission Subject: Waste water levies in the countries of the European Union ...... 34 (1999/C 297/047) E-2858/98 by Angela Sierra González to the Commission Subject: Construction of a bottling plant in Taguluche (La Gomera, Canary Islands) ...... 35 (1999/C 297/048) E-2882/98 by Niels Kofoed and Jan Mulder to the Commission Subject: Reduction of potato starch export refunds ...... 36 (1999/C 297/049) E-2885/98 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué to the Commission Subject: Fisheries ...... 37 (1999/C 297/050) E-2900/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Cooperative organizations ...... 37 (1999/C 297/051) E-2943/98 by Gianfranco Dell’Alba to the Commission Subject: B7-707 P Human rights and democracy in Asian countries ...... 38 (1999/C 297/052) E-2965/98 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Subsidy for Community fishermen affected by ecological bans in third countries ...... 38 (1999/C 297/053) E-2967/98 by Gisèle Moreau to the Commission Subject: Applicability of Regulation 1408/71 on the transfer of acquired rights ...... 39 (1999/C 297/054) E-2988/98 by Gerhard Schmid to the Commission Subject: Meat inspection fees pursuant to Directive 93/118/EC ...... 40 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/055) E-3010/98 by Cristiana Muscardini and Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: The political situation in Angola ...... 41 (1999/C 297/056) P-3016/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Substandard road construction in Greece ...... 42 (1999/C 297/057) E-3019/98 by Karsten Hoppenstedt to the Commission Subject: Prohibition on radio-controlled alarm systems in Belgium ...... 43 (1999/C 297/058) E-3022/98 by Florus Wijsenbeek to the Commission Subject: Public footpaths ...... 44 (1999/C 297/059) E-3046/98 by Honório Novo, Joaquim Miranda and Sérgio Ribeiro to the Commission Subject: Spanish hydrological plan ...... 45 (1999/C 297/060) P-3052/98 by Ursula Stenzel to the Commission Subject: ECHO ...... 46 (1999/C 297/061) E-3082/98 by José Pomés Ruiz to the Commission Subject: Application of Council Regulation (EEC) 3693/93 ...... 47 (1999/C 297/062) E-3109/98 by Ingo Friedrich to the Commission Subject: Book entitled ‘Konservatismus und Rechtradikalismus’ (‘Conservatism and right- wing radicalism’) ...... 47 (1999/C 297/063) E-3112/98 by Thomas Mann to the Commission Subject: Implementation procedures for the Leonardo programme ...... 48 (1999/C 297/064) E-3124/98 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: Oligopolies and milk market in Italy ...... 49 (1999/C 297/065) E-3129/98 by Brigitte Langenhagen to the Commission Subject: Distortions of competition in relation to the purchase of horsemeat ...... 50 (1999/C 297/066) E-3138/98 by Giuseppe Rauti to the Commission Subject: Mismanagement of vocational training funds ...... 51 (1999/C 297/067) E-3143/98 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: International literacy day ...... 51 (1999/C 297/068) E-3168/98 by Luciano Vecchi to the Commission Subject: ECHO humanitarian operations in North Korea ...... 52 (1999/C 297/069) E-3173/98 by Katerina Daskalaki to the Commission Subject: Participation of Greek NGOs in urgent humanitarian aid programmes ...... 53 (1999/C 297/070) E-3178/98 by Christian Rovsing to the Commission Subject: Medicine residues in horse meat (Supplementary Answer) ...... 54 (1999/C 297/071) P-3187/98 by David Thomas to the Commission Subject: Meat hygiene: Poultry ...... 54 (1999/C 297/072) E-3188/98 by Arthur Newens to the Commission Subject: Humanitarian aid to the Sudan ...... 55 (1999/C 297/073) E-3193/98 by Arthur Newens to the Commission Subject: Trade with Turkey ...... 55 (1999/C 297/074) E-3197/98 by W.G. van Velzen to the Commission Subject: Progress on the European Energy Charter ...... 56 (1999/C 297/075) P-3205/98 by Anne McIntosh to the Commission Subject: European overnight railway services ...... 57 (1999/C 297/076) P-3211/98 by Bernard Castagnède to the Commission Subject: Compensation for banana producers following hurricane Georges ...... 57 (1999/C 297/077) E-3220/98 by Laura González Álvarez and Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Irregularities in the awarding of a construction contract in Cerceda, La Coruña (Galicia, Spain) ...... 58 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/078) E-3223/98 by Luigi Moretti to the Commission Subject: Radio broadcasting ...... 59 (1999/C 297/079) E-3230/98 by Edith Müller to the Commission Subject: Business relationships with outside companies ...... 60 (1999/C 297/080) E-3234/98 by David Martin to the Commission Subject: A single market for opiates ...... 61 (1999/C 297/081) E-3238/98 by José Valverde López to the Commission Subject: Interreg initiative in Andalusia ...... 61 (1999/C 297/082) P-3242/98 by Georg Jarzembowski to the Commission Subject: Council inactivity in the legislative process ...... 62 (1999/C 297/083) P-3262/98 by Antonios Trakatellis to the Commission Subject: Reforms in connection with implementation in Greece of projects under the Second CSF and Cohesion Fund and list of projects with identified shortcomings and defective work ...... 63 (1999/C 297/084) P-3277/98 by Maartje van Putten to the Commission Subject: Chad-Cameroon pipeline ...... 64 (1999/C 297/085) E-3297/98 by José Barros Moura to the Commission Subject: Transfer of Macao to Chinese administration P troops ...... 65 (1999/C 297/086) P-3314/98 by Rijk van Dam to the Commission Subject: The detained leader of the United People’s Party of Azerbaijan, Alakram Gumbatov ...... 65 (1999/C 297/087) E-3349/98 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: The drug Viagra ...... 66 (1999/C 297/088) P-3357/98 by Georges Berthu to the Commission Subject: Transfer of national central bank gold reserves to the ECB ...... 67 (1999/C 297/089) P-3358/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Project for water supplies to Zaragoza and the surrounding area ...... 67 (1999/C 297/090) E-3369/98 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Semi-skimmed milk ...... 68 (1999/C 297/091) E-3370/98 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Karen people of Burma ...... 69 (1999/C 297/092) E-3378/98 by Gunilla Carlsson to the Commission Subject: Data protection directive ...... 69 (1999/C 297/093) P-3402/98 by Catherine Lalumière to the Commission Subject: Possibility for the European Union of Association for Craft and Small and Medium- Sized Enterprises (UEAPME) to participate in European consultations between management and labour as a fully fledged social partner ..... 70 (1999/C 297/094) E-3413/98 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: ‘Tuscia Qualità’ consortium ...... 71 (1999/C 297/095) E-3437/98 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Refuse collection in Rome ...... 72 (1999/C 297/096) E-3468/98 by Panayotis Lambrias to the Commission Subject: Regulation of duty-free shops ...... 73 (1999/C 297/097) E-3473/98 by Yves Verwaerde to the Commission Subject: Monitoring producer organisations in the processed vegetable sector ...... 73 (1999/C 297/098) P-3479/98 by Luciano Vecchi to the Commission Subject: Approval of projects carried out by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) funded by budget line B7-6000 74 (1999/C 297/099) E-3482/98 by Marialiese Flemming to the Commission Subject: Safety criteria for nuclear power stations in potential applicant countries in the former Eastern bloc .... 75 (1999/C 297/100) E-3488/98 by Anne McIntosh to the Commission Subject: European Union publicity material ...... 75 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/101) E-3489/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: Formation of the ‘African Democratic Congress’ in Lausanne ...... 76 (1999/C 297/102) P-3493/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Capitalization of interest and the failure to transpose Community directives ...... 77 (1999/C 297/103) E-3506/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Common organisation of the market in bananas (Agenda 2000) ...... 78 (1999/C 297/104) E-3538/98 by Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Siting of a solid urban waste treatment plant in Albudeite (Murcia, Spain) ...... 78 (1999/C 297/105) E-3546/98 by Jan Mulder to the Commission Subject: Extra US government support to farmers ...... 79 (1999/C 297/106) E-3558/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Mutagens ...... 80 (1999/C 297/107) E-3568/98 by Gary Titley to the Commission Subject: Alleged jamming of MED TV broadcasts by the Turkish authorities ...... 81 (1999/C 297/108) E-3585/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Implementation of the operational programme on natural gas ...... 81 (1999/C 297/109) E-3587/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Exemption of Greece from Directive 98/18/EC ...... 82 (1999/C 297/110) E-3593/98 by Jan Mulder to the Commission Subject: Affixing of a quality mark in order to identify organic agricultural products from the United States ..... 83 (1999/C 297/111) E-3596/98 by Ingo Friedrich to the Commission Subject: Independence of the European Central Bank ...... 84 (1999/C 297/112) E-3597/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen to the Commission Subject: Invitations to tender ...... 84 (1999/C 297/113) E-3598/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Environmental and health dangers facing the inhabitants of Samos (Greece) ...... 86 (1999/C 297/114) E-3601/98 by Alessandro Danesin to the Commission Subject: Common immigration policy ...... 86 (1999/C 297/115) E-3607/98 by Elisabeth Schroedter to the Commission Subject: The Cretan islands of Gavdhopoúla and Gávdhos proposed as priority natural habitats of Community importance as part of the Natura 2000 network ...... 88 (1999/C 297/116) E-3609/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: High-tension power line in Bal de Chistau ...... 89 (1999/C 297/117) P-3623/98 by Hilde Hawlicek to the Commission Subject: Procedure for the awarding of a contract for the drawing up of a study on cross- border fixing of book prices 89 (1999/C 297/118) P-3624/98 by Stanislaw Tillich to the Commission Subject: Calls for tender issued by the Commission on 18 July 1998: No 98/S 137-92959, No 98/S 137-92298, No 98/S137-92958, No 98/S138-91477 ...... 90 (1999/C 297/119) E-3632/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: NGO capacity-building in the developing countries ...... 91 (1999/C 297/120) E-3639/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Food aid to Russia ...... 91 (1999/C 297/121) E-3647/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Community fraud and political malpractice ...... 91 (1999/C 297/122) E-3649/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: UCLAF ...... 92 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3647/98 and E-3649/98 ...... 92 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/123) E-3648/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Exercise of power, Community fraud and political malpractice ...... 93 (1999/C 297/124) E-3680/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Environmental awareness park on the outskirts of Athens ...... 93 (1999/C 297/125) E-4096/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Environmental awareness park in the Athens region ...... 94 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3680/98 and E-4096/98 ...... 94 (1999/C 297/126) E-3687/98 by Michl Ebner to the Commission Subject: EU directives laying down rules for the catering trade ...... 94 (1999/C 297/127) E-3690/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Unfair tax treatment of Greek university staff ...... 95 (1999/C 297/128) P-3695/98 by Patrick Cox to the Commission Subject: Booklet detailing the rules of the road in the various Member States ...... 96 (1999/C 297/129) E-3734/98 by Aline Pailler to the Council Subject: International convention on the rights of migrant workers ...... 96 (1999/C 297/130) E-3738/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Abolition of duty-free sales ...... 97 (1999/C 297/131) E-3740/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Battery hens ...... 97 (1999/C 297/132) E-3742/98 by Maartje van Putten to the Commission Subject: Quarantine regulations concerning imports of pets into the United Kingdom ...... 98 (1999/C 297/133) E-3744/98 by Ulla Sandbæk to the Commission Subject: Appointments in GD IB and GD VIII to deal with women and development issues ...... 99 (1999/C 297/134) E-3756/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Counterfeiting and piracy ...... 100 (1999/C 297/135) E-3757/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Counterfeiting and piracy ...... 100 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3756/98 and E-3757/98 ...... 100 (1999/C 297/136) E-3769/98 by Susan Waddington to the Commission Subject: Treatment of British passport holders by French border police ...... 101 (1999/C 297/137) E-3777/98 by María Sornosa Martínez to the Commission Subject: Standardising qualifications for posts in the European civil service ...... 101 (1999/C 297/138) E-3779/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Aid for the pigmeat sector ...... 102 (1999/C 297/139) E-3786/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Public information about cargo on passenger flights ...... 103 (1999/C 297/140) E-3787/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Transport of radioactive material by air ...... 103 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3786/98 and E-3787/98 ...... 103 (1999/C 297/141) E-3789/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Export of live animals ...... 104 (1999/C 297/142) P-3805/98 by Marie-Arlette Carlotti to the Commission Subject: Eligibility criteria for decentralised cooperation programmes ...... 104 (1999/C 297/143) E-3809/98 by Barbara Weiler to the Commission Subject: Cases C-2/97 and C-49/98 (minimum social standards) referred for preliminary rulings ...... 105 (1999/C 297/144) E-3838/98 by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz to the Commission Subject: Football transfers ...... 106 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/145) E-3840/98 by Luigi Moretti to the Commission Subject: Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca di Stato (national mint and stationery office) ...... 107 (1999/C 297/146) E-3846/98 by José Valverde López to the Commission Subject: Stage reached in the transposition of the directive on the disposal of PCBs and PCTs ...... 107 (1999/C 297/147) E-3858/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: FIBA decision concerning basketball ...... 108 (1999/C 297/148) E-3860/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Construction of hospital in woodland in area of archaeological importance in municipality of Vari ..... 108 (1999/C 297/149) P-3865/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen to the Commission Subject: Enforcement of the Zoonose Directive ...... 109 (1999/C 297/150) P-3868/98 by W.G. van Velzen to the Commission Subject: Storage of nuclear waste from the reactor in Petten (Netherlands) ...... 111 (1999/C 297/151) E-3887/98 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: Application procedure for NGO funding ...... 111 (1999/C 297/152) E-3888/98 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: Funding for NGOs ...... 112 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3887/98 and E-3888/98 ...... 112 (1999/C 297/153) E-3909/98 by Pedro Aparicio Sánchez to the Commission Subject: Can an EU Member State apply two different directives to the same profession? ...... 112 (1999/C 297/154) P-3913/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Ecofin Council meeting of 1 December 1998 ...... 113 (1999/C 297/155) P-3915/98 by Sirkka-Liisa Anttila to the Commission Subject: Steps to improve animal protection in the European Union during the Finnish Council Presidency ..... 114 (1999/C 297/156) E-3918/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Ecofin Council meeting of 1 December 1998 ...... 115 (1999/C 297/157) E-3919/98 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: Rules on the manufacture and marketing of objects containing precious metals ...... 116 (1999/C 297/158) E-3924/98 by Michl Ebner to the Commission Subject: Recognition of hunting licences ...... 117 (1999/C 297/159) E-3932/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: The rearmament of South Africa ...... 118 (1999/C 297/160) E-3935/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Council Subject: Imprisonment of three Cuban journalists ...... 118 (1999/C 297/161) E-3968/98 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: ‘Improved stove’ programmes ...... 119 (1999/C 297/162) E-3969/98 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: ‘Improved stove’ programmes ...... 119 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3968/98 and E-3969/98 ...... 120 (1999/C 297/163) E-3975/98 by Raphaël Chanterie to the Commission Subject: Value added tax on veterinary services ...... 120 (1999/C 297/164) E-3986/98 by Heidi Hautala to the Commission Subject: Allocation of mushroom import quotas ...... 121 (1999/C 297/165) P-4012/98 by Gérard d’Aboville to the Commission Subject: System of export refunds P Amendment of Community Regulation No 3665/87 ...... 121 (1999/C 297/166) E-4017/98 by David Hallam to the Commission Subject: Discrimination against rural areas in the telecommunications industry ...... 122 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/167) E-4024/98 by Ben Fayot to the Commission Subject: Adverse effect of distortion of competition on Luxembourgish SMEs ...... 123 (1999/C 297/168) E-4030/98 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Checks on the ban on the production and use of animal feed derived from cattle ...... 123 (1999/C 297/169) E-4031/98 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Imports of beef and veal and of animal feed produced in third countries ...... 124 Joint answer to Written Questions E-4030/98 and E-4031/98 ...... 124 (1999/C 297/170) E-4035/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz to the Commission Subject: Dolphins kept in dolphinariums ...... 125 (1999/C 297/171) E-4038/98 by Wilfried Telkämper to the Commission Subject: Risks posed by EDF’s nuclear power station at Fessenheim on the Upper Rhine in Alsace ...... 125 (1999/C 297/172) E-4044/98 by Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: ERDF funding for the Lorca-Águilas trunk road in the Spanish region of Murcia ...... 126 (1999/C 297/173) P-4045/98 by Nelly Maes to the Commission Subject: Activities of the European information outlets financed under budget line B3-301 ...... 126 (1999/C 297/174) E-4046/98 by Ian White to the Commission Subject: Levels of MHS supervision in licensed slaughterhouses ...... 127 (1999/C 297/175) E-4065/98 by Esko Seppänen to the Council Subject: The Wassenaar regulations ...... 127 (1999/C 297/176) E-4067/98 by Sérgio Ribeiro to the Commission Subject: Access of immigrants from other EU Member States to civil service employment in Luxembourg ...... 128 (1999/C 297/177) E-4073/98 by Daniela Raschhofer to the Commission Subject: Commission research on Agenda 2000 for ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’ ...... 129 (1999/C 297/178) E-4078/98 by James Nicholson to the Commission Subject: Publication ‘The Raspberry Ice Cream War’ ...... 129 (1999/C 297/179) P-4088/98 by Luciana Castellina to the Council Subject: Future of the language sections in the European Schools ...... 130 (1999/C 297/180) E-4089/98 by Freddy Blak to the Commission Subject: Women in senior posts in the Commission ...... 131 (1999/C 297/181) E-4091/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Council Subject: European coordination of defence industries ...... 132 (1999/C 297/182) E-4109/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Council Subject: Infringement of the Treaty on European Union P UK participation in attack on Iraq ...... 132 (1999/C 297/183) E-0007/99 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué to the Commission Subject: Fisheries ...... 133 (1999/C 297/184) P-0010/99 by Werner Langen to the Commission Subject: Meat hygiene legislation in Rhineland-Palatinate ...... 134 (1999/C 297/185) E-0018/99 by Eryl McNally to the Commission Subject: Language costs ...... 134 (1999/C 297/186) E-0019/99 by Eryl McNally to the Commission Subject: Degree standardisation ...... 135 (1999/C 297/187) P-0023/99 by David Hallam to the Commission Subject: Poultry imports and residue testing ...... 136 (1999/C 297/188) P-0025/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Council Subject: Accession of Cyprus to EU ...... 137 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/189) E-0028/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Aitoliko Lagoon ...... 137 (1999/C 297/190) E-0038/99 by Giorgio La Malfa to the Commission Subject: Urban Forum measures in the Mediterranean ...... 138 (1999/C 297/191) E-0041/99 by Philippe De Coene to the Commission Subject: Availability of pharmaceuticals for horses ...... 139 (1999/C 297/192) E-0044/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Implementation of the TAXIS Programme for the computerisation of the Greek Inland Revenue ...... 140 (1999/C 297/193) P-0050/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Transaction fees for credit card payments abroad ...... 141 (1999/C 297/194) E-0077/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Demolition of Greek historic building in FYROM ...... 142 (1999/C 297/195) E-0092/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Community study centre devoted to Santiago de Compostela ...... 143 (1999/C 297/196) E-0095/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Spanish as a compulsory school subject in the United States ...... 143 (1999/C 297/197) E-0096/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Rural libraries in Central America to foster the culture of peace ...... 144 (1999/C 297/198) E-0098/99 by Alessandro Danesin to the Commission Subject: The revision of telephone charges in Italy ...... 145 (1999/C 297/199) E-0105/99 by Anthony Wilson to the Commission Subject: Scrapies in sheep flocks in New Zealand ...... 146 (1999/C 297/200) E-0139/99 by André Fourçans to the Commission Subject: Erasmus student exchange programme ...... 146 (1999/C 297/201) E-0149/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: 1999, International Year of the Elderly ...... 147 (1999/C 297/202) P-0153/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Establishment and operation of National Blood-Donation Centre in Greece ...... 148 (1999/C 297/203) E-0158/99 by José Barros Moura to the Commission Subject: Refugees in Díli (East Timor) ...... 149 (1999/C 297/204) P-0160/99 by Riccardo Garosci to the Council Subject: Additional commissions on euro transactions ...... 149 (1999/C 297/205) E-0188/99 by Angela Sierra González, Pedro Marset Campos and Laura González Álvarez to the Commission Subject: Nuclear power station in Morocco ...... 150 (1999/C 297/206) P-0226/99 by Sören Wibe to the Commission Subject: ESCB secrecy rules ...... 151 (1999/C 297/207) P-0227/99 by Ulf Holm to the Commission Subject: Arms export rules ...... 151 (1999/C 297/208) E-0235/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Contracts at Leonardo da Vinci airport, Rome ...... 152 (1999/C 297/209) E-0236/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Council Subject: Italian secret services report on the euro’s use for money-laundering purposes ...... 152 (1999/C 297/210) P-0247/99 by Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: Interpol conference on drugs in Burma ...... 153 (1999/C 297/211) E-0290/99 by Paul Rübig to the Council Subject: Protection for the European granite industry ...... 154 EN (Continued on inside back cover) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 297/212) E-0338/99 by Karla Peijs to the Council Subject: National sides of euro coins ...... 155 (1999/C 297/213) P-0373/99 by Olivier Dupuis to the Council Subject: Worrying state of health of Mr Ukshin Hoti and disappearances and arrests without charge in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ...... 156 (1999/C 297/214) P-0384/99 by Ursula Stenzel to the Commission Subject: Selection procedure ...... 156 (1999/C 297/215) E-0388/99 by Gerhard Schmid to the Commission Subject: Objective 5b projects in Bavaria ...... 157 (1999/C 297/216) E-0439/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Programmes rejected by the Commission’s DG X ...... 158 (1999/C 297/217) E-0469/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: Marche regional law discriminating against Freemasons ...... 158 (1999/C 297/218) E-0501/99 by James Nicholson to the Commission Subject: International Year of the Older Person ...... 159 (1999/C 297/219) E-0561/99 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Competition policy in the retailing sector ...... 159 (1999/C 297/220) E-0787/99 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Competition policy in the retailing sector ...... 160 (1999/C 297/221) P-0828/99 by Eva Kjer Hansen to the Commission Subject: Recruitment of officials without tests ...... 160

EN 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/1

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(1999/C 297/001) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1263/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Protection ofthe rights ofanimals under the Swiss civil code

According to reports in leading Italian newspapers, dogs and cats in Switzerland will soon enjoy rights similar to those ofhuman beings.

Attitudes to such animals are quite different in the rest of Europe, where they are subjected to all forms of ill treatment and do not receive the slightest protection, are often used for cruel fights (e.g. the scourge of dog fights) and experimentation and where vivisection is still practised.

Will the Commission take steps to ensure that firm rules are laid down in Community Member States as soon as possible in respect ofdomestic animals, such as the establishment ofcentres forstray animals?

Will the Commission also consider the idea ofproposing to Member States that a relevant clause be added to the civil code, as is happening in Switzerland?

Given that animals have no legal capacity, it could be decided that specific rules should govern the maintenance or assignment ofanimals in the event ofdeath or dissolution ofthe family.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 1998)

The Commission is not currently aware of any modifications to the law of Switzerland along the lines referred to by the Honourable Member.

In formulating and implementing the Community’s agriculture, transport, internal market and research policies, Member States and the Community are required to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals.

This principle is included in a protocol to the Treaty ofAmsterdam. The Commission does not, however, think that it is legally possible to confer rights on the animals themselves, therefore it prefers not to use the expression ‘animal rights’. C 297/2 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/002) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1652/98 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: Renewal of the EU-Morocco fisheries agreement

Morocco has made public its intention not to renew the existing fisheries agreement with the European Union next year.

Should this prove to be the case, it would have serious implications for the activity of the small-scale Community fleet. The fleet based in the regions of Galicia, Andalusia and the Canary Islands would be particularly hard hit: the grave threat to its future exploitation of the fishing grounds around the Canary Islands and Western Sahara would in turn bring redundancies and damage the production sphere in the aforementioned areas of Spain already afflicted by high unemployment.

In this regard the Commission must play a prominent role in the negotiations with the Kingdom of Morocco in order to prevent the fisheries agreement from being used as a bargaining counter on which the future of this important Community sector would hinge.

What is the Commission’s view of Morocco’s announcement not to renew the fisheries agreement with the EU?

What measures does the Commission intend to take in order to guarantee the future of the sector and of the small-scale European fleet which fishes in the fishing grounds around the Canary Islands and Western Sahara in the negotiations on a future fisheries agreement with Morocco?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

The Commission is aware of the statements by Morocco concerning non-renewal of the current fisheries agreement.

It will shortly engage in detailed discussions, both with the Member States and with Morocco, to identify various options for the future of fisheries relations with that country.

At the appropriate time the Commission will examine with the Member States what, if any, socio-economic initiatives it should take.

(1999/C 297/003) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2007/98 by Felipe Camisón Asensio (PPE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: ‘Mediterranean ports’ pilot action (ERDF funds)

It has recently been announced that the European Commission has approved various regional- planning pilot actions designed to solve similar problems affecting different regions in the Member States. One is the ‘Mediterranean Ports’ action which will concern Spain and Portugal.

Will the Commission give details, for each geographical locality under consideration, of the funding, implementation timetable and specific projects planned for the ‘Mediterranean Ports’ action?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 1998)

The pilot scheme ‘Gateways to the Mediterranean’, part-financed under Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) 2084/93 (1) on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) during the period 1997-99, concerns transnational cooperation between Portugal, Spain and Morocco in the field of spatial planning. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/3

For this pilot scheme, ERDF part-financing of ECU 5 million is envisaged compared to a total public cost of ECU 6,67 million for the part corresponding to Spain and Portugal. The eligible regions in the Member States are as follows: Lisboa e Vale do Tejo, Alentejo and the Algarve in Portugal; Andalusia, Estremadura and Murcia in Spain; all of the Objective 1 regions.

The financing of the part concerning Morocco is not yet settled. Possible part-financing of its participation by the MEDA programme is not yet decided. The Commission is awaiting a better definition of Morocco’s participation before taking a final decision on this pilot scheme.

Projects will be approved by the monitoring committee, according to the selection criteria laid down in the programme for the pilot scheme.

(1) OJ L 195, 31.7.1993.

(1999/C 297/004) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2067/98 by Mair Morgan (PSE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Live exports

How does the Commission intend to ensure traders who receive export refunds and who export live cattle from the EU to the Middle East and North Africa treat the animals in a humane way?

Does the Commission have any intention to encourage more external-EU animal exports on the hook rather than on the hoof?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

In order to increase the degree of protection to cattle being transported to third countries, at the end of last year the Council adopted a proposal from the Commission, under which the payment of export refunds will be subject to compliance with the provisions on the protection of animals during transport (see Regulation (EC) 2634/97 of 18 December 1997 amending Regulation (EEC) 805/68 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1)). Implementing rules have since been adopted by the Commission in March 1998 (see Regulation (EC) 615/98 of March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport (2)). Important elements are that each consignment of cattle will be checked when leaving the Community, while at arrival consignments of cattle will be checked on a regular basis or when there are grounds for suspecting particular risks by an independent vet. These rules will apply from 1 September 1998.

The Commission is not currently proposing to adopt any measures to discourage live exports which respect the applicable animal welfare rules. Export of live bovine animals is a traditional trade and as internal prices in the Union are above the third country prices, an export refund is provided. Export refunds have been paid since the beginning of the common market organisation for beef in 1968. In certain third countries there is a specific demand for imports of live animals. If the Union does not offer live animals for sale, other countries will do so and the Community will lose that market.

Export refunds for beef and live animals are fixed at least every three months and published in the Official journal. The export refund paid on beef is differentiated. The rate of refund varies according to destination. The present refund level paid for live animals other than pure-bred breeding animals to the destinations with the highest refunds are ECU 52/100 kg live weight for male cattle and ECU 22,50/100 kg live weight for female cattle, while for fresh meat of male adult bovine animals the refund rate is ECU 110,50/100 kg carcase weight.

(1) OJ L 356, 31.12.1997. (2) OJ L 82, 19.3.1998. C 297/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/005) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2127/98 by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Aid for new company installations

The State aid granted to new industrial installations is subject to a ceiling which, published information suggests, may have been exceeded when the Alfacel company set up a new installation in Dueñas (Palencia), thereby distorting competition and damaging the sector as a whole.

Can the Commission say:

+ what measures DG XVI is adopting to establish the total amount of State aid in question, including aid from State funds and that provided by any kind of public, local, provincial, regional, national or Community body?

+ how should DG IV proceed if it does indeed emerge that State aid has exceeded 65 % and reached 90 %?

+ does the Commission possess information or a file on the aid granted to the said company?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 1998)

The Commission has several mechanisms to prevent the ceilings on aid being exceeded. As a preventive measure, the Directorate-General for Competition is consulted on all programmes to be part-financed by the Structural Funds and the decision granting aid is not signed until it indicates its agreement. During the implementation of programmes, the Commission participates in the monitoring committees and in the ongoing assessment. It also receives implementation reports. It contacts the authorities of the Member States regarding any specific problems. After implementation of the programmes, the Commission takes part in the ex-post evaluation.

Despite these various mechanisms, the increasing number of programmes with aid schemes part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) can make checks difficult to carry out when aid could come from a variety of sources. This is leading, in the case of Spain, to demands for more sophisticated inspection mechanisms. As a pilot experiment, an aid register is being set up in the region of Castile-Leon. The Commission plans to extend the register to all areas eligible under the Structural Funds during the next programming period.

With regard to Alfacel, the Commission has requested further information from the Spanish authorities in order to check that the national, regional and Community aid paid to the company for its investment project did not exceed the cumulative ceiling.

(1999/C 297/006) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2138/98 by John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Animal welfare and the Belgian Blue breed of cattle

Because of their size Belgian Blue calves can be born only by Caesarean section. The breed can however be raised in the European Union so that in Denmark 7 000 Belgian Blue calves are born by Caesarean section. A case is currently pending between a Swedish farmer and the EU Court of Justice about whether Sweden can maintain its ban on imports of semen and animals of this breed.

1. Can the Commission confirm or deny that it is dangerous for cows repeatedly to have calves by Caesarean section?

2. In view of the animal welfare protocol adopted in the common agricultural policy, will the Commission take the initiative to draw up specific animal welfare criteria? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/5

3. Will the Commission take the initiative to ban this breed if Sweden wins its case in the EU Court of Justice?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

1. All surgical operations carry a certain risk, but if performed correctly by a veterinarian, caesarian section is a safe procedure, even if performed repeatedly.

2. and 3. The Community has legislation covering various aspects of the rearing, transport and slaughter of farm animals. Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (1) includes amongst other things a special paragraph on mutilations and breeding procedures.

The Commission has no plans at present to propose additional legislation concerning any particular breed of cattle.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.

(1999/C 297/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2144/98 by Barry Seal (PSE) to the Commission

(13 July 1998)

Subject: Review of eligible areas under RETEX Community initiative

In view of the serious and continuing losses in textiles and clothing jobs in the Yorkshire region, particularly in those parts of the region excluded from the current RETEX programme, is the Commission prepared to review the RETEX regulations to allow greater flexibility in the choice of eligible areas?

As the Commission knows, the European Parliament has previously expressed its wish to see at least the same level of flexibility applied to RETEX as is currently applied to the Konver Community Initiative. This flexibility is especially desirable since so many of the people losing jobs in the textile and clothing industries are women and are from ethnic minority communities which experience the greatest difficulty in finding alternative employment.

Answer given by Mme Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1998)

The RETEX Community Initiative, launched in 1992, was originally planned to run until 1997 but has been extended, with extra funding, to 1999. Under the guidelines for operational programmes under RETEX, eligible areas have to be situated in objective 1, 2 or 5b areas heavily dependent on the textile and clothing sector. Special emphasis must be given to concentrating on the zones within the eligible regions where the present or anticipated difficulties are the greatest. This has been particularly important for beneficiaries situated in the most disadvantaged regions of the Community. In the 1994 guidelines for RETEX the Commission maintained this definition of eligible areas.

The guidelines for Konver, also adopted in 1994, define the eligible areas in a more flexible way due to the different scope and relative importance of the defence industry in areas outside objective 1, 2 and 5b areas. This has allowed the inclusion in Konver programmes of zones that are not part of the latter areas.

With the end of the current programming period approaching, the new regulatory framework for interventions under the structural funds is being prepared. Considerable parts of current RETEX areas will be covered by the new regional objectives. In these circumstances the Commission does not consider it appropriate to review the definition of eligible areas for this initiative. C 297/6 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2149/98 by Honor Funk (PPE) to theCommission

(13 July 1998)

Subject: Transport of live animals

The chairman of the animal protection society has claimed that the EU has done nothing to alleviate suffering in the transport of live animals.

1. Is it true that every day animals for slaughter are transported long distances under cruel conditions to third countries, where there are no checks on whether EU criteria are satisfied?

2. Can the Commission indicate whether animals being transported long distances are now cared for appreciably better than was the case when evidence of cruel practices was documented on film?

3. Is the transport of meat supported with higher subsidies than the transport of live animals?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

Council directives on the protection of animals during transport have existed since 1977. The latest comprehensive update took place with the adoption of Council Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995 amending Directive 90/628/EEC concerning the protection of animals during transport (1).

Council Regulation (EC) 411/98 of 16 February 1998 on additional animal protection standards applicable to road vehicles used for the carriage of livestock on journeys exceeding eight hours (2); and Commission Regulation (EC) 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport (3) provide for better implementation of the current Directive and further proposals are in course of preparation. Although implementation of the relevant texts by the Member States has not always been uniformly satisfactory, the Commission takes the view that a substantial improvement of the welfare of protected animals has been achieved.

The Community can not legislate directly with regard to the welfare conditions of livestock transported beyond the territory of the Community. However, in order to increase the degree of protection to cattle transported to third countries, at the end of last year the Council adopted a proposal from the Commission, under which the payment of export refunds will be subject to compliance with the provisions on the protection of animals during transport (Regulation (EC) 2634/97 (4)). Implementing rules have since been adopted by the Commission in March 1998 (Regulation (EC) 615/98 (3)). Important elements are that each consignment of cattle will be checked when leaving the Community by the authority of the Member State of exit. Furthermore, checks will be carried out at arrival in the third country when there are grounds for suspecting breaches of the rules and on consignments of cattle selected by the exporting Member State on the basis of risk analysis. These rules will apply from 1 September 1998. The Commission is confident that for the future the new rules will achieve a substantial improvement in the transport of exported Community livestock.

Export refunds for beef and live animals are fixed at least every three months and published in the Official journal. The export refund paid on beef is differentiated. The rate of refund varies according to destination. The present refund level paid for live animals other than pure-bred breeding animals to the destinations with the highest refunds are ECU 52 per 100 kilograms live weight for male cattle and ECU 22,5 per 100 kilograms live weight for female cattle, while for fresh meat of male adult bovine animals the refund rate is ECU 110,5 per 100 kilograms carcase weight.

(1) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995. (2) OJ L 52, 21.2.1998. (3) OJ L 82, 19.3.1998. (4) OJ L 356, 31.12.1997. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/7

(1999/C 297/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2167/98 by Vincenzo Viola (PPE)to the Commission

(13 July 1998)

Subject: Granting of an extension of the deadlines for the admissibility of expenditure for the Ulixes programme

Because of investigations carried out by the Italian judicial authorities the Local Action Group for the Leader Ulixes in Pantelleria asked the Commission to suspend the deadlines for the Ulixes programme during the current investigations. This suspension was granted on 23 November 1995. Subsequently, on 16 April 1997 the Commission granted the Ulixes Local Action Group an extension of the deadline for admissibility of expenditure for a period of 19 months, during which administrative activity would be suspended. 31 July 1998 was set as the new deadline.

Since the Italian Ministry for Agricultural Policies only informed the Local Action Group about the extension of the deadline on 6 May 1997 and hence the extension granted by the Commission was in effect only 14 months, instead of the 19 mentioned in Decision (97) 996 of 16 April 1997, can the Commission state the reasons for this obstacle to benefiting from the entire 19-month extension granted previously and put back the actual final deadline to 31 December 1998, not least because of the serious administrative problems the Ulixes Local Action Group has experienced as a result of the unjustified suspension of the administrative activities envisaged for the implementation of the Leader programme for Pantelleria?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

On 6 December 1991, the Commission approved the global grant for the Leader Community Initiative in Italy for the 1990-93 Structural Funds’ programming period.

The decision fixed deadlines of 31 December 1993 for commitments and 31 December 1995 for payments by the final beneficiaries.

The deadline for payments by the final beneficiaries under the Italian Leader I programme was extended initially to 30 June 1996 by a Commission decision of 3 April 1995 and then to 31 December 1996 by a Commission decision of 28 July 1995.

The Commission can in certain circumstances, grant an extension of the deadlines for implementing requirements, such as the deadline for making payments, if properly justified. Thus, in cases where legal proceedings are under way, the Commission can grant an extension usually corresponding to the length of time the activities are suspended.

As regards the projects currently subject to legal proceedings, the Commission informed the Ulixes local action group and the Italian Ministry of Agriculture in a letter dated November 1995 that legal proceedings do not waive one’s right to the contribution, they just suspend it for the duration of the proceedings.

As the Honourable Member points out, the Commission, at the Italian Ministry of Agriculture’s request, granted the Ulixes local action group alone an extension to the deadline by which payments had to be made, from 31 December 1996 to 31 July 1998, because of the legal proceedings. This extension, following on the heels of the two earlier extensions to the Leader I programme in Italy mentioned above, was granted for the months in which the Ulixes local action group’s activities were suspended on legal grounds.

The Italian authorities informed us that the local action group’s activities were suspended from 25 March 1995 until 28 October 1996, i.e. for a 19-month period. The Commission accordingly decided on 16 April 1997 to extend the last date for the final beneficiaries to make payments by 19 months from 31 December 1996. An extension lasting longer than the 19 months suspension for legal proceedings was not justified.

In the specific case of the Ulixes local action group, it was able to resume activities two months before the deadline set by the Commission, since it was released from the legal proceedings on 28 October 1996. So, while the Italian Ministry for Agriculture’s request for a 21-month extension was accepted in principle, it was reduced by two months to take account of this. C 297/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/010) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2206/98 by (Hanja) Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Fisheries in the Netherlands Antilles

Can the Commission indicate why an export ban on fish has been imposed on the Netherlands Antilles?When does the Commission intend to lift this ban?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 1998)

Imports of fishery products from third countries are regulated since 1991 by Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products (1). It provides in particular for the conditions to be met by establishments, factory vessels and freezer vessels to be approved to place fishery products on the Community market. This Directive applies to internal Community production and foresees that the provisions applied to imports of fishery products shall be at least equivalent to those governing the Community production.

In order to fix the import conditions of fishery products from a third country or an overseas territory, the Directive lays down that the Commission shall take particular account of the legislation of the third country or territory, the organisation of the competent authority of the third country or territory and of its inspection services, the actual health conditions during the production, storage and dispatch of fishery products intended for the Community and the assurance which the third country or territory can give on the compliance with the standards laid down in the Annex of the Directive.

Commission Decision 97/296/EC of 22 April 1997 drawing up the list of third countries from which the import of fishery products is authorized for human consumption (2) requires the Member States to ensure that no fishery products, in whatever form intended for human consumption, are imported except from the third countries or territories listed in the Annex to the Decision. The countries or territories contained in the list have provided information and guarantees on these items. As an exception to avoid disruption of trade, the above decision allowed Member States to import on a bilateral basis fishery products from third countries and territories not included in the list up to 1 July 1998.

Since the Dutch Antilles provided to the Commission the necessary information after the date of 1 July 1998 it was not possible for the Commission to submit a proposal to authorize the imports of fishery products from this country to Member States. Therefore the Dutch Antilles do not figure on the lists of Decision 97/296/EC. As soon as the information received is evaluated, and it can be concluded that the sanitary conditions applied to fishery products in the Dutch Antilles intended for the Community market give equivalent guarantees to the Community provisions, a proposal to authorize these imports will be presented.

(1) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991. (2) OJ L 122, 14.5.1997.

(1999/C 297/011) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2218/98 by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Stopping vessels’ fishing activities permanently

Article 8(2) of Regulation No 3699/93 (1) of 21 December 1993 laying down the criteria and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries and aquaculture sector and the processing and marketing of its products, sets out the measures to stop vessels’ fishing activities permanently, and further stipulates that for vessels of less than 25 gross registered tonnes only the scrapping of the vessel may qualify for official aid. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/9

This implies that vessels of great ethnological, historical or artistic interest should be destroyed indiscrimi- nately a practice already applied to vessels operating off the coasts of the Balearic Islands and Catalonia despite the fact that they could remain seaworthy and continue to sail, whilst undertaking not to engage further in fishing activities.

Can the Commission say whether it intends to make the aforementioned regulations more flexible, so that stopping vessels’activities permanently becomes just one of a number of equally viable options and a suitable further use can be found for those fishing vessels seeking to cease operations under this procedure?

(1) OJ L 346, 31.12.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 1998)

In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) 3699/93 of 21 December 1993 laying down the criteria and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries and aquaculture sector and the processing and marketing of its products (1), assistance from the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) for the cessation of fishing can be paid in respect of fishing vessels of less than 25 gross registered tonnes only when the vessel is scrapped. However in certain individual cases, when a vessel is clearly of interest as part of the national heritage, its transfer to a museum may be regarded as scrapping.

The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member concerning the possible loss of old traditional fishing vessels but does not envisage any amendment to the regulation in force before the new programming period for the Structural Funds.

However, the Commission would point out that it will shortly resubmit a proposal for an implementing regulation which will specify the exact scope of structural assistance in the fisheries sector for the period 2000-2006.

(1) OJ L 346, 31.12.1993.

(1999/C 297/012) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2281/98 by Paul Lannoye (V) to the Commission

(13 July 1998)

Subject: Pesticide residues in GM plants

On 3 April 1996 the European Union authorized the placing on the market of glyphosate resistant transgenic soya and on 23 January 1997 a similar authorization was granted to glufosinate-ammonium resistant transgenic maize. Unlike the situation in the past, glyphosate and glufosinate-ammonium are now used post- emergence for GM soya crops and GM maize crops respectively. Soya beans and maize kernels from these transgenic crops could therefore contain residues of ‘their’herbicide or its metabolites. Certain information indicates that discussion is also taking place at present within the ‘Codex alimentarius’which is seeking to increase the level of limit values for herbicide residues (including glyphosate) in foodstuffs.

1. Can the Commission confirm this information on the discussions within the ‘Codex alimentarius’? If so, what position has been adopted by the European Union?

2. Can the Commission:

(a) What quantities of glyphosate residues have been found in transgenic soya beans which are resistant to this herbicide? What metabolites of glyphosate have been detected, in what quantities and what is their toxicity? What quantities of glyphosate residues and its metabolites are found generally in non-GM soya?

(b) What quantities of glufosinate residues have been found in transgenic maize kernels which are resistant to this herbicide? What metabolites of glufosinate have been detected, in what quantities and what is their toxicity? What quantities of glufosinate residues and its metabolites are found generally in non-GM maize? C 297/10 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

1. The Commission is aware that the 1997 joint meeting on pesticide residues (JMPR) examined the toxicology of aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). The JMPR’s report has not yet been considered by the Codex committee on pesticide residues (CCPR) but Codex levels for AMPA on maize, maize fodder and maize forage recommended in the report will be discussed at the 31th CCPR in 1999.

The Community’s position on residue levels is that they should be fixed at levels reflecting the authorised uses of minimum quantities of plant protection products necessaryto achieve adequate protection of the plants concerned, applied in such a manner that the amount of residue is the smallest practicable, particularlyin view of the protection of the environment and in terms of estimated dietaryintake. This is the basis upon which Communitymaximum residue levels (MRLs) are fixed and the policyunderpinning the Community’sposition in discussing recommended levels in Codex Alimentarius. However, the Communityinsists that full and adequate information concerning authorised uses and data from supervised field trials is submitted for examination for the fixing both of MRLs and of recommended Codex levels. The Communityis also prepared to examine the fixing of MRLs as import tolerances on the basis of submission of acceptable data.

2. (a) The Commission is, at this stage, not suggesting a change in the existing MRL of 20 milligrams per kilogram for glyphosate on soya beans which was fixed on the basis of data concerning authorised uses on non-geneticallymodified crops in third countries and is the same as the Codex. On the basis of examination of available data, it is not to be anticipated that an MRL for glyphosate greater than 20 milligrams per kilogram would be required on geneticallymodified soyabeans.

AMPA is the main metabolite of glyphosate. It is estimated that in genetically modified soya beans it may occur as a residue at 50 % of the glyphosate residue, whereas in non-genetically modified soya beans its presence is not significant. The 1997 JMPR concluded that AMPA showed little toxicityand had a similar toxicological profile to glyphosate. An acceptable daily intake (ADI) at 0-0,3 milligrams per kilogram was set for the sum of glyphosate and AMPA.

Data available to the Commission suggest that in general the level of glyphosate residues in conventional soya beans would not exceed 7 milligrams per kilogram.

2. (b) The Commission is not aware that glufosinate has been debated in the same context as glyphosate and AMPA. A Codex level of 0,1 milligrams per kilogram for glufosinate-ammonium on maize was fixed in 1997 and an ADI of 0,02 milligrams per kilogram in 1991. No harmonised CommunityMRLs are yetfixed for glufosinate. In this situation, Member States can establish at national level MRLs for this active substance, taking into account the residues resulting from the new authorised uses of glufosinate containing plant protection products on geneticallymodified maize.

(1999/C 297/013) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2293/98

by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Lamb prices

Can the Commission state what the average market price for lamb was, as paid to farmers in the different states of the EU, last month (or the most recent month for which the figures are available)? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/11

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

The average price in ECU per 100 kilogramme paid in each Member State to farmers for lamb carcasses in May 1998 (1)is as follows:

Belgium 380,1 Denmark 361,5 Germany 351,3 Greece 358,6 Spain 302,0 France 381,6 Ireland 331,7 Italy 353,2 Luxembourg 380,1 Netherlands 370,7 Austria 386,2 Portugal 319,4 Finland 178,9 Sweden 382,6 United Kingdom 383,3

(1)Latest definitive figures.

(1999/C 297/014) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2295/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: EU beef exports to third countries

Can the Commission provide figures to show the total amount of beef exported from the EU to third countries over the last three years and state what was the average amount of export refunds paid per kg?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 1998)

Exports of beef during the last three years were 1 199 255 tonnes carcase weight in 1995, 1 103 951 tonnes in 1996 and 1 050 034 tonnes in 1997.

Export refunds for beef and live animals are fixed at least every three months and published in the Official journal. The export refund paid on beef is differentiated and the rate varies according to destination. The present refund level paid for live animals other than pure-bred breeding animals to the destinations with the highest refunds are ECU 52,00 per 100 kilogramme live weight for male cattle, while for fresh meat of male adult bovine animals the refund rate is ECU 110,50 per 100 kilogramme carcase weight. For fresh meat of male adult bovine animals the refund rate has varied between ECU 110,50 per 100 kilogramme to ECU 169,00 per 100 kilogramme during the last three years.

(1999/C 297/015) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2299/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Measures to prevent depopulation

In the EU there are regions whose development is seriously threatened by depopulation. These include the EU’s northern peripheral regions. The population becomes concentrated in the cities and conurbations, where even greater social problems then develop. C 297/12 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

How does the Commission propose to increase the effectiveness of its existing policies in halting this depopulation? How will the Commission target its regional policy funding to these areas? The current programmes have not done enough to achieve this.

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 1998)

A high level of outward migration is generally taken as a sign of a lack of economic opportunities in any given region. Within the Community as a whole, the evidence is, however, that migration between regions and between Member States today is only on a limited scale.

The Community specifically targets the less prosperous areas under objective 1 of the Structural Funds, the problem rural areas under objective 5b and the least densely populated areas under objective 6. These are the areas most at risk from outmigration especially of the young and those with the most marketable skills and qualifications. The Community’s policies under the Structural Funds seek to create new opportunities in the assisted regions for the benefit of the resident population. The evidence suggests that they have had some success in the past decade in terms of reducing inter-regional disparities in income and unemployment. In that sense, the policies have contributed, alongside national policies, to limiting the scale of migration flows.

In its proposals for the future of the Structural Funds (1), the Commission proposes to maintain help to the less developed areas under objective 1 which, in the future, would also include the former objective 6 regions. Outside these areas, the Commission’s proposal for a new objective 2 would offer support to rural areas undergoing restructuring, for which depopulation has been included among the eligibility criteria. In addition, the Commission’s proposals for the reform of the common agricultural policy would allow for areas outside Objective 1 and 2 to be supported by rural development measures which would help to counteract the exodus of population from these areas.

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998.

(1999/C 297/016) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2307/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Cross-border cooperation on the treatment of urban waste

1. Which basic national and European legislation 6 similar to the technical regulations on air pollution control or the Federal pollution protection law in the Federal Republic of Germany 6 is the precondition for authorization of plants designed specifically for the thermal treatment and utilization of urban waste in neighbouring European countries?

2. Which plants for the treatment and utilization of urban waste in the EU are supported through EU funds and to what extent?

3. What legal requirements apply to urban waste from the FRG which is treated and utilized in plants in other EU Member States?

4. Does the Commission consider that a price of ECU 40 per tonne for heat treatment or utilization in a planned new plant in Esbjörg (Denmark) is realistic? If so, how can this price be justified and, in the Commission’s view, how will such prices affect waste flows in the FRG?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

1. and 3. Under the European law currently in force urban-waste incinerators must, inter alia, meet the requirements set out in Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on waste, as currently amended by 89/369/EEC (2) and 89/429/EEC (3) on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste-incineration plants. Once 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/13

Directive 96/61/EC (4) concerning integrated pollution prevention and control enters into force its requirements, too, will apply.

Under the structural funds’ programme approach the Member States or regions approve, on their own responsibility, any individual projects cofinanced by the structural funds, such as waste incinerators or recycling plants. Compliance with Community legislation is obligatory. In its 7th annual report on the structural funds the Commission estimated that in the 1994-99 objective-1 programmes around ECU 225 million were allocated to waste collection and waste treatment. However, in this context the Commission has no systematic data on allocations of or amounts granted to any individual installations cofinanced bystructural funds.

2. In addition the management and treatment of urban waste count among the urgent forms of action in terms of cohesion-fund environmental co-financing. The estimated amounts involved in co-financing in this sector for 1993-97 total ECU 77 million for Spain, ECU 268 million for Portugal, ECU 46 million for Greece and ECU 12 for Ireland. The following projects are either still in progress or have recentlybeen completed:

(ECU million)

Project Location Treatment Cost Support Status BM/193/85 Kalamata 8 GR Aerobic composting 1,21 0,4 Ongoing BM/196/91 Madrid 8 E RDF Incineration 83,59 1,50 Completed BM/466/91 Verona 8 I RDF Incineration 28,36 1,42 Ongoing BM/194/92 Tilburg 8 NL Anaerobic fermentation 11,00 1,64 Ongoing BM/238/92 Faenza 8 I Aerobic Composting 5,21 0,99 Completed BM/073/93 Kaiserslauten 8 D Anaerobic fermentation 7,25 1,01 Ongoing BM/349/93 Moerdijk 8 NL Waste incineration and Eligible 4,79 1,68 Completed Natural Gas BM/509/94 Bilbao 8 E Sludge incineration Eligible 4,54 0,56 Completed BM/080/96 Bizkaia 8 E Waste incineration and 148,00 3,00 Ongoing Natural Gas

4. It is not possible to produce anyestimates concerning the planned new facilityin Esjbjerg, more particularlybecause prices depend veryheavilyupon local factors.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975. (2) OJ L 163, 14.6.1989. (3) OJ L 203, 15.7.1989. (4) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.

(1999/C 297/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2309/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Solid waste dumping in the Kouroupitos river bed at Hania

The bed of the Kouroupitos at Hania has become a solid waste dump, with an obvious impact on the local environment. The Commission started procedures in 1992, with a view to prodding the Greek authorities into action to protect it, but with little effect, as theyhave done practicallynothing in the matter.

What does the Commission intend to do to bring an end to the despoliation of this river bed, and what will be the economic consequences for Greece of a continuing displayof indifference byits competent authorities to a matter in which it should have long ago complied with the Commission’s recommendations? C 297/14 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

In its judgment of 7 April 1992 the Court of Justice noted that, since it had not taken the action needed in order to ensure that, in the Khania region, refuse and also toxic, dangerous wastes were disposed of without endangering human health and without damaging the environment and, since, for that region, it had not drawn up plans or programmes with a view to the disposal of refuse and of toxic and dangerous wastes, Greece had not met the requirements laid down in Articles 4 and 6 of Directive 75/442/EEC on wastes (1) and Articles 6 and 12 of Directive 78/319/EEC on toxic and dangerous wastes (2).

Noting that Greece had still not taken the action needed in order to implement the judgment of the Court of Justice referred to above, the Commission brought a further action before the Court on 17 November 1997 on the basis of Article 171 of the EC Treaty. The matter is currently pending. It is for the Court to recognise the Member States’ failure to comply and, in its judgment, to set the amount of the penalty to be paid by the Member State concerned.

The Greek authorities have sent the Commission a study that they carried out in order to draw up waste management plans for the Khania region. However, according to information received by the Commission, the procedure for adopting the management plans has still not been finalised.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975. (2) OJ L 84, 31.3.1978.

(1999/C 297/018) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2339/98 by Marie-Noëlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Rules on the labelling of genetically modified organisms

What action is the Commission taking to require its trading partners, in particular the United States, to conform to the rules on the labelling of genetically modified organisms which will apply in the Member States so as to guarantee the principles of caution and transparency which must guide our policy in this field?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 1998)

Community legislation concerning compulsory labelling of products consisting of, or derived from, genetically modified organisms (GMO) applies to products sold within the Community, irrespective of the origin or provenance of such products.

Under Directive 90/220/EEC (1) as amended by Commission Directive 97/35/EC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (2) products which are to be placed on the market which consist of, or contain, genetically modified organisms require a consent. The information that is required in a notification for a consent requires a proposal for labelling or accompanying documentation which indicates the presence of the genetically modified organisms.

Concerning the particular field of foodstuffs, the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to Article 1 (2) of the Regulation (EC) 258/97 of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 January 1997 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients (3) which states that the Regulation shall apply to ‘the placing on the market within the Community’ of (novel) foods and food ingredients. Further, by Regulation (EC) 1139/98 concerning the compulsory indication of the labelling of certain foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars other than those provided for in Durective 79/112/EEC (4) concerning the labelling of certain maize and soya, it was ensured that food and food ingredients produced from soya and maize, which do not fall under Regulation (EC) 258/97, because they were on the market before 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/15

that Regulation entered into force, are put on the same footing as regards labelling as if they fell under the scope of Regulation (EC) 258/97.It also could serve as a model for the labelling of other GMO.

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990. (2) OJ L 169, 27.6.1997. (3) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997. (4) OJ L 159, 3.6.1998.

(1999/C 297/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2379/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Naples and the European Regional Development Fund

Can the Commission provide the following information:

2 the number of projects submitted in the City of Naples to be funded by the ERDF;

2 the number of projects actually approved, their location and duration;

2 the amount of financial aid provided or promised by the European Union for projects funded by the ERDF on the basis of the estimates contained within the present Structural Funds;

2 a comparative analysis of the European projects submitted, funded and carried out in other Italian cities within the context of the ERDF?

Can the Commission provide data showing the impact on employment of the projects which have been carried out with ERDF funding in Naples, by comparison with projects in other Italian cities?

In the light of the current situation, can the Commission also indicate any circumstances in which the City of Naples has not fully utilized the ERDF funds and the extent to which the City of Naples will be able to continue to receive the support from that Fund?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 1998)

Since the first reform of the Structural Funds in 1989, the predominant form of assistance has been operational programmes.Apart from major projects, which are dealt with on an individual basis, the specific projects financed inside a programme from which Italy benefits are simply communicated to the members of the monitoring committee for the programme by the authority responsible for its implementation.

In general, the list of these projects is not structured by physical location but by beneficiary (commune, province, region or company benefiting from aid).On the basis of the data which the Commission has, it is not therefore possible to provide the detailed information requested by the Honourable Member for the town of Naples, or to make a comparative analysis with other Italian cities.Also, the Commission does not have data concerning the impact on employment in the city of Naples only.

With regard to the resources made available by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the city of Naples, the Objective 1 Community Support Framework for Italy for the period 1994-99 stipulates that 70 % of the resources allocated to the region of Campania (ECU 890 million) should be used in the metropolitan area of Naples.A specific evaluation of the use of these resources has not been carried out yet. Nevertheless, under its agreement of July 1995 with the Italian authorities on improving the management of the Structural Funds in Italy, the Commission is following closely the implementation of all the programmes, including the regional programme for Campania.

It is not possible to indicate the level of Structural Funds spending for the city of Naples in the next programming period. C 297/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2390/98

by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Value of fish caught in Community waters

Can the Commission indicate the total value of fish caught in EU waters in the most recent year for which figures are available? Can it indicate the value and quantity of fish caught within the Irish 200-mile limit (most recent year for which data is available) and by which fishing fleets this catch was landed?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 1998)

The figure for nominal catches (defined by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the Commission as the equivalent live weight of the quantities landed) was 7,7 million tonnes (including aquaculture) for the EU-15 in 1995. This information is given on page 15 and subsequent pages of the statistical bulletin sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat-General of Parliament. Developments over the past ten years are also given for each Member State, for the main fishing zones and for the most important species.

The value of EU-15 landings was ECU 7 224 million in 1995 (see Chapter 4, page 19 et seq. of the statistical bulletin).

The Commission does not have data on the catches made in Ireland’s 200 mile zone nor on the boats fishing there. The statistics are produced on the basis of the rectangles defined by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). These rectangles do not coincide with exclusive economic areas defined by a 200 mile limit.

(1999/C 297/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2392/98

by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Restrictions on movements of domestic pets

Is the Commission aware of the restrictions on the movement of domestic pets between Ireland and other parts of the EU, and does it agree that these restrictions are unjustified on scientific grounds, that they are unnecessary and that they are contrary to the principle of free movement of persons and their property?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 1998)

The Commission is aware of the problems which the Honourable Member has mentioned concerning rabies quarantine regulations.

An alternative system to quarantine in Ireland has been applicable from 1 July 1994, for traded dogs and cats entering the Member State. This system involves vaccination and blood testing plus certification that the traded dogs and cats have been reared in isolation. The dogs and cats must be electronically identified. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/17

(1999/C 297/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2399/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Additional set-aside and sowing times in Finland

Finland has been experiencing veryhard times for spring sowing. Because of the bad weather conditions it was not possible to cultivate the land even in June. The Commission’s decision on the possibilityof additional set- aside quotas for Finland has been postponed until the end of June. Farmers, however, need to decide whether to set land aside or sow their crops into the frostyand waterlogged land in the hope of subsidies. In Finland the farming conditions in spring are often relativelydifficult and are not comparable to those in southern Europe.

Would it not be better for the time of sowing and, where appropriate, the need for additional set-aside, to be decided at national level rather than having to wait for the sometimes long-winded decisions of the EU? Decisions taken at national level might help speed up and simplifydecisions on sowing and increase farmers’ confidence in the EU.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Sowing times and additional set-aside are not related. The Communityfixes a deadline bywhich producers have to adopt their cultivation plans. Producers have to submit aid applications based on those cultivation plans under the Integrated Administration and Control System for the compensatory payments scheme by 15 Mayat the latest. For Finland, this date has been put back until 15 June to take account of the country’s climate.

If weather conditions prevent this date from being met, measures can be adopted to allow the amendment of aid applications. This was the case in Finland this spring and Commission Regulation (EC) 1552/98 of 17 July 1998 derogating from Regulation (EEC) 3887/92 laying down detailed rules for applying the Integrated Administration and Control System for certain Community aid schemes (1) was adopted to remedythe situation byallowing areas declared as ‘arable crops’ to be changed to ‘set-aside areas’. Since the adoption of such decisions requires a request from the national authorities to the Commission, it is up to those authorities to weigh up the situation in good time. The Commission is prepared to respond at veryshort notice if such requests prove justified.

(1) OJ L 202, 18.7.1998.

(1999/C 297/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2404/98 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: European ban on the use of the pesticide Drione

Is the Commission aware that the presence of the pesticide Drione in the water of the Meuse is causing problems for drinking water supplyin the Netherlands?

When will the assessment committee be releasing its opinion on a ban on Drione?

Are there likelyto be anyinitiatives or recommendations concerning the voluntarydiscontinuation of the use of Drione, as in the Netherlands?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

Under the obligation laid down in Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardizing and rationalizing reports on the implementation of certain directives relating to the environment (1), the Netherlands submitted a report concerning the period 1993-1995 on a number of water related directives C 297/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

including Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption (2). At present the data are being assessed by the Commission through the topic centre for inland waters of the European environment agency. The results will be known in the following months. Diuron based pesticides are a problem for some water suppliers in the Netherlands especially during the asparagus season. The way these suppliers partly solve this problem is by monitoring the raw water intake in big storage reservoirs and by closing the intake when necessary.

At the Community level the rules defining the marketing of plant protection products are set out in Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (3). 90 active ingredients are included in a first priority list drafted under Commission Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 of 11 December 1992 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (4). Diuron, the active substance to which the Honourable Member is probably referring, is not included in this list, but will be considered in a future list. The Commission is aware that in the Netherlands the board for the authorisation of pesticides (CTB) intends to ban all products containing diuron due to persistence with effect from 1 December 1998 unless the users can prove that the environmental impact is negligible. A final decision is foreseen in early 1999.

The Commission will review individual substances according to the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC through priority lists. At present no voluntary agreement schemes are foreseen in this area at Community level.

(1) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991. (2) OJ L 229, 30.8.1980. (3) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991. (4) OJ L 366, 15.2.1992.

(1999/C 297/024) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2513/98

by Gianni Tamino (V) to theCommission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Expansion of the ‘Gardaland’ amusement park (Castelnuovo del Garda, Italy)

Lake Garda is one of the most attractive lakes of Europe in terms of natural beauty and, especially, botanical interest, thanks to the special Mediterranean microclimate prevailing at its Alpine location. It is also one of the most popular spring and summer holiday destinations in central Europe. This leads to considerable pressure on its facilities for a good half of the year, as accentuated over recent decades by rising property development.

In March 1998, the EIB granted a loan of ECU 31 million (LIT 60 billion) to the ‘Gardaland’ company for the expansion of the ‘Gardaland’ amusement park at Castelnuovo del Garda (Verona province). This park attracted 2.7 million vistors in 1997 alone. Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on VAT includes property development projects among those on which VAT may be levied by decision of the Member State concerned (Annex II), while the following VAT directive (Directive 97/11/EEC) (2) makes specific reference to theme parks in this connection.

Has the Commission taken action to ensure that a proper environmental impact assessment is carried out for the expansion of the ‘Gardaland’ park? How will account be taken of the consequences for the lake environment of increased numbers of people, and of the pressure for further lakeside development which will result from the expansion of ‘Gardaland’? Will environment-friendly tourist and cultural activities be promoted within the park?

Can the Commission ensure that the local authorities and associations for the protection of the environment and the countryside will be involved in the assessment of the project?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. (2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/19

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 1998)

The project for the enlargement and modernisation of the existing theme park of Castelnuovo del Garda (known as ‘Gardaland’), mentioned bythe Honourable Member, does not require an environmental impact assessment in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. In addition, although the above mentioned project falls under Annex II of the Directive 97/11/EC (1) (the directive amending Directive 85/337/EEC), it cannot legallyrequire an environmental impact assessment on the basis of such a directive, because the deadline for the directive to be transposed in Member States (14 March 1999) is not yet expired, and consequently Member States are not yet obliged to apply it.

However, in the light of the fact that such projects are included in the list of the directive mentioned, environmental aspects have been assessed bythe European investment bank during the appraisal of the project, in the framework of the financing procedure.

The expansion of the Gardaland theme park should be put in its environmental, touristic, cultural and social contexts. Gardaland is in the area of Lake Garda but is not a direct lake front development. It is located in an area of flat agricultural land, there will be no impact of anybotanical significance, and anytopographical impact will be minimal. The main focus of the Gardaland theme park is to diversifythe range of natural, cultural, educational and leisure activities offered to tourists visiting the region. Thus the Gardaland activities playa passive role in attracting tourists and supporting economic activities in the service sector. The aim of the park is to deepen the tourist service offering, increasing the economic added value without having to increase tourist numbers, during the summer season.

Gardaland is not an amusement park but a theme park, providing leisure, recreational, educational and research related themes. Theme parks are classed as culture, and are cultural events, although the definition of culture is open to debate. The management of the Gardaland theme park is veryenvironmentallysensitive. Waste and sewage is managed to a high standard on-site and the landscaping creates a real natural green park atmosphere out of the plain at the southern end of the lake.

The local authorities zoned and approved the expansion of Gardaland, thus interested parties had the usual possibilities of involvement.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(1999/C 297/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2528/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: End-of-life vehicles/motorcycles

1. Has the Commission carried out a specific environmental impact assessment for end-of-life motorcycles?

2. Is the Commission satisfied that the provisions envisaged for motorcycles in the proposed Directive are proportionate to those envisaged for larger vehicles?

3. Has the Commission carried out an economic impact assessment of the effect that this proposed Directive would have on the motor-cycle manufacturing and retailing industries in the EU?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

The Commission has, in line with Article 130 R (3) of the EC Treaty, assessed the potential benefits and costs of action and lack of action in relation to end of life vehicles. A number of other principles, namelythose mentioned in Article 130 R (2) of the EC Treatyhave also been taken into account. C 297/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In this context the Commission has carefully considered the need to include end of life motorcycles in the scope of the proposal for a directive on end of life vehicles (1). Motorcycle manufacturers and users have been duly consulted in this process. In light of, inter alia, the economic considerations mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission has come to the conclusion that end of life motorcycles should be excluded from the scope of articles 4 and 7of the proposal. At the same time the Commission has reached the conclusion that there is no justification for the exclusion of end of life motorcycles from the other provisions of the proposal.

(1) OJ C 337, 7.11.1997.

(1999/C 297/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2529/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Private imports of American cars to the UK

Article 30 of the Treaty of Rome states that ‘Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall, without prejudice to the following provision, be prohibited between Member States.’

Many owners of American care in the UK believe that this right is being curtailed in their case. They have complained that under the single vehicle approval scheme, the application of type approval standards prevents the free movement of American vehicles between Member States. Furthermore, they contend that mutual recognition provisions are impracticable for those wishing to import a single vehicle and that, in any case, UK officials are not respecting these provisions.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. Is the Commission taking any action to investigate this matter and to ensure the free passage of American cars which comply with EU rules on noise and emissions between Member States?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Whenever the Commission receives a complaint backed up by evidence concerning a possible infringement of Community law by a Member State, it conducts an investigation. As regards the registration of motor vehicles, it acts in accordance with its interpretative communication on procedures for the type-approval and registration of vehicles previously registered in another Member State (1).

The Commission has received complaints about UK regulations on single vehicle approval which suggest that they may contravene Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty.

It is currently liaising with the UK authorities with a view to clarifying the exact scope of the regulations in question and ascertaining to what extent they are justified.

(1) OJ C 143, 15.5.1996.

(1999/C 297/027) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2541/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Promotion of flower production

Italy is one of Europe’s major flower producers, especially in the areas of San Remo (Liguria) and Santa Marínella (Lazio). For this reason there are many professional organizations promoting initiatives and activities connected with the distribution and promotion of Italian products in this sector. Recently there appeared in 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/21

the press an advertisement for this purpose by Unaflor, the national union of associations of flower producers, subsidised by the European Union.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. On the basis of what programme or initiative did Unaflor obtain the above-mentioned funding?

2. Are there any other programmes or initiatives promoted by the Commission to develop flower growing and marketing?

3. Would it be possible, on the basis of those programmes or initiatives, also to subsidise similar activities such as the promotion of trade fairs, shows and congresses?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

Since 1997 the Commission has supported the horticultural sector by participating in campaigns for the promotion of flowers in the Member States with an annual budget of ECU 15 million.

1. The national union of associations of flower producers (Unaflor) submitted an application at the time of the first promotion campaign for cut flowers and live plants in 1997. This resulted in it carrying out a promotion programme with a budget of ECU 1 978 000, of which the Community financed 60 %, i.e. ECU 1 186 979.

This year again, as part of the second promotion campaign, Unaflor submitted an application for the continuation of the initial programme with a budget of ECU 557 770, of which the Community will finance ECU 334 662. It has also proposed another programme, ‘Verde 2000’, with a budget of ECU 1 342 499, of which the Community is to finance 60 %.

Under Commission Regulation (EC) 832/97 of 7 May 1997 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) 2275/96 introducing specific measures for live plants and floricultural products (1), Italy received an appropriation of ECU 2 543 761. It had proposed five programmes including that of Unaflor. In 1998, under Regulation (EC) 803/98 (2), Italy has available ECU 2 587 129 and has proposed four promotion programmes, including the two abovementioned Unaflor programmes.

2. The promotion of products in this sector concerns 14 Member States, which, as a result of more than 30 promotion programmes over a period of already one year, have sought to achieve the objective of promoting the cultivation and marketing of cut flowers and live plants.

3. Article 2(1)(c) of Regulations (EC) 832/97 and (EC) 803/98 relates to the similar activities referred to by the Honourable Member.

It should also be mentioned in this connection that next September, in Tuscany (Pescia), at the flower show held there every two years, as an initiative of the ‘Toscana Piante e Fiori’ Association there will be a European stand, which qualified for financial assistance as part of the European campaign for the promotion of flowers.

(1) OJ L 119, 8.5.1997. (2) OJ L 115, 17.4.1998.

(1999/C 297/028) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2543/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Environmental impact assessment on a telephony station

With reference to my previous question ‘Non-ionizing radiation in the communes of Orte and Gallese’ (E-2073/98) concerning the building of a cellular telephony satellite station with a radiation frequency of 5 Ghz, I should like to state that this station has not been subject to an environmental impact assessment in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC (1). Can the Commission therefore give its opinion on the matter?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. C 297/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (28 October 1998)

Cellular telephone satellite stations are not included in the list of the projects of Annex I or II of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1).

Consequently, if the telephone satellite station mentioned by the Honourable Member has not been submitted to any environmental impact assessment, that cannot be considered as a breach of Community environmental legislation.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 297/029) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2545/98 by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) and John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1998)

Subject: Pesticides

An article in the Danish newspaper Aktuelt of Monday, 20 July 1998 concerning the pesticide, Round-up, pointed out that pesticide manufacturers were themselves investigating the effects of their products on the environment.

What safeguards are in place to ensure that the Member States verify manufacturers’ information?

What safeguards are in place in Directive 91/414/EEC (1) to ensure that the effects of the active substances on reproduction are investigated?

What safeguards are in place in Directive 91/414/EEC to ensure that the effects of the ancillary substances on reproduction are investigated?

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (28 October 1998)

Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1) specifies the data that have to be submitted by industry when applying for the inclusion of an active substance in its positive list or for the authorization of a plant protection product at national level. Such data include effects on reproduction of the active substance.

For ‘additives’ (i.e. formulants in plant protection products) there is no systematic requirement to perform the same series of testing. However the Directive provides that in individual cases it may be necessary to require certain information for formulants. Before such information will be required and before possible new studies have to be performed, all information on the formulant, made available to the authority, will be considered, in particular when the use of the formulant is permitted in food, animal feeding stuffs, medicines, or cosmetics in accordance with Community legislation, or a safety data sheet has been submitted for the formulant in accordance with Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (2).

When generating such data, industry has to follow the detailed provisions of the Directive which refers to the application of internationally validated test guidelines where they exist. Moreover all testing to obtain data on the properties or safety with respect to human or animal health or the environment has to be done according to the principles of good laboratory practice (GLP). This implies a quality control system of the laboratories performing the studies.

When deciding at Community level on the inclusion of an active substance in the positive list it has to be established that, consequent on application consistent with good plant protection practice, the plant protection products and their residues containing that active substance do not have any harmful effect on human health. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/23

Also when deciding at Member State level on the authorization of a plant protection product it has to be established, in the light of current scientific and technical knowledge that the plant protection product, when used properly, has no harmful effect on human health.

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991. (2) OJ L 196, 16.8.1967.

(1999/C 297/030) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2552/98

by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Accidents at work in the EU

Is the Commission able to say how many serious and fatal accidents at work have occurred in each of the Member States since 1996? How many such accidents have occurred as a result of the failure to incorporate Community social and employment law into national law or the failure to implement it?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1998)

On the basis of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (1) and the Council Resolution of 21 December 1987 (2), the Commission initiated a project in 1990 on the harmonisation of occupational accident statistics throughout the Community. This is known as the ESAW (European Statistics on Accidents at Work) project. The Council recognised the importance of this project in its Resolution of 27 March 1995 (3).

The first results of the project relate to accidents in 1993 and 1994, which are the most recent figures available. In 1993 (4), among a total of 122,4 million persons in employment, a total of 4,8 million work accidents resulting in more than three days’ absence from work were reported. 5 977 of these accidents were fatal. In 1994 (5), the number of people in employment rose to 131,9 million, and the number of work accidents resulting in more than three days’ absence from work was estimated at 4,9 million, 6 423 of them fatal. Analysis of the European average frequency (accidents involving more than three days’ absence from work per 100 000 persons in employment) reveals a figure of 4 505 for 1993 and 4 539 for 1994, a very slight increase. However, fatal accident frequency independent of the type of activity actually improved, falling from 5,3 in 1993 to 4,9 in 1994.

The results for each Member State for the two years 1993 and 1994 are set out in detail in the Eurostat publications referred to, copies of which are being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament’s Secretariat. The corresponding harmonised statistics for 1995 and subsequent years have not yet been published, which means that accident figures for 1996 are not yet available.

The Member States have informed the Commission of the measures taken to incorporate the directives on health and safety protection for workers at work into national law.

The Parliament, Council, Economic and Social Committee and Advisory Committee on Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work are regularly informed by the Commission of the results of the practical implementation of these provisions, on the basis of the reports provided by the Member States.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. (2) OJ C 28, 3.2.1988. (3) OJ C 168, 4.7.1995. (4) Source: Eurostat, ‘Statistics in Focus, Population and social conditions’ 1997/2. (5) Source: Eurostat, ‘Statistics in Focus, Population and social conditions’ 1998/2. C 297/24 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/031) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2557/98 by (Hanja) Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: UK quarantine law

Is it true that the United Kingdom still requires pet animals brought in byworkers from elsewhere in the European Union (people who have found work in the United Kingdom and have decided to settle there) to be held in quarantine for six months?

Is it true that the United Kingdom permits cats and dogs imported for commercial purposes to be brought into the countryprovided that a health certificate, a certificate of anti-rabies vaccination and microchip identification can be produced and a blood test has been carried out?

Does the Commission know whythis distinction is made, and does it conform to European legislation?

Will the Commission ask the United Kingdom government to drop this unusual form of discrimination with its bias against animals and allow pets that have been certified as healthyto be brought into the UK without problems?

(1999/C 297/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2615/98 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Quarantine laws in the United Kingdom

1. Can the Commission confirm that the United Kingdom is at present the onlyEU countrystill to apply quarantine legislation to pets entering the country?

2. Can the Commission indicate whether these laws are in conformitywith current European legislation in this field?

3. Does the Commission agree that the quarantine laws in the United Kingdom are veryold-fashioned and cause animals unnecessarysuffering?

Joint answer toWritten QuestionsE-2557/98 and E-2615/98 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 1998)

The conditions for intra-Communitytrade in dogs and cats are laid down byArticle 10 (2) of Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July1992 layingdown animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Communityof animals, semen, ova and embryosnot subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Communityrules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC ( 1).

Derogating from and additionallyto the provisions in this paragraph, for placing on the market in the United Kingdom and Ireland, dogs and cats must come from registered holdings where theyhave been confined since birth, must be properlyidentified, must be transported in recognized means of transport and the immune response to vaccination must be proven byserological testing.

Paragraph 4 of that article allows the United Kingdom and Ireland to retain national quarantine rules for those carnivores, primates, bats and other animals susceptible to rabies covered byDirective 92/65/EEC for which no guarantees can be given that since birth theynever left their holding of origin. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/25

The Commission is officially informed that the British government is currently looking at the import requirements and quarantine arrangements with a view to take account of the technical progress and the development of the disease in countries outside the United Kingdom. However, any new system ought to be at least as effective in maintaining rabies freedom of the country as the current quarantine system, and controls should be workable and enforceable.

The Commission actively supports Member States to eradicate this disease by large-scale oral vaccination of silvatic foxes. These programmes include financial contributions not only to the Member States, but also to continental neighbouring countries. This should help to protect the territories of Member States where rabies is successfully controlled or eradicated.

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992.

(1999/C 297/033) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2559/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(28 July 1998)

Subject: Discrimination against the EU freezer-trawler fleet in Argentinian waters

While there is obviously no reason to object to authorities imposing a ban where it is scientifically justified, the recent, and quite unexpected, decision by Argentina to institute a two-month ban on hake fishing within its 200-mile zone is an act of discrimination against the EU freezer-trawler fleet, which fishes there under the EU-Argentina fisheries agreement; by contrast, a ban of only twenty days applies to fresh-fish vessels. This unexpected and discriminatory measure has created considerable legal insecurity and entails serious economic suffering for the Spanish-Argentinian joint ventures involved; it could create a quite unacceptable precedent.

1. Can the Commission explain how and when it was officially informed of the Argentinian authorities’ intention to adopt this measure?

2. Was the Commission aware beforehand of the possibility of this occurring in the way that it did?

3. Was it informed of the matter by the industry?

4. What action has it taken on the matter, and how has it explained its actions to the industry affected?

5. Does the Commission consider this measure to be compatible with the terms of the EU-Argentina fisheries agreement, and, in particular, with the conditions agreed at the most recent meeting of the Joint Monitoring Committee set up under the agreement, providing for mutual consultation on any new measures and for the prior joint examination of the consequences of such measures?

6. Can the Commission state what measures it has adopted or intends to adopt to alleviate the damage which this measure will cause to the Community freezer-trawler fleet and ensure that such measures are not repeated in the future?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 1998)

1. and 3. The Commission was informed in early July through various sources of the Argentinian intention to impose closed periods for the hake fisheries from 15 July.

2. The Commission would recall that a closed period was introduced for the hake fishery already in 1997, and in the discussions with the Argentinian authorities notably in the joint committee of 4-5 May 1998 it was clear that the state of the hake stocks had not improved.

4. The Commission intervened without delay to underline its preoccupation at the sudden imposition of a closed period which disrupted the commercial activities of the fleet and also asked for clarification as to the differing periods of closure applied to separate segments of the fleet. C 297/26 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

5. The Community has consistently supported measures taken by the Argentinian authorities to redress the state of the hake stocks. This position is in the medium to long term interest of the Argentinian fishery sector including the vessels transferred under the fisheries agreement. It is the responsibility of the coastal state to take management measures on the stocks under its responsibility in accordance with the law of the sea.

6. The joint enterprises established under the agreement are subject to Argentinian law and consequently assume the financial and economic risks associated with any commercial company. It may be recalled that these companies received financial assistance from the Community in their establishment.

(1999/C 297/034) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2560/98 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission

(29 July 1998)

Subject: Future security at the Boliden company’s mine at Aznalcóllar (Doñana, Spain)

In the wake of the highly disturbing accident at Aznalcóllar (Spain), with its grave implications for the Doñana area, can the Commission state what proposals it has received from the Boliden mining company concerning its operational intentions for the Aznalcóllar mine, and also specify what preventive measures it is taking to ensure that any proposed future operations in this mining area are in line with safety standards and to prevent any more accidents from occurring?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 1998)

The Boliden company’s proposed mining operation at Los Frailes has undergone the environmental impact assessment required by Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1). The environmental impact statement was published in the official journal of the Province of Seville, No 180, of 5 August 1995. According to the Commission’s information, Boliden intends, this autumn, to apply for authorisation to bring the Los Frailes mine back into operation.

The Spanish authorities will be asked for details regarding the matters raised by the Honourable Member. In addition, as part of the follow-up to the accident these matters will be raised at a bilateral meeting between the Spanish authorities and the Commission, to be held in November 1998 in Madrid.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 297/035) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2591/98 by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Support for the ‘Friedrichshain Strategies, 1998-2000’ project in Friedrichshain, Berlin

The European Union has provided support for the ‘Friedrichshain Strategies, 1998-2000’ project in the Friedrichshain district of Berlin in connection with urban pilot schemes under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund. The district is also targeted by an URBAN project (Commission Decision 94/628/EC) (1) of 29 July 1994 concerning the Community support framework for the German Objective 1 regions). The urban pilot scheme was intended, inter alia, to create model jobs both directly, by integrating the long-term unemployed, and indirectly, through support measures for small and medium-sized enterprises.

1. Does the Commission consider that this objective has been attained?

2. Is the Commission in a position to check whether workers without social insurance have been employed in connection with the ‘Friedrichshain Strategies, 1998-2000’ project? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/27

3. How does the Commission prevent the financing of competing projects, particularly in the cultural sphere, coming under urban pilot schemes, the URBANproject and other public-sector development schemes in Friedrichshain?

4. What is the Commission’s view of the question of a project supported by EU funds, which envisages indirect support for small and medium-sized enterprises in Friedrichshain, and which in reality contains no incentives to attract such enterprises?

(1) OJ L 250, 26.9.1994, p. 18.

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 1998)

1. The project ‘strategies for Friedrichshain’ was approved under the European regional development fund (ERDF) urban pilot projects programme in July 1997. It was one of 26 innovative projects selected out of more than 500 submitted by cities across Europe. The project funding runs from 1997 until December 1999 and the ERDF grant total for the project is ECU 2,19 million. The first advance of the ERDF funding has been paid to the project and further payments will depend on its satisfactory progress. The Commission monitors progress, but at this stage it is too early to assess whether the aims of the project have been achieved.

2. The project is, in addition, subject to audit during and after completion. The audit assesses financial management and compliance with the terms of the grant offer, including the need to comply with all relevant Community legislation. Projects are also subject to audit by national administrations, which would also seek to ascertain compliance with national legislation, for example on social insurance.

3. In terms of competition for funding, the Commission does not permit the double funding of a project through different Community programmes. This is prevented, amongst other measures, through inter-service consultation prior to the approval of grant for a project.

The Kirchbauhof GmbH, responsible for the urban pilot project, has also submitted several applications for grant under the URBANCommunity initiative. Noneof these has been approved, and the ‘Kulturhaus Palisadenstrasse 48’ has not received ERDF aid under the URBANprogramme.

Generally, projects in the URBANarea are managed by the Beratungs- und Servicegesellschaft Umwelt GmbH which operates directly in the area and assesses the projects in coordination with the co-financing Berlin authorities (Bezirk/Land). Up to now, two projects have been approved in Friedrichshain under the URBAN programme, both in the context of energy saving concepts (St. Pius-Kirche and Schwimmhalle).

4. The main instrument proposed for support to small and medium sized enterprises (SME) within the urban pilot project is the consultation agency, which will offer advice and professional support to SMEs in the area. It is not yet possible to judge the success of this pilot project, although reports to date indicate progress is being made.

(1999/C 297/036) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2630/98

by Arie Oostlander (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Netherlands packaging requirements for milk products that qualify for subsidies under the EU school milk scheme

Are the Netherlands packaging requirements for milk products, which give rise to additional costs far in excess of the effect of subsidies under the EU school milk scheme, not inconsistent with the spirit and letter of the pertinent regulation? C 297/28 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

If so, should such packaging not be prohibited so that the promotion of dairy products may have its intended effect?

Is the Commission prepared to approach the Netherlands authorities in this matter?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

The Honourable Member’s question probably refers to the provision requiring packs of full-fat or semi- skimmed milk distributed under the school milk scheme in the Netherlands to contain 0,25 litre. In this respect, the Commission can confirm that the Community legislation on the school milk scheme makes no such requirement. The Netherlands authorities introduced the rule to facilitate inspections and notified the Commission of it in 1994 as part of their national application provisions. The Commission did not comment on it. It also appears that the Netherlands authorities are preparing an amendment of the provision in question.

The Commission recognises that small packs do indeed increase the cost of the product, and that this is likely to counteract the effect of the aid. However, such packaging also has certain undeniable advantages, particularly practical and administrative ones. The Commission therefore does not consider it appropriate to adopt Community rules on the matter.

(1999/C 297/037) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2725/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Regulation No 258/97 on novel foods

The Commission’s answer to question P-1999/98 (1) suggests that Article 8 of Regulation 258/97 (2) has not been transposed in full by the Commission. Is the answer to be taken as meaning that the Commission wants labelling to indicate only the procedure, and not the modified characteristics or properties, such as resistance to herbicides or insecticides?

Why is the Commission failing to transpose Article 8 of Regulation 258/97 in full?

(1) OJ C 50, 22.2.1999, p. 123. (2) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 1998)

Article 8, and more particularly paragraph 1(a) thereof, of Regulation (EC) 258/97 on new foodstuffs, as referred to by the Honourable Member, stipulates that the labelling for a new food or new food ingredient that is no longer equivalent to an existing food or food ingredient must have entered on it the modified food characteristics or properties (composition, nutrient value or nutritional effects or intended use of the food), accompanied by a description of the method whereby that characteristic or property has been acquired. It emerges from those provisions that the characteristics having been modified at plant level, such as resistance to herbicides or to insects, are agronomic and not food characteristics, and so do not need to be labelled in pursuance of said article. Conversely, a statement that a food or food ingredient has been produced from, for example, ‘genetically-modified soya or maize’ corresponds to the modified food characteristics (for food composition) and to their method of acquisition (genetically) which should appear on the labelling.

The Commission fully implements Article 8 of Regulation 258/97. As stated above the entries hoped for by the Honourable Member are not covered by this regulation and its provisions. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/29

(1999/C 297/038) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2764/98 by Armelle Guinebertière (UPE) to the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Subject: Cessation of work on the proposal for a directive on the distance selling of financial services

On several occasions the Commission has emphasised the pressing need for legislation on the distance selling of financial services.This stemmed from a legitimate desire to harmonise legislation within the European Union, improve consumer protection and achieve fairer competition among the professionals.The Austrian Presidency also seemed committed to these goals.

However, the Commission has just decided not to continue the work on drawing up a directive in this area.If the existing legal void persists, it is to be feared that the European citizen will be unable to make sense of this business and that obtaining consumer credits, mortgages, shares and insurance cover will not be made any easier.

In these circumstances, how does the Commission intend to defend consumers’ interests at a time when the euro is being celebrated?

(1999/C 297/039) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2862/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Distance selling of financial services

Financial services were originally to have been covered by the general directive on distance selling but when this was no longer so the European Parliament called on the Commission to draw up a separate directive on financial services.The draft directive was rejected on 15 July 1998.This means in practice that the general consumer will find it difficult to benefit from the internal market in financial services and thus from the introduction of the Euro on the financial markets.

What are the Commission’s grounds for excluding the financial sector from the internal market? Why did the Commission choose to reject the draft directive on financial services? Finally, how does the Commission intend to remedy the situation in which consumers have now been left?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2764/98 and P-2862/98 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1998)

On 14 October 1998 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Directive on distance contracts concluded between suppliers and consumers for financial services (1).This proposal is now being examined by Parliament under the co-decision procedure.

(1) COM(98) 468.

(1999/C 297/040) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2773/98 by (Hanja) Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Subsidy for nature conservation areas in the Netherlands

According to the Dutch media (De Telegraaf of 28 July 1998) the Netherlands failed to take up substantial EU subsidies because the Commission was not notified in good time of nature conservation areas.

Can the Commission confirm this? C 297/30 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Can the Commission indicate what projects were submitted by the Netherlands and for which ones subsidies were granted?

Can the Commission state how much money other Member States have received for their nature conservation areas, and what conservation areas are involved?

Is it true that the Commission issued a warning in April 1998 to countries which were slow in submitting projects?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

The Netherlands sent two projects to the Commission under Life-Nature in 1998. The ‘Nieuwkoopse Plassen’ project was accepted and received joint financing of ECU 895 222. The ‘Fochteloërveen peat bog’ project was declared ineligible. The site where the activities were to take place had not been applied for by the Member State under the Community ‘Nature’ Directive.

Each year the Commission publishes a list, per Member State, of the amounts allotted to and the summaries of each of the projects that have been jointly financed under Life-Nature. The Commission will send the documents for 1992-97 direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat-General of Parliament. The 1998 brochure will only be available from October 1998.

It is quite true that the Commission has regularly reminded the Member States that, in order to be eligible for joint financing under Life-Nature, the sites referred to should have been applied for under the ‘Birds’ (1)or ‘Habitats’ (2) directives.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. (2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 297/041) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2793/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: LIFE programme

The European Commission has drawn up the list of 201 projects which are to receive EU part-financing for 1998 under the Community’s financial instrument, LIFE, which provides up to ECU 96,6 million in support of environmental measures.

The 118 LIFE Environment projects selected for funding of ECU 48,6 million (from the 634 projects submitted by all the Member States) do not appear to include Italian projects.

Will the Commission say how many Italian projects were submitted, how many are for pilot measures, how many concern demonstration, promotion and technical assistance measures for local authorities, and how many concern preliminary measures to support European legislation and policies?

Does the Commission not find it surprising that no Italian project has been selected?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

A the moment 116 projects involving ECU 48,85 million have received joint Community funding under the LIFE financial instrument in order to implement Community policy and law on the environment (LIFE- Environment).

The Italian projects receiving joint funding account for 13 out of the 183 projects put forward, and involve ECU 4,72 million. Six of those projects relate to innovative and demonstration activities in order to promote long-term industrial development, whereas seven cover demonstration, promotion and technical assistance to local authorities. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/31

Of the 183 Italian projects put forward 49 relate to industrial activities, 117 to action concerning local communities and one to preparatory activities. Sixteen projects were not put on file since they were considered to be ineligible under the rules.

(1999/C 297/042) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2802/98 by Christof Tannert (PSE)to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: Code of Conduct for European companies operating in third countries

In paragraph 20 of its resolution (A4-400/96) (1) of 12 December 1996 on human rights throughout the world in 1995-1996 and the Union’s human rights policy, Parliament ‘calls on the Commission and the Council rapidly to submit a proposal on a Code of Conduct for European companies operating in third countries which obliges them to respect human rights in all their forms (civil, social, economical, environmental), including mechanisms of control and sanction on the grounds of the existing OECD proposal’.

What steps has the Commission taken in this respect and when will it submit a proposal for such a Code of Conduct for European companies operating in third countries?

(1) OJ C 20, 20.1.1997, p. 161.

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

The Commission gave its views on the Code of Conduct for European companies operating in non- Community countries when the report on human rights throughout the world in 1995-96 referred to by the Honourable Member was adopted on 12 December 1996.

The Commission takes a constructive approach on human rights by helping raise public awareness, supporting private initiatives and closely following initiatives by individual companies or sectoral groups to introduce voluntary codes. Having carried out an exploratory study to see how it can promote codes of conduct for Community companies operating in developing countries, particularly in the social sector, it is now analysing the terms of codes already in existence to see how they are being applied and to establish their scope and impact.

The Commission is working with social partners under the European social dialogue to promote discussion and dialogue on initiatives which include codes of conduct and social labelling. It plans to launch a debate within civil society, i.e. social partners and NGOs, to find common ground in the initiatives which have already been taken and will undoubtedly increase in Europe.

(1999/C 297/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2812/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V)to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: Evaluation of the packaging directive (94/62/EC)

Three years after the entry into force of the packaging directive 94/62/EC (1), would the Commission please indicate:

how overall demand for packaging has evolved in the period 1990-1997?

how overall packaging recycling (material recycling) has evolved in the period 1990-1997? C 297/32 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

= how high the technically feasible and economically viable packaging-recycling ratio was in 1997?

= how the market share of beverages in reusable packaging (<21) evolved in the period 1990-1997?

= in which Member States are there incinerators (>500t/a) in which packaging waste is burned (annual capacity per plant) and how many of them are there?

= in which of these plants is the average calorific value higher than 13 MJ?

= in which of these plants is a minimum of 33 % of the calorific value of the incinerated waste supplied for commercial use to outside users?

= which of the incinerator plants use:

= dust filters (textile or electro filters)

= flue gas scrubbers

= advanced facilities (catalytic converters, deNOX equipment, second filters, absorbers)?

= which of these plants meet the requirements of Directive 89/369/EEC (2)?

= whether Directive 94/62/EC harmonised the requirements for market access within the EU?

= how many different recycling schemes for sales packaging of different types were in force within the 15 Member States in 1998?

= how many different fee schemes therefore have to be recognised?

= how many CEN-standards have been finalised after 3½ years of work for Mandate 2000?

= when the standards will be available for use under the packaging directive?

= what its opinion is of the CEN draft standards in the light of Directive 94/62/EC?

= what the actual status and/or use is of biodegradable plastic packaging in the EU?

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10. (2) OJ L 163, 14.6.1989, p. 32.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

The Commission regrets that it does not have, at this stage, sufficient information to be able to answer the question.

The first obligation to report on the application of Directive 91/692/EEC on standardizing and rationalizing reports on the implementation of certain directives relating to the environment (1) will relate to the period 1998-2000 so that the reports will not be available to the Commission before 30 June 2001. At the same time, Decision 97/138/EC relating to the database system on packaging and packaging waste (2) establishes that the first data to be provided shall relate to 1997 but the time allowed for transmission to the Commission is 18 months so that the data might be received by 30 June 1999.

Furthermore, the Commission intends to launch a number of studies on the present situation of systems for the management of packaging and packaging waste in Europe. The results will be available in 1999.

(1) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991. (2) OJ L 52, 22.2.1997. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/33

(1999/C 297/044) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2852/98 by Umberto Bossi (TDI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Preservation of natural habitats

The Ravenna district and provincial authorities and the Emilia Romagna regional authority have signed an agreement on a programme for the implementation of the ‘Ravenna port area’ special programme involving the building of a marine passenger terminal and connecting roads.

Under the preliminary plans, the connecting roads are to run through state-owned areas of pine forest, the Pialassa Baiona and the Pineta di San Vitale, in violation of numerous laws that protect the last unspoilt areas of the Adriatic.

. The Italian Constitutional Court has repeatedly reaffirmed the ‘primacy’ of landscape and environmental considerations and the special protective regulations in this area,

. the construction work planned in the Pialassa Baiona (an area protected by the RAMSAR Convention and benefiting from Community funds under the LIFE programme) involves raising the level of the road systemconsiderably and the installation of street lights,

. the planned project would violate specific regulations designed to protect pine forests in nature reserves (the ASFD pine forest . Staggioni section and the Pineta di San Vitale),

. in addition, some of the areas affected are regarded as ZSPs (zones of special protection) and others have been designated by the regional authorities as SCIs (sites of Community importance),

. the project cannot be regarded as being intermodal since it encourages the use of road transport,

. following repeated protests fromcitizens, the above authorities have drawn up a second agreementon the programme, which, however, does not replace the previous one.

In view of the above, can the Commission say whether the implementation of the ‘intermodal’ project described above contravenes Directive 92/43 (1) or any other directive?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 1998)

A complaint concerning the project mentioned by the Honourable Member has been recently registered. The case is currently being examined by the Commission.

A request for information has been sent to the Italian authorities in order to obtain more detailed elements on the case mentioned.

The Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1999/C 297/045) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2853/98 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Denmark and the Schengen agreement

Can Denmark withdraw from the Schengen agreement and reintroduce checks on individuals which had to be abolished in the meantime? C 297/34 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1998)

The Member States involved entered the Schengen Agreement as part of the Community’s aim to achieve an internal market comprising an area without internal borders. There are thus no provisions in the Agreement allowing a Member State to rescind the Agreement.

Nor are there any provisions in the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis into the framework of the European Union, annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam, for a Member State governed by the Schengen acquis to terminate its involvement.

(1999/C 297/046) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2854/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Waste water levies in the countries of the European Union

In addition to the substantial investment and running costs in connection with the treatment of waste water in accordance with the EU legislation, some Member States are imposing some additional waste water levies. Under the Law on Waste Water Levies in the Federal Republic of Germany levies have to be paid for the discharge of waste water into any body of water. The amount of the levy depends on the organic waste load, which is calculated separately in respect of various parameters, initially in pollution units. A rate of levy is afterwards applied to those pollution units. This results in very heavy additional financial burdens for undertakings in Germany.

1. Do similar waste water levies exist in other European Community countries, and if so, which?

2. In each case, in respect of what parameters ( pollutants) must levies be paid?

3. How high are the rates of levy in respect of the various parameters?

4. Are there any reductions, and if so, under what circumstances?

5. Can levies be set off against expenditure incurred in setting up or expanding waste water treatment plants?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1998)

The determination of costs for water supply and wastewater treatment falls, under the existing legal situation, into the competence of the Member States. These costs may contain also the environment costs, which form an incentive to the reduction of water pollution in the form of fees beside the costs for the establishment and operation of the necessary plants.

The proposal of the Commission for a water framework directive (1) provides for the principle of the levying of cost-covering fees for water services. However at present this covers only financial costs, not environment and resource costs. Following this proposal the Commission will, where this is appropriate, come forward with proposals to ensure that the prices for water use also reflect environment and resource costs.

The Commission requested the Member States to furnish information about wastewater fees in 1994. However not all Member States answered the questions completely and since then the regulations on the levy of wastewater fees may have changed. Based on the information obtained at that time, the situation is that in most of the Member States fees for the derivative from sewage are levied. The type and the scope of the collection of charges and the fee scale differ strongly from each other. In principle, one has to differentiate 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/35

between the levy from fees for indirect discharge (discharge of the wastewater into collecting systems) and fees for direct discharge (discharge of the treated wastewater into waters). Fees for indirect discharge are levied in all Member States, but not always from all groups of wastewater producers. Wastewater fees for direct discharge, as they are raised in Germany on the basis of the Abwasserabgabengesetz, are also levied in Belgium, Spain, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The basis for the determination of the level of the fee is usually the waste load. This is made either on the basis of measurements, calculations or the permission values. Therefore, in most of the Member States the organic load, removable materials, heavy metals and nutrients (phosphorous and nitrogen) are used as parameters. In France and Germany toxic materials and halogenised hydrocarbons are also used as parameters.

A direct comparison of the fee level for the waste load is not possible because of different calculation systems.

(1) COM(97) 49 final modified by COM(97) 614 final and COM(98) 76 final.

(1999/C 297/047) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2858/98 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Construction of a bottling plant in Taguluche (La Gomera, Canary Islands)

The Canary Islands regional government has declared the installation of a water-bottling plant in Taguluche (La Gomera) as being in the public interest. The site earmarked for the plant covers an area called Taguluche, which the regional government is seeking to have included in the Natura 2000 network provided for in Directive 92/43/EEC (1) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

As it happens, this area houses the palm groves of Phoenix, one of the priority habitats referred to directly in Directive 92/43/EEC. Installing the aforesaid bottling plant would have an obvious impact on the conservation of the palm groves and of agricultural land in the area, in that it would cut off the scarce supplies of water from the natural tributaries of the local ravine.

Is it the Commission’s view that installing an industrial plant such as the one planned is compatible with the conservation of the area proposed for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 1998)

The Commission feels that the implementation of an industrial project such as that mentioned by the Honourable Member could be compatible with the protection of an area put forward for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network provided that the conditions set out in Article 6(3) and (4) of Council Directive 92/43/ EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora are met.

Under that article any plan or project that is not directly linked or necessary to the management of the site, but which is likely to affect this in a significant manner, either individually or in conjunction with other projects, must be subjected to a suitable assessment of its impact on the site in terms of its conservation aims. In the light of the results of the impact assessment of the site, and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the Member-State authorities will only agree to the plan or project once they have been assured that it will not impair the integrity of the site concerned and once public opinion has, where appropriate, been sounded out.

If, despite the negative outcome of the site impact assessment, and in the absence of alternatives, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for pressing, major public-interest reasons, including social or economic factors, the Member State concerned shall take all compensatory action needed in order to ensure that the overall consistency of Natura 2000 is maintained. That Member State must inform the Commission of C 297/36 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

any compensatory action to be taken. Where the site concerned includes a priority natural habitat or species only human-health and public-safety aspects may be invoked, or else major benefits for the environment or, in the wake of a decision from the Commission, other pressing reasons that are greatly in the public interest.

The Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that Taguluche and its surrounding area have not been designated as a special bird-protection area under Article 4 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1). So far they have also not been officially put forward by the Spanish authorities as being a site for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(1999/C 297/048) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2882/98 by Niels Kofoed (ELDR) and Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Reduction of potato starch export refunds

The Cereal Management Committee decided on 13 August to apply a lump sum reduction of the export refund for potato starch of ECU 10 (maize basis), which immediately brought this sector into a position of imbalance and ‘non-competitiveness’with other starches.

In the report from the European Parliament of 28 April 1998 on the prolongation of the potato starch quota system, the vital principle of equilibrium between the different types of starch was recognised and supported = and furthermore confirmed in Council Regulation 1284/98 (1) on 16 June 1998.

In the light of this very sensible balance and the upcoming changes in the common agricultural policy (Agenda 2000) can the Commission indicate:

1. Why this principle of equilibrium, which always has been and still is a cornerstone of the EU starch policy, has been disregarded in the calculation of the export refunds for potato starch on 12 August 1998?

2. Whether it is prepared in future to follow the statements from the European Parliament as well as the Council regarding injustice through balance in the starch sector?

(1) OJ L 178, 23.6.1998, p. 3.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

1. On 13 August 1998 it was decided to apply a lump sum reduction to the export refund for potato starch of ECU 10 per tonne (maize basis) without changing the amounts for other starches, and in particular maize starch, due to the lack of transparency on the maize market during the difficult period between marketing years, and the fact that the new potato crop would become available from mid-August.

From 11 September 1998, the normal situation of equivalent refunds for starch and maize starch was restored.

2. The Commission would like to recall its report to the Council establishing a quota system in relation to the production of potato starch, of 11 November 1997 (1) and in particular the following remark within the framework of Agenda 2000:

Since the non-cereal starch and compensation arrangements have always been governed by the basic cereals Regulation (link to maize), the adjustment of those arrangements will follow the measures taken for maize as part of the Agenda 2000 decisions.

(1) COM(97) 576 final. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/37

(1999/C 297/049) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2885/98

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué(PPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Fisheries

In the light of the repeated use of drift nets by vessels from various EU Member States in bonito fishing grounds in the Bay of Biscay in both the present and previous fishing years, does the Commission envisage imposing penalties of any kind on the culprits in question, given the serious harm caused to the fisheries sector in Spain as a whole, and in the Basque country in particular?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

Driftnet fishing for tuna will be prohibited only from 1 January 2001. In line with Council decisions on the subject, driftnets are authorised and the restrictions for 1998 and earlier years have mainly concerned their permitted lengths. The Commission has worked hard to ensure that these provisions are complied with and it has sent a report of its observations each year to Parliament. In these reports, the Commission has noted that the rules limiting the authorised maximum length to 2.5 km have been satisfactorily implemented since 1995, and no infringements have been detected. There can therefore be no question of imposing penalties. In any case, it is the duty of Member States to penalise infringements.

The Commission for its part will continue to monitor compliance with the rules on the use of driftnets and will similarly ensure compliance with the ban on their use when the time comes; if any infringements are detected, it will be analysing the action taken by Member States.

(1999/C 297/050) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2900/98

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Cooperative organizations

By introducing legislation to regulate the debts of cooperative organizations (Law 2538/97 on the cancellation of debts), the Greek Government has dealt with an issue which successive governments in the country had long neglected. The latter had refused to take timely steps to tackle the problem of how cooperative organizations were to bear the costs of harvesting products affected by Chernobyl and of how to tackle the effects of a government social policy which had led to the accumulation of debts. The cancellation of the debts of cooperative organizations, which the Commission believes to be anti-competitive, is tantamount to over- looking the responsibility of successive governments during the period 1981 to 1995, since these debts consist of interest outstanding on loans granted as part of the social policy. An attempt by the Commission to overturn this law could be interpreted as a stance in favour of private sector companies and against the cooperative sector, as well as representing a serious blow to cooperative organizations. The Commission should also bear in mind that it should not take a decision of this kind which would hamper the serious efforts now being made to regulate cooperatives’ liabilities as regards the credit system and restore order in this sector so that it can play a vital role in maintaining farm incomes, which will be hit by the reform of the CAP and liberalisation of the market, as well as helping to develop the agricultural sector in Greece.

Has the Commission assessed all the implications of any decision to overturn the law on the cancellation of the debts of cooperative organizations? C 297/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

On 8 April 1998, the Commission decided to launch an investigation under Article 93 (2) of the EC Treatyon the aid measures included in Greek law nr. 2538/97. In the framework of this procedure, the Commission expressed its doubts about the conformitywith the Treatyof several aid measures, including the debt write-offs mentioned bythe Honourable Member.

The Commission will receive the observations of the Greek government, as well as anyremarks from third parties. Following assessment of this information, the Commission will issue a final decision on these aid measures.

(1999/C 297/051) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2943/98 by Gianfranco Dell’Alba (TDI) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: B7-707 1 Human rights and democracyin Asian countries

On the initiative of the European Parliament, the European Union budget provides in Item B7-707, Human rights and democracyin Asian countries, for ECU 5 million covering the promotion of the radio broadcasting of information byTibetans.

On 31 July1998, 7 months after the budget was adopted bythe BudgetaryAuthority,no commitment appropriation has been committed although specific projects have been presented to the Commission. Since the Commission entered this budget line in its preliminarydraft budget with the same remark and the Council retained it at first reading, whyhas the Commission still done nothing and what is it waiting for in order to implement it?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1998)

In the context of its general contacts and specific human rights dialogue with China one of the Commission’s prime objectives is recognition and protection of the cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious identityof ethnic minorities in China, and especiallyin Tibet.

The Commission has decided to take a concrete approach, concentrating on projects within Tibet itself to help local communities of ethnic Tibetans.

So far none of the projects submitted to it has fitted in with this strategyof positive measures and it has therefore declined to support them.

It naturallyremains willing to give favourable consideration to requests from non-governmental organisations working in the Autonomous Region of Tibet along the lines set out above.

(1999/C 297/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2965/98 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Subsidyfor Communityfishermen affected byecological bans in third countries

The ecological ban, imposed for the months of September and October bythe Mauritanian Government, will force numerous Communityshipowners who specialise in catching black hake to moor their boats in harbour and face a closed season imposed bythis African state. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/39

Current rules ban any form of aid from the European Union or from the Member States’ coffers to offset losses in the event of ecological bans, which raises the question of how the shipowners and fishermen affected can meet the considerable financial losses suffered during the idle period imposed by the countries in question.

Can the Commission say what measures, in the form of compulsory insurance or a similar solution, it has planned in order to help the fishermen affected by these measures imposed by third countries, and enable the Community fisheries industry to survive the financial hardship suffered by thousands of families in Europe’s fisheries sector?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) 3699/93 of 21 December 1993 laying down the criteria and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries and aquaculture sector and the processing and marketing of its products (1), FIFG assistance may be used only to finance measures intended to offset partially the loss of income suffered as a result of a temporary cessation of fishing activities caused by unforeseen and non-repetitive events resulting from biological phenomena in particular. However, the cessation of fishing activities under the Community agreement with Mauritania is not an unforeseen event as provision is made for this eventuality under the Agreement.

The Commission would like to point out that Member States can implement the other measures provided for under the FIFG operational programme which might help fleet restructuring. Complementary measures can be introduced under the Community initiative PESCA, which aims to help the fisheries industry successfully bring about change.

As for taking out insurance against the cessation of fishing activities under Community fishing agreements with third countries, it is up to fishing ventures themselves to investigate whether or not this is possible. Such insurance cannot be made compulsory under Community law.

(1) OJ L 346, 31.12.1993.

(1999/C 297/053) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2967/98 by Gisèle Moreau (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Applicability of Regulation 1408/71 on the transfer of acquired rights

Ihave been approached by an Italiancitizen residing in Turin who paid 102 quarters of pension contributions in Italy (‘Fondo Pensioni Ferroneri dello Stato’) and 78 quarters in France (CRAV). He has been told that Regulation 1408/71 does not apply in his particular case. At a time when the Commission is rightly proposing to extend Regulation 1408/71 (1) to cover residents of third countries legally residing in a Member State, is it also prepared to take action to ensure that Regulation 1408/71 applies to all citizens of the European Union, regardless of their social security scheme?

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

Regulation No 1606/98 of 29 June 1998 (1) extends the scope of Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (2) and of Regulation (EEC) 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 (3) to special schemes for civil servants, and will enter into force on 25 October 1998. C 297/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Hence, as from 29 June 1998, the party concerned may rely on the provisions of Article 51a of this Regulation in aggregating periods of insurance under the special scheme for civil servants in Italy and the general scheme in France.In effect, although the ‘Ferrovie dello Stato’ were privatised on 1 January 1993, the insurance scheme remains basically the same, i.e. it is still under the aegis of the Ministry of the Treasury.

It seems that the question concerns the acquisition of rights to the Italian retirement pension.If the interested party aggregates periods of insurance in Italy and in France he will of course be entitled to the Italian retirement pension, but the pro rata amount will be calculated under the general scheme, since he has not contributed to the special scheme for civil servants for the entire 35-year period.

On the other hand, he should be entitled to an old-age pension under the special scheme for Italian civil servants since he paid contributions under this scheme for 25 years and five months.

(1) OJ L 209, 25.7.1998. (2) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971. (3) OJ L 74, 27.3.1972.

(1999/C 297/054) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2988/98 by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Meat inspection fees pursuant to Directive 93/118/EC

Directive 93/118/EC (1) lays down lump-sum fees for meat inspections.A number of establishments obliged to pay fees have taken legal action against district authorities demanding higher fees.

1.Can individual establishments invoke the Directive, which is addressed to the Member States?

2.Can the lump-sum amounts be exceeded, without any requirements having to be satisfied, until they cover the actual costs?

3.When costs are calculated, what is the point of reference: the individual authority or the total costs incurred by a Member State?

(1) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 15.

Reply given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

1.The Commission is of the opinion that Council Directive 93/118/EEC of 22 December 1993 amending Directive 85/73/EEC on the financing of health inspections and controls of fresh meat and poultrymeat may not be invoked by individual establishments.This view is based on the application to the text and objectives of this Directive of criteria laid down by the Court of Justice.

2.Directive 85/73/CEE, as amended by Directive 93/118/CEE, lays down flat-rate amounts for Community fees.These are based on a number of parameters, such as the average time needed for the inspection, administrative costs and staff costs.The Directive offers Member States a certain amount of flexibility starting from these central amounts.

This solution is designed to ensure the effective functioning of the inspection system and avoid any distortion of competition.However, flexibility is conditional on certain requirements.In other words, Member States may request payment of amounts higher than the standard levels subject to certain conditions laid down in the provisions of both the Directive and its Annex.The first requirement is laid down in Article 2(3): ‘Member States shall be authorised to collect an amount exceeding the level or levels of the Community fees, provided that the total fee collected by each Member State is not greater than the actual figure for inspection costs.’ 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/41

Member States must be able to justify their method of calculation (Article 2(5)). Once this requirement is satisfied, the Member States concerned may, for meat coming under Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat (1), increase the standard amounts for fees for individual establishments, subject to the conditions laid down (Annex, Chapter 1(4)(a)), or ‘collect a special fee covering actual costs’ (Annex, Chapter 1(4)(b)). There has been some debate about the meaning of the word ‘special’. In the traditional sense, i.e. specific to a certain species and common to all individual animals of that species, this implies that the Member State may opt to increase the standard amount for fees above the Community level in line with costs actually incurred.

3. The text refers to the total fees collected by each Member State.

(1) OJ 121, 29.7.1964.

(1999/C 297/055) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3010/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI)and Amedeo Amadeo (NI)to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: The political situation in Angola

The unilateral decision by the Angolan Government to expel UNITA members from the Government of Unity and National Reconciliation and the exclusion of the UNITA parliamentary group from the National Assembly are clear violations of the Lusaka Protocol and a serious breach of democratic principles. The suspended Members of Parliament are no longer able to represent their voters, are being subjected to harsh economic and material restrictions and, together with their families, are having to face up to strong psychological pressures. Furthermore, they are unable to leave the country and inform the outside world of what is happening in Angola.

1. Would the Commission not agree that, by breaking the agreements entered into, the government (MPLA) is attempting by illegal means to destroy UNITA? What view does it take of the fact that the government is using the security forces to suppress that party and seize its assets and the property of private individuals, thus undermining the efforts to achieve peace and national reconciliation?

2. Is it aware that the mercenaries who were required to leave the country have since returned to set up private police forces?

3. Can it state whether EU financial aid to Angola has been used to purchase Soviet-made weapons and luxury cars for the local nomenklatura? If it has not, what has it been used for?

4. Does it agree with those who believe that the recent events in Angola bear the stamp of a Marxist- Leninist ideological struggle to prevent democracy from taking hold by peaceful means through political mediation?

5. How does it intend to prevent democracy from being destroyed in Angola, to uphold human rights in that country and to speak out in support of UNITA in all the relevant international bodies?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 1998)

The Government of Angola did indeed decide to suspend UNITA members of the Government of Unity and National Reconciliation (GURN) on 31 August 1998, and asked the Supreme Court to consider suspending the 70 UNITA deputies in the National Assembly, on the grounds that UNITA had not complied with key provisions in the timetable for implementing the Lusaka Protocol. The Government of Angola decided to apply these measures for as long as UNITA failed to clarify its position with regard to the peace process. Following the setting-up in Luanda of a UNITA renewal committee, whose members declared their continued commitment to the peace process, the majority of Ministers and Deputy Ministers were reinstated in late September. C 297/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The Commission would draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the EU statement of 29 September, which stated: ‘The EU express their deep concern on the marked deterioration in the politico-military situation in Angola. There appears to be a real risk of a return to war and of a further widespread suffering of the Angolan people. The EU remains convinced that a lasting peace in Angola can only be obtained by full compliance with the Lusaka Protocol, which, together with the ‘Acordos de Paz’ and the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, remain the fundamental basis of the peace process. Clearly the blame for the current impasse in the peace process rests primarily with UNITA ... .’ It follows from this statement that the first step is for UNITA to prove its commitment to the Lusaka agreement and fulfil all its obligations, in particular the complete demilitarisation and return to State control of all territory.

The Commission would point out that the UNITA leadership based in areas which have not been returned to State administration is subject to sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council and transposed into Community law. The Commission is, however, extremely concerned at the rising tension in Angola and hopes that the Government and the UNITA leadership will resume dialogue to defuse the crisis. There have indeed been some reports of mercenaries in Angola. However, it is for the UN mission in Angola (MONUA) to check these allegations and to assess any potential mercenary involvement in the Angolan conflict.

The Community does not grant any direct budgetary assistance to the Government of Angola, so Community funds cannot have been used by the Government to buy military equipment. Community aid goes towards meeting the essential requirements of population groups in need, particularly with regard to health, food security, education and training, and to supporting rehabilitation work in this war-torn country.

The Commission backs the peace efforts of the UN Secretary General and his Representative. It is prepared to support democratisation.

(1999/C 297/056) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3016/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Substandard road construction in Greece

Greece is the country where the largest number of fatal road accidents in the EU occur and the number is steadily rising. One major reason for this is the very poor state of its motorways, which are funded mainly by the Community.

The problem is highlighted by the refusal of the Ministry of the Environment, Regional Planning and Public Works to assume responsibility for large sections of the Patras-Athens-Thessaloniki-Evzoni motorway, removing it from the tenderers to whom the contracts were originally awarded because of faulty workmanship. Furthermore, according to press reports, 30 kilometres of the Athens-Lamia road and 40 kilometres of the Athens-Korinthos road are evidently in a dangerously poor condition.

To what extent does the Commission monitor the quality of the work carried out on road construction projects in Greece receiving Community funding and what steps will it take if substandard workmanship is discovered in connection with these projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 1998)

The Commission is aware of the problem posed by the poor quality of certain sections of the Athens-Iliki and Athens-Corinth motorways. It has addressed official questions to the Greek authorities on a number of occasions since the first meeting of the Monitoring Committee for the roads and access operational programme on 13 July 1995.

Subsequently, the Greek authorities have informed the Commission on a number of occasions of the appointment of groups of experts to decide on the causes of the problems and appropriate remedies and of attempts by the firms responsible to repair the motorways; these have not, however, yielded satisfactory results. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/43

The Commission regards the delay in settling this matter as worrying. It will insist that the Greek authorities find a swift solution so that the motorways can be correctly repaired, responsibility clearly established and those to blame punished. This would also send a useful message to all those currently engaged in carrying out other projects under the Community Support Framework. The Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question No P-2120/98 by Mr Trakatellis (1) concerning checks on the quality of public works.

The Commission will monitor this question closely and will not fail to apply the rules on the recovery of Community funds if the present situation continues.

(1) OJ C 354, 24.11.1998.

(1999/C 297/057) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3019/98 by Karsten Hoppenstedt (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Prohibition on radio-controlled alarm systems in Belgium

1. Can the Commission confirm that radio-controlled alarm systems 7 i.e. those which do not use cables 7 are prohibited in Belgium and are therefore not recognised by the licensing authority, UPEA?

2. Is the Commission aware that, where insurance companies in Belgium require an alarm system to be installed, for instance to protect a building against break-ins, they only recognise state-approved systems, and will not accept radio-controlled systems?

3. Is the Commission aware that in other Member States of the Community radio-controlled alarm systems are recognised by the competent State authorities and that they are also marketed and used there?

4. Does the Commission agree that the Belgian regulations constitute a violation of Community law, particularly of the provisions concerning free movement of goods?

5. Can the Commission confirm that the Telecommunications Council of 26 February 1998 agreed that radio equipment (including remote control systems) could be marketed and used throughout the Union without any special approval being obtained from the respective authorities?

6. As a result of the Telecommunications Council of 26 February 1998, can foreign enterprises freely supply radio-controlled alarm systems to Belgium and can customers there equip their homes with such systems in order to protect them?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1998)

The marketing of alarm systems in Belgium is governed by the Law of 10 April 1990 on firms providing security services and on internal security services, according to which all alarm systems have to be approved by the ‘equipment committee’, and by the Royal Decree of 31 March 1994 establishing this approval procedure. Under this procedure, a series of tests and trials are conducted on the products concerned, as specified in Annexes 3 and 5 of the aforementioned Royal Decree. These tests relate to the operation of the equipment in question. Article 8 of the Decree also contains a clause regarding the mutual recognition of certificates and test reports issued by an approved or accredited body in another Member State, on the condition that these attest to the conformity of such systems and networks with standards or technical regulations which ensure a level of protection equivalent to that laid down by the Decree.

It was, however, not possible to grant approval to wireless alarm systems, because the tests specified in Annexes 3 and 5 of the Decree of 31 March 1994 had been devised at a time when wireless systems did not exist in Belgium and could not therefore be applied to them. C 297/44 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Deeming that this legal loophole was contrary to Community law and, in particular, to Article 30 of the EC Treaty, the Commission approached the Belgian authorities. In this context, on 25 June 1998, the Belgian authorities, in accordance with the procedure laid down by Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (1), gave notice of a new draft Royal Decree establishing the procedure for approval of alarm systems and networks, by which the tests laid down in the Annexes could also be applied to wireless alarm systems. Given that no detailed opinion was delivered on this draft Decree, it could be adopted after the end of the standstill period of three months, i.e. as of 25 September 1998. The Belgian authorities have been contacted on this matter, and it would appear that the draft will be adopted in the very near future, certainly before the end of the year.

As a result of this legal amendment, insurance companies will, in principle, also have to agree to insure properties protected by wireless alarm systems which are State-approved or are recognised by the authorities as equivalent. It should, however, be noted that the private status of these companies means that they are not obliged to observe the principle of the free movement of goods enshrined in Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty, which only cover State measures.

On the basis of the clause on mutual recognition contained in Article 9 of the above-mentioned draft, it should be possible for a wireless alarm system which is legally approved in another Member State to be marketed in Belgium.

As regards the telecommunications aspects, it should be noted that, according to the conclusions of the Telecommunications Council of 26 February 1998, a Member State may restrict the use of radio equipment for reasons associated with good spectrum management.

In addition, even if the wireless alarm systems conform with Community requirements in the field of telecommunications, it should be noted that other aspects regarding the operation of the equipment in question are not covered by these Directives. Under such conditions, an approval procedure conducted prior to a product being placed on the market for the first time may, in principle, be regarded as compatible with Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty, on account of the sensitive nature of the products concerned and the importance of their smooth operation in order to reasonably guarantee the protection of the safety of persons.

(1) OJ L 109, 26.4.1993.

(1999/C 297/058) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3022/98 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Public footpaths

Is the Commission aware that a number of walking routes have been created in the European Union which are identified by the letters G.R.?

Is the Commission aware, furthermore, that these footpaths are an important way of promoting rural tourism?

Will the Commission help to ensure that paths leading from one Member State to another are marked more clearly than they are at present?

Will the Commission also take measures to ensure the production of a publication indicating the routes of long-distance footpaths and how they link up with other pedestrian infrastructure, similar to that which exists for cyclepaths?

Will the Commission seek the creation of a legal status for public footpaths crossing public and private land?

If so, how?

If not, why not? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/45

Answer by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

The Commission is aware of the existence of walking routes for ramblers signposted with the initials ‘G.R.’, signifying ‘Grande Randonnée ramblers’ route’. The Commission is, however, not aware of any studies on the impact of such footpaths on the development of rural tourism.

The Commission does not have a legal basis for regulating how these paths are marked, how they link up between Member States, nor to ensure the publication of maps of these long-distance footpaths. These issues are the responsibility of the various organisations which lay, equip, signpost and maintain these paths in the Member States. The Commission also has no legal basis for seeking legal status for public footpaths crossing public and private land. This issue, which particularly concerns rights of property, access and use, is the responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

However, in the framework of Rural Development Programmes operating in certain areas of the Community, it may happen that structural funds are used to co-finance operations related to footpaths created by Member States’ authorities and marked ‘GR’. Such co-financed projects are most common in tourist areas focused particularly on nature and adventure tourism, which provide lookout posts for observing wild life, or studying biotopes, etc. When these footpaths cross private land, Member States take prior action so they remain open to the general public. As regards publishing maps of these long-distance footpaths, co-financing is also possible in the framework of these same programmes, when it is felt such information material will contribute to promoting tourism as a way to maximise the pay-back from investments and local economic potential.

Lastly, in certain geographic areas, these paths may even be linked to others in non-Community areas, as is the case between Austria and Hungary or between Germany and Poland.

(1999/C 297/059) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3046/98

by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL), Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NG) and Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Spanish hydrological plan

The Spanish press reports that the government has submitted a hydrological mini-plan worth 216 000 million pesetas (approximately 260 000 million escudos) to parliament for urgent approval so as to allow community co-funding be sought.

Amongst the construction projects involved in this mini-plan is the extension of the channel diverting water between the rivers Tagus and Segura, construction of which has not yet begun.

The Tagus is an international river, and the carrying out of work affecting this water course and specifically, diverting it should be subject to prior discussion and agreement with the other countries concerned, name Portugal. Furthermore, works of this kind require in-depth environmental impact assessment, and according to the Spanish place no such studies have been carried out.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Has the Spanish government already submitted its request for co-funding for the work on extendedly channel between the Tagus and Segura?

2. Is it going to accept this request for funding, without the project’s having passed an environmental impact assessment and without the Portuguese government’s having accepted that this channel should be built? C 297/46 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

To date, the Commission has not received a request from the Spanish authorities for part-financing in connection with these works. If they are to be part-financed by the Community in due course, the Commission will be ensuring that the rules on eligibility and combination of funding are fully complied with, as well as all the legal provisions relating to the environment or arising from international obligations such as under the joint management of cross-border river basins.

(1999/C 297/060) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3052/98

by Ursula Stenzel (PPE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: ECHO

The members of the Committee on Budgetary Control sharply criticised the Commission in their hearing of Commissioners Bonino, Liikanen and Gradin on the ECHO fraud cases.

Can the Commission say when the internal assessment of all potential future cases of this nature, mentioned by Commissioner Liikanen in the committee meeting, will be available?

Once the assessment is completed, will the Commissioner be able to guarantee that such occurrences will no longer be possible in future?

Can the Commission explain convincingly, and in a form comprehensible to EU citizens, why the UCLAF report was not handed over to Parliament in its entirety?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

The Commission has carried out a detailed inquiry into the use of external technical and administrative support. A first overview of the results was presented to Parliament’s Committee on Budgets on 5 November 1998. The budgetary authority will be provided with more detailed information in time for the second reading of the 1999 budget.

The Commission is doing all in its power to ensure that the evaluation referred to by the Honourable Member will be available shortly, bearing in mind the time needed to collect and analyse the results of the current inquiry.

The Commission will ensure that measures are taken to remedy identified irregularities on a permanent basis.

As stated by Mr Santer at the first part-session in October 1998, the Commission, together with Parliament, is looking into ways of providing Parliament with more information on inquiries conducted by the Task Force for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention while observing the need to avoid prejudicing people’s rights and breaching the confidentiality of the inquiries and the secrecy of formal investigations.

Here, the President has already taken the initiative of transmitting the report by the Task Force for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention direct to Parliament’s President. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/47

(1999/C 297/061) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3082/98 by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Application of Council Regulation (EEC) 3693/93

Given the importance of Council Regulation (EEC) 3696/93 (1),which is designed to harmonise the criteria governing the statistical classification of products by activity (CPA) in the EU:

Will the Commission say to what extent the said regulation has been applied in the various Member States?

Has it established a monitoring or control procedure of any kind to verify whether the regulation is indeed being applied?

Does it have any evidence that the regulation may have been breached in the Member States? If so,what form have the penalties imposed taken?

(1) OJ L 342,31.12.1993,p. 1.

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Council Regulation (EEC) 3696/93 of 29 October 1993 on the statistical classification of products by activity (CPA) in the Community as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) 1232/98 (1) provided a framework to ensure comparability between national and Community classifications and hence national and Community statistics.

The Regulation permits the Member States wishing to use a national classification derived from the CPA to do so. Nine Member States (Germany,Spain,France,Italy,the Netherlands,Austria,Portugal,Finland and Sweden) have developed national product classifications linked to CPA. Six Member States (Belgium, Denmark,Greece,Ireland,Luxembourg and the United Kingdom) ensure that sectorial applications are harmonised with CPA.

The Commission is monitoring developments through the statistical programme committee (SPC) as established by Article 4 of the Regulation. An additional audit is foreseen in 1999 as part of the procedure for the next update of CPA in 2002.

(1) OJ L 177,22.6.1998.

(1999/C 297/062) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3109/98 by Ingo Friedrich(PPE) to theCommission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Book entitled ‘Konservatismus und Rechtradikalismus’ (‘Conservatism and right- wing radicalism’)

Is it true that the Commission has financed or supported ‘Konservatismus und Rechtradikalismus’,a book with a foreword by Emil Carlebach,a member of the national executive of the DKP (the German Communist Party), and Peter Gingold?

If so,why is the Commission funding anti-democratic,left-wing radical authors of this kind?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

The Youth for Europe programme gives young people the opportunity to develop projects at a local level. This provides them with valuable experience of working on their own initiative (Action A.II.1 youth initiatives). C 297/48 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In the framework of this action the Commission financed a youth initiative project dealing with racism and xenophobia which produced the publication in question. This project was selected after compliance with the established selection criteria. It was approved by the German national agency of Youth for Europe and then accepted for funding by a selection panel, which consists of representatives of the Member States, the European youth forum and the Commission. The final evaluation of the project demonstrates that the activities stated in the application have been duly completed. However, a controversial publication has been produced, based on the experience of the project participants, which contains contributions from those mentioned by the Honourable Member. The Commission was informed of this publication only after the project managers had handed in their final report.

The Commission is of the opinion that this publication, which was produced entirely on the initiative of the project participants, should be tolerated in a pluralist society, which respects a variety of different opinions. Moreover, young people should be encouraged to deal with the difficult subjects of racism and xenophobia.

However, the controversial discussion of the present publication has led the Commission to instruct the national agencies to apply stricter criteria regarding the evaluation of the content of projects.

(1999/C 297/063) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3112/98 by Thomas Mann (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Implementation procedures for the Leonardo programme

In practice it can happen that, once a Leonardo project is up and running, the previously agreed number of participants eligible to receive funding is reduced. The organizers are then no longer able to finance the action which is already underway with the anticipated resources.

1. Potential organizers of European traineeships are deterred by the prospect of the financial risk involved.

2. The complicated application procedure prevents the pool of potential applicants from being extended.

3. In view of the protracted selection procedures, various forms of one-year vocational training are de facto excluded from European work experience projects.

4. The need to involve a national body (such as the Carl Duisberg foundation) makes the whole procedure more time-consuming and costly.

What does the Commission intend to do to remedy these defects?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

1. Once a Leonardo da Vinci project has started, the approved number of participants will not be reduced. Where the actual number of participants is smaller than envisaged when funding was awarded, the national coordination unit (NCU) responsible for managing placement and exchange programmes under strand I reduces the approved funding by the appropriate amount. There are no financial risks for programme promoters provided they administer their allocated funds correctly.

2. The procedure adopted is intended to provide the national authorities and the Commission with guarantees that the organisation and quality of in-company training will be properly monitored. Promoters are selected by the competent authorities (these are designated by the participating States, and the Commission informed). Selection must follow precise procedures. Practice has shown that the number of promoters and trainees has increased since the start of the Leonardo da Vinci programme and that this number is sufficient for the global grant allocated to each participating country to be expended. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/49

3. The selection process timetable adopted for the placement and exchange programme under strand I allows young people following a one-year basic training course to participate in a short-duration Leonardo da Vinci programme. It is in fact possible to submit applications before the start of basic training courses, and promoters do make use of this possibility in practice.

4. The Leonardo da Vinci programme has introduced decentralised management of strand I mobility programmes in (at the moment) 24 countries. This arrangement has been operating satisfactorily for several years. It is not a question of organisations playing an intermediary role; it is the NCUs themselves which are responsible for managing mobility programmes.

The Commission’s proposal for the establishing of the second phase of the Leonardo da Vinci programme from the year 2000 includes simplification and further decentralisation of programme management and measures in order to improve access to the programme.

(1999/C 297/064) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3124/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Oligopolies and milk market in Italy

The milk market in Italy seems to be dominated by an oligopoly formed by two or three big names. When municipal milk marketing boards were privatised these few names managed to offer very large sums with which rival associations of agricultural producers were unable to compete. For one northern Italian board more than three times the reserve price was paid.

It is evident that it is the consumers that will have to pay, and so-called quality milk will cost a small fortune although the difference in price is not justified by the difference in quality.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Is it aware of this situation?

2. Could it go into the dynamics of the market and check the possibility of basic competition?

3. How can an oligopoly situation guarantee the interests of consumers in the use of an essential basic foodstuff?

4. Can it confirm whether it has investigated the acquisition of the Rome milk marketing board?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

1. to 3. The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it is unaware of any business practices on the Italian milk market that could be caught by Article 85 or 86 of the EC Treaty. It would point out in this connection that an oligopoly situation is not in itself contrary to either article. It can therefore intervene on an oligopolistic market only in cases where it has in its possession particulars showing that businesses are conducting themselves in a manner contrary to Articles 85 and 86.

4. The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it decided on 25 March 1998 to institute proceedings under Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of aid granted for the privatisation of Centrale del Latte di Roma. It is currently examining the comments received from interested parties. In accordance with the procedure under Article 93(2), it will then take a final decision on the aid in question. C 297/50 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/065) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3129/98 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE)to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Distortions of competition in relation to the purchase of horsemeat

In northern Germany there are, apparently, substantial differences in the price structure applied to the purchase of horsemeat by German purchasers on the one hand and French, Belgian and Italian purchasers on the other.

Can the Commission confirm the existence of these distortions of competition between Member States in relation to the purchase of horsemeat? Does this situation arise as a result of EU subsidies?

Are such distortions of competition in line with the CAP?

Are national subsidies permissible in this area?

What possible means exist of restricting the transport of live animals to a minimum, in line with EU policy?

Would a young businessman investing in slaughtering, butchering and processing activities be regarded as eligible to receive EU assistance?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1998)

Horsemeat for human consumption is not covered by a common organisation of the market at Community level. By virtue of Council Regulation 26, of 4 April 1962 (1), only the provisions of Article 93(1) of the EC Treaty and of the first sentence of Article 93(3) are applicable to state aids granted for the production and marketing of agricultural products falling within the scope of Annex II of the Treaty which are not covered by a common organisation of the market. This means that although Member States are required to notify draft aid measures to the Commission, the powers of the Commission are limited to formulating observations on the aid measures concerned. The Commission does not have the power to launch a formal investigation into the aid measures concerned in accordance with Article 93(2), nor can it adopt a decision finding the aids to be incompatible with the common market because they give rise to distortions of competition.

There is no Community welfare legislation requiring the reduction to a minimum of the transport of live animals. The Community legislation on the protection of animals during transport only states under which conditions animals may be transported.

These conditions might however result in practice in a reduction of the number of animals that are transported over distances of more than eight hours within the Community.

Council Regulation (EC) 951/97 of 20 May 1997, on improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products (2) provides Community assistance to those carrying out investments relating to the processing and marketing of agricultural products. The investments must comply with the objectives set out in the regulation and shall, in principle, concern the products listed in Annex II to the EC Treaty. Furthermore, they must guarantee the producers of the basic products an adequate and lasting share in the resulting economic benefits. As horses and horse meat are included in this Annex, the slaughter, cutting and processing of horses and horse meat is eligible for support under this scheme. The measure is implemented via programmes submitted by Member States and approved by the Commission at the beginning of the programming period 1994-1999. The execution of the programmes and in particular the selection of investments is the responsibility of Member States.

(1) OJ 30, 20.4.1962. (2) OJ L 142, 2.6.1997. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/51

(1999/C 297/066) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3138/98 by Giuseppe Rauti (NI) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Mismanagement of vocational training funds

Dr Giovanni De Blasiis, in charge of the legal department of Basilicata regional council, has lodged a petition on misuse of Community funds earmarked for vocational training, which was entered in the general register as No 47/96. On 26 June 1996 Parliament’s Committee on Petitions deemed the matters raised to be admissible, therefore began consideration of the petition and decided to ask the Commission to take a stance on the various aspects of the problem.

What action does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

In response to a request for information from the petitions committee concerning petition No 47/96 by Dr Giovanni De Blasiis, the Commission transmitted a reply to the committee on 12 November 1996. The petition was discussed at a meeting of the petitions committee on 17-18 March 1997 and closed.

(1999/C 297/067) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3143/98 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: International literacy day

The international literacy day was celebrated on 8 September. This day was designated by the UN and Unesco with the aim of raising the awareness of the international community and ensuring that a commitment is entered into on a global scale with regard to education and development. Despite this, it is estimated that in the year 2005 there will be 870 million illiterate people over the age of 15. Similarly, according to data supplied by the Spanish national statistics institute, there are over a million illiterate people in Spain of which 960 000 are women and 380 000 are men.

In this connection, could the Commission answer the following two questions:

9 Can the Commission say how many people in the European Union are illiterate and provide a breakdown bothby gender and as a percentage of thepopulation of eachMember State?

9 What specific actions are being pursued by the Union to end illiteracy?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

On 14 May 1987 the Council and Ministers of Education adopted conclusions concerning a European programme to step up action against illiteracy. Illiteracy was regarded as being attributable to a series of mutually sustaining causes, in addition to school-linked factors: social, geographic, medical, psychological factors, as well as a lack of correspondence between educational requirements and those of the languages used by the media, including the languages of information processing. It was also considered that compulsory schooling alone was incapable of eradicating illiteracy and that initiatives should be taken as part of an overall strategy to bothprevent illiteracy in schoolsand improve literacy among adults. C 297/52 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Parliament resolution A3-0400/92 of 21 April 1993 on the eradication of illiteracy in the Member States notes that illiteracy, in particular functional illiteracy amongadults, still persists in the Community and that Member States are failingto take adequate measures to deal with it. It also stresses that there is no definition of illiteracy in Europe and that this lack of coherence affects the relevance of the studies carried out. It calls upon European, national, regional and local institutions to marshal their human and financial resources in order to enable the population of the European Community to exercise one of its fundamental rights: the right to education and to a minimum of knowledge.

The Commission is not carryingout any specific measures in the field of illiteracy, but some projects contained in the Socrates, Leonardo da Vinci and Youth for Europe programmes involve activities in this field when targeted at young people or adults in difficulty. Likewise, the European Social Fund, in particular under Objective 3, finances measures to help disadvantaged people, which may include activities to combat illiteracy.

(1999/C 297/068) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3168/98

by Luciano Vecchi (PSE)to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: ECHO humanitarian operations in North Korea

Over the past few months ECHO has supported a series of projects submitted and implemented by European humanitarian aid NGOs in North Korea.

These operations have undoubtedly had a positive impact on the serious humanitarian crisis affectingthe country in a whole range of areas (food, social conditions, health, etc.).

At the same time problems have apparently arisen with regard to relations with the North Korean authorities.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Does it intend to continue providingsupport for NGO humanitarian operations, as is to be hoped given the ongoing disastrous problems facing North Korea?

2. What criteria will be used and what financial resources will be made available for this purpose?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf on the Commission

(23 November 1998)

Based on what Commission staff and partner non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have observed in the field, North Korea is facingan economic and structural crisis (which has resulted in shortagesin food, medicine and medical equipment) rather than a classic famine situation (such as may be encountered in some African countries). Many observers have the impression that, over the last months, the general situation seems to have improved, mainly due to the massive inflow of international assistance.

For humanitarian agencies in the health and medical sectors, working conditions in North Korea have always been subject to important restrictions (access to information, access to beneficiaries, monitoringconditions). In recent months, North Korean authorities have even tightened up working conditions in this sector and apparently local authorities intend to take back full responsability for public health sectors over the coming months. Several NGO partners have already left the country, because their memoranda of understandingwere not renewed by the North Koreans (currently only three partners active in the health and medical sectors remain in the country). 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/53

Last year the Commission allocated around ECU 20 million to North Korea in the health and medical sector, as compared to ECU 2,5 million this year. The Commission is still financing two humanitarian projects in North Korea. However, in order for humanitarian action in this sector to be meaningful and effective and therefore in line with the Commission’s mandate, certain conditions must be met (freedom of access to beneficiaries and freedom to monitor the projects by NGOs). Before deciding on any future interventions in the health and medical sectors, the Commission will therefore have to pay close attention to developments in this regard.

(1999/C 297/069) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3173/98

by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Participation of Greek NGOs in urgent humanitarian aid programmes

Since the foundation of ECHO in 1991, a large amount of money has been made available for cooperation with its partners. The management of these programmes by the partners takes place under pressure, and this probably influences the selection criteria for partners which must provide the following guarantees: a) transparent and effective management under these difficult circumstances, and b) the participation of organizations based in all the Member States.

Will the Commission say: What are the most important of these criteria and, specifically, what is the rate of participation of Greek NGOs in urgent humanitarian aid programmes (which sectors and which geographical regions and countries)? What amounts of money have Greek NGOs managed within the framework of the relevant programmes?

Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

When choosing Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) to implement humanitarian operations the Commission’s assessment is based on the criteria laid out in the Council Regulation (EC) 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid (1), which includes: capacity for administrative and financial management, technical and logistical capacity for the planned operation, experience in the field of humanitarian aid and if need be experience in the third country concerned with the humanitarian operation involved, results of previous actions and impartiality.

The number of contracts for humanitarian operations concluded with Greek NGOs has noticeably increased in the last few years. Thus, from 2 contracts in 1996 to 6 in 1997 and 1998. The following are the Greek NGOs and amounts allocated in the context of these contracts: Greek Committee for International Democratic Solidarity: ECU 820 000 (5 contracts), Croix Rouge Hellénique: ECU 150 000 (1 contract), Kessap Dimitra: ECU 385 000 (1 contract), Médecins du Monde: ECU 1 070 000 (7 contracts).

The Greek NGOs receiving finance are in particular active in the health and food sectors and in emergency rehabilitation. The countries in which they operate are Lebanon, Albania, Jordan, Israel, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

The Commission, while respecting the criteria mentioned above, is keen to encourage Greek NGOs to take part in Community humanitarian programmes, and attaches particular importance to staff training. In this connection it is planning specific training sessions to help familiarise them with the procedures applying to the new framework partnership contract that will enter into force in January 1999.

(1) OJ L 163, 2.7.1996. C 297/54 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/070) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3178/98 by Christian Rovsing (PPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Medicine residues in horse meat

In view of the public concern over medicine residues in foodstuffs and the fact that animals, including racehorses, need to be treated for diseases:

1. What will the Commission do to ensure that MRL (Maximum Residue Limits) are laid down for all essential medicines and that the latter can be afforded by all horse owners?

2. Since professional racehorses receive considerable amounts of medicine duringtheir career, how will the Commission ensure that they do not end up as food?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-41/99 by Mr De Coene (1).

(1) See page 139.

(1999/C 297/071) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3187/98 by David Thomas (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Meat hygiene: Poultry

Does the Commission know how many Member States have successfully fully implemented the Poultry Meat Directive (71/118/EEC) (1)? Can the Commission also confirm whether all Member States have properly enforced the presence of at least one official veterinary surgeon in slaughter houses, as required under this Directive?

(1) OJ L 55, 8.3.1971, p. 23.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that all the Member States have notified the national measures taken in order to comply with Directive 71/118/EEC on health problems affectingthe trade in fresh poultry meat as amended and updated by Council Directive 92/116/EEC of 17 December 1992 (1). In order to verify the application of this directive the Veterinary and phytosanitary office carried out in 1994 and 1995 evaluation visits in all the Member States. The findings have been presented to the Member States and discussed with them. Some deficiencies in transposition and implementation and in particular in the field of the presence of the official veterinarian have been pointed out in some Member States. Recommendations for modification of the existinglegislationare beingconsidered duringthe preparation of the ‘simplification project’.

The Commission regrets to inform the Honourable Member that it is for the time being short of staff in the sector of veterinary inspection. Further verification of the application of the requirements of Council Directives 71/118/EEC is necessary, but the Commission can only use its scarce resources to address a limited number of priorities. A procedure to recruit new staff has been initiated and the poultry sector will become one of the priorities of the Food and veterinary office. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/55

The Commission is always ready to provide the Honourable Member with more detailed information.

(1) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993.

(1999/C 297/072) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3188/98 by Arthur Newens (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Humanitarian aid to the Sudan

Would the Commission state how much humanitarian and other EU aid has been delivered to the Sudan annually in each of the last five years and provide an estimate for the current year?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1998)

Total humanitarian assistance for Sudan over the last five years is ECU 115,64 million. The breakdown per year is ECU 26,11 million in 1994, ECU 21,40 million in 1995, ECU 17,38 million in 1996, ECU 18,95 million in 1997 and ECU 31,80 million in 1998 (to October). The above figures are not inclusive of costs of the regional ‘ECHO-flight’ operation, providing humanitarian air transport to Sudan and to Somalia. The annual cost of the Sudan operations of ECHO flight is roughly ECU 2,5 million per year.

In addition to the figures concerning humanitarian assistance, the Commission provided co-financing to non- governmental organisations (NGOs) per year of ECU 441 824 in 1994, ECU 550 835 in 1995, ECU 619 208 in 1996, ECU 978 809 in 1997, and ECU 651 589 in 1998 (estimated); aid to human rights and democratization of ECU 74 500 in 1996 and ECU 663 990 in 1998 (estimated); and food aid or security of ECU 12,07 million in 1994, ECU 7,53 million in 1995, ECU 3,80 million in 1996, ECU 2,00 million in 1997 and ECU 39,00 million in 1998 (estimated).

(1999/C 297/073) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3193/98 by Arthur Newens (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Trade with Turkey

Would the Commission provide figures detailing the changes in the volume of trade transacted between the EU as a whole and EU Member States, on the one hand, and Turkey, on the other, since the Customs Union came into effect?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Trade between the Community and Turkey has increased substantially since the entry into force of the customs union, from around ECU 22 000 million in 1995 to upwards of ECU 28 000 million in 1996 and ECU 34 000 million in 1997. The Community’s surplus on the account likewise increased over the same period, from ECU 4 000 million in 1995 to ECU 8 000 million in 1996 and ECU 10 000 million in 1997. The same trends are reflected in the figures for Member States’ bilateral trade with Turkey. C 297/56 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The impact of customs union on EC-Turkey trade was analysed in the Commission’s annual report on developments in relations with Turkey since the entry into force of the customs union (1).

(1) COM(98) 147 final.

(1999/C 297/074) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3197/98 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Progress on the European Energy Charter

In Kyoto the EU gave a binding undertaking to reduce emissions of CO2 and agreed on the targets to be achieved in this respect over the next few years. In the context of joint implementation the Member States are to draw up plans aimed at reducing CO2 emissions. Energy policy is of crucial importance in respect of joint implementation.

1. What role is the Commission 1 and, in particular, DG XVII 1 playing in drafting the plans of the Member States and, in this connection, in coordination at EU level?

2. What activities and results can the Commission report in the drafting and implementing of plans with regard to negotiable emission rights for energy with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe?

3. Is the Commission currently able to estimate what role energy plays in the plans of the Member States, and what forms of action the Member States are taking?

4. Can the Commission say which Member States are in the forefront of drafting plans under the Kyoto agreement, and which ones are lagging behind?

5. What role is the EIB playing in implementing plans with regard to the Kyoto objectives, and does the Commission have a political coordinating role in this respect with regard to the EIB?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 1998)

1. In order to meet their emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol both the Member States and the Community have important roles to play. However, in line with the subsidiarity principle, the Member States have the major responsibility for meeting the Kyoto reduction target. The Community, as a signatory of, and future party to, the Protocol, has the responsibility to ensure that Member States’ actions are consistent with the EC Treaty and that their obligations are met under the Protocol. It also has an important role in complementing, reinforcing and supporting Member States’ actions with common and co-ordinated policies and measures. Given that emissions of CO2 from energy use and production are the most important source of greenhouse gas, it is clear that the energy sector plays an important role in the development and preparation of the Commission’s proposals related to climate change.

2. Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol provides for emission trading. However, the detailed rules still have to be worked out. The Commission believes that international emission trading can be a useful mechanism for reducing abatement costs provided certain prerequisites are fulfilled. These include the condition that its use is subject to strict rules on monitoring, reporting, accountability and compliance. The Community continues to insist on the environmental effectiveness and transparency of emission trading.

3. Energy related greenhouse gas emissions account for over two thirds of total Community emissions, so the energy sector itself and those sectors such as transport and industry that use energy will play an important role in meeting Kyoto targets. The Commission has recently issued a communication ‘Strengthening environmental integration within Community energy policy’ (1) which develops the first elements of an energy strategy at the Community level to meet Kyoto commitments. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/57

The Commission has asked the Member States to provide details of their own national climate change strategies so that it can develop an overall cost-effective and environmentally sound Community climate change strategy. It intends to come forward with a new communication on this by June 1999.

4. The Commission does not have the information available at this stage to make an informed reply to this question.

5. The European investment bank (EIB), as an important provider of funds for the development of the Community’s economy, already takes into account the environmental objectives of the Community when making loans. The Commission will work to ensure that the EIB takes due account in its lending of the importance of the Community meeting its Kyoto target.

(1) COM(98) 571 final.

(1999/C 297/075) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3205/98 by Anne McIntosh (PPE)to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: European overnight railway services

In the light of the decision of the Court of First Instance, does the Commission intend to extend the operating authorisation of European Night Services beyond the present period of eight years?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

In its decision of 15 September 1998, the Court of first instance decided that the agreement concerning European night services does not infringe Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty.

Under these circumstances a new Commission decision granting an exemption in accordance with the provisions of Article 85(3) of the EC Treaty is not necessary.

(1999/C 297/076) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3211/98 by Bernard Castagnède (ARE)to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Compensation for banana producers following hurricane Georges

What steps does the Commission intend to take to compensate European and traditional ACP banana producers in the Caribbean whose crops have been devastated by hurricane Georges?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

Under Council Regulation (EEC) 404/93 of 13 February on the common organisation of the market in bananas (1), the Commission can adopt specific measures if banana supplies to the Community market are affected by exceptional circumstances.

It is first of all necessary to establish whether the circumstances really are exceptional. Those resulting from hurricane Georges¢s passage over Guadeloupe are currently being evaluated, so the Commission is not yet in a position to take a decision in the matter. C 297/58 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The Commission would also inform the Honourable Member that it has received a letter from the Dominican Republic informing it that banana production after the hurricane remains sufficient to supply the Community market as planned.

(1)OJ L 47, 25.2.1993.

(1999/C 297/077) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3220/98 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NG) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Irregularities in the awarding of a construction contract in Cerceda, La Coruña (Galicia, Spain)

Sogama S.A. is a publicly-owned Galician company active in the field of environmental management set up by the autonomous authorities as a means of carrying out their responsibilities in this field. In order to carry out its activities, the company published an invitation to tender for the construction of a thermoelectric waste treatment plant in the municipality of Cerceda (La Coruña)which will receive financial support from the Community. The call for tender resulted in tenders from various companies. The initial selection process did not result in the awarding of a contract. Subsequently, at some point not known to the unions, and without the publication of any announcement, the contract was awarded to a company based outside the autonomous community. Some important public offices, including the Galician Ombudsman, publicly criticised the awarding of the contract since it appeared that the administrative rules laid down had not been complied with. The regional authorities were even accused of having created the limited liability company in order to circumvent control by public authorities.

Workers active in the sector have initiated legal proceedings in Spain through their Union representatives.

1. Since this construction project receives Community financial support, can the Commission call on the competent authorities to initiate an investigation to look into the accusations levelled by Spanish trade unions?

2. Given that Galicia is among the European regions with the highest rates of unemployment, does the Commission not think that European funds allocated to the abovementioned construction project would fulfil their objective better if the companies concerned were based in Galicia or had factories there?

3. In what manner can the Commission intercede before the Spanish authorities in order to guarantee compliance with Community legislation on the environment and, more specifically, with (a)Directive 91/156/ EEC (1)on waste, (b)Directive 85/337/EEC ( 2)on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and (c)Directive 90/313/EEC ( 3)on the freedom of access to information on the environment.

4. As the guardian of the Treaties, to what extent does the Commission consider that workers employed by Galician companies have been discriminated against by the awarding of the contract to a non Galician company?

(1)OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32. (2)OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. (3)OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

1. On 7 May 1998, the Commission approved part-financing by the Cohesion Fund of the waste management project in Galicia. This project involved the construction of the thermoelectric plant mentioned by the Honourable Members.

The Commission was not aware of any irregularities in the award of the public contract referred to by the Honourable Members, and it is difficult to deal with this case on the basis of the information provided. The Commission would therefore ask the Honourable Members for more details on this matter in order to justify 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/59

its making an approach to the Spanish Government in order to check whether there has been an infringement of Community public procurement legislation. These details should focus on the following aspects: the statutes of Sogama S.A. (the extent of the administration’s holding in the company, its management or administrative, managerial or supervisory structures, the reason why this company was set up); any available documents concerning the initial procedure which failed to produce a result (contract notice, invitation to tender, specifications, evaluation report) and any information concerning possible irregularities which may have been committed in the course of this procedure; and any information concerning the procedure by which the contract was finally awarded, as well as any details on possible infringements of Community public procurement legislation.

2. and 4. The Community Directives relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (1) assist in the completion of the internal market through provisions aimed at ensuring compliance with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and equal treatment. It would be incompatible with these principles, and with the EC Treaty itself, to establish any form of preferences, including regional, which would favour certain tenderers over others.

3. Compliance with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2) and Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste (3), and with several other provisions concerning atmospheric emissions, is a precondition for the adoption of decisions concerning the financing of waste management projects under the Cohesion Fund. As regards Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment in particular (4), the Commission is not aware of any infringements having been committed.

(1) Directives 93/36/EEC, 93/37/EEC and 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 (OJ L 199, 9.8.1993), and Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 (OJ L 209, 24.7.1992). (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (3) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. (4) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(1999/C 297/078) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3223/98 by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Radio broadcasting

The French authorities recently closed down a radio station for a day as a penalty for having broadcast more foreign songs than the statutory limit.

Could the Commission state whether the legislation in question complies with the European rules on free competition?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

French Law No 94/88 of 1 February 1994 amending Law No 86/1067 of 30 September 1986 on freedom of communication stipulates that, with effect from 1 January 1996, sound broadcasting services authorised by the Conseil superieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA) must broadcast, at ‘significant listening times’ (1), at least 40 % of songs in French, half of which at least must be from ‘new talents or new productions’. The CSA checks compliance with these quotas on a quarterly basis and is entitled to impose sanctions ? ranging from a simple warning to compulsory closure ? on stations which fail to comply.

The Commission is aware that this obligation creates problems for a number of stations which, by their very nature or by virtue of their programming decisions, regularly fail to meet the imposed quota. It has taken note in the press of the successive sanctions imposed on the station referred to by the honourable Member. C 297/60 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The Commission has embarked upon talks with the French authorities regarding these quotas and the way in which they operate, since it considers that they may restrict the free movement of services in the Community. In the near future the Commission will assess these restrictions in the light of the objectives of general interest, particularly the cultural policy objectives, pursued by the French authorities.

(1) From 6.30 a.m. to 10.30 p.m. according to the CSA.

(1999/C 297/079) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3230/98

by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Business relationships with outside companies

Over the last few years the Commission has maintained special business relations with the companies belonging to Mr Perry, an entrepreneur based in Luxembourg. (His abbreviated telephone number was listed in the Commission’s internal telephone directory and he claims to have done approximately ECU 100 million worth of business with the Commission in the past.)

In connection with the accusations of fraud which have been levelled at him he has told the press (Focus magazine of 5 October 1998) that he knows of eleven other firms which have had experiences similar to his.

Can the Commission provide a list of all companies which it has contracted to hire outside staff? Can it say on what basis such companies are included in its internal directory? Can it supply figures showing the amount of business it has done with these companies over the last five years?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 1999)

The Commission would confirm that, over the years, it has called on numerous firms to perform a range of tasks involving the provision of staff.

A list of these firms, compiled for the ‘outside staff’ data base of the Directorate-General for Personnel and Administration, is being transmitted directly to the Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat. However, it should be emphasised that each Directorate-General is the authorising department for the budget headings within its remit and accordingly concludes its own contracts. It would be necessary to carry out a wide-ranging analysis on a case by case basis in all the Directorates-General and departments in order to establish the amount of business done with each firm over the last five years. Unfortunately, given the current budgetary rigour, the Commission does not have the human resources required for such a survey.

The Commission would stress that in recent years, with the support of the budgetary authority, it has endeavoured to reduce the number of outside staff by the repatriation of mini-budgets and by the conversion of appropriations into posts. The rules on the use of outside staff have been clarified by the ‘Code of Conduct governing the use of outside staff by Commission departments’.

With regard to the Technical Assistance Offices (BATs), on 22 July 1998 the Commission adopted a communication (SEC(98) 1217) laying down the following provisions relating to new/renewed programmes:

@ recourse to BATs should be part of the specific legislation on the programme/action;

@ an ex ante evaluation of the need to have recourse to BATs should be carried out;

@ a guide to the use of BATs is in preparation; compliance with the framework of rules and procedures set out in this guide will be ensured by the BAT monitoring unit and the Central Contract Team. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/61

In Autumn 1998, a survey was launched in the Commission departments, as part of the 1999 budget procedure, to ascertain the various forms of technical and administrative assistance, including BATS, which were charged to Parts A and B of the budget. A standard budget remark and ceilings for each budgetary heading concerned will ensure transparency whenever recourse is had to such assistance.

With regard to the inclusion of these firms’ telephone numbers in the directory in the form of abridged codes, officials who have access only to local numbers can ring specified correspondents in Belgium, in Europe or throughout the world without going though the switchboard. This arrangement makes communication more efficient for users who frequently contact a small number of specific external numbers; it reduces the switchboard’s workload and it limits the number of international lines which need be allocated. The abridged numbers are given to delegations, ministries and other institutions and to those private firms with which the Commission has contractual links (travel agencies, sub-contractors). Firms derive no advantage from being included in the list of abbreviated numbers (they are only for outgoing calls from the Commission) and the arrangement entails no legal obligation for the Commission.

(1999/C 297/080) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3234/98

by David Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: A single market for opiates

Could the Commission please outline the Community-wide approach to the free movement of opiates and say what measures it is taking to create a single market for opiates?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Opiates, products derived from opium, fall into the category of drugs whose manufacture, importation, exportation and use are governed by the provisions of the 1961 Vienna Convention, to which all the Member States are signatories but not the Community. Since they are harmful to health and may be a basis for trafficking, opiates are subject to strict regulations issued by each of the Member States, which, in the absence of Community legislation on the subject, have responsibility in this field. Under the provisions of Article 36 of the EC Treaty, the Member States are, in particular, entitled to take measures to prohibit or restrict imports of opiates from other Member States. For almost ten years the Commission has tried on a number of occasions, and again very recently, to get the Member States to establish a common approach both to the supervised movement of opiates in the Community and to the supervision of imports of opiates from non-member countries. This has proved impossible, since most Member States wish to retain total control of the flows of opiates across their borders. Therefore the Commission is at present unable to take any practical initiatives in this field.

(1999/C 297/081) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3238/98

by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Interreg initiative in Andalusia

What programmes and investments are planned or are being planned under the Interreg initiative in Andalusia? C 297/62 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Andalusia benefits from two programmes under the Community Initiative Interreg, one concerning the cross- border areas between Spain and Portugal, and the other those between Spain and Morocco.

The financial resources are allocated to the programmes as a whole and are not distributed on a regional basis. Moreover, apart from projects of a certain scale which have already been specified, the projects to be financed under the programmes are selected by the authorities responsible for implementing them. The Commission is not therefore in a position to give detailed answers to the questions raised.

With regard to Interreg Spain-Portugal, only Huelva province is concerned by this programme in Andalusia. The purpose of the programme is to develop the cross-border area and to encourage mixed Hispano- Portuguese initiatives by supporting local development and small infrastructure measures. This programme covers the part-financing of the Lepe-Ayamonte motorway project in Huelva province, at a cost of over ECU 4 million, for instance.

The provinces of Cadiz, Malaga, Ceuta and Melilla are eligible under the Interreg Spain-Morocco programme in Andalusia. The programme provides for the development of cross-border cooperation and acceleration of the pace of adaptation and integration of the regional economy in the internal market. The biggest project involves underwater electricity connection at a total eligible cost of ECU 70,22 million, with a contribution of ECU 13,26 million from the European Regional Development Fund. This project has already been completed.

(1999/C 297/082) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3242/98

by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Council inactivity in the legislative process

In contrast to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union is not bound by set deadlines in the performance of its tasks pursuant to the Treaty Establishing the European Community (ECT). In the legislative process, as with other decisions, the time when a decision is taken is always at the discretion of the Council. In the past this has meant that in controversial and politically sensitive matters the Council has often been inactive, even when the Commission has submitted a proposal and Parliament has exercised its rights of codecision in accordance with the Treaty. In these cases of Council inactivity Community law merely allows the Commission to amend or withdraw its proposal (cf. Article 189a ECT).

In this context I should like to ask the Commission:

1. In how many instances in the last ten years has the Council adopted neither a favourable nor an unfavourable decision in respect of a Commission proposal and after the involvement of Parliament?

2. How many dossiers are older than the period of office of the current Commission, and how many are more than nine months old?

3. To which policy areas of the EC do the dossiers referred to in question 1 belong?

4. Does the Commission intend to submit to the next Intergovernmental Conference a proposal for inclusion in the EC Treaty of a clause establishing a timetable for Council decisions on Commission proposals or any other decision?

5. If not, what are the Commission’s views on including in the EC treaty a deadline of, say, six or nine months for Council decisions? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/63

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat-General lists in which he will find detailed answers to the questions raised.

1. There are 280 proposals since 1 January 1988 transmitted to the Council, on which it has consulted Parliament but not taken a decision.

2. 68of these proposals were transmitted to it before 31 December 1994; 205 of these proposals were transmitted to it before 31 December 1997 (i.e. over nine months ago).

3. With regard to policy areas, the Honourable Member is referred to the list mentioned above, where proposals are classified by sector.

4. No.

5. The Commission has always endeavoured to act in such a way that the legislator can take a decision on its proposals as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/083) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3262/98

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) to the Commission

(22 October 1998)

Subject: Reforms in connection with implementation in Greece of projects under the Second CSF and Cohesion Fund and list of projects with identified shortcomings and defective work

A careful reading of Commissioner Wulf-Mathies’ answer of 12 October 2120/98( 1) leaves no doubt that it is not only the contractors but also the supervisory bodies who are responsible for the serious failings in the implementation of the projects. Moreover, a number of other important questions have been raised concerning the supervision of the projects and the changes introduced after the proposals by the joint steering committee made up of Greek and Community experts. Recently, not only were serious shortcomings identified but also variances of as much as 90 %. If these irregularities are taken together with a number of recent road accidents attributed to poor road surfacing, the responsibility is enormous and rests not only with the Greeks but also the Community as joint funder of the projects.

1. What reforms has the joint committee proposed, apart from setting up the ESPEL quality control mechanism, and which of these have been adopted and implemented in Greek law?

2. Why was there such a delay in ordering thorough checks to be carried out i.e. until 1 July 1998, when serious shortcomings had already been identified in completed projects and projects in progress?

3. How are checks carried out on projects, i.e. are spot checks carried out once the work is completed but not during construction by the supervisor of the project and the national body responsible for implementation of the project?

4. In which projects were shortcomings identified? Which national bodies were responsible for implementation of those projects and what is their responsibility? Can the Commission provide a detailed breakdown of this information.

(1) OJ C 135, 14.5.1999, p. 16. C 297/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

1. In addition to the setting up of Espel, which acts as a third party inspection body, a modernisation plan covering the directorate concerned within the Ministry of Public Works is under way.

2. Espel began its work on 1 January 1998. It was felt that, in the first six months, large numbers of sampling checks were preferable to exhaustive checks on only a few projects.

3. The checks carried out by Espel on projects receiving Community part-finance take place irrespective of the stage the projects have reached, i.e. even if they have been completed.

4. The Commission does not have a list of the projects checked by Espel and it would point out that the number of tests carried out by sampling on each project examined in the first six months does not allow specific projects to be singled out.

As it stated in the answer to the Written Question referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission intends to follow developments closely.

(1999/C 297/084) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3277/98 by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission

(22 October 1998)

Subject: Chad-Cameroon pipeline

At the recent meeting of the ACP-EU Joint Assembly, Commissioner Pinheiro said that the European Investment Bank had been approached by the Governments of Chad and Cameroon for financial support for a pipeline project between the two countries to be managed by Exxon. According to a DG VIII representative (speaking at a press conference about the project called by Mr Wilfried Telkämper, MEP), the Commission already strongly supports this project politically.

Will the Commission uphold that political support, in the light of the environmental and social problems the project will produce and which, according to studies carried out by the World Bank’s Expert Panel and by the Netherlands Government’s EIA assessors, have not been adequately addressed by Exxon’s environmental impact assessment and management plans? And will the Commission be recommending Community funding for the project in any form, such as through the EDF or EIB?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

The Commission does not intend to propose Community financing for the proposed pipeline to carry Chad oil to the port of Kribi (Cameroon).

It also considers it is inconceivable to prevent such a poor country as Chad from exploiting the only resource which will give it any real revenue.

In the Commission’s view, a positive approach is indicated and in-depth discussions should be initiated with the Chad authorities on measures to protect the environment and the health of those sections of the population affected by oil exploitation, to allocate a reasonable proportion of oil revenue to village communities in the oil-producing region and to protect their legitimate rights and, at a more general level, on the effective and targeted use of oil revenue to combat poverty.

The Commission would point out that the European Investment Bank (EIB) is an independent institution and has its own decision-making bodies. However, it understands that the EIB would be prepared to consider participating in the financing of the pipeline with other financial institutions such as the World Bank and that 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/65

any decision it might take will take account of the answers to the social and environmental questions raised by such a project.

(1999/C 297/085) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3297/98 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Transfer of Macao to Chinese administration ' troops

In 1975 Portugal withdrew its military forces from the territory of Macao, the size of which did not justify a military presence. The Sino-Portuguese joint declaration grants the Central Government of the People’s Republic of China exclusive competence in the area of defence and foreign policy, it being understood by the two parties that no Chinese troops would be stationed there. This was confirmed in April 1997in the European Parliament by Mr Lu Ping in reply to my question.

Nevertheless, the Deputy Prime Minister Qian Qichen has now announced to the Preparatory Commission meeting in Beijing that China will send troops to Macao as a symbol of sovereignty.

How does the Commission assess this fact from the point of view of the credibility of China’s commitments to the principle of ‘one country, two systems’?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1998)

The Commission is aware that after having administered the enclave of Macau since 1553, the Portuguese government decided in 1975 to withdraw its military forces from the territory. Under the terms of the Sino- Portuguese declaration of 1987, China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau from 20 December 1999. Under Article 14 of the Basic law of the Macau special administrative region of the Peoples Republic of China, the Central Peoples Government shall be responsible for the external defence of the Macau special administrative region. The government of Macau shall be responsible for the maintenance of internal public order.

The Commission strongly supports the application of the ‘one country, two systems’ policy to the future special administrative region of Macau, and will continue to co-operate closely with the territory under the Community-Macau Trade and co-operation agreement. The Commission will carefully monitor developments regarding the transfer of sovereignty.

In this context the Commission attaches utmost importance to the principle that law enforcement, crime prevention and the maintenance of public order are tasks which will be the responsibility of the authorities and the judiciary of the special administrative region. Under the Basic law these tasks cannot be the responsibility of any Chinese military presence stationed in Macao. The only conceivable justification of such a presence would be to deal with external threats to Macao’s security, which is not currently apparent.

(1999/C 297/086) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3314/98 by Rijk van Dam (EDD) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: The detained leader of the United People’s Party of Azerbaijan, Alakram Gumbatov

1. Is the Commission aware of the situation of the detained leader of the United People’s Party of Azerbaijan, Alakram Gumbatov, whose wife is living in the Netherlands as a refugee?

2. How does it view the fact that Gumbatov has been held without trial and that the criminal proceedings and the file on the case are not being disclosed to the outside world? C 297/66 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

3. Does it feel that Gumbatov’s arrest is evidence of insufficient a guarantee of political freedoms by the Azerbaijani authorities?

4. What does it thinkof the situation that has now arisen, in which the Azerbaijani authorities appear to be deliberately withholding medical aid and food from Gumbatov?

5. Is the Commission willing to appeal to the Azerbaijani Government on humanitarian grounds to bring Gumbatov’s treatment in detention into line with the relevant international standards, possibly in cooperation with the International Red Cross?

6. What is the human rights situation in Azerbaijan? What does the above example mean for trade relations between the EU and Azerbaijan?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

The Commission has not been informed in detail about the case of Mr Gumbatov. However, it understands that he was arrested in 1993 at a time when Azerbaijan faced the danger of political dissolution. The President at that time had lost power and several war lords controlled different parts of the country. One of these was Mr Gumbatov who declared an independent Talish-Mugan Republic in the southern part of Azerbaijan, near the border with Iran.

The Commission understands that Mr Gumbatov was sentenced to death in February 1996 on charges of treason and attempting to stage a coup d’Etat. The death sentence has since been abolished in Azerbaijan.

The Commission is aware of the general conditions under which prisoners are held in Azerbaijan, which are highly unsatisfactory. The Commission would be willing to support any initiative on the part of the Union to improve the conditions under which prisoners are held in Azerbaijan and to bring the legal system up to Organization for security and cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and Council of Europe standards.

Representatives of the Commission raised the general issue of human rights during different meetings with representatives of the Azerbaijani government. The Parliament delegation for the relations with the Transcaucasian Republics also discussed this when it visited Azerbaijan at the end of June 1998. In any future contacts, the Commission will continue to press the Azerbaijani authorities to improve their situation. The next Community-Azerbaijan joint committee meeting foreseen for December 1998 also provides an opportunity to discuss informally the human rights situation with the authorities and to explore ways and means of improving the situation. Moreover, the entry into force of the partnership and cooperation agreement (PCA) next year will provide a more institutionalised platform for the Community and its Member States to address these questions. The Commission has equally launched projects in Azerbaijan under the Tacis democracy programme.

(1999/C 297/087) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3349/98 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: The drug Viagra

There have been reactions all over Europe to the reports published in the German daily newspaper ‘Bild’ on 13 October last of experiments carried out with the Pfizer drug Viagra on dogs in Sandwich in Great Britain.

The Commission:

1. Whether or not for the purposes of authorization, has it been informed, via its departments or the EMEA, of experiments on animals using Viagra and, if so, which and how many animals were used?

2. What are its views on killing animals in order to produce this kind of medicinal product, not least in the light of the EU’s declared intention to reduce the numbers of this kind of experiment? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/67

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/088) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3357/98 by Georges Berthu (NI) to the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Subject: Transfer of national central bank gold reserves to the ECB

On 21 October 1998, when the report on foreign currency reserves in the third stage of EMU was being considered in plenary sitting, I asked Commission Member Mr de Silguy if foreign currency reserves in gold currently held by national central banks would be physically transferred, in whole or in part, to Frankfurt. The different statements made at European level hitherto have remained ambiguous on that point. Nor was the question answered in the debate that followed. Can the Commission issue a formal answer?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 1998)

According to Article 3 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and of the European Central Bank (ECB), the official foreign reserves of the Member States are held and managed by the ESCB.

Article 30 of the ESCB/ECB Statute specifies the conditions under which the ECB shall be provided with foreign reserve assets by the national central banks. It states that the ECB shall have the full right to hold and manage the foreign reserves that are transferred to it and to use them for the purpose set out in the Statute.

However, there are no plans for the physical transfer of gold reserves from the national central banks to the ECB.

(1999/C 297/089) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3358/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(4 November 1998)

Subject: Project for water supplies to Zaragoza and the surrounding area

In the Spanish region of Aragon plans exist for a large-scale ‘Project for water supplies to Zaragoza and the surrounding area’.

This project, which has now been approved, has been described as the largest of all those eligible for Cohesion Fund money in the Spanish state. It is intended to provide the city of Zaragoza and some fifty municipalities in the surrounding area with a high-quality water supply.

A total of PTA 22 000 million has been allocated to fund this project, with over half this sum (approximately PTA 12 000 million) being contributed by the EU. A physical link of over 100 km will be created to transport the water from its point of origin at the Yesa reservoir to its final destination (Zaragoza and surrounding area).

In view of the large sum involved and the input from the Union’s coffers, and given that lack of time is the biggest problem, since a decision will have to be made on tendering no later than 31 December 1999 if the EU contribution is actually to take effect: Is the Commission fully informed of the state of progress on the project? C 297/68 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

What are the deadlines for awarding the tender, beginning work on the project and completing it within such time that there is no risk of losing eligibility for the Community funding?

Does the possibility exist of extending the deadlines without prejudice to the Community funding?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

The Commission received an application on 4 August 1998 for a Cohesion Fund subsidy for the preliminary stage (drafting of preparatory studies) of the water supply project for the city of Zaragoza and some fifty municipalities in the Ebro valley between Novillas and Fuentes de Ebro. Work on the studies began in August 1998 and they are due to be completed in April 1999. However, no additional information has been provided on the construction phase of this project.

If the Spanish authorities were to submit an aid application for the construction of this project under the 1999 budget, the Commission could examine the possibility of part-financing subject to compliance with the rules and requirements laid down in Council Regulation (EC) 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund (1) and the availability of funds under the budget for that year.

It should be borne in mind that the date governing the eligibility of expenditure is the date on which the aid application is submitted to the Commission. Naturally, it is preferable that the project should be as advanced as possible from the point of view of awarding the tender for the works.

(1) OJ L 130, 25.5.1994.

(1999/C 297/090) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3369/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Semi-skimmed milk

Would the Commission confirm that its answer to question E-1368/98 (1) is correct?

Is it not in order for Member States to charge different prices for whole and semi-skimmed milk?

Was consideration given to child health issues when Regulation (EEC) 3392/93 (2), Article 4.1b was drawn up?

(1) OJ C 402, 22.12.1998, p. 119. (2) OJ L 306, 11.12.1993, p. 27.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Commission confirms that its answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-1368/98 is correct.

The Community legislation on school milk subsidies provides that the amount of aid for the different dairy products shall be determined taking into account the milk content of the products concerned. In other words, the amount of aid should be related to the value of the products. The underlying objective is to ensure that the net selling price for the different products would be more or less the same so as to avoid that this price would influence the choice of the pupil for one product or another. However, the regulations do not oblige Member States to charge the same selling price for different products. They merely oblige Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that the aid is reflected in the price paid by the beneficiary. It is, therefore, admissible that semi-skimmed milk and whole milk be sold at different prices. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/69

The Commission is convinced that the operation of the Community school milk scheme is consistent with policy on health issues.

(1999/C 297/091) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3370/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR)to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Karen people of Burma

Has the Commission studied the recent ILO report on Burma? What action does it intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

It is clear from recent reports of the heads of mission in Rangoon and from other sources such as the International labour organisation’s report that the situation in Burma is deteriorating. There are clear indications of widespread forced labour and intensified harassment of the elected opposition and of the leader of the National league for democracy (NLD) Aung Sang Suu Kyi. Civilian abuse, extrajudicial executions, and massive programmes of forced relocation are the daily agenda of the State peace and development council (SPDC).

The General Affairs Council, held in Luxembourg on 26 October 1998, once again considered the deteriorating internal situation in Burma and remained deeply concerned at the lack of positive response from the Burmese authorities to the repeated calls for steps towards the promotion of democracy and human rights, and national reconciliation.

The Council therefore strengthened the Union common position (1), which was expiring on 28 October 1998 and extended its application for six months to 28 April 1999. The new common position (2) includes a widening of the visa ban by explicitly including transit visas under the current ban and its extension to cover Burmese authorities in the tourism sector, while ensuring that the ban is applied rigorously to all individual members of the SPDC and the military, together with their families. It further echoes the view, expressed by Daw Aung Suu Kyi, that, in the present situation, it is inappropriate for tourists to visit Burma.

(1) OJ L 287, 8.11.1996. (2) 98/303/CFSP.

(1999/C 297/092) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3378/98 by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE)to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Data protection directive

On 24 October 1998, the Law on Personal Data entered into force in Sweden. This legislation is based, inter alia, on the EC directive on data protection. Under the Swedish authorities’ strict interpretation of the law, it will be applied to home pages on the Internet. This means that owners of home pages with chat functions may be breaking the law because chat pages contain data about individuals and their opinions and because the Internet is global and the information may be disseminated to countries outside the EU and the EEA.

Was it the Commission’s intention to restrict the type of Internet use described above when the data protection directive was adopted? C 297/70 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1) applies to all processing of personal data irrespective of the means used.It therefore also applies to the processing of personal data carried out by automatic means on the Internet.

As indicated in particular in Article 33 of that directive, the Parliament and the Council were fully aware of the challenges presented by the information society in the case of the right to protection of privacy.This is why the aim of the directive is to ensure that personal data are processed in a fair and lawful manner with a view to gaining the confidence of individuals in the use of their data both in the traditional world and in the on-line environment.

Consequently, the use of the Internet for conversation (‘chat’) involving the processing of personal data of the participants or of other people is subject to the relevant rules, without there being any limitation on using the Internet.For example, those responsible for such a site accessible to everybody should thus inform the users beforehand about the public nature of the site as well as about the risk of data being passed on to non-member countries which do not guarantee an adequate level of protection for their personal data.Under these conditions, those taking part in conversation (‘chat’) can freely consent to exchanging their personal data.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(1999/C 297/093) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3402/98 by Catherine Lalumière (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Possibility for the European Union of Association for Craft and Small and Medium- Sized Enterprises (UEAPME) to participate in European consultations between management and labour as a fully fledged social partner

SMEs and craft trades constitute the vital fabric of the European economy, accounting for 99,8 % of all European Union firms.They provide 68 million jobs, i.e.a growing share (some 72 %) of total employment in the European private non-primary sector.SMEs therefore make a major contribution to creating wealth and jobs.

Under the rules governing the arrangements for dialogue between management and labour (Article 4 of the Social Protocol), however, the main organisation representing craft trades and SMEs, covering 9 140 000 firms and some 50 million workers, is debarred from the structures for negotiations, which are conducted exclusively between three organisations (UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC).

This situation sidelines a very large proportion of SMEs, which are refused the right to participate in European consultations between management and labour.Furthermore, the present procedures do not appear to observe ILO Conventions 87 and 98 on the principle of the right to negotiate.

The Court of First Instance recently dismissed UEAPME’s action, asserting that, ‘having regard to the provisions of the Agreement, the applicant cannot claim to possess either a general right to participate in the negotiation stage of the second procedure provided for by the Agreement or, in the context of this case, an individual right to participate in negotiation of the framework agreement’.

That response = whatever its basis may be in law = is politically far from satisfactory.The present practise is harmful to the smooth operation of the European social model, which requires democratically informed dialogue between management and labour.

What action could the Commission take to resolve this dilemma? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/71

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

The Commission considers that small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) have a key role to play in contributing to the creation of wealth and jobs in the Community.

The Commission has to ensure that the signatories to an agreement, which is to be transposed into Community legislation, are sufficiently representative in relation to the scope of the agreement.The Commission must respect the autonomy of the social partners as regards the choice of negotiating partners, and thereafter during the negotiations.As regards consultations, both the Commission and the Council indeed have responsibility to ensure that these are as representative as possible.The Court of first instance has recently supported this approach in a landmark judgement (1).These principles underpin the Commission’s communication on adapting and promoting the social dialogue at European level (2) which included proposals to improve the working of the social dialogue.

In consultations, the four main organisations representing SMEs, the European Union of crafts and small and medium-sized enterprises (Ueapme), Eurocommerce, the Union of industrial and employers’ confederations of Europe (Unice) and Copa (comité intersyndical des organisations professionnelles du personnel artisanal), have always been represented in consultation procedures initiated by the Commission.They have not all, however, been invited to the meetings between the social partners and Troika and Heads of State and government as initiated at the Luxembourg European Council on employment in November 1997.Given this omission and the need to improve the current structure for the standing committee on employment, the Commission adopted in parallel to the communication a proposal to the Council to reform the standing committee.This proposal would enlarge the social partners’ participation in these important Troika meetings, to include also Ueapme, Eurocommerce and Copa on the employers’ side.In short the Commission proposes to the Council the creation of a single, transparent and representative forum for high-level dialogue on employment2.

As for negotiations, in its communication the Commission urges the social partners to seek political compromise to ensure that their dialogue is as effective as possible and attracts widespread support by ensuring optimum representation.This message, which is in line with the position of the Parliament on the green paper which preceded the communication, has led to a discussion between Unice and Ueapme on the possibility for the latter to take part in all the relevant joint-action and negotiation processes within the European social dialogue.This discussion seems to be close to a positive solution, which the Commission would whole heartedly welcome.

(1) Judgment of 17 June 1998, Ueapme v Council (case T-135/96), Rec.1998). (2) COM(98) 322 final.

(1999/C 297/094) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3413/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: ‘Tuscia Qualità’ consortium

The ‘Tuscia Qualità’ provincial consortium was set up by a number of public authorities, cultural associations, credit institutions and businessmen in the province of Viterbo for the purpose of selecting, promoting and publicising high-quality food and craft products, tourist services and cultural events in the Viterbo area by means of the ‘Tuscia Qualità’ label.

In view of the size and characteristics of this area just north of Rome, almost all of which has Objective 5b status, and since the consortium’s objectives are to promote the policies being pursued by the EU in that field, would the Commission state:

1.whether it would be possible to publicise the initiative at Community level and establish links with similar initiatives such as the ‘Culinary heritage’ project?

2.whether there is any possibility of the Commission providing this admirable initiative with guidance and support?

3.whether more appropriate Community channels and programmes exist to supplement those set up at national or regional level? C 297/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Under Objective 5(b) and the Community Initiative Leader II, the Guidance Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund can part-finance measures relating to promotion, labelling and investment in local and regional quality agricultural and forest products. The national and regional authorities are solely competent for considering projects with a view to part-financing. The Lazio Region Assessorato Economia e Finanza (Department of the Economy and Finance) has the task of coordinatingthe implementation of Community structural measures in the Lazio Region under Objective 5(b) and the Community Leader II Initiative.

Identifying partners and exchanging experience in the field covered by the project could be fostered through the Leader European Observatory.

The Commission points out that agricultural products and foodstuffs laying claim to a particular quality linked with a specific geographical name and identified with that geographical name by a label should be registered under the Community system provided for in Regulation (EEC) 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1).

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

(1999/C 297/095) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3437/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Refuse collection in Rome

Over the last few months there have been a number of disputes with the Rome city authorities and with AMA (the company responsible for collectingthe city’s refuse) concerningthe arrangementsfor refuse collections, which prevent the bins intended for the collection of solid waste and those designed to facilitate selective collection from beingused easily.

In view of the above, could the Commission say:

1. What collection arrangements are currently in operation in the other EU Member States?

2. Whether it considers such a state of affairs to be contrary to EU directives on the collection and recycling of waste?

3. What its general view of the matter is?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

1. There are no specific directives on waste collection and there are a variety of schemes for the collection of waste in Member States. It is not possible to give a comprehensive answer to the question of the Honourable Member because many factors have to be taken into account, includingclimate, eatinghabits, and local conditions. Usually, there are also differences among regions in a given Member State in order to adapt to local circumstances.

2. Directive 75/442/EEC on waste (1) as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC (2) stipulates in Article 4 that waste has to be recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and the environment. Details about the organisation of waste collection and disposal are left to Member States which have wide discretion in this area. Generally, differences of opinion between a local authority and a company entrusted with the task of collection and disposal of municipal waste, do not affect Community environmental legislation in the waste area. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/73

3. The information provided does not allow the Commission to give an opinion on the problem raised by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L194, 25.7.1975. (2) OJ L78, 26.3.1991.

(1999/C 297/096) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3468/98 by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Regulation of duty-free shops

The Commission’s delaying over the regulation of duty-free shops has created confusion among the organizations affected. At the same time, the Member States are taking their own, conflicting measures. Would the Commission, therefore, say what measures it will take, in collaboration with Parliament, to remove the confusion in the minds of the buying public and lay down clear rules to govern the operation of such shops?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Rules for the taxation of goods sold by duty-free shops to passengers travelling within the Community are contained in the general provisions of Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes 9 Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (1) and Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (2). Until 30 June 1999, Member States may, as a derogative measure under Article 28k of Directive 77/388/EEC and Article 28 of Directive 92/12/EEC, exempt such supplies from VAT and excise duties, subject to certain conditions in terms of value and quantity.

The Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that, according to the EC Treaty, Member States shall take all appropriate measures for the implementation of existing Community legislation.

To facilitate the application of the existing legislation in the specific case of the ending of intra-Community duty-free sales, the Commission met representatives of Member States in order to discuss how existing VAT and excise provisions should be applied to sales to intra-Community air and ferry travellers. Subsequently, the Commission issued a press release (3) clarifying the situation.

(1) OJ L145, 13.6.1977. (2) OJ L76, 23.3.1992. (3) IP98/858.

(1999/C 297/097) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3473/98 by Yves Verwaerde (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Monitoring producer organisations in the processed vegetable sector

Producer organisations have a central role in the new common organisation of the market in the processed vegetable sector.

The scrutiny of contracts is to be stepped up. The role of producer organisations will consist of centralising payments, negotiating and signing contracts, ensuring a balance between supply and demand, determining the sown areas required under a given contract, and carrying out the relevant checks. C 297/74 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

It would appear, however, that certain manufacturers, especially in the Picardy and Nord-Pas-de-Calais regions, currently exercise control over structurally defective producer organisations and that the utilisation of the subsidies allocated under the EAGGFdoes not always comply with the spirit of European regulations.

What means does the Commission have of exerting pressure on these less-than-transparent producer organisations?

Will it inform them directly that because of their conduct they risk seeing assistance to them under the EAGGF withheld?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

Under Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC) 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1) Member States are responsible for granting recognition to producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector and for monitoring their internal operation. The Commission can, however, make representations to the national authorities asking them to examine any problem arising as a result of the defective structure of the producer organisations. The Commission can also propose that this examination be undertaken during the checks on the application of the Community rules carried out at regular intervals by the departments responsible for the clearance of accounts.

Information concerning this matter must be sent to the French authorities. A request for information in this connection has been presented to them. If necessary the matter will be considered during the checks to be carried out in France for the clearance of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) accounts.

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.

(1999/C 297/098) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3479/98 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission

(12 November 1998)

Subject: Approval of projects carried out by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) funded by budget line B7-6000

The establishment of the joint service for the management of external cooperation instruments continues to be affected by a lack of transparency regarding the co-financing of NGO projects under budget line B7-6000.

Can the Commission say:

; which department will sign contracts with the NGOs on behalf of the Commission, and hence finalise the decision-making procedure;

; how will the actual flow of information be guaranteed between the joint service (responsible, inter alia, for monitoring and assessing the projects) and DG VIII’s A 4 unit, which is to base its relations with the NGOs on these assessments?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 1999)

The Development Directorate (unit VIII/A/4 ; Civil Society and NGOs; decentralised cooperation) will be responsible for overseeing the decision-making procedure for implementing the appropriations, although it will also involve desk officers and the delegations in the countries concerned by the relevant projects. When the appraisal process is complete, a contract will be signed ; until further notice this will be done by the Director of Directorate A, in DG VIII. The Joint Relex Service (unit SCR/C/5 ; NGOs, food aid, population matters, Aids) will be responsible for implementing the contract. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/75

Units VIII/A/4 and SCR/C/5 have made a concerted effort to set up a mutual information system to ensure that any important data likely to influence a decision on whether an NGO is eligible is available at the right time. The assessment reports will automatically be sent to DGVIII/A/4. In addition, the two units will hold monthly meetings chaired by the two heads of unit, which should ensure an appropriate exchange of information.

(1999/C 297/099) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3482/98 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Safety criteria for nuclear power stations in potential applicant countries in the former Eastern bloc

Some of the nuclear power stations in potential applicant countries in the former Eastern bloc are known to be in a disastrous condition. Some of them have been classified as beyond repair by an EU commission of experts. Reports suggest that no efforts are currently being undertaken by the Commission to ensure uniform safety standards in Europe in the form of a directive.

What steps is the Commission planning to raise safety standards for nuclear power stations in potential applicant countries in the former Eastern bloc to the level in the West? How does it intend to ensure that uniform safety standards are implemented in the event of these countries joining when no relevant directives have been adopted? What measures will it be taking to ensure that those nuclear power stations classified as beyond repair by the above commission of experts are decommissioned as soon as the countries in question join the EU?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 1999)

The competence and responsibility for the safe design, construction and operation of a nuclear installation rest with the Member State having jurisdiction over such installation. The ‘acquis communautaire’ in the field of nuclear safety is based on the Euratom treaty in particular Chapter III (health and safety). Nevertheless a ‘safety culture’ has emerged over the years which is common to all Member States and is based upon a common understanding of the challenges arising from the use of nuclear energy and a similar conception of safety as the first priority.

In order to raise the level of safety in the Eastern countries, the Commission has, through the Community assistance programmes, supported the creation and operation of strong, competent and independent nuclear safety authorities and assisted the plant operators in safety upgrading measures. In its communication (1) to the Council and the Parliament, the Commission has given further indications on proposed action to achieve the objective of a high level of nuclear safety in these countries.

The Commission’s position on reactors which cannot be upgraded has been outlined in Agenda 2000 (2)as well as in the decisions on the Accession Partnerships which have been adopted by the Council. The timetables agreed by the governments concerned, subject to certain conditions, for the closure of non upgradeable units must be respected. This applies to Bohunice V1 in Slovakia, Ignalina in Lithuania and to units 1-4 at Kozloduy in Bulgaria.

(1) COM(98) 134. (2) COM(97) 2000 final.

(1999/C 297/100) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3488/98 by Anne McIntosh (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: European Union publicity material

Will the Commission please indicate the cost of the publicity material currently being distributed to British schools concerning the European Union and who bears this cost? C 297/76 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Would the Commission agree that any such material distributed in Member States which concerns the benefits of EU membership and participation in the euro should present both sides of the argument, both for and against?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 1999)

The policy of the Commission’s representation in the United Kingdom is not to circulate publications except upon request.

No general publicity material about the Community is being distributed to British schools by the representation in the United Kingdom. However at the request of British teachers, publications such as ‘Euroquest ) a trail of questions and answers about the EU’ are sent to schools at their request. These publications are written by British teachers and are intended to be used for teaching purposes. One million copies of this particular title were printed in 1998 at a cost of ECU 204 547.

No material advocating the euro or the United Kingdom’s participation in the euro zone is being circulated anywhere in the United Kingdom by the representation. The representation respects the position of the British government and regards possible participation in the euro as a matter for the British Parliament and people. The representation, again only on request, provides information on activities concerning the euro in other Member States, at European level and internationally.

Finally, no funds have been made available for the promotion of the euro by the representation in the United Kingdom and the British government has not signed a convention with the Commission.

(1999/C 297/101) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3489/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Formation of the ‘African Democratic Congress’ in Lausanne

On 25 September 1998 it was announced that the ‘African Democratic Congress’, apparently comprising three Rwandan political groupings or parties, had been formed in Lausanne, Switzerland. The most prominent signatory is former defence minister James Gasana, forced to flee Rwanda in 1993. The published manifesto condemns the crimes perpetrated by both Hutu and Tutsi extremists in equal measure and advocates a free, democratic and non-racial Rwanda which forms part of an ‘African integration movement’.

At the same time, reports are emerging of the terrible plight of the Sud-Kivu province in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and in particular of its chief town, Bukavu. Hutu militia belonging to ‘interhamwe’ groups have begun operations against the relatively firm control of the Rwandan and Ugandan militaries, whose unpaid soldiers are making their living from looting. There is growing public hostility towards the US and scepticism vis-à-vis the European Union.

Will the Commission provide a full account of the aforementioned facts, comment upon them, enlarge upon them or correct them?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

The current government of Rwanda results from the 1998 Arusha Agreements, which provided for the establishment of a Government of National Unity with the representation of several political parties. At the same time these agreements do not permit certain political activities.

It is clear that the current situation in Rwanda reflects a transition period and that all Rwandese must participate in the debate on the future of the country. The Commission therefore welcomes any initiative to encourage such a debate and hopes that a genuine constructive dialogue will develop among all Rwandese both inside and outside the country. However, the ‘African Democratic Congress’ declaration of 25 September 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/77

1998 leaves some doubt as to the founders’ intentions of seeking political solutions, given the call to ‘struggle against the dictatorship in power in Rwanda’. The Commission is aware of the need for further progress towards democracyin Rwanda, but this must take place through dialogue. Incitement to armed struggle can onlyexacerbate conflict and ethnic and political polarisation and lead to further humanitarian disasters.

The Commission must unfortunatelyconfirm the situation described bythe Honourable Member and shares his concern about the worrying developments in the situation in Kivu. While the Commission is aware that the keys to solving the conflict are in the hands of the African people themselves, it is contributing to efforts to create the conditions for a negotiation and dialogue ( both within and outside the country( that could lead to lasting peace in the Great Lakes/Central African region.

The Commission remains willing to support the rehabilitation and reconstruction of Kivu and assist in setting up the structures necessaryfor establishing the rule of law as soon as the situation in the countrypermits it. Initiatives are also under wayto studythe possibilityof bringing humanitarian aid to the sections of the population seriouslyaffected bythis conflict, one which looks set to continue.

(1999/C 297/102) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3493/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(12 November 1998)

Subject: Capitalization of interest and the failure to transpose Communitydirectives

Thousands of Greek citizens are in an impossible situation owing to the implementation of Law 2601/98 on the rules governing bank interest on loans. Greek farmers recentlyalleged that this Law is unconstitutional, and it is contraryto the provisions of CommunityDirectives 87/102/EEC ( 1) and 90/88/EEC (2) which do not allow the capitalization of interest in anyMember State of the EU.

Will the Commission saywhat action it intends to take to ensure that the above directives are transposed into Greek law and that their provisions are properlyimplemented in Greece?

(1) OJ L 42, 12.2.1987, p. 48. (2) OJ L 61, 10.3.1990, p. 14.

Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

The Commission is not aware of Law 2601/98 as a national measure for the transposition of Council Directive 90/88/EEC of 22 February1990 amending Directive 87/102/EEC for the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning consumer credit.

It is not for the Commission to express an opinion on the conformityof a national law with the Constitution of a Member State.

It should be stated that Directives 87/102/EEC and 90/88/EEC do not prohibit the capitalisation of interest. Their aim is to provide consumers with more information so that theyare better able to compare the cost of credit being offered byvarious lenders. This aim is achieved through the uniform application of the method for calculating the annual percentage rate of charge as referred to in Article 1(2)(e) of Directive 87/102/EEC. However, this provision is not intended to rule out the capitalisation of interest.

It should also be mentioned that Directives 87/102/EEC and 90/88/EEC applyonlyto consumer credit as defined in Article 1(2)(c) of Directive 87/102/EEC. Loans to farmers are therefore not covered. C 297/78 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/103) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3506/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Common organisation of the market in bananas (Agenda 2000)

With reference to the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) 404/93 on the common organisation of the market in bananas (COM(98) 4 final & 98/0013 CNS) (1), there is a need to ensure that certain aspects of the common organisation of the market in bananas are adapted to meet international commitments (especially those of the WTO) and it should also be pointed out that amending the procedures for the issue of import licences might have negative repercussions on the income and employment situation of Community and ACP producers.

Can the Commission therefore take action to guarantee fair prices to both producers and consumers, given that the new arrangements for issuing import licences to be established will then have to guarantee fair competition between all commercial operators so as not to disturb the equilibrium of supply in the Union between all the regions of origin without exception?

(1) OJ C 75, 11.3.1998, p. 6.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

When amending (1) Council Regulation (EEC) 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common organization of the market in bananas (2) to meet the requirements of the World trade organization (WTO) ruling the Commission was cognisant of its other international commitments under the 4th Lome Convention in respect of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and its duties towards European producers.

The allocation of licences under the new regime is based on proof of actual imports. There is also a provision within the new regime for an increase in the compensatory aid for Community producers. Effects on ACP producers by the new regime have been taken into consideration through a proposal for a Council regulation (3) to establish a special framework of assistance for traditional ACP suppliers.

(1) COM(98) 4 final. (2) OJ L 47, 25.2.1993. (3) COM(98) 5 final.

(1999/C 297/104) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3538/98 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Siting of a solid urban waste treatment plant in Albudeite (Murcia, Spain)

The general meeting of the Murcian Regional Solid Urban Waste Consortium has decided that the future solid urban waste treatment plant should be built on a site 5 km from Albudeite town centre.

Public disquiet has been mounting because, apart from the fact that the decision on the plant site was taken without conducting the mandatory environmental impact assessment, the most essential information was withheld from Albudeite Municipal Council until the exact moment when it bowed to the wishes of the consortium. The reason why a meeting was held without prior notice just seven days before the deadline was due to expire, without allowing sufficient time for the municipal councils concerned to consider the suitability of the chosen site, was that the developers were anxious to obtain POMAL subsidies. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/79

Bearing in mind that the plant could adversely affect economic development in Albudeite, where the economy is based primarily on agriculture:

1. Is the Commission aware of the situation?

2. Does it not believe that the actions of the developers have infringed Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom of access to information on the environment (1)?

3. What steps will the Commission take in this particular instance to ensure proper compliance with Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2)?

4. Does not the Commission consider itself obliged to insist that the consortium establish the necessary separation between the hurried decision on the plant site and the award of the corresponding POMAL subsidies by carrying out the appropriate environmental impact assessment and examining any proposals which other municipal councils might put forward?

5. Could the Commission request the authorities involved to supply more detailed information about the substance of the project, to enable the councils concerned to take such decisions as they might deem necessary to protect their legitimate interests?

(1) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer give by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 1999)

1. The Commission is not aware of the facts set out by the Honorary Member. However, it confirms that provision has been made for cofinancing the project concerned under the ‘Medio Ambiente Local’ (POMAL) operational programme.

2. Article 3 of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment (1) provides that public authorities are required to make available information relating to the environment to any natural or legal person at his request and without his having to prove an interest. Purely on the basis of the facts presented in the written question, the Commission is not in a position to ascertain whether the Spanish authorities received a request for access to information to which they responded inappropriately.

3. and 4. The Commission has asked the Spanish authorities for information on the facts denounced by the Honourable Member.

5. As indicated in paragraph 2 above, any natural or legal person may, under Directive 90/313/EEC, request a public authority to be given access to information on the environment. The public authority must respond to the person requesting information as soon as possible and at the latest within two months.

(1) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(1999/C 297/105) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3546/98 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 December 1998)

Subject: Extra US government support to farmers

The Commission will undoubtedly be aware of the extra support the US government is giving to its farmers, the Farm Bill notwithstanding, in response to the extremely difficult circumstances to which they have been reduced by low prices on the world market.

1. Does the Commission consider that this extra support complies with World Trade Organisation rules? C 297/80 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

2. What conclusions does the Commission draw from the granting of this extra support to farmers in the US in relation to its own proposals on Common Agricultural Policy reform, or in relation to extra support to the pig-farming sector, having regard to the extremely precarious circumstances to which it has been reduced at the present time?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

1. Members of the World trade organization (WTO) have undertaken to reduce domestic support in accordance with quantified commitments. However, subsidies complying with specific criteria laid down in the agreement on agriculture (so-called ‘green’ and ‘blue’ box measures) are not subject to this reduction commitment. The United States measures will need to be reported to the World trade organization which will enable them to be examined in the light of their nature and the United States total support reduction commitment but, at this stage, it appears unlikely that they will involve any breach of that commitment.

2. This United States measure is essentially a short term reaction to a specific situation and does not call into question the Agenda 2000 proposals which have long term objectives. The Commission has taken measures to alleviate the problems in the pigmeat market.

(1999/C 297/106) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3558/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 December 1998)

Subject: Mutagens

Council Directive 67/548/EEC (1) on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, divides mutagens into three categories.

In reaffirming that only categories 1 and 2 are important as regards the amendment, it is stated that category 1 covers only substances whose mutagenic effects on humans have been directly proven, and that it is accepted that in practice it is extremely difficult to prove such effects. The substances that fall into category 2 are therefore of considerable practical importance. These are substances which can be shown, by means of ‘appropriate research using animals’ and ‘other relevant information’, to cause hereditary genetic damage.

Can the Commission, as a precautionary measure, treat these types of mutagen as carcinogens for the purposes of the directive.

(1) OJ L 196, 16.8.1967, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 1999)

In the context of the programme ‘Europe against cancer’ an action plan has been launched by Council Decisions 90/238/Euratom, ECSC, EEC (1) and 93/362/EEC (2) to focus attention on substances and preparations considered to be carcinogens. Following the adoption of Directive 94/60/EC (3), 14th amendment to Directive 76/769/EEC on restrictions on the marketing and use of dangerous substances and preparations (4), the Commission is required to propose directives prohibiting the use by consumers of substances classified as carcinogens, mutagens or toxic to reproduction categories 1 or 2. The proposals from the Commission must take account of the risks and advantages of the substances as well as of the Community legislative provisions on risks analysis.

To date, the use by consumers of about 850 substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction category 1 or 2 has been prohibited. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/81

In addition to this information, and with regard to the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work, the Commission confirms that the Honourable Member’s suggestions have already been taken into account in the amended proposal for a Council Directive (5) amending for the second time Directive 90/394/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work, which was adopted by the Commission on 12 November 1998 following receipt of the European Parliament’s opinion.

(1) OJ L 137, 30.5.1990. (2) OJ L 150, 22.6.1993. (3) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994. (4) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976. (5) OJ C 392, 16.12.1998.

(1999/C 297/107) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3568/98 by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission

(1 December 1998)

Subject: Alleged jamming of MED TV broadcasts by the Turkish authorities

When last questioned about this problem, the Commission stated that hard evidence was needed before complaints might be forwarded to the Turkish authorities over their alleged jamming of MED TV broadcasts.

As these problems affect the British-based MED TV organisation, which does not have the necessary funds to secure detailed evidence of the source of this jamming, will the Commission itself undertake to investigate this problem?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it does not fall within the scope of the Community’s relationships with Turkey, as they presently exist under the association and custom union agreements, to undertake the type of inquiry which is suggested.

(1999/C 297/108) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3585/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the operational programme on natural gas

The Second Community Support Framework for Greece comprises the operational programme on natural gas and has a total public budget of ECU 747 million. This programmes contains the following subprogrammes: 1. High pressure pipeline; 2. Medium pressure networks; 3. Low pressure networks; 4. Expropriations, underground installations and remote control and management system; and 5. Technical aid.

Given that the subprogrammes have been running since 1994, will the Commission state:

1. What progress has been made and what has been the take-up rate of appropriations in the case of each of the subprogrammes?

2. Where delays in take-up have occurred, what are the main reasons for these delays in the case of each subprogramme? C 297/82 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

3. In the latest review of the Second CSF for Greece, were changes made to the above programme, and if so what amount of funding was involved and which measures were affected?

4. Given that for a variety of reasons (financial, a decline in international oil prices, a reduction in VAT on electricity, etc.), there has been a significant reduction in the cost of rival sources of energy (oil and electricity) and the assumptions on which the project was based are no longer valid, does the Commission consider that measures are needed to ensure the viability of this project and, if so, what kind of measures?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 1999)

On the basis of the latest financing plan approved by the Commission on 5 December 1997, the current rate of utilisation of appropriations allocated up to 31 December 1998 for each of the five subprogrammes in the operational programme on ‘natural gas’ financed under the Community Support Framework for Greece is 100 % for the first subprogramme, 72 % for the second subprogramme, 56 % for the third subprogramme, 79 % for the fourth subprogramme and 100 % for the fifth subprogramme. Thus there has not been any lengthy delay in the utilisation of appropriations, apart from in the 3rd subprogramme, where extensive preparation was required to set up the legal framework for the adoption of urban network concessions.

The operational programme did not undergo any modification in the last review of the CSF.

The introduction of natural gas in Greece is of great importance, both in terms of diversification of the energy supply and from the environmental point of view. A strict analysis of financial viability is not a suitable way of appraising such a project. The current economic situation as regards the international prices of rival sources of energy does not challenge the appropriateness of this measure.

(1999/C 297/109) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3587/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Exemption of Greece from Directive 98/18/EC

Directive 98/18/EC (1) on safety rules and standards for passenger ships provides that existing ships over 27 years old on 1 October 2000 must be substantially upgraded to make them safer. However, ships flying the Greek flag, and notably ships operating exclusively on domestic voyages between ports situated in Greece, are exempted; they will be withdrawn when they are 35 years old.

Will the Commission say:

1. Why is it safe to allow ships operating routes to the Greek islands not to be upgraded, but unsafe in the case of ships of other Member States which have to be upgraded?

2. Does the Commission envisage the possibility that ships which have not been adequately upgraded and operate routes in other Member States may be sold to Greek shipowners to be used to operate routes between Greek ports?

3. Has Greece forwarded to the Commission a list of existing passenger ships exempted from the provisions of the above directive on the basis of Article 6.3(g) of the above directive?

(1) OJ L 144, 15.5.1998, p. 1. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/83

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 1999)

1. The Commission has no reason to believe that the risks involved for passenger ships providing services between islands in Greece would be less than for those operating on domestic voyages in other Member States. The derogation in Article 6.3.(g) of Council Directive 98/18/EC to exempt a limited number of existing passenger ships from compliance with some of the upgrading requirements of the Directive has been granted to Greece for reasons of socio-economic cohesion, whilst giving due consideration to the fact that, unlike other Member States, Greece imposes a maximum age limit of 35 years on passenger ships for operation on domestic voyages. As the upgrading requirements in the Directive entail major structural modifications and substantial investments, it is considered that requiring this upgrading for ships with a remaining service life of less than 8 years would not be economically viable.

2. The Commission does not foresee a risk that passenger ships not complying with the upgrading requirements of the Directive would be sold to Greek owners to be engaged on domestic voyages between Greek ports. This risk has been excluded by limiting the possibility for derogation of Article 6.3.(g) to existing passenger ships which were already operating exclusively on domestic voyages in Greece before 1 January 1996 or which were transferred to such domestic voyages prior to the date of entry into force of the Directive.

3. Greece has notified to the Commission, in accordance with Article 6.3.(g), the list of existing passenger ships for which the derogation of Article 6.3.(g) may be applied. This list will be published in the Official journal in the near future.

(1999/C 297/110) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3593/98 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Affixing of a quality mark in order to identify organic agricultural products from the United States

Every now and then, we read in the press that the United States is thinking of revising the criteria applied to organic agricultural products, in particular with a view to authorising the use of genetically modified organisms in organic farming.

1. Can the Commission confirm these reports?

2. Does the Commission feel that, if this development does indeed take place in the US, organic products imported from the US might eventually share shelf space in shops in Europe with organic products from the European Union, without the consumer’s attention being drawn to the difference between the products (with or without GMOs)?

3. Can the Commission indicate why no list of organic agricultural products has been drawn up for incorporation in the Codex Alimentarius?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 1999)

1. The Commission has submitted, under the arrangements provided under the World trade organization (WTO) agreement on technical barriers to trade, comments on the United States’proposed regulation for organic farming. Special concerns have been raised on the envisaged authorisation of genetically modified organisms in the draft United States standards. The original United States proposed rule on organic standards was withdrawn in May 1998 after a large number of comments, including objections to the inclusion of genetically modified crops. The Commission understands that in the revised version to be published shortly this element has been dropped.

2. The Community has well developed rules for the production and labelling of organic products. Council Regulation (EEC) 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (1) provides in Article 11 for a regime of equivalency for products C 297/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

imported from third countries. This regime is managed either by the Commission (Article 11.1) or, as is currently the case for products from the United States, by the Member States (Article 11.6). The Community requirements provide that before organic products are imported into the Community from a third country, it has been adequately demonstrated that the products were produced in accordance with production standards and inspection arrangements equivalent to those applied to Community production. The Council is currently discussing the introduction of an overall prohibition of the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in organic farming in the Community. It is clear that, once a decision on this issue is adopted by the Council, the possible use of GMOs in organic farming in a third country will have to be considered in the framework of this equivalency regime.

3. The draft for a Codex guideline currently under discussion provides for a prohibition on the use of GMOs in organic farming, and permits countries to establish equivalence regimes with regard to imports of organic products. It is expected that the Codex guidelines for organic products (from crop origin) will be adopted in April 1999.

(1) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991.

(1999/C 297/111) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3596/98 by Ingo Friedrich (PPE)to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Independence of the European Central Bank

Recent opinion surveys in the countries taking part in monetary union confirm increased public confidence in the single European currency, thanks not least to the efforts that have been made to attain and comply with the convergence criteria 3 in particular, price stability.

Pursuant to Article 107 of the EC Treaty, the governments of the Member States have undertaken to respect the independence of the European Central Bank and the national central banks and not to seek to influence the members of the decision-making bodies in the performance of their tasks. This independence is the guarantee of the principal objective of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB): the maintenance of price stability. Accordingly, the shaping of currency and monetary policy is the sole responsibility of the appropriate decision-making bodies of the ESCB.

In view of recent discussions, how does the Commission envisage ensuring compliance in the future with the relevant Treaty provisions so as to safeguard the independence of the ESCB?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

As guardian of the EC Treaty, the Commission attaches the greatest importance to the respect of the Treaty provisions relating to the independence of central banks. The Commission will monitor the strict respect of these provisions in order to avoid any infringement.

(1999/C 297/112) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3597/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR)to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Invitations to tender

In an effort to guarantee free and equal competition, public works above a certain threshold value must be the subject of an EU invitation to tender. In connection with such invitations, it often proves difficult for firms that want to tender to find out what exactly is to be supplied or done because the specification is often couched in very abstract and formalistic terms to prevent any complaints about failure to comply with EU tendering rules. Experience has shown that this prevents some SMUs from tendering for works within their remit, and they generally incur extra consultancy costs in connection with tenders for technically uncomplicated works. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/85

Would it be compatible with tendering rules to formulate EU invitations to tender more simply in the form of clearer specifications so that in future there can be no doubt about what is wanted and on what terms?

How will the Commission ensure that SMUs are guaranteed equal access to tenders without incurring extra consultancy costs?

Has the Commission considered drawing up a guide to the formulation of EU invitations to tender so as to comply with the tendering rules without complicating procedures for either those calling for tenders or those tendering?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 1999)

The Commission, in its communication on public procurement in the European Union (1), has already proposed a set of measures aimed at the development of a favourable environment for businesses, and in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) including exchange of the present system of publication for an Internet based solution; incentives to encourage contracting entities to use electronic means of submission (such use would imply a reduction of the overall length of the procedure); amendment to the existing directives to put electronic means of exchanging information on an equal footing with other means; development of a framework for implementing an effective public procurement training policy in the Community; adoption of a communication on SMEs and public procurement, developing the possibilities of improving access to information by consistent application of information and communications technology; and harmonisation of qualification systems (i.e. in the field of contracts covered by Council Directive 93/37/ EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (2)).

The Commission has already made considerable efforts to make tendering procedures more transparent and less costly for suppliers and especially for SMEs. Through the SIMAP (système d’information pour les marchés publics) project, the Commission aims at improving the quality of information about Community procurement opportunities and ensuring that information is available to all potentially interested suppliers. In the longer term, it will address the whole procurement process, including bids, award of contracts, delivery, invoicing and payment. The SIMAP website (http://simap.eu.int) gives background information about the procurement market, procurement directives and guidelines as well as links to other sites with information about procurement opportunities across the Community and beyond. Access to the SIMAP website is free of charge from 1 January 1999.

Transparency of invitations to tender is being encouraged through some specific tools, such as the standard forms to be used for notification, which simplify and harmonise tender notices; the common procurement vocabulary (CPV), which is used for the identification of the object of the contract, making it easier for potential suppliers to identify the procurement contracts in which they are interested; and the development of ‘purchaser’s profiles’, which enable contracting entities to submit electronically not only their tender notices for publication but also complete tender documentation and any supplementary information, which suppliers can search via the ‘search and retrieval mechanism’ if they are interested.

Finally, it should be noted that, in addition to the guides to the Community rules on public procurement (classic sectors) published in 1997, the Commission has also supported the production of ‘Selling to the public sector 3 a practical guide for SMEs’ (3), intended to help SMEs faced with the practical difficulties, including dealing with the bidding phase.

The Commission will continue to support and make more efficient the various European networks providing information and technical assistance to SMEs seeking to participate in public procurement.

(1) COM(98) 143 final. (2) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993. (3) To be published in the Official Journal. C 297/86 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/113) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3598/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Environmental and health dangers facing the inhabitants of Samos (Greece)

Kokkari on Samos is one of the most beautiful regions of the island and attracts hundreds of tourists every year.

Over the last few years the Greek Electricity Board (DEI), acting with the full backing of the Greek government, has been pressing ahead with plans to set up electricity production units in this region, without taking into account the reactions of the local community and local government bodies and brushing aside allegations made by environmentalists that the installation of new units (in addition to the existing units which have been polluting the region for over 20 years) will jeopardise the safety of the local population, because of the concentration of large amounts of inflammable material in the immediate vicinity of inhabited areas.

The EU is meeting 60 % of the overall investment costs (total budget: DR 390 million) through the European Regional Development Fund.

Will the Commission say whether it is aware of the above state of affairs and what action it intends to take to ensure that the natural environment of Samos and the health and safety of inhabitants of the island are effectively protected?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The Commission has taken note of the intended extension of the DEI’s electricity generating station within the municipality of Kokkari on Samos, following the filing of a complaint against the conditions under which this project is being implemented, and also concerning the operating conditions of that station in general.

In June 1998, in reply to a request for information, the Greek authorities sent to the Commission Ministerial Decision No 61045 of 13 March 1998 by means of which the environmental impact study carried out in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment (1), was approved. According to the Commission’s information the Greek Council of State has had this matter laid before it and its decision is awaited for early 1999.

In addition an informal meeting with the plaintiffs was held in Brussels in November 1998. At that meeting the plaintiffs supplied new documents concerning the pollution caused by the operation of that power station. The Commission is currently examining those documents in order to be able to decide what further action to take in this matter.

The project referred to by the Honourable Member is not being jointly financed by the European Regional Development Fund.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 297/114) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3601/98 by Alessandro Danesin (PPE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Common immigration policy

Recent events in Italy such as the landings on the coast of Apulia and the endless queues for residence permits have made it even more imperative to solve a problem that has continued since the beginning of the 80s when Italy became one of the preferred destinations of illegal immigrants that not only want to remain there, but above all to gain admittance to the European Union. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/87

The problem has become increasingly topical, especially since the Schengen agreements entered into force (for Italy on 26 October 1996). Every year some 100 000 to 150 000 immigrants (1/5 of the number estimated for the whole of Europe) enter Italy clandestinely, but the papers of only 272 000 of them have so far been in order (some 13 million in the EU). And the last law at our disposal is the Martelli law.

Despite the Commission’s assurances that the creation of an area without internal frontiers is a process parallel to the introduction of harmonised controls at external frontiers and despite the fact that the subject was again recently taken into serious consideration in the Amsterdam Treaty, the EU does not have legislation on immigration that is common to all the Member States.

Is the strategic document on immigration and asylum recently issued by the Austrian Presidency, which has been controversial from the outset, enough? Can the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 continue to form the basis for a phenomenon that day after day becomes more complicated and urgent from a political, economic, social and environmental point of view?

Does the Commission not think it should speed up the introduction of a common immigration policy in the Member States of the EU?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The Treaty of Amsterdam implies fundamental changes to the previous institutional arrangements set up by the Treaty on European Union. The implementation without delays of the new provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam is a process consisting of several steps and involving all European institutions.

The Commission produced in July 1998 a communication ‘towards an area of freedom, security and justice’ (1) presenting its approach on the implementation of the area of freedom, security and justice. This is now under examination by the Parliament which has also decided to convene a conference of national parliaments in March 1999.

The Austrian Presidency of the Council tabled a draft strategy paper on immigration and asylum policy. Under the initiative of the Presidency, the Justice and home affairs (JHA) Council of 3-4 December 1998 took note of an interim report on that subject. Discussion will continue within the relevant working groups of the Council under German Presidency.

The European Council, meeting in Vienna on 11-12 December 1998 adopted an action plan (2) (drawn up by the Council and the Commission) on how best to implement the provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty on the establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice. The action plan is divided in two parts. The first covers actions to be undertaken within two years the second covers activities to be completed within five years. The European Council urged the Council to start immediately with the implementation of the two years priorities as defined in the action plan. Moreover, the decision has already been taken to hold a special European Council in Tampere, October 1999.

The present and future treaty arrangements specifically require asylum-related measures adopted at European level to be in accordance with the 1951 Geneva Convention (see Article K.2 of the Treaty on European Union, and Article 63(1) of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam). The Treaty of Amsterdam also envisages the adoption by the Council of complementary instruments. Work has been going on in this area for some time on the basis of two proposals from the Commission for joint actions on temporary protection of displaced persons and on solidarity in the admission and residence of beneficiaries of the temporary protection of displaced persons (3) (burden sharing).

It is also worth noting that in the area of migration policy, the Commission drafted, in July 1997, a proposal for a convention establishing the framework for a comprehensive admission policy of third-country nationals to the Member States. The Council has already completed a first reading of this draft and the opinion of the Parliament is still awaited.

(1) COM(98) 459 final. (2) OJ C 19, 23.1.1999, p. 1. (3) COM(98) 372 final. C 297/88 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/115) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3607/98 by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: The Cretan islands of Gavdhopoúla and Gávdhos proposed as priority natural habitats of Community importance as part of the Natura 2000 network

1. Is the Commission aware that, on the basis of an in-depth investigation, the Cretan islands of Gavdhopoúla and Gávdhos have been designated by the Greek Ministry for Regional Planning and the Environment as an irreplaceable natural asset and, consequently, proposed as priority natural habitats of Community importance as part of the Natura 2000 network? However, Gavdhopoúla is to be totally demolished, asphalted over and used as an industrial zone, while Gávdhos is to be turned into a high-density urban development?

2. Is the Commission aware of reports that money from the European Structural Funds is to be used for the development and industrialisation or urbanisation of these two islands? If so, what is the total amount involved, and what percentage of the cost will be funded from Community resources?

3. Does the Commission take the view that the destruction of the unique flora and fauna on these islands is compatible with European environmental legislation and the Treaty of Amsterdam, which lays down protection and improvement of the environment as a basic task for all the Member States?

4. To what extent is the Commission aware of the status of the island of Gavdhopoúla? Does it fall within the ambit of the European single market? If not, what is the Commission’s view of the theoretical possibility that goods might be traded there without the rules of the single market being applied, despite the island’s close geographical proximity to it?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

1. The islands of Gavdos and Gavdopoula form a site included in the list of proposed sites of Community importance (SCIs) transmitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1), with a view to their future inclusion in the European ecological network Natura 2000. The Commission is aware of the issues raised by the Honourable Member concerning the island of Gavdopoula and precise information will be sought from the Greek authorities concerning the industrial plant on Gavdopoula as well as the plans for urban development on Gavdos. According to informal information already provided, the environmental impact assessment study for the projects on Gavdopoula has not been approved by the Ministry of Environment.

2. Following rumours about investments planned on the island of Gavdopoula, the Commission contacted the Greek authorities to obtain information. It emerged that no actual project is in progress and none has been authorised for the islands in question. Consequently, no Community aid has been requested and none is planned.

3. The site in question hosts certain priority habitat types and species and should therefore, according to the criteria set out in Directive 92/43/EEC, be selected as a SCI. As a result, the Commission is of the opinion that the Member State is obliged by Directive 92/43/EEC and its obligations under the EC Treaty to refrain from any activity likely to seriously compromise the ecological integrity of that site.

4. The islands of Gavdos and Gavdopoula are under Greek sovereignty in accordance with the arrangements of the Treaty of London of 1913.

The Act of Accession of Greece to the Communities (2) did not introduce any special regime of any kind for these islands.

The rules of Community law (primary and secondary) apply, therefore, to these islands as they apply to the whole geographical territory of Greece.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. (2) OJ L 291, 19.11.1979. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/89

(1999/C 297/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3609/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: High-tension power line in Bal de Chistau

Since the early 1990s the inhabitants of Bal de Chistau, in the Aragón Pyrenees, have used every possible legal argument in their fight against the construction of a high-tension power line between France and Spain which would come through the La Pez pass. In their efforts to protect what is virtually an unspoiled valley they have received support from all the political parties represented in Aragón and a large number of groups and associations of all kinds, ranging from environmental bodies to business associations and chambers of commerce.

The project is being promoted by Red Eléctrica Española in conjunction with its French counterpart, Electricité de France, and it involves the construction of a 400 000-volt power line linking the French and Spanish electricity grids. If the line is routed through Bal de Chistau the local people fear that it could jeopardise the development of tourism in the area on account of the serious impact it would have on health conditions, the environment and the landscape. For some time the company behind the project 5 Red Eléctrica Española (REE) 5 abandoned any hope of being able to go ahead with it on account of the obstacles in its path, and it began to consider possible alternative routings. However, the REE regional director, Agustí Maure, has recently said that his company has proposed four possible routes to the Spanish Government and that the Chistau option is once again under consideration.

Does the Commission know what stage this project has reached? If so, what action could it take to prevent the line from being constructed along a route which would seriously affect the fora and fauna of the Poset Maladeta Park and the tourist development of an area which has no other resources at its disposal?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaardon behalf of the Commission

(8 February 1999)

The Commission has been aware since 1991 of the Aragón-Cazaril project to carry electricity between France and Spain, which might cross the Gistain valley in Aragón, Spain. This aims to reinforce electricity interconnection capacity between France and Spain, and is a priority project of the Trans European energy networks. Much of the line has already been built, but not the crossing of the Pyrenean region. The Commission understands that some alternative layouts are under study, but no final decision has been taken.

If, as the Honourable Member indicates, the Spanish government is considering alternative ways of implementing the project, including a crossing of the Gistain valley, this does not reveal that a breach of Community environmental law may occur and therefore the Commission is not in a position to intervene in the matter.

(1999/C 297/117) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3623/98 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Procedure for the awarding of a contract for the drawing up of a study on cross- border fixing of book prices

In response to my question to the Commission of 1 July 1998 (P-2184/98) (1) as to which institution of the Commission would be entrusted with the task of drawing up an opinion on cross-border fixing of book prices in European linguistic areas, I received the following answer from Commissioner Oreja on 11 September: A restricted call for tender was published on the basis of the notification of a call for expressions of interest (2). At the end of the various stages of the procedure, Euromonitor Consultancy was appointed.

After numerous enquiries, this reference from the Official Journal cited above could not be found, and I would therefore ask the following questions: C 297/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Why was there only a restricted call for tender? How restricted, in fact, was the call for tender, and why can the reference from the Official Journal not be found?

In response to these questions, could the Commission attach the precise text of the call for tender?

(1)OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 40. (2)OJ S 153, 8.8.1997.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 1999)

The choice of contractor was made after a standard selection and award procedure. Before concluding a contract the Commission must issue an invitation to tender. In view of the very specific nature of the contract in question (carrying out research into the various economic and cultural aspects of books and reading), the Commission decided to conduct a restricted procedure, which involves distribution to natural and legal persons selected according to their special qualifications based on the applications received in response to the call for expressions of interest which was indeed published in the Official Journal (1). This procedure, which is often used when the value of the contract is below a certain amount, also has the advantage of being quicker. The Commission in this case wanted to act on the Council’s request without delay. An invitation to tender was therefore issued to this effect in November 1997. A copy has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1)OJ S 153, 8.8.1997.

(1999/C 297/118) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3624/98 by Stanislaw Tillich (PPE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Calls for tender issued by the Commission on 18 July 1998: No 98/S 137-92959, No 98/S 137- 92298, No 98/S 137-92958, No 98/S 138-91477

Can the Commission explain why the above calls for tender, which had extremely short deadlines, were published during the peak holiday period and at a time when the medium of publication of calls for tender was being changed from paper to CD-ROM, with the result that a large number of persons and organisations were not able to respond within the specified deadlines?

Might the Commission consider extending the deadline for these calls for tender, since complaints have already been submitted in this respect and, if it did so, the Commission might avoid the impression that only insiders had been able to abide by these deadlines in this case, which involves DG XXIII?

Answer by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Calls for tender 98/S137-92959, 98/S137-90298 and 98/S137-92958 were published in the Official Journal of 18 July 1998 and were open until 8 September 1998. Some 295 organisations requested the documents for these calls, despite the specialised nature of the work involved.

The time limit for the receipt of tenders complied with Article 18 of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (1). This article in fact states that the time limit for the receipt of tenders shall not be less than 52 days from the date of dispatch of the notice.

As for call for tender 98/S138-91477, it was published on 21 July 1998 (with a deadline of 10 September 1998). The Commission received 24 bids, which is a considerable number for this kind of contract. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/91

These calls were published at these dates in order to meet the deadlines for making the financial commitments in 1998. While the Commission is aware that the dates of publication were not ideal, every effort was made to publicise the calls by other means, for instance by passing the information to the Euro Info Centres for local transmission.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(1999/C 297/119) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3632/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: NGO capacity-building in the developing countries

What action is the Commission taking to assist in capacity-building for non-governmental organizations and local communities in the developing countries so that they may participate in monitoring and protecting forests and wildlife?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 1998)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat a computer print- out containing the information requested.

(1999/C 297/120) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3639/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Food aid to Russia

In its preparations for a food-aid package for Russia has the Commission considered the inclusion of quantities of frozen pelagic species (fish) for which there is at present a very poor export market for the EU?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

It is not the Commission’s intention to include fish in the food supply programme for Russia, as its government has not requested this product.

(1999/C 297/121) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3647/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Community fraud and political malpractice

The 5 November issue of the Italian news weekly ‘Panorama’ reports on the case of the theft of refugee aid provided by ECHO, the Community agency that manages humanitarian aid.

ECHO is responsible for overseeing the effectiveness of Community action, and in the space of a few months it has had to deal with Bosnia, the African Great Lakes region and Kurdistan. This resulted in a large amount of work and a threefold increase in the agency’s budget. It is now responsible for monitoring and overseeing more C 297/92 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

than 1 400 projects. In order to cope with the increased workload an agency was used, which had already been mentioned in connection with the Bertholet (Commissioner Cresson’s dentist)affair, the Perry-Lux agency, currently under investigation by the Luxembourg courts.

UCLAF itself, the Community’s anti-fraud unit, is currently carrying out an investigation into the director of ECHO and a series of contracts given to Perry-Lux, one of which goes back to 1993 and of which no trace can be found, another worth ECU 500 million (the equivalent of one billion lire)was actually spurious, and others, worth ECU 2,3 million are still the subject of investigations.

Does the Commission not consider it necessary to comment on these revelations in order to clarify the situation?

(1999/C 297/122) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3649/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: UCLAF

Several newspapers have reported that increasing numbers of intermediary companies are being set up by Community officials in order to respond to calls for tenders issued by the European Union.

In the light of the revelations about scandals and fraud engulfing the Community institutions, can the Commission explain why UCLAF, the Community anti-fraud unit, has been so slow to act? Following the statements made by Claude Perry to the Luxembourg judges, in connection with the ECHO scandal, will the Commission publish a detailed review of the companies with which the Commission deals in order to check up on their activities, ownership and contracts?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3647/98 and E-3649/98 given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The Commission considers that it has already clarified its position regarding the allegations mentioned by the Honourable Member. The Commission has given information directly to the Parliament. In particular, the Commission’s internal report on the Echo affair has been transmitted to the Parliament. Moreover, press information has been provided by the Commission.

The Commission would like to underline that the correct total amount of the four contracts involved under judicial investigation was ECU 2 421 080 .

It is furthermore not appropriate to consider that Uclaf has been slow to act. The Commission would stress that it is the enquiry conducted by its own Task Force for the Co-ordination of the fight against fraud that led to the conclusion that it was necessary to refer the case to the judicial authorities in Luxembourg. This was done on 10 July 1998, simultaneously with the completion of the report regarding the on-the-spot control carried out in the company principally involved.

The Commission would moreover point out that it carries out investigations for the purposes of protecting the financial interests of the Community each time there are sufficient suspicions. In this context, the Commission adopted on 14 July 1998 a decision concerning investigations carried out by the Task Force Co-ordination of the fight against fraud. In addition, detailed rules of application were adopted on 9 December 1998. These texts contain provisions regarding the way in which information is transmitted to the Parliament’s committee on budgetary control while respecting the confidentiality of the investigations and the rights of natural and legal persons.

In relation to the possible review of the companies with which the Commission deals, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3230/98 by Mrs Müller (1).

(1)See page 60. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/93

(1999/C 297/123) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3648/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Exercise of power, Community fraud and political malpractice

The 5November issue of an authoritative Italian weekly news magazine contains a report on a series of acts of corruption in which the European Commission is said to be directly implicated, the very institution which regularly condemns inefficiency, delays and cases of corruption in Member States.

According to the weekly magazine ‘Panorama’, the former French prime minister Mrs Cresson, now the commissioner for scientific research, is caught up in a complex web of business and political interests.

It appears that Mrs Cresson’s dentist assisted her in her work in Brussels, without a regular salary but with support from the businessman Perry, the owner of Perry-Lux, the agency now famous for being involved in cases of Community fraud, and the prospect of possible consultancy work, which, it should be pointed out, Cresson did not facilitate. Instead, Mrs Cresson appointed the dentist and his son under contracts as scientific researchers. These contracts had previously been given only to the most eminent medical and scientific authorities in Europe commissioned to write important reports.

Does the Commission intend, as a matter of urgency, to respond to these accusations, and to provide all the explanations necessary to clarify a situation which discredits all the institutions of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 1999)

The person referred to by the Honourable Member is an odonto-stomatologist who has practised, in particular, as a head of service in hospitals. The periods he spent on special assignment to the Minister for Social Affairs and with the National Association for the enhancement of research have broadened his scientific background, making him suitable for the function of visiting scientist.

The person in question does indeed have contracts with private companies (in particular, those mentioned in the article), but they have nothing to do with the Commission, as acknowledged by the article and the Honourable Member.

This person’s son had a one-year contract (now expired) with the Commission in order to carry out specific analysis and administrative management tasks. The Directorate-General which recruited him has 170 auxiliary posts which it renews regularly.

(1999/C 297/124) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3680/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: Environmental awareness park on the outskirts of Athens

On the outskirts of Athens (municipalities of Ilioupolis, Agioi, Anargyroi and Kamatero) is situated a very large public property, the ‘Pyrgos Vasilissis’, around which an environmental awareness park is being created. The Community is contributing to the necessary investment (Dr 2,5billion) (ERDF, pilot urban schemes under Article 10). However, there have been many complaints from local residents that the construction of a hypermarket (2,7 hectares!) next to the park has been authorised, which will pose major problems concerning traffic, parking, pollution, etc. C 297/94 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The Commission:

1. Is it aware of this situation and what view does it take of such a development next to the park which is receiving Community funding?

2. Can it give an assurance that environmental impact surveys have been carried out?

3. Have all other necessary measures been taken to prevent the justifiable fears of the local residents from materialising?

(1999/C 297/125) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4096/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NG)to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Environmental awareness park in the Athens region

In the Athens urban area (municipalities of Ilion, Ag. Anargyron and Kamateron) there is a very large public estate called the Vasilissi Tower Estate. On this site and in the surrounding area an environmental awareness park is being constructed. The total investment amounts to DR 2,5 billion and is being co-funded by the EU (ERDF, urban pilot projects, Article 10).

However, a large number of complaints have been received by local residents that permission has been granted for the construction of a supermarket (covering 2,7 ha.!) next to the environmental awareness park, which will cause serious traffic congestion and parking problems, pollution, etc ...

Will the Commission say:

1. Is it aware of this project next to the park, and how does it view this matter?

2. Can it confirm whether environmental impact studies have been carried out?

3. Have any other measures been taken to prevent the justified fears of local citizens being realised?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3680/98 and E-4096/98 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/126) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3687/98 by Michl Ebner (PPE)to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: EU directives laying down rules for the catering trade

The Confederation of National Hotel and Restaurant Associations in the European Community (HOTREC) has recently published a booklet on 150 EU measures concerning hotels, restaurants and cafés. It analyses in detail the more than 150 directives which have either been proposed or have already been adopted by the European Union which concern everyday activities in hotels, restaurants and cafés in Europe.

In recent years there has been such a sharp increase in the number of EU directives covering this area that it is questionable whether the establishments affected are in a position to comply with them or implement them.

Given that there are some 150 EU directives affecting the catering trade and that it is very difficult for the businesses affected to comply with such a large number of rules, can the Commission say whether it intends to reduce the large number of directives and make them more efficient, for example by systematically taking measures through other than legislative means? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/95

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

The Commission communication ‘Simpler legislation for better action: The facts’ (1) demonstrates that the number of Commission proposals is going down, in particular the number of legislative proposals. There were 16proposals for legislation in 1997, against 60proposals in 1990. Improved consultation processes provide for clearer, simpler and more accessible legal acts. Subsidiarity and proportionality, editorial quality, simplification (2), codification, amendment and consolidation as well as improved access to information, effective transposition and shared responsibility are the guidelines of the future legislative action of the Commission.

In its report ‘Subsidiarity and proportionality ( A responsibility to be shared’ (3) presented to the recent European Council in Vienna (11/12 December 1998), and which has been provided also to the Parliament, the Commission presents a complete analysis of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and demonstrates how these principles are put into practice. In its analysis of proposals made by the Commission, the report points out that 35 % of proposals derive from international agreements, between 25 % and 30 % of proposals are concerned with adaptation of existing Community law, 20 % of proposals are a response to specific requests of other Community institutions, Member States, and business interests, and 10 % are related to instruments to be adopted under the Treaties, for example, agricultural prices and multi-annual research programmes. The report points out also that the Commission regularly reviews outstanding proposals that are no longer necessary and that 70 such proposals are due to be withdrawn.

As for the publication mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission notes that most of the measures identified as affecting the hotel, restaurant and café sector refer to businesses generally, and that the list of measures includes not only legislation but also policy papers, studies, and Community programmes some of which benefit the sector. As far as enterprise policy is concerned, the Commission systematically takes account of the implications of specific legislative proposals for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) (4), and in its Action plan on promoting entrepreneurship and competitiveness (5) the Commission has indicated its intention to strengthen the existing business impact assessment system set up for that purpose.

(1) COM(98) 345 final. (2) SLIM: Simpler legislation for the internal market. BEST: Business environment simplification Task Force. (3) COM(98) 1786. (4) Improving the quality of legislation for business ( The European Commission Business impact assessment system, Brussels 1997, DG XXIII. (5) COM(98) 550 final.

(1999/C 297/127) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3690/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: Unfair tax treatment of Greek university staff

Greek Law 2530/97 lays down rules governing the status, scale of salaries and other matters relating to teaching and research staff at Higher Educational Establishments (AEI) and Technological Educational Establishment (TEI) in Greece.

This Law provides that staff may be engaged in activities apart from their university teaching commitments, but that such activities may not exceed eight hours weekly; Article 3 states that a percentage (between 15 and 30 %) of the remuneration earned by university teachers from their professional activities outside teaching shall be withheld in ‘accounts’ which constitute a form of separate fund. These funds are not for the exclusive benefit of the university body but are also available to various social organisations. The imposition of the above charge (which accounts for as much as 30 % of their remuneration) is incompatible with the Greek Constitution and violates the principle of ‘reciprocity’, since university staff derive practically no benefits from the above ‘accounts’.

Will the Commission say whether the above is compatible with the principle of equal treatment of taxpayers, and what action it intends to take to prevent the unfair treatment of Greek university staff at the hands of the Greek tax authorities? C 297/96 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

The question raised by the Honourable Member refers to a situation which is not governed by Community law. Greek income tax legislation is not subject to any harmonisation. It is not,therefore,for the Commission to comment on the way the Greek authorities apply the legislation.

(1999/C 297/128) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3695/98 by Patrick Cox (ELDR) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Booklet detailing the rules of the road in the various Member States

Given the ever-increasing number of road accidents and deaths,and in view of the Commission’s commitment to a programme on road safety,will the Commission consider producing a booklet in all languages setting out the rules of the road applicable in each Member State?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that most of the traffic rules applicable in Europe have been harmonised in the framework of the Geneva and Vienna conventions under the auspices of the United Nations economic commission for Europe.

However,there are still differences that can be quite important for people travelling by road throughout Europe. The Commission consequently published a leaflet jointly with the ‘Alliance internationale de tourisme’ (AIT) in 1991 indicating the most important differences in traffic rules and signs. The leaflet,produced in English,French and German,has been widely distributed through the national association members of AIT. The advice in that leaflet is still accurate.

An assessment will be made of the costs and potential effectiveness of publishing the sort of document which the Honourable Member suggests and these could be evaluated in relation to other publicity campaigns.

(1999/C 297/129) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3734/98 by Aline Pailler (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(11 December 1998)

Subject: International convention on the rights of migrant workers

In its reply to Written Question E-2283/96 (1) by the same author as this question,the Commission stated that no Member State had ratified the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families. Has the Council decided to take steps to encourage ratification of this convention,as called for by the European Parliament in its resolution on human rights in the European Union?

(1) OJ C 365,4.12.1996,p. 103.

(22 April 1999)

The Council recognizes the importance attached by the European Parliament to the implementation of the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families, which was adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990. However, 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/97

the Council has not so far been called upon to encourage the Member States to proceed with the ratification of this convention.

(1999/C 297/130) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3738/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Abolition of duty-free sales

In anticipation of a review of the entire European tax system, the 1992 directives decreed that duty-free sales in the European Union would come to an end in June 1999. The decision in favour of abolishing duty-free sales, which was taken by the Ministers of Finance, can be changed only by a symbolic use of unanimity, which it is difficult to achieve in this area.

In view of the fact that the sector employs 140 000 people, and that the profits made on such sales enable all of Europe’s biggest airports to absorb a range of costs and finance works and investment, and in view of the by now spasmodic quest for job creation:

Can the Commission indicate the logic behind the decision to abolish a sector which makes such a positive contribution to Community employment?

Does it intend to call a halt, as a matter of urgency, to the procedures for abolishing the sector, and initiate a study to examine the results of such abolition and its impact on industrial production and employment?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The rationale behind the ending of intra-Community duty-free sales is that of a single market. With the elimination of import and export formalities, the possibility has been created for all citizens to purchase goods, tax included, in the Member State of their choice. The changes to the tax system implicitly put an end to duty- free sales to travellers within the Community. With the sole purpose of alleviating any economic and social problems that might arise from such legislative changes, the Ecofin Council in 1991 unanimously decided to introduce a specific measure, limited in time, allowing for the phasing out of that activity.

Regarding the employment aspect, the Commission has adopted on 17 February 1999 a communication to the Parliament and the Council concerning the employment aspects of the decision to abolish tax and duty-free sales for intra-Community travellers (1).

This communication is the follow-up to the request by the Vienna European Council in December 1998 to examine by March 1999, the problems that could arise with regard to employment following the abolition of intra-Community duty-free sales.

(1) COM(99) 65.

(1999/C 297/131) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3740/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Battery hens

Will the Commission indicate what research it has put in hand or undertaken on practical alternative methods to the battery system for producing eggs? C 297/98 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Animal welfare has been a research topic under the FAIR specific research programme (agriculture and fisheries, including agro-industry, food technologies, forestry, aquaculture and rural development, 1994- 1998) since its inception.

Under this programme, research projects selected following calls for proposals can be funded by the Community. Two projects related to the welfare of poultry have been funded so far. The first deals with ‘Genetic solutions to health and welfare problems in poultry caused by painful skeleton disorders’ and the second with ‘feather pecking: solutions through understanding’. Abstracts are sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. In future research projects on animal welfare, including poultry, will continue to be funded under the 5th Community framework programme for research and technological development (1998-2002).

(1999/C 297/132) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3742/98 by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Quarantine regulations concerning imports of pets into the United Kingdom

In the light of Directives 90/425/EEC (1) and 92/65/EEC (2), can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. Is the Commission aware of the report ‘Quarantine and Rabies: a reappraisal’ of the Advisory Group on Quarantine published by the British Ministry of Agriculture on October 1998 and, if so, has the Commission any views on recommendations 27 to 29 dealing with the harmonisation of a European system for the control of rabies?

2. Is it true that the Commission intends to revise (parts of) Directive 92/65/EEC and, if so, how does the Commission intend to tackle the derogation applicable to the United Kingdom with regard to imports of pets?

3. Has the Commission had an exchange of views recently with the British government on the British quarantine rules and the effect they have on freedom of movement in the internal market and, if so, can the Commission indicate the results of these contacts?

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29. (2) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 1999)

The British government has forwarded to the Commission the report of the advisory group on quarantine, chaired by Professor Ian Kennedy, which was published on 23 September 1998.

This report, based on an independent assessment of the risk of the introduction of rabies into the United Kingdom, is definitely in favour of a change in the current policy on quarantine and the Commission considers its recommendations to be a major step forward. The Commission awaits the final decision of the British authorities following the three month consultation period.

The decision of the British authorities will have to be considered in the light of the international code of the ‘Office international des epizooties’ (OIE) in its chapter relating to rabies. The recommendations of this code are very close to the main points of the Kennedy report and it is reasonable to think that it may justify a specific system for the entry of carnivores into Member States free of rabies.

However, as mentioned in recommendation 27 of the advisory group, the proposed system will need to be transitional. The situation with regard to rabies within Europe is improving very quickly. This is the consequence of the great success of the campaign of oral vaccination of foxes actively supported by the Commission. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/99

It should be noted that the Community legislation cited by the Honourable Member (Council Directives 90/425/EEC of26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion ofthe internal market and 92/65/EEC of13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community ofanimals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC) does not apply to veterinary checks on movements between Member States ofpets accompanied by their owners, where such movements are not the subject ofa commercial transaction.

(1999/C 297/133) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3744/98

by Ulla Sandbæk (EDD) to theCommission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Appointments in GD IB and GD VIII to deal with women and development issues

The Commission has adopted the idea ofa ‘mainstreaming’ approach to women and development issues. How many people at the Commission have been appointed to ensure that this approach is put into practice? How many have been appointed to the new common service department and to GD IB and GD VIII? Have these posts been filled by temporary external staff on secondment or by actual officials and, in the latter case, in which grade (A, B or C)?

The Commission has a budget for staff training. What proportion of this budget has so far been spent on training staff in ‘mainstreaming’ in relation to women? Are any of these funds earmarked for such training?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Since 1996, the Commission’s policy on ‘mainstreaming’ has required each directorate general to integrate a gender and equal opportunities perspective into its policy areas.

In the case of the directorates general responsible for development issues, this priority is reflected in the respective organisation charts. In the Joint Relex Service, Unit B.5’s responsibilities include gender issues. In DG VIII (Development) and DG IB (External relations: Southern Mediterranean, Middle East, Latin America, South and South-East Asia and North-South cooperation), Units A2 and D2 are responsible for ‘mainstreaming’ ofgender issues in their respective directorates general.

However, the Commission is fully aware that @ if they are to be effective @ ‘mainstreaming’ activities can not be limited to these units alone. Thus many other officials are also involved in ‘mainstreaming’ in their daily work. As part ofits policy on ‘mainstreaming’ the Commission is building on the regular exchange of information and experience which already takes place between directorates general on this issue. Officials have been appointed by 29 directorates general and horizontal services with specific responsibility for gender ‘mainstreaming’ in their respective services and participate in the inter-service cooperation to develop and monitor the Commission policy of gender ‘mainstreaming’. Specific training for officials and a specific mention ofthe gender dimension ofmanagement will appear in a call fortender which is about to be launched for the training of all middle and senior management in the Commission.

Three specific training courses are organised at present in this area, the latest of which is specifically targeted at the ‘mainstreaming’ officers in the Commission who are themselves responsible for promoting this policy in the individual directorates general. About 250 people follow these three courses over a period of 12 months and their cost accounts for approximately 8 % of the budget for centrally-organised training activities. C 297/100 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/134) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3756/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Counterfeiting and piracy

On 22 October 1998 the Commission announced the publication of a Green Paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market, with which it launched wide-ranging consultations on the matter with interested parties in the Member States.

The Green Paper pursues four lines of thought: a) support for monitoring activities by the private sector; b) the legal protection of authenticating and security devices; c) an assessment of the sanctions and other means capable of ensuring that intellectual property rights are enforced; and d) the establishment of appropriate administrative cooperation between the Member States’ competent authorities.

In the Commission’s opinion, what effect may the damage suffered by undertakings have as regards investment?

(1999/C 297/135) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3757/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Counterfeiting and piracy

In the Commission’s opinion, what effect may the damage suffered by undertakings have as regards employment?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3756/98 and E-3757/98 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

Counterfeiting and piracy have harmful social and economic effects on both enterprises and economies. Innovative and creative enterprises are obviously the first to suffer. One need only consider the two aspects mentioned by the Honourable Member 2 investment and employment 2 to see that the damage done to enterprises can sometimes be substantial.

With regard to investment, enterprises, and innovative enterprises in particular, often invest substantial sums of money in research, marketing and advertising for the development and commercialisation of new products. Counterfeiters reap the benefits of this investment without having to bear the costs, with the result that counterfeit products can be sold at a lower price than genuine products. The enterprises thus find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. If, therefore, these enterprises are unable to gain a return on their investment, they are likely either to cut back on the amount they invest or switch their investment to countries where they can be assured that their intellectual property rights are given effective protection.

When it comes employment, enterprises which fall victim to counterfeit activities often find themselves in direct competition with the counterfeiters, even if the counterfeit products are generally of inferior quality. As a result, they lose out on sales opportunities and their market shares dwindle. In addition, consumers who have been deceived by counterfeit products when they thought they were buying the genuine article sometimes then steer clear of such products altogether. The resulting loss of custom for these enterprises then has direct repercussions on the numbers they employ. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/101

The Commission’s Green Paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market should help measure the true economic impact of counterfeiting and piracy in the single market, including their effects on investment and employment, and establish a framework for devising appropriate solutions.

(1999/C 297/136) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3769/98 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Treatment of British passport holders by French border police

In response to my Written Question P-2892/98 (1) the Commission focused upon the right of Member States to check the identity of citizens crossing borders. However, the central point of my question concerned the manner in which citizens are treated when these checks are carried out. In the case described, was it prudent of the French authorities not to have women officers on duty at an international port to deal with situations involving women?

Does the Commission therefore agree that the French authority’s mismanagement of an otherwise easily resolvable situation, i.e. its failure to provide a woman officer, exacerbated the problem unnecessarily and resulted in the woman’s expulsion from France? Does not the Commission agree that this is unacceptable and that, in order to safeguard the dignity of women in such situations, in line with the Union’s general policies on non-discrimination, women officers should be on duty at all times at major points of entry into the Union and transit between Member States?

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 161.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Commission shares the honourable Member’s opinion on the importance of respecting the dignity of women, including during identity checks when crossing borders.

However, with the exception of the case mentioned in Written Question 2892/98, the Commission is not aware of any problems relating to the rights and dignity of women that may arise when citizens are checked at Community borders.

The Commission therefore believes that there is no reason to take specific measures concerning this matter.

(1999/C 297/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3777/98 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Standardising qualifications for posts in the European civil service

The Commission does not accept applications for category A posts in the European civil service from holders of Spanish university qualifications issued on completion of a three-year study period comprising two ‘cycles’, since under European legislation they are deemed to fall within category B.

In contrast, holders of university qualifications issued after three years in the remainder of the Member States are entitled to apply for category A posts.

1. What criteria does the Commission employ to differentiate between the university qualifications issued after three years in the various Member States?

2. On what basis does it establish the individual categories within the European civil service

3. What corrective measures does it intend to adopt in order to remove these inequalities? C 297/102 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

The Commission would first like to clarify the statement made in the Honourable Member’s question: candidates with the type of Spanish university qualifications obtained after between four and six years of study are eligible to sit competitions for category A/LA posts in the European civil service, whereas those with the type obtained after three years of university study (Diplomatura, Ingeniería Técnica and Arquitectura Técnica) are not.

Contrary to the Honourable Member’s assertion, the Commission does not accept all three-year university qualifications from the other Member States for this purpose.

As stated in Article 27 of the Staff Regulations, the Commission’s recruitment policy is directed to securing for the institution the services of officials of the highest standard of ability, recruited on the broadest possible geographical basis from among nationals of the Member States without reference to, inter alia, nationality.

The Commission is careful to ensure that these provisions are strictly complied with. In deciding whether a qualification grants access to the Community civil service, the Commission takes account of the legislation in the Member State where the studies leading to it were carried out.

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to other parliamentary questions on the same subject in particular question E-3027/98 from Mr Arias Cañete (1) and question E-4186/97 from Ms Dührkop Dührkop (2), where it explains its overall approach to Spanish university qualifications of both types and whether or not they give access to category A/LA posts in the Community civil service.

(1) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999, p. 73. (2) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998.

(1999/C 297/138) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3779/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Aid for the pigmeat sector

The EU pigmeat sector finds itself in the midst of a price slump, highlighting the existence of deep-seated structural problems which must be tackled fully sooner rather than later.

The impact of the current slump has been particularly severe for small family farms, many of which face the prospect of temporary, or even permanent closure.

The turnover of the EU pigmeat sector exceeds ECU 20 billion and the sector generates a large number of jobs.

Has the Commission therefore considered the possibility of adopting structural measures to prevent any further return to overproduction, which pushes down prices and forces producers to make sales below the cost price? Has it examined the possibility of including within these measures subsidies for the withdrawal of sows from the market, with a view to cutting production surpluses?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The Community pig industry is currently in a state of crisis because production greatly exceeds internal Community consumption. Pig farmers throughout Europe have expanded their herds, encouraged by the exceptionally high market prices in 1996 and 1997. The price drop in a situation of increased production is a typical cyclical phenomenon of pig production. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/103

Within the pig sector markets are expected to regulate themselves, so market prices reflect the balance of supply and demand. However, the Commission has some limited possibilities to intervene in the market when necessary, and is now using the full range of measures available to support the pigmeat market.

In general the current market organization in pigmeat has functioned quite well. European pig markets have experienced many low price periods and each time pig farming has emerged with improved efficiency and a better structure.

Various new ideas for amending the market organization have been put forward by some Member States and discussed by the management committee for pigmeat on 4 November 1998. The idea of withdrawing sows from production was also discussed in this framework. However, the result of this discussion was to concentrate all efforts on traditional market support measures.

(1999/C 297/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3786/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Public information about cargo on passenger flights

It has come to my attention that radioactive material is sometimes transported as cargo on passenger flights.

1. Does not the Commission feel that the public is entitled to be informed as to which flights carry this type of cargo?

2. Why is such cargo not transported solely on cargo flights?

(1999/C 297/140) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3787/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Transport of radioactive material by air

Can the Commission list all the companies in the EU which are licensed to transport radioactive material by air?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3786/98 and E-3787/98 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 1999)

The transport of radioactive material is organised in accordance with the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and implemented for air transport by the technical requirements adopted within the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), which are currently applied by all Member States. Such requirements apply equally to cargo and passenger flights. Any air carrier licensed for the carriage of freight is entitled to carry such material, provided it applies the related requirements (mainly through design and strength of packaging).

Since the Commission considers that the application of these requirements provides the necessary guarantees for the safe transport of such materials it has not made any proposals for Community legislation in this sphere.

This issue 7 like others relating to safety 7 is naturally subject to continual consideration. Responsible authorities would respond to any change in circumstances that altered the present levels of safety. C 297/104 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/141) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3789/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to theCommission (11 December 1998)

Subject: Export of live animals

On 18 December 1997, the Commission agreed to amend Regulation (EEC) 805/68 (1) on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal. Amendments to the conditions under which live animals may be exported to third countries include the introduction of controls involvingveterinary inspections at third- country entry points. Havingdecided deliberately to exclude animal welfare groupsfrom beingauthorised to carry out such checks, even though they have been the only organisations prepared to expose cruelty in the treatment of exported animals, will the Commission indicate what procedures have been introduced to enforce the requirements of the amended Regulation and how many veterinary inspectors are to be employed for this task?

(1) OJ L 148, 28.6.1968, p. 24.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 February 1999)

Commission Regulation (EC) 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport (1) provides that the payment of export refunds for live cattle is conditional upon compliance with Community legislation on the protection of animals duringtransport.

All consignments of cattle are subject to systematic checks on exit from the Community carried out by an official veterinarian of the Member State of exit. Furthermore, checks are carried out at arrival in the third country when there are grounds for suspecting breaches of the rules and on consignments selected by the exportingMember State on the basis of risk analysis.

The checks in third countries are carried out by a veterinarian of an international control and supervisory agency approved for this purpose by a Member State or by a veterinarian of an official agency of a Member State. The Member State which approved an international control and supervisory agency shall verify on regular basis or when there are serious grounds for suspicion that the conditions for approval are not met.

The Commission verifies the manner in which checks on animal welfare are performed by the national authorities.

In the framework of the restructuringof the Commission’s food and veterinary office, a groupof three veterinarians has been created. One of them has been workingin this field for a considerable time, and the other two will be recruted in the near future from the list of candidates.

(1) OJ L 82, 19.3.1998.

(1999/C 297/142) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3805/98 by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission (4 December 1998)

Subject: Eligibility criteria for decentralised cooperation programmes

New draconian eligibility criteria, especially concerning the bank guarantee, are a feature of the relaunch of the decentralised cooperation programmes announced by the European Commission.

Does the Commission intend to maintain a criterion of this nature which, on the one hand, penalises all small- scale structures (such as associations and NGOs), which are unable to take on a guarantee like that, and, on the other, contravenes French law relatingto local authorities?

French local authorities are automatically solvent under French law. The bank guarantee criterion imposed by the Commission would require the local authorities to pay bank charges and would de facto violate public accountingrules. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/105

The new criteria imposed by the Commission in respect of the decentralised cooperation programmes may actually discourage a higher rate of participation by civil society.

Civil society has been waiting long and patiently for the decentralised cooperation programmes to be relaunched. Cannot the Commission put in place an alternative system which would enable small-scale structures and local authorities to participate in the relaunch of programmes of this nature without any encumbrances?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Under the Commission’s Structural Fund proposals for 2000-2006, bank guarantees could $ where necessary $ be required in respect of public money made available to intermediary organisations responsible for implementation. This requirement would not apply to the final recipients of support.

It would be for Member States to determine, in accordance with national legislation, how these provisions would be implemented in practice. Such arrangements already apply in some Member States, particularly to local action groups receiving support under the Community’s Leader initiative.

(1999/C 297/143) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3809/98 by Barbara Weiler (PSE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Cases C-2/97 and C-49/98 (minimum social standards) referred for preliminary rulings

The European social model guarantees a certain minimum level of social rights. European provisions do not, however, prevent individual Member States from taking steps to maintain or introduce a higher level of protection in respect of working conditions.

Several cases referred to the European Court of Justice and relating to minimum provisions based on Article 118a (new Article 138) of the EC Treaty give cause for concern. Case C-2/97 (’società italiana petroli SpA’) involves the admissibility of stricter Italian limit values for carcinogenic substances in benzene; in case C-49/98, by decision of 10February 1998 the Wiesbaden industrial tribunal referred to the European Court of Justice the question of the application of more favourable German holiday entitlements to workers posted abroad. In both instances the referring courts $ and, in the ’società italiana petroli SpA’ case, the Advocate- General $ took the view that the Community’s minimum provisions prevent or make it more difficult for the Member States to adopt stricter protective measures for employees or goods from abroad, than provided for by EC legislation.

Is the Commission aware of this threat to higher levels of protection? If the European Court of Justice were to confirm this trend in its case law, how would it affect the Commission’s policy on legislative initiatives on minimum social standards?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 1999)

The Court of Justice delivered its judgment in case C-2/97 on 17 December 1998. In line with the Commission’s position expressed in its observations presented under the procedure, the Court ruled that a national provision which requires the employer to reduce workers’ exposure to a carcinogen irrespective of the assessment of risks is not contrary to Council Directive 90/394/EEC of 28 June 1990 on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work (1), in that it constitutes a more stringent measure for the protection of working conditions as authorised by Article 118a (3) of the EC Treaty and Directive 90/394/EEC.

The Honourable Member’s question refers to the Community’s minimum provisions contained in Directive 93/104/EC (2) concerning the organisation of working time, which is the subject of one of the questions in referral for preliminary ruling C-49/98. The Commission is able to confirm that this Directive, in accordance C 297/106 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

with Article 118a of the EC Treaty, is without prejudice to the maintaining or introduction by a Member State of more stringent measures to ensure safe working conditions, as long as they are compatible with the Treaty. This is specifically confirmed by Article 15 of Directive 93/104/EEC.

As this case concerns the transnational posting of workers, the Commission reminds the Honourable Member that European Parliament and Council Directive 96/71/EC of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (3) contains a hard core of mandatory rules providing minimum protection, which must be observed in the host Member State by employers posting workers to another Member State as part of the provision of services.These mandatory rules include provisions on a minimum period of paid annual leave.

Under these circumstances, the minimum provisions in force in the host Member State which must be applied to posted workers may stipulate a period of annual leave which is longer than that provided for by Directive 93/104/EC, to the extent that this minimum period is fixed either by legislation or by generally applicable collective agreements.The provisions of the Directive on the posting of workers must be implemented by the Member States by 16 December 1999.

(1) OJ L 196, 26.7.1990. (2) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993. (3) OJ L 18, 21.1.1997.

(1999/C 297/144) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3838/98 by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Football transfers

As well as involving fantastic sums of money, transfers of professional players, particularly footballers, have become a mechanism for speculation and for restricting the free movement of footballers within the European Union.

What action will the Commission take to remedy this situation?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Since the Court of Justice judgment of 15 December 1995 in Bosman (1), the payment of fees at the end of an employment contract that are unrelated to training costs is prohibited for all international transfers within the European Economic Area (EEA) of footballers who are or have turned professional.The Court of Justice did not cover the question of the payment of fees in other situations, e.g. transfers of non-Community players, transfers of players under contract and domestic transfers.

The Commission sees to it that the Bosman judgment is complied with.It also considers that any attempt to continue to apply the international system of FIFA and UEFA transfers to situations other than those covered by the judgment in question is liable to infringe Article 85 of the EC Treaty.The same holds for the obligation imposed by FIFA on national associations to introduce national transfer systems.

For that reason, and recognising the need to encourage the recruitment and training of young players, the Commission has, since the Bosman judgment, been encouraging the organisations responsible to present it with an alternative to the international transfer system.With no acceptable proposal forthcoming, the Commission sent a statement of objections to FIFA on 15 December 1998.Its aim was to obtain the definitive abolition of all transfer systems based on fees unrelated to actual training costs.It is thus responding to numerous complaints and hopes to encourage FIFA to devise a system that is compatible with the rules of the EC Treaty and promotes the training of young players.

(1) Case C-415/93 [1995] ECR I-4921. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/107

(1999/C 297/145) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3840/98 by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca di Stato (national mint and stationery office)

It was recently reported that Mr Van Miert, the European Commissioner, had written to the Italian Minister of Finance to raise with him various issues relating to the Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca di Stato (national mint and stationery office), including its monopoly over supplies of paper to government departments.

Could the Commission provide more precise information on this subject, specifying the facts alleged and the conclusions reached by Mr Van Miert?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

The Commission started to investigate possible state aid to Poligrafico in April 1997. The information submitted by the Italian authorities, upon request of the Commission, on several occasions did not reassure the Commission as regards the absence of state aid.

The Commission, by decision of 28 October 1998, thus decided to start the procedure under Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty. The decision was notified to the Italian government by letter of 26 November 1998. The Italian government has to submit its observations and the required information within one month from the receipt of the letter.

The procedure will allow the Commission to assess the presence of state aid, and, if there is state aid, its compatibility with the common market, in the capital increases in favour of Cartiere Miliani di Fabriano, controlled by Poligrafico, and in the exclusive contract granted to Poligrafico itself for the provision of products and services to the state. The Commission will further evaluate additional aid measures to be granted by the state in connection with the restructuring of the group.

The measures will be evaluated in accordance with the state aid rules of the EC Treaty, and in particular with the guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty.

(1999/C 297/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3846/98 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Stage reached in the transposition of the directive on the disposal of PCBs and PCTs

Directive 96/59/EC (1) on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls was to be incorporated into the national laws of the Member States by the end of March 1998.

What is the situation as regards the Member States’ compliance in the transposition of this directive?

(1) OJ L 243, 24.9.1996, p. 31.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 1999)

Eight Member States (Belgium, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, Finland, Sweden) have communicated to the Commission implementing measures for Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT). The Com- mission has opened infringement proceedings under Article 169 EC Treaty against the seven Member States which have not communicated their implementing measures. C 297/108 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3858/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: FIBA decision concerning basketball

The International Basketball Federation (FIBA) has decided to abolish the restriction on the number ofnon- Community players in a team $ currently a maximum oftwo $ fromthe 1999-2000 season.

This decision will shatter the foundationsofCommunity basketball, lower the standard ofthe basketball teams ofthe Union’s Member States, destroy the ambition ofyoung European basketball players to pursue a professional career and, finally, lead inexorably to the sidelining and ‘unemployment’ of existing European professional players.

FIBA’s decision actually targets two large groups of professional basketball players, those from the former Yugoslavia and those from the USA, and (most importantly) will result in the loss of national identity in basketball in the Member States ofthe Union.

Will the Commission say:

1. whether the freedom of basketball players from third countries to establish themselves and work in Europe is consistent with Community law,

2. how it will respond to FIBA’s decision, which undermines European basketball and gives second place to European basketball players, and

3. whether the above decision was taken following talks with the European basketball players’ union? If not, is such a procedure consistent with the EU’s fundamental view that negotiations must take place before any decision is taken which affects working conditions?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Commission can only repeat what it said in its answer to oral question H-1131/98 by the Honourable Member.

The decision taken by FIBA is not, in principle, a breach ofCommunity law. Accordingly, the Commission does not plan to bring any action against that organisation. The decision was taken by the appropriate bodies ofthe international Federation afterthose involved in this sport had been able to express their views.

(1999/C 297/148) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3860/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Construction ofhospital in woodland in area ofarchaeological importance in municipality ofVari

The Greek Ministries ofthe Environment and Health have authorised the construction ofa large medical research facilitycovering an area of5 010 square metres in the municipality ofVari, Attica, which will house the Central Public Health Laboratory, the National Research Centre and the Health Service Institute for Research and Quality Control. Obviously, this is a facility at which biological and chemical research will be carried out, producing hazardous toxic and chemical waste. The entire complex, which is EU-funded, is to be built in woodland in an area ofarchaeological importance. In fact,8 000 square metres ofwoodland have already been cleared in one night. The scheme has provoked an outcry from the local residents and authorities in the area, while the antiquities department ofthe Ministry ofCulture is opposed to it unless the requisite excavations are carried out to determine whether or not the work can go ahead without endangering the important antiquities in the area. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/109

In the light of these circumstances, will the Commission say:

1. whether it is aware of this situation; whether all provisions and procedures have been complied with and whether the Greek authorities have furnished the Commission with all the necessary supporting documents to obtain the Commission’s authorisation for funding the construction of the complex,

2. whether, in particular, an environmental impact assessment has been carried out, as required by Directive 85/337/EEC, and whether there are studies to certify that there is no risk to the surrounding archaeological area,

3. what action it will take to ascertain whether these allegations are correct and whether the Greek authorities have complied with all the necessary provisions and procedures, and

4. in the event of ascertaining that local residents’ allegations are correct, what possibilities there are of repairing the damage already done, particularly to the surrounding woodland?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 1999)

This project is part-financed under the ‘Health and welfare’ operational programme of the current Community Support Framework for Greece. The programme Monitoring Committee agreed to its part-financing after receiving the information and documents required under the procedures in force.

According to the information received from the national authorities, the laboratory will not generate toxic or dangerous waste. Hence Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1) does not apply to the project.

The Greek authorities have also stated that all permits and authorisations required by Greek law in respect of archaeological sites, forested areas, etc. have been issued.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 297/149) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3865/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 December 1998)

Subject: Enforcement of the Zoonose Directive

In view of the time limits which it lays down, the Zoonose Directive (92/117) (1) should by now have been implemented in all Member States. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Unless the Directive is implemented in all Member States, it is very difficult to argue the case for imposing special requirements in respect of products from third countries.

What steps has the Commission actually taken to ensure that the Directive is enforced throughout the Community?

Might it not be possible to envisage using a ’scoreboard’ approach, along the lines of the famous Single Market Scoreboard?

Has the Commission considered instituting proceedings in the Court of Justice pursuant to Articles 169 and 171?

Will the Commission explain in detail how it interprets the objective of Article 14 of the Directive?

(1) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993, p. 38. C 297/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Article 17(1) of Directive 92/117/EEC of 17 December 1992 concerning measures for protection against specified zoonoses and specified zoonotic agents in animals and products of animal origin, in order to prevent outbreaks of food-borne infections and intoxications (the Zoonoses Directive) requires Member States to implement the Directive before 1 January 1994.

Certain provisions of this Directive were amended by Directive 97/22/EC of 22 April 1997 (1) for which the implementation deadline expired on 1 September 1997. In the case of both directives, the Commission, as soon as the deadline expired, opened infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty against the Member States which had not notified their implementation measures. One of these proceedings led to a judgement of the Court of justice noting that Italy had not fulfilled its obligation to implement Directive 92/117/EEC.

At present, the Commission still awaits for Directive 97/22/EC notification of the implementation measures of France, Italy and the Netherlands. According to the last information available to the Commission the publication of the national measures by these Member States is imminent.

The ‘Action plan for the single market’ (2) of June 1997 provided for the implementation progress to be measured every sixmonths in a ‘scoreboard’ presented by the Commission. For such an act as the Zoonoses Directive, the Commission considers existing instruments sufficient to follow the implementation in each Member State.

Besides these legal actions the Commission has actively encouraged and assisted Member States in their attempts to reach the objectives of the Zoonoses Directive and to combat zoonotic diseases in animals. The financial funding for eradication and control of zoonoses has been significant. For 1999 the Community financial contribution for eradication and monitoring of zoonotic diseases in animals and other programmes aimed at the prevention of zoonoses equals 36 million euro. Among other measures taken is the establishment of the Community reference laboratories for salmonella and for epidemiology of zoonoses, providing national reference laboratories with details of analytical methods, organising comparative testing and conducting training courses and workshops.

An important tool for the evaluation of the enforcement of the Zoonoses Directive is the control activity of the Food and veterinary office. As a result of missions the Commission may, if necessary, endorse safeguard measures or open infringement proceedings.

The Commission is supporting a study concerning a scientific evaluation of the arrangements for dealing with zoonoses in the Member States from a public health point of view within the framework of the recently adopted Decision No 2119/98/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 1998 setting up a network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the Community (3). This project will start at the beginning of 1999 and the results will be used in the review required under Article 15 of the Zoonoses Directive.

According to Article 14 of Directive 92/117/EEC third countries should submit a plan giving details of the guarantees they afford as regards inspections for zoonoses and zoonotic agents. The admission, or retention, on the Community list of third countries from which imports are authorised shall be subject to the submission of such plan. At present, no third country has submitted a zoonoses plan and this should mean that trade from the third countries concerned is stopped. However, taking into account the level which various Member States have achieved in order to implement the requirements of the Zoonoses Directive, such an act would be inappropriate, could lead to unforeseen consequences in trade with third countries and could provoke a challenge in the World trade organisation (WTO). The Commission is preparing a proposal to the Council and the Parliament to postpone the time limit laid down in Article 14 of the Directive.

(1) OJ L 113, 30.4.1997. (2) CSE(97)1 final. (3) OJ L 268, 3.10.1998. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/111

(1999/C 297/150) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3868/98 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission

(9 December 1998)

Subject: Storage of nuclear waste from the reactor in Petten (Netherlands)

We have noted the answers of 20 November 1998 by Mrs Cresson, on behalf of the Commission, to my initial questions on the problems with the storage capacity for nuclear waste from the High Flux Reactor in Petten (E-3041/98) (1). It is clear from your answers that this problem falls within the remit of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) since it is responsible for operational matters.

1. The ’second-string solution’ referred to in your answer will also create major problems, since the reactor building’s tank is reaching capacity. Will the Commission now speedily search for a new solution?

2. The Commission’s answer states that waste management is a national matter. However, we are talking here about a JRC which is run by the Commmission. Is the solution to this problem not then partly the Commission’s responsibility? Will the Commission now bring in other EU Member States to help to resolve this problem?

(1) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999, p. 75.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

1. The solution proposed for the storage of the High flux reactor (HFR) spent fuel elements in case of delayed availability of the storage at the Habog facility ‘Centrale organisatie voor radioactif afval’ (COVRA project) namely storage in the reactor pound, is indeed a limited solution. At the end of 1999 all storage space in the pound will have been used and other solutions are necessary.

As the fresh fuel was made of American origin material, one other option would be to send the spent fuel back to the United States, as was done before 1988. But a prior condition imposed by the American authorities is a commitment to convert the HFR from present highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. However such a conversion is a costly technical operation. It should not inflict losses on the technical characteristics of this reactor, which produces about 60 % of radio-pharmaceutical products used in Europe, nor reduce its competitive edge in this market which is already very tight. Appropriate studies have therefore been launched and, if a positive outcome is obtained, spent fuel could be sent back to the United States in 1999. The HFR budget would have to be adjusted to such an expensive solution.

Reprocessing in France was analysed as well. This option has some advantages but it necessitates the return of waste to the Netherlands after several years. Furthermore, reprocessing in France, with relative correlated actions, is an expensive solution not covered by the HFR budget.

2. No Member State has a well established, accepted and licensed waste disposal facility for high level waste or spent fuel, and for the time being there is an obligation to return waste to the country where the plant is situated. No trend towards an internationalisation or even ‘europeanisation’ of waste storage is foreseen.

(1999/C 297/151) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3887/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Application procedure for NGO funding

Would the Commission please indicate how applications from NGOs for funding from Item B7-6000 are appraised and prioritised? C 297/112 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/152) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3888/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Funding for NGOs

How is the Commission addressing the delays that NGOs are experiencing when seeking co-financing from Item B7-6000?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3887/98 and E-3888/98 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

1. Applications for funding under budget line B7-6000 are appraised and prioritised according to Council Regulation (EC) 1658/98 of 17 July 1998 on co-financing operations with European non-governmental development organisations (NGOs) in fields of interest to the developing countries (1), as well as the general conditions for co-financing with NGOs. Projects are chosen on the basis of their viability, their impact on the poorest, and their compatibility with Community development objectives.

2. Some NGOs experienced delays in 1998 in obtaining decisions on their funding requests. This was due primarily to the decision of the Commission to suspend the execution of the budget line following the judgment of the Court of justice on the absence of a legal basis and before the interinstitutional agreement in July 1998.

The Commission is now giving priority to the examination of proposals to allow the current backlog to be eliminated in the first months of 1999.

(1) OJ L 213, 30.7.1998.

(1999/C 297/153) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3909/98 by Pedro Aparicio Sánchez (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Can an EU Member State apply two different directives to the same profession?

With regard to the profession of dietician, some countries apply Directive 89/48/EEC (1) and others Directive 92/51/EEC (2), depending on whether training is given by a university (with a duration of three or more years) in the first case, or in the form of further vocational training (post-secondary) in the second case. In France, meanwhile, the profession of dietician is classed at both levels (university and vocational training), while French academic, professional and employment legislation puts the two levels on an equal footing, and Directive 92/51/EEC is applied exclusively,

Bearing in mind that in Spain the current ‘Técnicos Superiores en Dietética’ (vocational training, level 3) are covered by Directive 92/51/EEC and that the Spanish Government is nevertheless seeking to introduce a new university qualification in dietetics (level 2) which is to be covered by Directive 89/48/EEC in view of the content and duration of the courses involved, can an EU Member State apply two different directives to the same profession?

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989, p. 16. (2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25.

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

The training of those exercising a profession in a Member State is in the first place the responsibility of the Member State in question. There is a connection between training and the right to exercise a profession which varies and differs according to the profession and the Member State. This situation means that there are 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/113

a number of possibilities. There may be training in a Member State even though the profession connected with such training is not governed by any regulations in the Member State. In such a case, since there are no requirements for exercising the profession, it is dependent on market conditions, i.e. supply and demand. Other circumstances are possible. Training connected with the exercise of a profession in a Member State may be acknowledged and allow the exercise of that profession;this is the more common occurrence. Another possibility is that there may be several training options within a Member State and that one or more of these may not be recognised by the Member State where an individual followed training and therefore do not permit the exercise of a regulated activity.

With regard to the application of the two directives (89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC) on a general system for the recognition of professional diplomas and qualifications, these are intended to be applied only in the case of Community citizens who are properly qualified in their Member State of origin and who move to another Member State for the purpose of exercising the same profession. There will, as a rule, be successive and not simultaneous application of the two directives mentioned earlier. This refers to a situation whereby a Member State decides to change the level of training for those exercising a profession on its territory and, as a result, amends the training requirements for those wishing to exercise the profession. In this instance, the Member State is free to determine the acquired rights of those possessing earlier qualifications who want to continue exercising the same profession in the country.

However, it cannot be excluded that a Member State may accept that two distinct training options, for which the period of training is different, can qualify a person for the exercise of a profession. It may be two different professions or the same profession. In this instance, for example, there may differences in the pay scales of those exercising the profession. In any case, the Member State in question will have to ensure the application of the provisions laid down in Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC or by the Treaty, whenever a migrant wishes to exercise the same profession for which he was qualified in his Member State of origin.

Lastly, it is worth mentioning in closing the relevant principle, i.e. if there is no harmonisation at Community level, the Member States are free to set the conditions of training for, access to and exercise of a profession and to regulate or not to regulate the sector in question, while obviously complying with the provisions of the Treaty or derived law on the recognition of professional diplomas and qualifications.

(1999/C 297/154) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3913/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Ecofin Council meeting of 1 December 1998

At this meeting, Ministers discussed the first interim report of the Code of Conduct Group on business taxation.

Press reports following the Council meeting clearly indicate that some journalists have obtained copies of this report. In view of this, can the Commission make this interim report available to MEPs? In particular, can the Commission explain to MEPs what measures in what Member States the Code of Conduct Group is discussing?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

When the code of conduct group was established in March 1998 the Ecofin Council determined that its work should remain confidential.

There is an understandable concern that disclosure of information before the issues have been fully evaluated could adversely affect both the assessment process and the commitment to exchange what may be sensitive information on national legislative measures and practices. Given that the initial list of measures is not exhaustive, there are concerns that its disclosure might have negative economic, social and budgetary effects for individual Member States, as well as for the business community. C 297/114 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Regardless of press speculation therefore, working papers, including details of tax measures under discussion in the group, and the interim report of the group are not available for distribution.

The Commission has issued a communication (1) to the Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the code of conduct and other elements of the tax package.

(1) COM(98) 595 final.

(1999/C 297/155) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3915/98

by Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (ELDR) to the Commission

(21 December 1998)

Subject: Steps to improve animal protection in the European Union during the Finnish Council Presidency

In accordance with the protocol to the Amsterdam Treaty, in its agricultural policy the Community must take full account of animal welfare requirements. The welfare and treatment of animals are very important factors in the selection and assessment of foodstuffs by consumers. More and more often, consumers want to be sure that the procedures for the production, care and breeding of animals and their transport and treatment are ethically acceptable and beyond reproach. It is up to Commission to put forward the requisite proposals for directives on animal protection, taking consumer expectations into account.

One objective of the forthcoming Finnish Council Presidency is to achieve tangible progress on these animal protection issues. Does the Commission have sufficient staff to draw up the requisite proposals on animal protection? According to the information at my disposal, this is not the case. When and how does the Commission intend to expand its staff complement in this area?

It would be extremely important and useful if the Commission were to put forward the following proposals on animal protection before the start of the Finnish Council Presidency:

1. Amendment of Council Directive 93/119/EC (1) on protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing in respect of the authorised stunning and killing procedures.

2. As provided for in Council Directive 98/58/EC (2) on the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, proposal on the harmonisation of the checks to ensure compliance with animal protection provisions required under the Directive and the related reports.

3. Amendment of Council Directive 91/630/EEC (3) laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs in such a way that it better reflects current knowledge on the animal protection requirements vital to the welfare of pigs.

Does the Commission plan to prepare its proposals concerning the above-mentioned directives on animal protection in good time so that a decision could be taken on them during the Finnish Council Presidency?

(1) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 21. (2) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998, p. 23. (3) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 33.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 1999)

The Commission is very sensitive about the welfare of animals and gives it high priority. Since the beginning of February 1999 two Commission members of staff are dealing with farm animal welfare matters. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/115

The German Presidency of the Council also gives animal welfare a high priority, and aims to achieve Council adoption of the proposal on the protection of laying hens kept in various systems of rearing (1), and Council discussion of the proposal on the protection of pigs passing through staging points (2).

The Commission is preparing a proposal on the stunning and killing of animals (Council Directive 93/119/EC) based on the reports of the scientific veterinary committee. It is also preparing a proposal on the harmonisation of checks and related reports (Council Directive 98/58/EC). These proposals are expected to be ready for discussion during the Finnish Presidency of the Council.

The Commission has also started to make checks on the application of Community animal welfare legislation. The results will be discussed in line with Council Directive 98/58/EC as soon as resources permit.

The Commission is about to start preparing the proposal for new standards for the welfare of pigs (Council Directive 91/630/EEC) which should be ready towards the end of the year.

(1) COM(98) 135 final. (2) COM(98) 478 final.

(1999/C 297/156) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3918/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Ecofin Council meeting of 1 December 1998

At this meeting the original intention was that Ministers would discuss the work of the VAT Committee and the Committee on Excise Duties. They were unable to do so for lack of time. They did, however, discuss the work of the Code of Conduct Group on business taxation.

Can the Commission please provide details of all formal and informal groups and committees currently active in the field of taxation and taxation policy at EU level and indicate the remit of these groups and their composition?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 1999)

The following committees and working groups are currently operating in the taxation field under the auspices of the Commission:

6 the Value Added Tax Committee, which is composed of representatives of the administrations concerned and is chaired by a Commission official, gives its opinion, in an advisory capacity, on all questions of interpretation of the Sixth VAT Directive;

6 the Excise Committee, which is composed of representatives of the administrations concerned and is chaired by a Commission official, has to decide on questions of application and interpretation of the Directives on excise duties (under the regulatory committee procedure);

6 the Standing Committee on Administrative Cooperation (SCAC), which is composed of representatives of the administrations concerned and is chaired by a Commission official, is the forum for discussing administrative cooperation. It deals with questions concerning the application of Council Regulation (EEC) 218/92 of 27 January 1992 on administrative cooperation in the field of indirect taxation (1) and Council Directive 77/799/EEC of 19 December 1977 concerning mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of direct taxation (2). It also acts as the management committee for the Fiscalis programme under Parliament and Council Decision No 888/98/EC of 30 March 1998 establishing a programme of Community action to ameliorate the indirect taxation systems of the internal market (Fiscalis programme) (3). SCAC has three specialised subcommittees: SCAF (Anti-Fraud Subcommittee), SCAT (Training Subcommittee) and SCIT (Information Technology Subcommittee); C 297/116 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

the Taxation Policy Group, which is composed of the Finance Ministers’ personal representatives and is chaired by the Member of the Commission with special responsibility for taxation, was set up to provide a forum for the informal discussion of current taxation policy issues in the context of the Community objectives of reducing distortions of competition in the single market, preventing significant erosion of Member States’ tax revenues and promotingjob creation. A subgroupcomposed of representatives of the tax administrations has been instructed to look into the tax arrangements applicable to supplementary pension schemes and life assurance policies;

meetings of the heads of customs and tax administrations and meetings of the deputy heads of indirect taxation departments, duringwhich all major issues within their areas of responsibility are discussed;

WorkingParty No 1, composed of representatives of the administrations concerned and chaired by a Commission official, is an advisory body which assists the Commission in preparinglegislativemeasures in the VAT field.

In addition to the committees and workingparties operatingunder the auspices of the Commission, there are specialised workinggroupsmeetingwithin the Council:

the Code of Conduct Group for Business Taxation, composed of high-level national representatives, is responsible for monitoringimplementation of the agreementreached in December 1997 between the Member States on the introduction of a code of conduct to eliminate harmful competition in the field of business taxation;

the WorkingParty on Financial Questions, composed of representatives of the Member States’ tax administrations and of the Commission, is the Council body responsible for discussingall Commission proposals in the taxation field.

(1) OJ L 24, 1.2.1992. (2) OJ L 336, 27.12.1977. (3) OJ L 126, 28.4.1998.

(1999/C 297/157) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3919/98

by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Rules on the manufacture and marketingof objects containingprecious metals

On 31 July 1998 the Spanish Association of Jewellers, Silversmiths and Watchmakers submitted a formal complaint to the Commission concerningobstacles to the free movement of Spanish goodsin this sector in the intra-Community area. The above association takes the view that the diverse legislation in the Member States governing the manufacture and marketing of objects containing precious metals and the lack of a Community directive on the subject are giving rise to a situation where some Member States (particularly Portugal, the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Ireland) are hindering and preventing the marketing of Spanish products in the countries concerned, even though the checks made are identical or equivalent to those carried out in Spain. The consequence is a duplication of checks, verification of purity and stampingfees for the same product, since these procedures must be carried out both in the state of origin and in the state of destination, with the result that commercial transactions are delayed and on some occasions cancelled.

The Commission:

1. Can it say whether it has launched any investigations to confirm or refute the distortions of competition reported by the Spanish Association of Jewellers, Silversmiths and Watchmakers, through which some Member States are alleged to be obstructing the free movement of Spanish goods? If so, what were the results?

2. Has it considered the possibility of bringing in legislation on the manufacture and marketing of objects containingprecious metals? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/117

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3158/98 by Mrs Ferrer (1).

(1) OJ C 207, 21.7.1999, p. 33.

(1999/C 297/158) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3924/98 by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Recognition of hunting licences

Within the Community, wide disparities exist between the individual Member States and between the various regions and/or Länder as regards the content, conditions, scope and cost of hunting licences.

Any hunter wishing to hunt in another Member State may do so upon acquisition of a ‘Guest Hunters’ Licence’. Such acquisition requires no examination in hunting techniques, although local residents must indeed pass an examination of that nature. To some extent, therefore, the system discriminates against the latter.

In some cases, the hunting licences acquired in one Member State are not even recognised in other countries.

The Commission:

: does it therefore intend to seek harmonisation or approximation of the provisions for the acquisition of a hunting licence; and

: does it intend, with a view to the completion of the single market, to require the Member States at least to provide for mutual recognition of the hunting examinations which are the basis for the issuing of a hunting licence?

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 introduced a general system for the recognition of higher- education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration (1). This directive was subsequently supplemented by Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training (2). The second directive concerns diplomas that were not covered by the first. These directives refer to professional qualifications and do not therefore cover hunting licences, which are permits issued for a leisure activity.

While containing provisions on hunting, Community legislation on the environment : especially Council Directives 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3) and 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (4) : does not lay down any requirements concerning the examinations that hunters must pass before acquiring a licence.

The Commission has no plans at the moment to seek Community harmonisation in this area. The honourable Member is referred to the provision of Article 3b of the EC Treaty, which states that ‘the Community shall act within the limits of the powers conferred upon it by this Treaty and of the objectives assigned to it therein’ and that ‘any action by the Community shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of this Treaty.’

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989. (2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992. (3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. (4) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. C 297/118 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/159) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3932/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: The rearmament of South Africa

The Republic of South Africa has just announced a broad programme of rearmament, including the purchase of warships, fighter aircraft, tanks, cannon and other heavy and light artillery from various European firms, in addition to the creation of jobs in the South African arms industry, which grew substantially as a result of the embargo during the apartheid era.

Can the Commission say:

1. what the total cost of these purchases was, statingwhich countries and firms benefited and what the repercussions on employment were in both South Africa and Europe;

2. whether there is any external threat to South Africa which might justify this operation;

3. what the likely impact of this expenditure will be on the current negotiations for an economic agreement between the EU and South Africa and what the overall effect is on its new status as Member State of the Lomé Convention?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 1999)

The Commission was not consulted, informed or otherwise involved in the program of arm’s procurement of South Africa. It is however aware of South African press statements on this issue.

The Commission is not in a position, nor is it within its role, to assess the need to modernise South Africa’s security and defense systems as decided by the South African government.

The Commission does not see any direct link between the South African decision referred to and the negotiations between the Community and South Africa or South Africa’s new status as a Member State of the Lomé Convention.

(1999/C 297/160) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3935/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Imprisonment of three Cuban journalists

The Inter-American Press Association (IAPA), meetingin Punta del Este (Uruguay),has called on the Cuban Government to review the sentences passed on three Cuban journalists, Bernardo Arévalo Padrón, Lorenzo Paez Núñez and Carlos Recio Martínez, who are to serve prison terms of six years, one and a half years and one year respectively.

The IAPA has stressed once again that the Cuban Penal Code still refers to offences such as ‘giving false information’ or ‘any other form of criminal censure’, which are used as a pretext for banningfreedom of information in a country where the State is, moreover, the sole owner of all the mass media.

What is the Council prepared to do to cooperate in the review and, if possible, annulment of these sentences, as well as to promote freedom of information in Cuba? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/119

(26 April 1999)

The European Union adopted a common position on Cuba on 2 December 1996. The EU’s major objective remains to encourage and facilitate a process of peaceful transition to pluralist democracyand respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In June 1998 the EU and the ACP States agreed to admit Cuba as an observer at the negotiations for the successor Lomé Convention. In this context, the EU reminded Cuba of the stringent human rights standards that will be attached to anymembership of the new agreement.

In 1998 the Union made several representations to the Cuban authorities, particularlyto secure the freeing of dissidents.

At the last evaluation of the common position, on 7 December 1998, the Council noted that in the last six months the EU had intensified its dialogue with the Cuban authorities, in particular regarding human rights. The Council repeated that the European Union’s objective as regards Cuba remained the encouragement of a process of peaceful transition to pluralist democracyand respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Council is aware of the imprisonment of Mr Arévalo Padrón, director of the independent press agency ‘Línea Sur Press’, who was arrested in November 1997. Mr Paez Núñez, president of the ‘José de la Luz y Caballero’ association, was arrested in July1997. As regards Mr Recio Martínez, a journalist with the independent press agency‘Cuba Press’, who was imprisoned in September 1997, the Council’s information is that he has recentlybeen freed.

The Council will keep the European Parliament informed of developments and will continue to press the Cuban authorities for full observance of human rights and freedom of information.

In conclusion, the Council would point out to the Honourable Member that it is following with concern the acts of persecution carried out over the last few months in Cuba in respect of journalists in the independent press. The cases of the three journalists previouslymentioned are well known but we should not forget the case of Mr Joel Díaz, who has been detained for having exercised his right to freedom of information.

(1999/C 297/161) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3968/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE)to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: ‘Improved stove’ programmes

What investigations has the Commission made into the appropriateness of reliance upon ‘improved stove’ programmes and other fuel-wood demand or supply-side strategies to reduce fuel-wood in areas accommodating refugees?

(1999/C 297/162) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3969/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE)to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: ‘Improved stove’ programmes

What is the Commission’s policyon the provision to refugee camps of fuels for the purpose of cooking and heating? Does it advocate the provision of the ‘improved stove’, and has it taken on board recent evaluations which call into question the efficiencyof the ‘improved stove’ compared with the traditional three-stone fire? C 297/120 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3968/98 and E-3969/98 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

The relationship between refugees, biomass energy and improved stoves is a complex one. The Commission is seeking solutions for these issues from several directions and has a multiple approach on biomass energy issues: both the use and the production of biomass energy are addressed.

Within the framework of operations undertaken by the European Community humanitarian office (ECHO), in particular with regard to refugee camps, the Commission essentially intervenes through the funding of programmes implemented by the United Nations high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR).

Fuelwood and environment protection is a very important aspect in deploying assistance to refugees. In the arid regions of Africa and in West Tanzania the great concentration of refugees adds pressure on the environment. This issue is analysed with the UNHCR, on a case-to-case basis, from the programming phase of aid up to the evaluation phase of potential sites for accommodating new refugees.

The Community is addressing the biomass energy issues also from a broader policy angle. There are two projects facilitating policy formulation and implementation: (i) Sustainable forest management programmes in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and (ii) Regional biomass energy conservation programme for Southern Africa. A document on improved and traditional stoves in Africa, Asia and Latin America / Stove Images (1) has been finalised and broadly disseminated for information exchange purposes.

(1) ISBN 3-86099-136-1.

(1999/C 297/163) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3975/98 by Raphaël Chanterie (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Value added tax on veterinary services

Further to the European obligation to apply the standard VAT rate to veterinary services, such services appear to be liable to VAT ranging from a minimum rate of 15 % to a maximum of 25 % in certain Member States.

Article 13 of the sixth directive on indirect taxation, directive 77/388/EEC (1), permits Member States to grant exemption for ‘hospital and medical care’ and ‘the provision of medical care’, i.e. not for veterinary services, although annex Hprovides for a lower rate of VAT for pharmaceutical products for medical and veterinary purposes.

Are there sound reasons for making a distinction in the percentage between pharmaceutical products for veterinary use which attract a lower rate and veterinary services which do not, and is it not possible to revise the existing directive on the basis of the Protocol on the protection and welfare of animals?

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 1999)

Pursuant to Article 12(3)(a), taken in conjunction with Annex H, of the Sixth VAT Directive (77/388/EEC), Member States may, subject to certain conditions, apply a reduced rate of VAT to pharmaceutical products used for health care, prevention of diseases and treatment for medical and veterinary purposes. By virtue of that same Directive, they may also apply a reduced rate of VAT to supplies of goods and services intended for use in agricultural production. These cover animal care provided in the course of the agricultural production process and the corresponding medicinal products. However, the Commission has taken due note of the Honourable Member’s observations and will take them into account during the forthcoming work on VAT rates. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/121

(1999/C 297/164) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3986/98 by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Allocation of mushroom import quotas

The supply of European mushrooms is limited,both in quantity and in quality,and is confined to only a few suppliers. Recently,harvests in EU Member States have been reduced,inter alia,by disease in the Netherlands. In addition,exports to the United States have increased,so that the supply on the internal market has declined.

Imports of mushrooms from China are limited,and it has not proved possible to meet consumer demand in the new Member States. The position and competitiveness of traditional importers have suffered from import quotas. Importers apply for,and purchase,import licences,whose apportionment among the Member States is unclear.

Can the Commission publish its statistics on the allocation of import quotas by Member State? On what basis are licences granted?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 1999)

Community tariff quotas for preserved mushrooms of the Agaricus genus are administered by means of import licences (Commission Regulation (EC) 2125/95,as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) 2493/98) of 18 November 1998 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for preserved mushrooms (1) issued to importers in the Member States as and when they apply for them.

The data on the use of these quotas are notified regularly to the Member States. For 1998,the final figures (in tonnes,drained net weight ) were as follows: Belgium 33,Denmark 290,Germany 15 963,Greece 275,Spain 73,France 474,Italy 7 496,Netherlands 9 422,Austria 2 658,Portugal 30,Finland 301,Sweden 2 299,total 39 315. Of the overall quota of 68 215 tonnes for 1998,28 900 tonnes were unused.

Contrary to what the Honourable Member claims,Community statistics do not show any increase in exports of preserved mushrooms to the United States. On the other hand,prices for Community produce have fallen in recent years because of the build-up of stocks due to stagnant demand. The Community is therefore well able to meet its own requirements,in terms of both quantity and quality.

(1) OJ L 309,19.11.1998.

(1999/C 297/165) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4012/98 by Gérard d’Aboville (UPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: System of export refunds > Amendment of Community Regulation No 3665/87

Growing constraints are being imposed on Community exporters to obtain the refunds sought by the Community legislative authority which permit European agricultural products and food industry products to be exported outside the EU.

This increased regulatory burden is jeopardising the dynamism of the EU’s principal industrial sector,which has a turnover of ECU 500 billion,provides 2,5million jobs,adds value to more than 70 % of European agricultural production,has an economic spill-over impact on a host of sectors and,in population terms, constitutes an industrial fabric acting as a factor of social stability. The viability of many SMEs is at stake,and the relocation of international firms outside the EU is a further,equally serious thereat. C 297/122 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

The reduction in refunds, following the GATT accords, has been made worse by increased administrative measures, by a process of institutionalising advance fixing certificates by stepped-up checks on operations. This is understandable in order to combat fraud and thus safeguard the Community budget, but, by going so far as to systematically insist on proof of arrival at destination, the authorities are placing an excessive burden of proof on operators while at the same time simplifying rules on exports.

What measures does the Commission intend to adopt to:

! enable exporters acting in good faith to be sufficiently protected,

! ensure that the call for proof of arrival at destination is not automatic, but based on a risk analysis, so as not to handicap our exporters at a time when the United States and the Cairns Group countries are asserting their wish to increase their exports of processed food products?

In particular, how does the Commission propose to respond to the request put to it by Minister Glavany at the meeting of the EU Council of Agriculture Ministers of 23/24 November 1998?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 1999)

The redrafted version of Commission Regulation (EEC) 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (1) does not require systematic proof of arrival at destination for payment of the export refund. The principle is that the refund is paid on the production of proof of exit from the Community customs territory where one rate of refund has been fixed for all non-member countries and on the production of proof of import into a third country where the refund fixed for that country is higher than the lowest refund.

The Commission is careful to avoid a situation where Community funds may be allocated to economic operations which do not meet the requirements of the export refund scheme. For instance, cases have been found where products in bulk have been exported out of the Community in receipt of a refund, bagged in an OCT and subsequently reimported with a zero-rated preferential duty. Such operations may be organised with several successive parties, even if the exporters are acting in good faith.

At the request of the minister in question and of several other ministers at the Agriculture Council on 23 and 24 November 1998, there was discussion of whether proof of import into a third country should be requested automatically where the export refund is higher than the non-preferential import duty. The wording has been made more flexible as a result and proof must no longer be produced automatically. The redraft also gives the authorities in the Member States a certain degree of leeway with respect to the risk of deflection of trade.

(1) OJ L 351, 14.12.1987.

(1999/C 297/166) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4017/98

by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Discrimination against rural areas in the telecommunications industry

Is the Commission aware that, in the United Kingdom, the largest telecommunications company, British Telecom, has recently introduced what appears to be a discriminatory price differentiation for services provided to businesses located more than 25 kilometres from one of their fourteen service centres? Does the Commission plan to take any action to prevent such discrimination by monopoly undertakings against already disadvantaged rural areas? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/123

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 1999)

Condition 17 of the British Telecom (BT) licence prohibits undue preference and undue discrimination. Users who claim to be suffering from undue discrimination in relation to any tariff can therefore submit their case to the Office of telecommunications (OFTEL) which has the power to investigate and where necessary enforce BT’s licence conditions.

Given the existence of this national procedure, and in line with the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission does not intend to start an own-initiative inquiry regarding the practice described.

(1999/C 297/167) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4024/98 by Ben Fayot (PSE) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Adverse effect of distortion of competition on Luxembourgish SMEs

In 1997 new administrative and financial obstacles were erected in Germany, the result of which is that Luxembourgish craft enterprises seeking to trade in Germany are exposed to distortion of competition.

For example, the German law on the posting of workers (1997) obliges Luxembourgish construction firms operating in Germany to transfer 14,25 % of gross wages paid in Germany during the period of posting as holiday pay to a German fund, although there are comparable obligations in Luxembourg, the posting country (statutory holiday and obligatory holiday pay amounting to 11,77 % of gross pay). This double burden on Luxembourgish firms is a violation of the rules of competition applying in the Infernal Market and it represents a sealing off of the German market.

Does the Commission intend to defend vigorously the rules of the Internal Market in this instance, and to work towards a situation where Luxembourgish and other European firms engaged in the construction trade in Germany are freed from this additional burden?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 1999)

The honourable Member is referred to the Commission’s answer to Written Question E-3110/98 put by Ms Reding (1). The Commission also wishes to point out that it served formal notice on the German Government in November 1998.

(1) OJ C 135, 14.5.1999, p. 168.

(1999/C 297/168) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4030/98 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Checks on the ban on the production and use of animal feed derived from cattle

From 1 January 1999 there will be an EU-wide ban on the production and use of animal feed made from any substance and/or by-product originating in cattle.

However, it will still be possible to use animal feed (except for the feeding of cattle) made from substances and/or by-products originating in other animals (pigs or fowl). C 297/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What checks is the Commission intending to carry out in order to prevent the production and/or use of animal feed made from substances and/or by-products originating in cattle in all EU countries and particularly in Spain, where such feed is reported to be still widely used for the feeding of pigs?

2. Can the Commission confirm that it will continue to be possible to produce animal feed from substances and/or by-products originating in animals other than cattle?

(1999/C 297/169) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4031/98 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Imports of beef and veal and of animal feed produced in third countries

For reasons relating to the recent trade embargo on exports of Portuguese beef and veal, the Portuguese Government has decided to bring forward the introduction of the ban on the production of animal feed made from any substance or by-product originating in cattle.

This ban will not become compulsory throughout the EU until 1 January 1999.

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions:

1. From 1 January 1999, will it be possible to import beef and veal (either live or slaughtered animals) from third countries, where cattle continue to be fed on animal feed made from substances and by-products originating in cattle? How is the Commission to set about monitoring the way in which such animals are fed in third countries?

2. With effect from the same date, will it be possible to import animal feed made from substances and by- products of animal origin? How does the Commission intend to monitor the production of all types of imported animal feed?

Jointanswer to Written Questions E-4030/98 and E-4031/98 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 1999)

Commission Decision 94/381/EC of 27 June 1994 concerning certain protection measures with regard to bovine spongiform encephalopathy and the feeding of mammalian derived protein (1), prohibits the feeding of processed animal protein of mammalian origin to ruminants in the Community. This prohibition applies both to feedingstuffs produced in the Community and to feedingstuffs imported from third countries.

Current Community legislation contains no rules prohibiting or monitoring the feeding of feedingstuffs containing ingredients of bovine origin to animals other than ruminants nor has the Commission proposed to introduce such rules in areas other than those representing the highest risk of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE).

Certain Member States, such as Portugal and United Kingdom, have prohibited the use of feedingstuffs containing mammalian (including bovine) protein in feedingstuffs for all farm animals at a national level. Currently there are safeguard measures in place prohibiting the export of feedingstuffs of bovine origin from these two Member States to the other Member States.

The Commission proposes similar rules in the areas representing the highest TSE risk in its proposal for a Parliament and Council regulation laying down rules for the prevention and control of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (2).

(1) OJ L 172, 7.7.1994. (2) COM(98) 623 final. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/125

(1999/C 297/170) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4035/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Dolphins kept in dolphinariums

Dolphins are kept and put on show in numerous recreational and leisure parks, and also in zoos.

How does the Commission guarantee that these animals are kept in natural conditions?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

The import of dolphins is regulated in Council Regulation (EC) 338/97 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1). As all cetacean species are listed in Annex A to the Regulation, dolphins cannot be imported for primarily commercial purposes. In addition, a Member State’s scientific authority must be satisfied that the intended accommodation is equipped to conserve and care for the animal properly. The authorised location will be prescribed in the import permit and any movement from that location requires prior authorisation.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.

(1999/C 297/171) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4038/98 by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Risks posed by EDF’s nuclear power station at Fessenheim on the Upper Rhine in Alsace

On 11 December 1998 the second generating unit of the Fessenheim nuclear power station had to be shut down because of deformation of a flexible metal bellows in the coolingsystem. The first unit was shut down in August 1998 for the same reason.

What information does the Commission have of the nature, extent and impact of the incident at the Fessenheim power station and does it see a need for an inspection of the power station and the security system by an independent expert institution to provide the public in Switzerland, Germany and France with adequate protection against any risk?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 1999)

On 11 December 1998, duringrestart operations in Unit 1 at the Fessenheim power plant, deformation of the flexible metal bellows was noted in the spray coolingsystem for the containment. It was decided to replace those bellows. Investigations were immediately carried out on the counterparts in Unit 2, where the same type of deformation was identified. Therefore, as a precautionary measure in compliance with the safety rules the power plant’s management decided to shut Unit 2 down for the necessary work to be carried out. The repairs proceeded accordingto plan, thus enablingUnit 2 to be restarted on 28 December and the start-up operations for Unit 1to be reinitiated. Unit 1 should restart around mid-January.

The French safety authorities are responsible for licensingthe nuclear power installations and for compliance with the safety requirements and practices applyingin France. C 297/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/172) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4044/98 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(13 January 1999)

Subject: ERDF funding for the Lorca-Águilas trunk road in the Spanish region of Murcia

The Lorca-Águilas trunk road in the Spanish region of Murcia is being partly financed by ERDF funding. Section I of the road (0-3,8 km) has yet to be completed, although work apparently started on it recently.

1. Does the Commission know that the construction of this section was held up because of an adverse environmental impact assessment?

2. Does the Commission know whether changes were made subsequently to enable a favourable environmental impact assessment to be made?

3. Does the Commission consider that the construction of this section complies with European environmental provisions, in particular Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment?

4. Can the Commission supply information on progress made in the construction of the section of the road in question?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/173) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4045/98 by Nelly Maes (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Activities of the European information outlets financed under budget line B3-301

On 15 December 1998 Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control agreed to the transfer of appropriations amounting to ECU 3 million to budget line B3-301: Information outlets. During the 1998 financial year some ECU 13,5 million has been included in the budget under this item.

The three main objectives of this budget line are:

< to help finance information and documentation outlets for the public at large in collaboration with the national authorities;

< to help finance a total of 500 initiatives, including rural information forums, the European Documenta- tion Centres, the Info Points, reference collections in national libraries and the forums for sustainable development;

< to finance information campaigns by the International Federation of Europe Houses (of which there are 100 throughout Europe).

1. Can the Commission provide a detailed breakdown of all initiatives financed in Belgian under this budget line, stating the persons and/or groups who have received financial aid, what was subsidised (leaflets, staff, information material, the policy areas covered) and the addresses where the partners subsidised carry out their activities? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/127

2. Can the Commission provide a breakdown, if necessary through annual reports, of the activities carried out by these partners in Belgium in the last five years?

3. Can the Commission state whether it regularly evaluates the effectiveness of the activities subsidised? If so, can I see the evaluation reports?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

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

(1999/C 297/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4046/98 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission

(13 January 1999)

Subject: Levels of MHS supervision in licensed slaughterhouses

Would the Commission please specify why implementation regulations enacted in 1995 in full accordance with Directive 64/433/EEC (1) have been regarded by the Commission as failing to comply with the level of official veterinary supervision in licensed British slaughterhouses?

(1) OJ 121, 29.7.1964, p. 2012.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 1999)

The Commission has issued a reasoned opinion under Article 169 of the EC Treaty in respect of this matter. The principal infringement noted in this document concerns the level of supervision by qualified official veterinarians of United Kingdom meat plants. In particular the Commission has questioned the apparent inadequate frequency of veterinary controls in certain categories of establishment and the use of meat hygiene inspectors who are not qualified veterinarians to perform duties which under Community law must be carried out or adequately supervised by qualified veterinarians.

The United Kingdom has admitted that it currently has difficulties in recruiting sufficient veterinary staff. It recently submitted to the Commission its proposals for resolving this problem.

(1999/C 297/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4065/98 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NG) to the Council

(15 January 1999)

Subject: The Wassenaar regulations

The Wassenaar organisation, which continues the work carried out by COCOMduring the Cold War, has decided to agree, in accordance with the interests of the USA and its secret services, that the export of confidential technology should be subject to restrictions. This decision infringes the principle of the freedom to purchase services within the EU. How will the regulation on the licensing of exports of confidential technology agreed at Wassenaar be prepared in the EU? On what legal basis does the Council justify approving this kind of restriction on free trade? C 297/128 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(22 April 1999)

As the Honourable Member is certainly aware, all Member States are participating in the Wassenaar arrangement. This export control regime responds to the need of ensuring that appropriate export controls are applied by the participating countries to transfers of dual-use items and related military technology.

The commitments of Member States under the Wassenaar arrangement, as well as under the other export control regimes, are transposed into an integrated EUsystem consisting of Regulation (CE) 3381/94 of 19 December 1994 (legal basis Article 113 of the EC-Treaty) and of Council Decision 94/942/CFSP of 19 December 1994 (legal basis Article J.3 of the EU-Treaty) for CFSP aspects.

Modifications to the relevant lists, agreed in the Wassenaar framework, are incorporated, in accordance with the procedures set out in the Treaty, into the European Union’s dual-use regime.

The Commission recently submitted a proposal for a Council Regulation (EC), based exclusively on Article 113, which would amend, update and complete the Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use goods and technology. This proposal is currently being examined within the Council.

(1999/C 297/176) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4067/98 by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Access of immigrants from other EUMember States to civil service employment in Luxembourg

The project of EUcitizenship, an objective enshrined the TEU,is bound to encounter difficulties.

While it is clearly difficult to define the limits of civil service employment reserved for nationals, there are cases in which the principles of equality or non-discrimination for immigrants from other Member States which should be guaranteed have been flagrantly ignored. A number of such cases are the result of legislation in Luxembourg and the position taken by the authorities of this country as regards access to all levels of civil service employment: they have already elicited protests at Community level leading to the initiation of legal proceedings.

In order to take stock of the situation and to dispel my doubts and to enable me to adopt positions in exercising my mandate as an MEP, will the Commission say whether it has already taken measures ; and if so which measures ; as regards the access of immigrants from other EUMember States to civil service competitions and posts in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

Luxembourg legislation does not always give Community nationals generalised access to national civil service employment. The Commission initiated an infringement procedure on this subject, leading to a judgment by the Court of Justice on 2 July 1996 (Commission v. Luxembourg). In this judgment, the Court ruled against Luxembourg, on the grounds that it had maintained Luxembourg nationality as a general requirement for access to public service posts in certain areas of activity in the public sector.

Since the Court’s judgment, the Commission has initiated a further infringement procedure, as Luxembourg has not yet complied with the judgment. According to the information at the Commission’s disposal, the Luxembourg authorities have started an internal procedure to bring national legislation into line, but this has been delayed by the need to amend the country’s Constitution.

Under these circumstances, the infringement procedure against Luxembourg will follow its course on the basis of Article 171 of the EC Treaty until the national authorities take all the necessary measures to bring the relevant legislation into line with Community law. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/129

(1999/C 297/177) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4073/98 by Daniela Raschhofer(NI) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Commission research on Agenda 2000 for ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’

The Austrian newspaper ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’regularly publishes series and reports on Agenda 2000. In its issue of 26 November 1998 it expressly mentions that its research into Agenda 2000 has been supported by the Commission.

Can the Commission answer the following:

, What Commission staff member or department is responsible for PR/media contact?

, Was financial support also given for the research? If so, how much? If not, what is meant by ’support’?

, How are the subjects and data selected for channelling to the editors of ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’?

, Did ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’have the unrestricted use of the information obtained?

, Was this information available to other media?

, Who is responsible for selecting media eligible for support?

, What is the Commission’s aim in providing this support?

, Has the Commission given support to ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’or other Austrian newspapers in the past? If so, on what subjects (euro, eastward enlargement, Agenda 2000, etc.) and what amounts of support were involved?

Answergiven by MrOrejaon behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

In addition to the Spokesman’s service, the Directorate-general for information, communication, culture, audiovisual media and information networks is responsible for relations with the media.

In 1998 the representation of the Commission in Austria supported the ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’twice in spring with an amount of 7 267 euros (including taxes) for an information supplement on the euro, and in summer with an amount of 10 832 euros (including taxes) for an advertisement on the IGC.

The ‘Salzburger Nachrichten’made its own selection of the data, provided by the Commission, the subject being the priority information actions. The newspaper was able to use the information it received without restriction. The same material is available to other media.

The Commission head of representation in Austria is in the first instance responsible for selecting the media, under the authority of the centre in Brussels. The aim of this activity is to inform Austrian citizens about the Community.

Other newspapers have received financial contributions, for basically the same purposes, to a total amount of 40 320 euros.

(1999/C 297/178) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4078/98 by James Nicholson (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Publication ‘The Raspberry Ice Cream War’

Will the Commission advise what it plans to do with the copies of its publication, The Raspberry Ice Cream War, stockpiled in a warehouse in Oxfordshire, England and advise of the costs of (a) translating and producing the publication in English, (b) shipping the English language copies to England, and (c) storing the copies in the Oxfordshire warehouse? C 297/130 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

There are no copies stored in Oxfordshire. All were sent back to Luxembourg following the decision not to distribute in the United Kingdom. They have been used to satisfy requests for copies in English outside the United Kingdom.

Total production costs in the eleven official languages were 181 970 euro. Handling and sending costs to and from the United Kingdom were 7 885 euro. There are no storage costs.

(1999/C 297/179) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4088/98 by Luciana Castellina (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Future of the language sections in the European Schools

The next meeting of the Board of Governors of the European Schools, which will be held in Brussels in January 1999, is due to take a decision on the request made by the Italian Government, on 5 July 1998, for the creation of a third Italian language section in the European Schools in Brussels. It is also due to respond to the invitation issued by the Italian Government to a seminar to reflect on the future of, and a renewed role for, the European Schools.

In view of the fact that the creation and maintenance of language sections are currently not governed by objective and transparent criteria (as demonstrated by the decisions of the Board of Governors taken in April 1998 in Copenhagen, which led to certain language sections being created and a refusal to create others), and bearing in mind the importance of tackling the problem as soon as possible, particularly in view of the forthcoming enlargements, does the Council intend to act to help defend the plurality of languages and cultures in the European Schools and to further the process of reflection on their future and renewing their role?

(22 April 1999)

The Council recalls that the European Schools have been established on the basis of the Convention defining the statute of the European Schools, adopted in 1957, to which the Member States only (and not the European Community) are contracting parties. Moreover the new Convention signed by the European Community and the Member States on 21 June 1994, which, inter alia, modified the decision-making procedure within the organs of the Schools, has not yet been ratified by all the signatories and is consequently not yet in force.

The Council attaches great importance to the plurality of languages and cultures within the European Schools, which is enshrined in the Convention, but would remind the Honourable Member that this is a matter for all the parties to the 1957 Convention.

Decisions concerning educational matters within the Schools fall to the Board of Governors of the Schools, on which each Member State and the Commission is represented, and it is therefore the Board that determines questions relating to the language sections.

As the Honourable Member will be aware, certain organisational questions relating to the European Schools were raised at the last Education Council meeting, on 4 December 1998. The definition of objective and transparent criteria for the language sections and the opening and closing of the European Schools was raised, as was the importance of ensuring a proper balance between the number of language sections and the number of students.

The Council stresses that any consideration of the matter would be without prejudice to the Convention in force as well as the process of ratification of the 1994 Convention, and in particular to the competence of the Board of Governors. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/131

In this context, the Presidency, in consultation with the Council bodies which have examined this question, has taken the initiative of issuing an invitation to the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the European Schools to inform the Ministers meeting with the Council, by the end of the year, of the outcome of the discussions which are being held on improving the organisation of the European Schools.

(1999/C 297/180) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4089/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Women in senior posts in the Commission

I have the regrettable impression that not very many women are employed at the Commission, which could convey a negative image of the Commission as a male-dominated institution. I hope that the Commission can dispel this impression by answering the following questions.

How many senior posts in the Commission are occupied by women? How many women in total are employed at the Commission in categories A, B, C and D? Is there a policy of equal opportunities for the employment of men and women in the Commission? What effort is being made to place more women in senior posts in the Commission?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 1999)

1. At 31 December 1998, the Commission employed a total of 7 600 women, or 47,6 % of staff paid from the administrative budget.

This total breaks down as follows by category:

Category A 924 women 4 025 men 18,7 % women Category LA 1 003 women 783 men 56,2 % women Category B 1 255 women 1 934 men 39,4 % women Category C 4 228 women 1 002 men 80,8 % wome Category D 190 women 633 men 23,1 % women Total 7 600 women 8 377men 47,6 % women

2. Decision-making posts can be broken down by sex as follows:

Directors-General 3 women 52 men 5,4 % women Directors 19 women 160 men 10,6 % women Category A: Heads of Unit/Advisers 109 women 850 men 11,4 % women Category LA: Heads of Unit/Advisers 41 women 65 men 38,7 % women Total ; Decision-making posts 172 women 1 125 men 13,3 % women

3. In 1997, the Commission adopted its Third Action Programme on equal opportunities for men and women ; 1997-2000. As part of this programme, the Commission instructed the Directors-General and Heads of Departments to draw up specific measures to promote equality. Most directorates-general have internal monitoring committees and DG IX (Administration and Personnel) is responsible for preparing regular reports and for informing the group of Commission Members on equal opportunities.

In parallel with these measures, since 1995 the Commission has each year set targets for the recruitment of women to Category A posts and for the appointment of women to decision-making posts. These targets take account of enlargement requirements and the women available on reserve lists. Every quarter a check is made to see if the targets are being met. C 297/132 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Over the last four years, the number of women in Category A and in decision-making posts has increased. Between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 1998, the number of women in grade A2 posts increased from 4 to 19(10,6 %), while the number of women in middle management posts (A3, A4, A5 , heads of unit and advisers) increased from 8,3 % to 11,4 % in Category A and 28,2 % to 38,7 % in Category LA. At present, the percentage of women in the starting grades (A6, A7, A8) is 26,1 % while four years ago it was 19,6 %. During that time the percentage of women in Category A increased from 14 % to 18,7 %. It should be noted that the proportion of women recruited to Category A stands at 42 % (346 women/471 men) for these four years.

4. The Commission intends to continue its efforts to increase the number of women in decision-making posts.

(1999/C 297/181) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4091/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE)to the Council

(15 January 1999)

Subject: European coordination of defence industries

The approach of NATO’s fiftieth anniversary is being accompanied by a succession of studies into the major changes which have occurred on the international scene during the 50 years of NATO’s existence and the need for an agreement concerning tasks and challenges for the future. The differences in the political views held by America and Europe may become more accentuated if ways are not found of establishing cooperation between the defence industries on either side of the Atlantic with a view to developing the new technology of the 21st century.

Does the Council believe that the European defence industry will soon achieve a sufficient size and degree of coordination capability to allow constructive dialogue with the highly integrated industry in the USA? In this connection, what would be the effect of the differences in legal status which exist between the major defence companies of Germany and the United Kingdom, which are privately owned, and those in France, which are mainly in the public sector?

(22 April 1999)

As the Honourable Member is certainly aware, the ad hoc Group on the European Armaments Policy (POLARM) was established in 1995 to address issues related to the European armaments policy and to submit recommendations to the Council on the possible follow-up both by measures taken in the Community framework and according to Title V of the EU-Treaty. Furthermore, the future Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union states that ‘the progressive framing of a common defence policy will be supported, as Member States consider appropriate, by cooperation between them in the field of armaments.’

The POLARM Group is currently examining a Communication by the Commission entitled ‘Implementing European Union strategy on defence-related industries’. This Communication includes both a Plan of Action for defence industries and a proposal for a Common Position on drawing up a European armaments policy.

As to the Honourable Member’s last question, the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership do not fall within the remit of the Council.

(1999/C 297/182) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4109/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NG)to the Council

(15 January 1999)

Subject: Infringement of the Treaty on European Union , UK participation in attack on Iraq

The participation of the UK in military operations against Iraq is an infringement of Article J.1(1) and (2), Article J.2(1) and Article J.8 of the Treaty on European Union since there was no information or consultation 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/133

before the operations took place. Can the Council confirm or deny the this assertion? Should it be confirmed, what measures does the Council propose to take?

(26 April 1999)

The Honourable Member would have noticed that no common position on the matter had been defined by the Council. The information and consultation obligations have been respected. Under those circumstances, the Council fails to see how Article J.1(1) and (2), Article J.2(1) or Article J.8 of the Treaty on European Union had been infringed.

(1999/C 297/183) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0007/99

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué(PPE) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Fisheries

The Franco-Spanish seminar on the fishery resources of the Bay of Biscay, which was organised by the Spanish Oceanographic Institute (IEO) and the French Institute for Sea Fishing (FREMER) and in which the Basque Institute of Fishing Science and Technology also took part, closed on Friday, 27 November 1998. The seminar’s conclusions drew attention to the threat hanging over most of the fish species to be found in this area and to the urgent need for a fishery resources management plan to be drawn up for the area.

What action does the Commission intend to take to ensure the survival of this area, which is of great social and economic importance to the Basque Country?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

The status of fish resources in the Bay of Biscay, as described during the joint French/Spanish seminar, does not differ substantially from the situation of other fish resources in adjacent areas and, generally speaking, of Community waters. In fact, some important species such as hake, megrim, anglerfish, mackerel, form exploitable stocks which extend well beyond the limits of the Bay of Biscay.

The measures foreseen for the improvement of this situation are, therefore, not exclusive to the Bay of Biscay. They comprise notably the usual limitations of catch (TACs) (Council Regulation (EC) 48/99 of 18 December 1998 fixing, for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, the total allowable catches for 1999 and certain conditions under which they may be fished (1)) and the strict enforcement of the measures recently adopted on technical specifications of fishing gear (Regulation (EC) 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (2)). Other measures will also help alleviate the poor state of the stocks, such as the effort limitations (Regulation (EC) 2027/95 of 15 June 1995 establishing a system for the management of fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas and resources (3)) and the capacity limitations specified in the multi-annual guidance programmes (MAGP) for the period 1997-2001 (Commission Decisions No 119/98 to 131/98 (4)). Other legislation associated with markets and socio-economic aspects is being developed in order to ensure the sustainability of the fishing sector.

(1) OJ L 13, 18.1.1999. (2) OJ L 125, 27.4.1998. (3) OJ L 199, 24.8.1995. (4) OJ L 39, 12.2.1998. C 297/134 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/184) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0010/99 by Werner Langen (PPE) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Meat hygiene legislation in Rhineland-Palatinate

Under the meat hygiene legislation in the German Land ofRhineland-Palatinate the inspection costs for animals for slaughter are extremely high. The current average costs, DM 11,60 per pig and DM 23,10 per head ofcattle, are appreciably greater than the fixedEU rates ofDM 2,50 and DM 8,60 respectively. The most recent act adopted by the Rhineland-Palatinate Landtag to implement the meat hygiene legislation is also contrary to EU law because it does not set the flat-rate charges required by the 1985 EC Directive on fees. The Directive stipulates that any deviations from the standard rates must be subject to compliance with efficiency criteria, which have to be laid down by law. The new Rhineland-Palatinate law likewise fails to cover that point. Slaughter volume is not considered an admissible criterion under EU law, but is recognised as such in Rhineland-Palatinate’s meat hygiene enforcement law. Consequently, as far as Europe-wide competition is concerned, meat-producing firms in Rhineland-Palatinate are being forced to suffer severe disadvantages on account of their location. Since the law applies retrospectively as from 1 January 1991, fees have to be paid back after the event, and the firms’ survival is thus being placed in jeopardy.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Is it aware ofthis deliberate infringementofEU law?

2. How does the Rhineland-Palatinate Government explain and justify the infringement?

3. What steps will the Commission take to rectify the infringement?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 1999)

1. Council Directive 85/73/EC, as last amended by Directive 96/43/EC, introduces flat-rate Community fees for inspections and health controls on fresh meat carried out during slaughter and in connection with cutting operations and the storage offreshmeat.

However, on certain conditions (including in particular that the total fees charged do not exceed the actual cost ofinspection), Directive 85/73/EC also authorises Member States to charge amounts exceeding the levels of the Community fees laid down by the Directive (see in particular Article 5(3) of Directive 85/73/EC and point 4 ofAnnex A).

The Commission cannot deliver an opinion on the possible breach ofCommunity law referredto by the Honourable Member since it was unaware, prior to this question, ofthe existence ofa new law on veterinary fees in the German Land of Rhineland-Palatinate.

2. Nevertheless, on the basis ofthe details given by the Honourable Member, the Commission intends to ask the German Government to forward a copy of the new Rhineland-Palatinate law together with an explanation of why that Land is charging amounts that diverge so widely from the Community fees.

(1999/C 297/185) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0018/99 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Language costs

Could the Commission please indicate the total cost ofinterpretation and translation within the Institutions of the European Union? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/135

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

Expenditure relating to translation and interpreting planned by the Community institutions in the 1999 budget totals some EUR 686 million, broken down by institution as follows:

Institution Translation Interpreting Total Parliament 103,1 61,1 164,2 Council 131,0 46,0 177,0 Commission 218,7 42,5 261,2 Court of Justice 37,6 4,9 42,5 Court of Auditors 8,2 0,4 8,6 Economic and Social Committee (ESC) 0 6,0 6,0 Committee of the Regions (CR) 0 2,3 2,3 Joint organisational structure (ESC/CR) 24,1 0 24,1 Total 522,7 163,2 685,9

(1999/C 297/186) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0019/99 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Degree standardisation

Is it true that a Bachelor of Science degree obtained in England is not recognised as adequate to gain entry to the postgraduate examination which must be passed by those wishing to become a teacher in Spain?

How does the European Commission feel that it can help with the harmonisation of degree standards between the various Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 1999)

The first thing to stress is that, under the terms of Article 126 of the EC Treaty, matters relating to the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems are the responsibility of the Member States. This means that the recognition of qualifications for academic purposes is not covered by Community law. Consequently, the situation of citizens who have attended training in a Member State and wish to register at an educational establishment in another Member State in order to continue their studies is governed by national law only, and not by Community law. However, in accordance with the principle of equal treatment, the establishment in the host Member State must apply the same registration conditions to students from other Member States as it does to nationals.

Several Community directives have been adopted with regard to the professional recognition of qualifications. Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1) established a general system for the recognition of diplomas awarded on completion of training of at least three years’ duration. This Directive applies to the teaching profession, but does not harmonise training courses. Its purpose is to reconcile the freedom of each Member State as regards education matters with the right of all Community citizens to exercise their profession in any Member State.

For the purposes of this Directive, a ‘diploma’ is any diploma or other certificate awarded by an authority in a Member State testifying to completion of the level of training referred to by the Directive and to possession of the qualifications required to exercise the profession in question in the holder’s Member State of provenance. C 297/136 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In most Member States, access to the teaching profession is subject to the possession of a set of diplomas (university degree and teacher training certificate). Directive 89/48/EEC was transposed into Spanish law by Decree 1665/1991 of 25 October 1991. The recognition procedure for the teaching profession is set out in the Ministerial Order of 23 January 1995 (published in the Boletín oficial del Estado No 24 of 28 January 1995).

Under the terms of these provisions, and in accordance with the Directive, a migrant in possession of teaching qualifications from one Member State (in the case of the United Kingdom this means a bachelor degree and a postgraduate certificate in education) may benefit from recognition of these qualifications in order to exercise the profession of teacher in Spain.

Conversely, where the United Kingdom is the host country, recognition may be granted to migrants with the qualifications required to take up the profession of teacher in their country of provenance (in the case of Spain, the Licenciado and the Certificado de Aptitud Pedagógica).

A person who has not attended a complete teacher training course in a Member State and wishes to work as a teacher in another Member State has two options: (a) to complete the full teacher training course and obtain the teaching certificate in the country of provenance, and subsequently apply for professional recognition in accordance with the Directive and the national legislation transposing it; or (b) to attend teacher training in the host country in order to obtain the required teaching certificate; persons wishing to do this must first obtain the academic equivalent of the country’s diploma, a matter which is not covered by Community law.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.

(1999/C 297/187) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0023/99 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(12 January 1999)

Subject: Poultry imports and residue testing

Given that producers of poultrymeat in the UK and indeed other EU Member States comply with the strict EU veterinary residue testing regime aimed at ensuring the highest level of protection for consumers, will the Commission:

1. Provide details of the testing programme and substances tested for applied to poultrymeat producers in countries such as Brazil and Thailand who export poultrymeat to the EU?

2. Guarantee that third-country residue testing regimes for poultrymeat exported to the EU are not less rigorous than those applied within the EU itself?

3. Publish the results of the residue testing programmes of Third Countries exporting significant volumes of poultrymeat to the EU.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

According to Council Directive 96/23/EC on measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products (1), the results of these national plans for 1998, in accordance with Article 8, paragraph 3, should be presented by third countries to the Commission by 31 March 1999 at the latest.

At present the Commission, together with a group of experts from the Member States, is examining all the third countries’ national plans (including Brazil and Thailand) in order to take appropriate action.

(1) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/137

(1999/C 297/188) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0025/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NG) to the Council

(15 January 1999)

Subject: Accession of Cyprus to EU

On 31 December 1998, the authoritative news bulletin Agence Europe reported that at a congress on Germany and the EU organised by TEPSA (Trans-European Policy) ahead of the German Presidency of the EU, the Director of the Rome Institute of Foreign Affairs proposed that Cyprus should be asked to seek a form of federation in exchange for membership and Turkey be told that it could enter the group of 11 applicants provided it satisfied the Copenhagen criteria. If this strategy were not adopted, the EU would have to reject the accession of Cyprus and seek a different form of relationship with Turkey on the basis of clearly defined common interests. As the report presents the situation, the ‘proposals’ would entail an exchange of ‘offers’ from the EU to Cyprus and Turkey, though the acceptance of the offers would depend on the will of Turkey. However, whatever form of federation Cyprus might offer has already been officially rejected by the Turkish side and the possibility of Turkey joining the 11 other applicant countries has also been rejected because of the linkage with acceptance of the Copenhagen criteria. In other words, the proposal is undermined from the outset. However, as it was put forward at a congress with a view to the German Presidency by a reputable organisation which frequently advises the Community institutions, will the EU Presidency say what view it takes of the proposals concerned, which are completely contrary to the position adopted by the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee, which expressly decided that the accession of Cyprus to the EU is in no way connected with the search for a political settlement in Cyprus?

(26 April 1999)

It is normal that a subject such as the future enlargement of the European Union should give rise to a wide- ranging public debate. However, it is not for the Council to comment on the proceedings of a seminar or on information appearing in the press.

The position of the European Union on the accession of Cyprus has already been set out on several occasions by the Council, most recently at its meeting on 5 October 1998. The Council’s conclusions have been published.

(1999/C 297/189) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0028/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Aitoliko Lagoon

The last few months have seen thousands of fish washed up on the shores of the Aitoliko Lagoon. The fish are killed by a lack of oxygen and the presence of hydrogen sulphide in the Lagoon; this also poses a threat to the health of local residents who regularly suffer from respiratory problems owing to the foul smell hanging over the region.

Some of the factors which have reduced the local ecosystem to its present state are as follows:

< the embankments constructed around the Lagoon which prevent the circulation of the currents so that the water is not renewed and stagnates;

< the fact that the water is full of organic matter which has led to the eutrophication of aquatic plants, the creation of organic deposits, the breakdown of microorganisms and the production of hydrogen sulphide which has accumulated in the lower levels of the Lagoon at a depth of some 10 to 30 metres;

< public works intended to assist the agricultural sector by the drainage of land and the establishment of arable areas in shallow points of the Lagoon; and

< the fact that the biological purification plant has failed to function which means that all effluent from sewage pipes finds its way into the Lagoon. C 297/138 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Since the Aitoliko Lagoon is a complex and sensitive ecosystem which is protected both by the RAMSAR Convention and by Community directives.

Will the Commission say: 1. Has it spent any Community funds on the construction of the biological purification plant which now lies idle? 2. Does it intend to call on the competent Greek authorities to ensure that any measure incompatible with the protection of the ecosystem in question and the species it shelters will be abrogated? 3. Does it intend to fund a regional management projet to propose suitable solutions to the above problems?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1999)

1. As part of the operational ‘Environment’ programme for Greece, the Commission is jointly financing the improvement and extension of the Etolikon water reclamation works. There has so far been no spending on this project, and the contractor to carry out that project is still in the process of selection. It is expected that the project will be completed by the end of 1999.

2. The Messolonghi-Etolikon lagoons form part of an extensive wetland that is classified by Greece as a special protection area (SPA) in pursuance of the ‘Birds’ Directive (79/409/EEC) (1). That area, which has also been put forward as an important Community site in accordance with the ‘Habitats’ Directive (92/43/EEC) (2), will thus form part of the Natura 2000 European ecological network.

Under Directive 92/43/EEC the Member States are required to take appropriate action in order to avoid deterioration of natural habitats and habitats for species protected on Natura 2000 sites, together with any significant disturbance of the species for which those sites have been designated.

The Commission will ask the Greek authorities for closer details concerning any of the problems mentioned by the Honourable Member which might affect the area’s ecosystem, and also concerning the action intended.

3. The conservation of the Messolonghi-Etolikon lagoons has already been funded several times by the Community in order, inter alia, to define forms of management action for that area. In this connection a special environmental study has, in particular, been included in the operational ‘Environment’ programme under the second Community support framework for Greece. The responsibility for carrying out those tasks falls upon the Greek authorities. In future the Commission could fund other conservation activities concerning that area, providing that those activities help to implement Community law on the subject, add value in relation to funds already granted, and be eligible under the existing financial instruments.

Moreover, the Cohesion Fund has agreed to fund the project submitted by the Greek authorities with regard to providing waste-water disposal networks and to upgrading the town of Messolonghi’s biological effluent treatment works, provided that the project is compatible with the site management activities identified and initiated under the ‘Environment’ operational programme referred to above in connection with the Aetoliko and Messolonghi lagoons.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. (2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 297/190) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0038/99 by Giorgio La Malfa (ELDR) to the Commission (20 January 1999)

Subject: Urban Forum measures in the Mediterranean

The European Parliament adopted an amendment aimed at involving the network of Urban Forums in the measures covered by budget heading B4-0306.

By virtue of this amendment the budget line provides for the use of financial resources for projects to be carried out in the Mediterranean basin, in which a number of Central and Eastern European countries are involved. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/139

Can the Commission say what specific steps it is taking to respond to this clear recommendation by the European Parliament, especially in view of the importance of environmental management policy between the two shores of the Mediterranean?

Furthermore, what are the planned timescale and practical arrangements for consultation with the Commis- sion’s partners and in particular with the network of Urban Forums, with a view to the implementation of the measures awaited by Parliament?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The remarks relating to heading B4-306 in the European Union’s general budget for the 1999 accounting period (1) calls for a widening of the activities of the European Forum’s network for sustainable development to cover the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) without any specific mention of the Mediterranean countries. For the record the urban forum’s network already includes some Mediterranean members, namely: in Italy there are Venice and Terni, in Spain there are Grenada and Bilbao and in Greece there is Volos.

On 15 January 1999 the Commission took the step of bringing together a certain number of representatives of European-Forum-Network members in order to contemplate the conditions for extending the network within the CEECs. That thinking process is still continuing and could result in the final touches being made to a project during the spring of 1999.

(1) OJ L 39, 12.2.1999.

(1999/C 297/191) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0041/99 by Philippe De Coene (PSE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Availability of pharmaceuticals for horses

In accordance with EUlegislation now in force, horses are classified as animals for human consumption. This has important implications for the lawful administration of pharmaceuticals to sick horses.

Does the Commission not consider that a distinction ought to be made, in the interests of these animals’ welfare, between horses intended for human consumption and horses bred for other purposes?

How does the Commission view the proposal to amend all relevant legislation accordingly? Only then will it be possible for veterinarians to administer pharmaceutical products authorized for use with domestic animals and humans to horses.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

The Commission is well aware of this very complex problem and makes all efforts to find solutions for the availability of veterinary pharmaceuticals. However, the Commission must take into account aspects of consumer health protection as well as aspects of animal health and welfare. To this extent problems do not only exist for the treatment of horses but also concern ‘minor species’ such as fish, rabbits, sheep and goats, farmed game etc. and ‘minor uses’ for rare clinical indications.

In accordance with the EC Treaty, horses are agricultural animals. Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on health conditions for intra-Community trade in fresh meat (1) applies to horsemeat.

While in the Community the majority of horses are bred primarily for uses other than food production, slaughter of horses at a certain stage of their lives and trade in horses for slaughter is neither excluded by Community law nor national regulations of Member States. Taking account of the longevity of horses, the frequent change of owner or nationality and the different purposes for which a horse may be used during its career, the enforcement of a general distinction between horses as companion animals and food producing animals is difficult. C 297/140 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Slaughter for human consumption of individual horses could be excluded or delayed when they had received treatment with medicinal products containing substances for which the maximum residue limits (MRL) have not been established in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin (2). However, such horses should be specifically identified and the received treatment must be recorded. Commission Decision 93/623/EEC (3) established the identification document (passport) for horses when travelling all over the world. The passport, together with proper certification, has proven its validity in preventing the introduction into the Community of major equine diseases.

(1) OJ L 121, 29.7.1964. (2) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990. (3) OJ L 298, 3.12.1993.

(1999/C 297/192) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0044/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Implementation of the TAXIS Programme for the computerisation of the Greek Inland Revenue

Complaints have been steadily mounting about the exceptional difficulties encountered in implementing the TAXIS Programme on the computerisation of the Greek Inland Revenue.

Contrary to the assurances given by the Greek authorities which are included in the Commission’s answer to my Written Question on this subject E-1802/98 (1), the reports available to me concur that:

= By the end of 1998 far fewer than the scheduled 150 DOYs will have been integrated in the system. At least half of these will be ‘small’ DOYs responsible for very little tax revenue;

= The number of software applications being developed is still seven instead of the seventeen planned;

= The training system has not yet started to operate, despite the fact that training staff emoluments have been disbursed and paid in a regular manner.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1. Bearing in mind all the problems and difficulties that have arisen, when does it believe the Greek Inland Revenue computerisation system will be fully operational? In other words, when will the full cross- referencing of data in all Inland Revenue offices in Greece be possible?

2. Leaving aside the complexity of implementation, which should in any case have been foreseen, what are the essential reasons for the unconscionable delay in the development of the system?

3. Are there any other EU Member States in which Inland Revenue is not fully computerised?

(1) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 88.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

According to the information from the Greek authorities concerning the TAXIS project, there are already close to 110 DOYs operating. Seven software applications have completed the pilot application phase and been accepted by the national authorities. The other 10 applications have already been developed and are in the pilot application phase in order to test their functionality.

Staff training is well under way. All officials of those DOYs which have software applications functioning have received training. Already, 253 434 man/hours of training have been given, for a total of 5 035 persons. Obviously, the training will progress as the new applications are installed. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/141

The Greek authorities estimate that the entire system will be fully operational by the first half of 2001. Apart from the complexity of the project, they attribute the delays experienced, especially in the first phase of implementation, to the size of the project and to problems that arose duringimplementation.

As regards VAT, all the other Member States possess computerised systems connected to local offices which can, at least, access data stored centrally.

(1999/C 297/193) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0050/99

by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Subject: Transaction fees for credit card payments abroad

With the introduction of cash at the beginning of the year 2002 exchange charges will be a thing of the past in the Euro zone. It is understood, however, that credit card companies are planningto chargetransaction or handling fees instead of the present foreign exchange commissions. Consequently, where payments are made in another Member State of Economic and Monetary Union, 1 % of the value of the transaction will continue to be charged, the aim being to compensate for the loss of revenue from foreign exchange commissions.

What does the Commission think of these fees being charged by the credit card organizations, particularly in view of the future importance of electronic means of payment in business?

What measures does the Commission intend to take to prevent such fees from beingcharged?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 1999)

The Commission agrees with the observation of the Honourable Member that currency exchange risk between the national currency units of the euro zone and commissions intended to cover the risk are a thingof the past in the euro zone since 1 January 1999.

The charging structure for credit cards is a complex subject, which raises a number of issues. The Honourable Member reasons from the hypothesis that the former ‘spreads’ (differences between buyingand sellingrates) charged by banks for credit card payments in foreign currency purchases were single purpose charges attributable entirely to foreign currency risk. This is not how banks generally view the former ‘spreads’. These were in fact often used as the sole charging mechanism by most banks, producing revenue which (as they see it) defrayed the extra costs of the cross-border transaction, compared with a domestic one. Part of that ‘spread’ was paid to the international card payment clearingbody which ensured the clearingand settlement of the transaction amount.

The Commission shares the wish of the Honourable Member to see an end to the disparity between the costs of domestic and cross-border payments, whether by credit card, credit transfer or other means. However in a free market this can be achieved only by measures which encourage transparency and thus competition, rather than tryingto impose it.

The increased transparency brought about by economic and monetary union (EMU) will show customers what they are payinginstead of hidingit in a ‘spread’. Ultimately there is no reason in principle why these higher charges should be required, provided that the costs to banks of cross-border business do not significantly exceed the costs of providingthe equivalent domestic transactions. At present however there remain some significant differences, due mainly to different technical standards. The elimination of such differences should enable cost reductions to be made. C 297/142 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In addition to its recommendations on transparency in this area (Recommendation 98/286/EC (1)) the Commission has for some years actively encouraged the banking community to deal with differences in standards for all types of cross-border payment and to establish closer cross-border links between their systems. Some committees are working on these issues (e.g. the European committee for banking standards). The Commission will continue to encourage banks to come forward with improvements in their systems.

In addition, the Commission will issue a communication in spring 1999 covering the policy relating to payment systems in EMU. Political impetus in favour of such a communication was very much in evidence at the first meeting of the financial services policy group held on 28 January 1999, chaired by the Commission. This group of personal representatives of finance ministers, set up under the framework for action for financial services, agreed that introduction of the euro had brought a number of issues to the fore, including the fact that the infrastructure to help citizens to effect small-value cross-border payments has lagged behind developments at the wholesale level. The Commission’s communication will therefore outline an integrated strategy encompassing all remaining obstacles to efficient cross-border retail payments in euro, including payment cards, cheques and transfers.

(1) OJ L 130, 1.5.1998.

(1999/C 297/194) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0077/99

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to theCommission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Demolition of Greek historic building in FYROM

On 12 January 1999, the authorities in the town of Resna, FYROM, proceeded to demolish one of the most historic Greek monuments in that country. The Greek academy for boys, where Greek pupils from the Pelagonia region studied from as early as 1800 and where the great Greek teacher, Kosmas the Aetolian, taught was demolished (after cursory formalities) on the authority of the FYROM Ministry of Education.

This act is the latest in a number of provocative measures taken by the Skopje government against Greek cultural monuments in that country; recently (also in the town of Resna), the Greek inscriptions disappeared from the church of Ayios Georgios (built in 1842) and from the graves of Greeks in the Holy Trinity cemetery. Will the Commission say what action it will take to persuade FYROM to conform to standards of conduct befitting a genuine European country, particularly as that country is receiving generous funding through the PHARE programme and the European Investment Bank (EIB)?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

The Commission has taken note of the events in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to which the Honourable Member refers, particularly the demolition of one of the country’s historic Greek monuments. Following contacts with the head of the liaison office of the Hellenic Republic in Skopje, through its resident envoy there, the Commission has been informed of the latter’s démarche vis-à-vis the FYROM authorities with regard to this bilateral matter.

Depending on whatever measures may be taken following these events, the Commission could consider reorienting ongoing Phare cultural activities to contribute to the preservation of the country’s Greek monuments, too. In future, however, no Phare funds will be earmarked for cultural projects. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/143

(1999/C 297/195) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0092/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE)to the Commission (27 January 1999)

Subject: Community study centre devoted to Santiago de Compostela

The fact that the year which has just begun, 1999, is a Holy Year dedicated to Santiago de Compostela should prompt the Union to consider how its cultural heritage might be made to encompass the historical dimension spanning entire centuries of European practices revolving around a unique custom which has left its mark on the European genius.

Setting out from different starting-points, Europeans have, through many centuries, journeyed, endured difficulties, and fulfilled longings, and have consequently been more readily able to identify with a common cause, or the essence of our continent, just as other parts of the world have become identified with different expressions of their own culture.

To mark the Holy Year dedicated to Santiago de Compostela, does the Commission believe that the Union should take the decision to set up a study centre in the place lying at the heart of the tradition concerning St James - Santiago de Compostela - with a view to exploring the historical role of pilgrimages to that city within the unifying tradition of a spirit which has helped to bring the European continent as a whole culturally closer together?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s view on the religious and cultural heritage importance of ‘Santiago de Compostella’ for Europe. It is in this context, that in the framework of its cultural heritage actions and Raphael programme, the Commission has, in the last few years, supported financially the efforts of the Spanish authorities to preserve and enhance monuments along the Saint Jacques de Compostelle pilgrimage route.

A study centre devoted to ‘Santiago de Compostella’, would certainly contribute towards a better understanding of the historical role of pilgrimages and their positive effect in European cultural heritage terms. However, it has to be noted that in application of the subsidiarity principle and given the limited resources available, the Commission cannot take the decision of setting up such a centre. Any assistance on behalf of the Commission can, presently, only be envisaged within the framework of the Raphael programme which aims to encourage and support European cooperation initiatives in favour of the preservation and enhancement of cultural heritage as stipulated in Article 128 of the EC Treaty. In this context, should the Spanish authorities present a proposal which meets the criteria of the Raphael programme for 1999, as published in the Official journal (1), the Commission would gladly receive an application for consideration.

(1) OJ C 342, 10.11.1998.

(1999/C 297/196) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0095/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE)to the Commission (27 January 1999)

Subject: Spanish as a compulsory school subject in the United States

The US Secretary of Education maintains that Spanish will form part of the core curriculum in the country’s schools. This is one of the key goals which the Clinton Administration is aiming to achieve in the run-up to the year 2000, and Bill Clinton himself has said in a recent speech that US children should learn Spanish if it was not their mother tongue.

The Commission should consequently support and provide logistical back-up for the joint agreement between the United States and Spain to promote Spanish in the US, bearing in mind that the question will have an important role to play in enhancing the prestige of Community culture as a whole.

To what extent is the Commission willing to assist Spain in the task of spreading the influence of the Spanish language in the United States? How far can its solidarity be interpreted to mean that it will help to remedy such shortcomings as might arise? C 297/144 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Community has made the choice of fostering multilinguism and it promotes it in particular in the framework of its programmes in the field of education and training, specially in the Lingua component of the Socrates programme. Priority is given to the less widely used or taught languages.

These programmes aim at promoting the teaching and the learning of languages within the Community. The promoting of Community languages in third countries is not one of the objectives of these programmes.

However, the 1995 Agreement between the Community and the United States (Council Decision of 23 October 1995, 95/487/EC (1) establishing a cooperation programme in higher education and vocational education and training) incorporates as one of its objectives to promote mutual understanding between the people of the Community and the United States including broader knowledge of their languages, cultures and institutions.

This programme is implemented mainly through projects developed jointly by consortia of Community and American universities. The guidelines for the annual calls for proposals clearly state the objective above, and also add when explaining the conditions required for the mobility of students within the joint projects that:

‘A main objective of this Programme is to encourage and enable students to spend transatlantic study periods in a country or region in which they can experience a different academic, cultural and linguistic milieu from their home region. It is important, therefore, that measures to be taken by the partner institutions for the cultural and linguistic preparation of students be clearly addressed in the proposal. All students should receive cultural preparation for their foreign stay and all students spending a study period in a country whose official language is not their own should receive preparation in the host country’s language both before and after departure’.

Since 16 Spanish institutions take part in the 33 projects currently funded, this provides a non-negligible exposure to Spanish language and culture to both the American students studying in Spanish universities and the American universities sending them.

(1) OJ L 279, 22.11.1995.

(1999/C 297/197) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0096/99

by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Rural libraries in Central America to foster the culture of peace

The Community decision to equip 3 000 rural libraries in Central America will help to remedy the paradoxical situation in which teachers in the region are encouraging their pupils to read but have no books to give them.

The Community donation was not just intended to aid teaching and adult literacy programmes. On the contrary, the above-mentioned library project constituted a further step in the political reconstruction of a region that has been hit so severely by wars and conflicts.

Following the success of the Community initiative, does the Commission think that it should continue to support libraries in Central and South America to help to foster both the culture of peace and the expertise that can overcome the low literacy rates found in numerous isolated pockets in that part of the world? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/145

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his appreciation of its project to support rural libraries in Central America.

The Commission is convinced that such projects help to improve the education of those involved and thereby contribute, in the long run, to promoting peace and democracy; it is therefore quite willing to consider proposals for further programmes of this type in Central America.

(1999/C 297/198) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0098/99 by Alessandro Danesin (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: The revision of telephone charges in Italy

The newcharges set by Tim and Omnitel for calling a cellular phone from an ordinary phone sparked off such widespread consumer resistance that the government had to intervene.

Finally, on 12 January, the authority responsible for guarantees of communication decided to intervene and officially ordered that the newcharges to be abolished and those preceding the increase be restored.

But the damage has already been done and legitimate doubts have been raised: the action taken by the two companies which decided at the same time to increase the prices for the same services, is clearly contrary to competition policy and the free market in telephone services. The situation is, at the very least, abnormal: are we faced with a cartel, a duopoly or an oligopoly? Whatever one chooses to call it, we are dealing with collusive action against the interests of consumers.

It would be useful if these latest events were to prompt a series of measures to bring greater transparency to the current price jungle, especially with a view to the revision of all the charges which will take place in the Spring, and in the light of the example set by the rest of Europe (in the United Kingdom the relevant authority forced the two national companies in this sector to cut the costs of calling from an ordinary phone to a mobile by a quarter) and the rest of the world (in Hong Kong, the new liberalisation policy has led to the setting up of 30 newinternational telephone service providers, and the cost of calling America has been cut by 90 %).

Can the Commission answer the following:

9 Can it do something about this matter?

9 Despite the fact that each Member State has its own authorities responsible for enforcing national regulations on competition, should the Commission not continue to monitor the single market and investigate possible violations, especially because the recent introduction of the euro should benefit consumers by stimulating competition?

9 Is it not also true that the single market would be meaningless if it were permissible for cartels and restrictive agreement, to limit competition between firms, thus inevitably denying consumers the full benefits of a healthy competitive market?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty prohibits concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which directly or indirectly fix the selling prices of goods or services. It is for both the Commission and the national authorities to ensure compliance with this provision. As a rule, the Commission does not intervene in respect of action against infringements of this provision when action to the same effect has been initiated by a national competition authority, as is the case in Italy. C 297/146 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In paragraphs 29 et seq. of its notice of 22 August 1998 on the application of the competition rules to access agreements in the telecommunications sector framework, relevant markets and principles (1), the Commission identifies cases where it could take parallel action, namely where a formal complaint is referred to it and where national proceedings could lead to an excessive delay of the Commission’s action, without a satisfactory resolution of the matter at national level. An excessive delay could arise where the national authority fails to resolve the dispute within a reasonable period of time and where there is a substantial Community interest in the case affecting, or likely to affect, competition in a number of Member States.

Moreover, the Commission shares the opinion of the Honourable Member that the internal market would be affected if firms were able to limit competition by agreements and concerted practices at the expense of consumers in the telecommunications market which has first been opened up to competition. For that reason, it attaches special importance to the application in full of the competition rules in this sector, as emphasised in the notice referred to above.

(1)OJ C 265, 22.8.1998.

(1999/C 297/199) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0105/99

by Anthony Wilson (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Scrapies in sheep flocks in New Zealand

Can the Commission confirm whether any cases of scrapies have been found in sheep flocks in New Zealand?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

There have been two periods where scrapie was detected in sheep in New Zealand. In 1952, scrapie was found in three sheep imported from England and in 1954 in four sheep originating from the flock affected in 1952. Scrapie was identified in sheep which were in quarantine in 1976 and 1977.

The Commission is not aware of any recent cases of scrapie in sheep of New Zealand origin.

(1999/C 297/200) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0139/99

by André Fourçans (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Erasmus student exchange programme

Certain countries and universities taking part in the Erasmus student exchange programme do not recognise the equivalence of all units of study in the host country. This both undervalues the experience and hampers students who have to return to their country of origin to sit some of their examinations.

What does the Commission intend to do to prevent this type of nonsense and to ensure that all study abroad is recognised in the student’s country of origin? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/147

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concerns and is aware of the fact that even today some universities do not recognise the equivalence of all or part of the courses taken by their students abroad. However, since the Erasmus programme was launched the Commission has been striving to encourage recognition of diplomas and study periods spent abroad. Hence, in 1984 it created the network of National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARIC) and in 1989 it proposed a system for transferring academic credits (the European Credit Transfer System + ECTS).

Membership of the ECTS system in the context of the institutional contract signed by the Commission and each institution participating in the Erasmus programme is entirely optional, since the higher education institutions are independent and free to decide on the equivalences. However, if they join the system they must offer each student participating in a mobility programme with their partners a contract indicating the courses to be attended and the number of credits granted. This contract must be signed by the student, the dispatching university and the host university. If the student fulfils the terms of his contract the credits obtained abroad are validated and automatically replace the courses which the student would have normally followed during this period at his university of origin.

The ECTS system was launched in 1989 between 145 universities. Currently, more than 1 300 institutions have introduced the system. It is to be hoped that with the year 2000 on the horizon this system, which is based on three fundamental principles + transparency, trust and recognition + will be generalised.

(1999/C 297/201) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0149/99

by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: 1999, International Year of the Elderly

1999 is the International Year of the Elderly, under the slogan ‘Towards a society for all ages’, with four main thrusts laid down by the United Nations: the situation of the elderly, their continuing education, international relations and the connections between development and ageing. The intention is to stress the idea that a society for all is a society based on respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, cultural and religious diversity, social justice, democratic involvement and the rule of law.

How is the Union going to celebrate this International Year of the Elderly?

Given that I come from Aragón, the Spanish Autonomous Community with the highest average age in Spain (26,7 % of the population is over 60), I am highly aware of the problem of integrating older people into society, and I should like to know whether there is any Community programme which, to whatever extent, will help fund the various activities which society in Europe will be implementing to mark this Year of the Elderly, and, if so, would the Commission furnish details of how to access such funding?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The main Commission contribution to the United Nations international year for older people will be a communication entitled ‘Towards a Europe of all ages’ which will focus attention on ageing and older people’s issues in 1999 and beyond. This communication, due to be adopted by the end of March 1999, will contain a short analysis of the character of the demographic challenge facing the Community and will outline a strategy of active ageing as a plausible response. C 297/148 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

In addition to the communication, the Commission has participated in a number of events to celebrate the United Nations international year and organised a joint symposium with the Austrian Presidency of the Council in Vienna on 12-13 October 1998 entitled ‘A society for all ages’. A joint conference with the Finnish Presidency of the Council on ‘independent living of elderly people’ will take place on 6-7 October 1999, followed by a Commission conference to mark the end of the international year in November 1999.

As regards Community financial support, 11 projects on the theme of exchanging experience and disseminating information on issues relating to the promotion of a society for all ages were supported under the 1998 Commission call for proposals for preparatory actions in the field of social exclusion (budget lines B3-4101, B3-4102and B3-4116).

The Commission intends to publish a call for proposals in spring 1999 for budget line B3-4111 (preparatory measures combating and preventing discrimination). In accordance with the budget commentary for this line, support can be provided for actions to be implemented in the framework of the United Nations international year for older people, as well as measures to encourage co-operation and transfer of best practice in combating age discrimination and measures to promote full citizenship, participation and equal opportunities for older people.

In addition, the Commission stated in its Social action programme 1998-2000 (1) its intention of exploring the new scope for action opened up by Articles 13 and 137 of the Amsterdam Treaty, including the possibility of proposing framework programmes to combat discrimination and social exclusion. The Commission is preparing proposals in this regard and will ensure that these take proper account of issues related to ageing and older people.

(1) COM(98) 259 final.

(1999/C 297/202) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0153/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Establishment and operation of National Blood-Donation Centre in Greece

Measure 1,5 of the ‘Health and Welfare’ operational programme ? part of the sub-programme for health under the second Community Support Framework for Greece ? is entitled ‘Blood-donation facilities and equipment for the establishment and operation of a National Blood-Donation Centre’, one of the aims of which is to improve the testing of blood to prevent infection. After the recent revelations concerning a baby who was infected with AIDS following a blood transfusion, it is vitally important that such a centre be set up.

In view of the fact that there is a timetable, which runs from 1994, for implementing this particular measure of the sub-programme, will the Commission say:

1. what progress has been made and how much funding has been taken up for this measure,

2. whether there are delays in using the funds and, if so, what the reasons are for the delays, and

3. what measures it intends to take to get the centre operating more quickly on the basis of the Council’s resolution concerning the safety of transfusions and the self-sufficiency of the Community in blood?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/149

(1999/C 297/203) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0158/99 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Refugees in Díli (East Timor)

Is the Commission able to confirm or deny press reports to the effect that hundreds of people have sought refuge in Díli as they flee from armed civilian groups who are spreading panic amongst the population in various parts of East Timor? Can the Commission take any action to support the refugees on the basis of earlier decisions concerning humanitarian aid to the people of East Timor?

Through which organisations would such aid be channelled?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The Commission confirms that various militia groupings attacked civilians in Dili recently. There are reports about 5000 people being threatened and seeking refuge in churches. In the days following the incidents the situation did not get out of hand and tension has now eased.

The Commission and the Member States have pledged their commitment to provide continuing support to help the people of East Timor. The Commission has shown and will continue to show its preparedness to respond to events calling for emergency aid.

In the meantime the delegation in Jakarta will closely follow, in close concertation with Member States, the development of events and advise the Commission of any measures which would be instrumental to alleviate new problems.

(1999/C 297/204) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0160/99 by Riccardo Garosci (PPE) to the Council

(29 January 1999)

Subject: Additional commissions on euro transactions

In compliance with the provisions laid down by the ABI (Italian Bankers Association) some Italian banks are charging commissions over and above normal bank charges on cheques made out in euros received from euro zone countries, thus treating such payments as foreign transactions.

In so doing, they are failing to adhere to the ’standard of good practice’ and negating the purpose of the single currency, thereby showing scant regard for the interests of their clients and the legitimate hopes raised by the euro’s launch only a few weeks ago.

Given that the Commission has consistently maintained 5 firstly in the Regulation of 1997 on the use of the euro and subsequently in the Regulation of 1998 on the transitional phase and the Recommendation of 23 April 1998 on bank charges (with particular regard to Article 2 thereof) 5 that no foreign exchange commissions or additional fees over and above those normally levied on foreign services should be charged on banking transactions conducted in euros, how does the Council intend to ensure that a stop is put to these unfair practices without delay?

(26 April 1999)

1. In its recommendation of 23 April 1998 concerning banking charges for conversion to the euro, which was addressed to Member States and to banks and their associations, the Commission considered that banks are not legally entitled to charge for the conversion of incoming payments either denominated in euro or in national currency during the transitional period, for the conversion of accounts from national currency into euro at the end of the transitional period, a different fee for services in euro than that charged for identical services in national currency. C 297/150 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

2. According to Article 155 of the Treaty, it is for the Commission to ensure that the provisions of the Treaty and the measures taken by the institutions are applied.

(1999/C 297/205) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0188/99 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL), Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NG) and Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Nuclear power station in Morocco

The Government of Morocco has recently announced its wish to build a nuclear power station in the country. It would be located in the western part of Morocco, approximately 200 kilometres away from the Canary Islands. It would be the first nuclear power station in North Africa and the announcement of the project has provoked a degree of disquiet concerning the development of nuclear energy in Morocco.

No such installation would be needed if the country’s considerable potential for generating energy from renewable sources were to be adequately developed. Indeed, technicians from the Canary Islands government have offered to provide assistance in installing wind-powered electricity generators in Morocco.

Renewable energy sources therefore need to be developed in Morocco in order to promote the country’s socio- economic development and to prevent the introduction of energy sources such as nuclear power, with all the harmful environmental and economic effects which it undeniably has.

Is the Commission aware of the project to build a nuclear power station in Morocco?

Has the Commission offered any kind of technical or financial cooperation to assist the development of nuclear power in Morocco?

Has the Commission considered the possibility of offering aid to assist the installation and development of renewable energy sources in Morocco by means of the existing cooperation instruments?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

The Commission is aware that it is planned to build a nuclear power station for the desalination of seawater on the south coast of Morocco in the Tan-Tan region.

An agreement on this project was signed in December 1998 by Morocco and China.

The Commission has not made any proposal concerning nuclear energy in Morocco.

It is providing aid for the energy sector in Morocco on two fronts.

Firstly, the Commission has launched a large-scale project on decentralised rural electrification involving solar- powered energy under the bilateral indicative programmes with Morocco. This €14,5 million project will receive a total of €10 million for the electrification of isolated villages (douars) in the northern provinces. The financing proposal for this project is being finalised and will be submitted for Member States’ approval in the first half of the year.

Care has been taken to include environmental protection measures in the project.

Secondly, four energy projects have been prepared under regional programming in accordance with the recommendations of the Euro-Mediterranean Energy Forum under the 1998-2000 action plan established after the Trieste Conference. These are eligible for cofinancing from Mediterranean partner countries and the Member States.

They cover energy and the urban environment, thermal solar energy applications, a network of training in energy policy and a Mediterranean electricity network. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/151

Two other projects which will be wholly funded by the Commission concern the legal and institutional framework, restructuring of companies in the energy sector and support for the Euro-Mediterranean Energy Forum’s ad hoc working parties on energy policy, interconnections and economic analysis.

(1999/C 297/206) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0226/99 by Sören Wibe (PSE) to the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: ESCB secrecy rules

In its review of how Member States had fulfilled the convergence criteria, the Commission took the view that the Swedish central bank (Riksbank) would have to change its secrecy rules in order meet ESCB requirements.

The Riksbank has since moved in totally the opposite direction. It now publishes the minutes of its meetings immediately, and members of its management board may freely discuss monetary policy issues and express their personal views on such matters.

Can such openness be maintained if Sweden participates in EMU and the Riksbank thus becomes part of the ESCB, or must Sweden tighten up the Riksbank’s rules on secrecy, as the Commission has argued?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

In its convergence report of 25 March 1998 (1), the Commission did not express the specific opinion that present legislation in Sweden regarding confidentiality for the Riksbank is incompatible with the requirements of the EC Treaty. The Commission noted in the convergence report that the draft legislation at this moment did not ensure full integration of the Riksbank in the European system of central banks (ESCB). Such integration would require adaptation of a number of provisions in the Riksbank’s Statute as well as modifications to procedures and working methods of the Riksbank. This draft legislation was adopted at the end of 1998 without changes. In the view of the Commission, one aspect of the integration of national central banks in the ESCB is that Member States are obliged to respect the confidentiality regime under Article 38 of the ESCB Statute.

(1) COM(98) 1999 final.

(1999/C 297/207) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0227/99 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: Arms export rules

The German Presidency has proposed legally binding rules on arms exports. It is not yet clear whether these rules will be minimum rules and allow individual Member States to set more stringent standards, or will be aimed at achieving harmonisation and so apply to all Member States.

What is the Commission’s position on common minimum rules and harmonised rules respectively in relation to arms exports?

Which of the two options does it recommend?

If it favours harmonisation, what level does it consider appropriate for such harmonised rules? C 297/152 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

Which of the Member States’ current rules on arms exports does it consider would provide a reasonable basis for harmonised EU rules on arms exports?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The Presidency proposal to establish the Union code of conduct on arms on a firmer legal basis (Common Position under Article 3.2 of the Treaty of the European Union) was discussed at the General Affairs Council on 25 January but did not gain the unanimous support of Member States. The code therefore retains its non- binding legal status.

Matters relating to arms exports are dealt with by the Member States in the context of the Common foreign and security policy (CFSP). The Commission is fully associated with such deliberations. Article 223 of the EC Treaty applies in this area and there exist no Union rules concerning arms exports.

(1999/C 297/208) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0235/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Contracts at Leonardo da Vinci airport, Rome

On 21 September 1998 the Aeroporti di Roma company awarded the contract for cleaning and maintenance services at Leonardo da Vinci 7 Fiumicino airport, divided into three separate lots, to the following companies:

7 Linda srl;

7 SNAM Lazio Sud srl;

7 Bona Dea srl.

Given the airport’s importance as an international stop-over, can the Commission state whether the European rules on competition for public contracts have been complied with in this case?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/209) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0236/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Council

(15 February 1999)

Subject: Italian secret services report on the euro’s use for money-laundering purposes

Is the Council aware that, in a report which was subsequently published by the daily newspaper ‘Il Messagero’ on 25 January 1999, the Italian military secret services (SISMI) maintained that the euro could be used to launder proceeds from criminal activities which had not yet entered financial and banking channels?

Does it intend to ask the Italian Government to forward the SISMI report?

What action does it intend to take to prevent computer systems and the Internet from being used for criminal activities? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/153

(26 April 1999)

1. The Council has not received the report to which the Honourable Member refers.

2. On the subject of money laundering and actions to prevent computer systems and the Internet from being used for criminal activities,the Council would draw attention to the following:

" Joint Action of 3 December 1998 on money laundering,the identification,tracing,freezing,seizing and confiscation of instrumentalities and the proceeds from crime (1);

" Action Plan of 28 April 1997 to combat organised crime (2);

" Resolution of 17 January 1995 on the lawful interception of telecommunications (3).

The Council would also direct the Honourable Member to the ongoing discussions on:

" a Convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters;

" a Council Decision instructing Europol to deal with forgery of money and means of payment;

" the implementation of the Council conclusions of 3 December 1998 on elements of the Union’s strategy against high tech crime,and

" an Action Plan for a safer use of the Internet by combating illegal and harmful content on global networks.

3. Reference should also be made to the work being conducted in other fora,e.g.:

" Europol (harmonisation of work by EU law enforcement agencies to monitor the Internet; organised crime linked with high tech);

" Council of Europe (Committee on crime in cyberspace);

" OECD (Committee for information,computer and communications policy; guidelines for cryptography policy);

" G8 (Group on high tech crime; network of contact points; principles for combating high tech crime);

" Financial Action Task Force (Recommendations on money laundering).

(1) OJ L 333,9.12.1998,p. 1. (2) OJ C 251,15.8.1997,p. 1. (3) OJ C 329,4.11.1996,p. 1.

(1999/C 297/210) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0247/99 by (Hanja) Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Interpol conference on drugs in Burma

1. Is the Commission aware that Interpol’s Secretariat-General is organising the Fourth International Heroin Conference in Rangoon,Burma,from 23 to 26 February 1999 in conjunction with the military dictatorship in Burma?

2. Does not the Commission find it absurd that Interpol should be organising a conference of this nature in a country which is generally regarded as being one of the world’s major drugs exporters and in conjunction with a military dictatorship which is known to maintain its position by,among other things,the drugs trade?

3. Does not the Commission find that such cooperation seriously besmirches the good name of and confidence in Interpol?

4. Can the Commission indicate how Interpol is financed,which European countries are involved therein and who exercises any political supervision of Interpol’s conduct? C 297/154 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

5. Does the Commission know whether Europol is involved in this conference and, if it is, in what way?

6. Can the Commission indicate who is politically responsible for Europol’s participation in such conferences?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1999)

The Commission is aware that Interpol is holding its fourth conference on drugs in Rangoon from 23 to 26 February 1999.

Considering the undemocratic nature of the Burmese regime and its role in the recent cancellation of the 13th (ASEAN) joint co-operation committee meeting (JCC), scheduled for 24-27 January 1999 in Bangkok, the Commission agrees with the Parliament that the choice of Rangoon for this event is unfortunate. The Commission will not be participating in this event.

Various Member States have recently indicated that they wanted not send representatives to the conference.

Interpol is an intergovernmental organisation of which all Community Member States are part. The organisation’s resources come from the annual contributions paid by the governments of its members. The secretary general of Interpol, who is responsible for implementing the budget with the assistance of the financial controller, is answerable to the executive committee and the general assembly.

The director of Europol is responsible for decisions concerning the management of the tasks assigned to Europol and is accountable to the management board which consists of representatives of the 15 Member States and the Commission. Europol will not participate at the conference.

(1999/C 297/211) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0290/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Council (17 February 1999)

Subject: Protection for the European granite industry

In recent years, firms quarrying granite in Europe, most of which are constituted as small or medium-sized undertakings, have had to cope with substantial changes. Competition both on the internal market and from third countries has resulted in average price falls of between 30 % and 40 % and has left a permanent mark on this sector.

The most recent developments have resulted in this sector being faced by new challenges; resolute action is required from the Commission and the Member States. China supplies large amounts of granite for road and bridge construction, as well as for buildings, and India does the same for tombstones. Because of the different level of wage costs, these imports are much cheaper than European products. What is more, these third countries protect themselves in part by means of export duties against the export of raw materials for processing.

What options are available to the Council in relation to anti-dumping and protective tariffs, to react vigorously to this concrete situation, and how quickly, in concert with the Commission, can targeted measures subsequently be put in place?

Reply (26 April 1999)

1. It is recalled that, in accordance with the distribution of institutional responsibilities laid down by Council Regulation (EC) 384/96 in anti-dumping matters (1), the European Commission has the sole power to make provisional findings and to adopt provisional measures after consulting the Anti-dumping Committee. The adoption of definitive measures is a matter for the Council, on the basis of a proposal from the Commission.

2. As to the possibility of raising existing duties, such possibility exists through Regulation 3286/94 (Trade Barrier Regulation (2)), whereby the Commission can make proposals subject to all conditions and procedures provided for by this regulation. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/155

3. At this moment the Commission has not yet submitted proposals to the Council, either in relation to anti-dumping measures, nor in the framework of the trade barrier regulation.

(1) OJL 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. (2) OJL 349, 31.12.1994, p. 71.

(1999/C 297/212) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0338/99 by Karla Peijs (PPE) to the Council

(25 February 1999)

Subject: National sides of euro coins

1. Is the Council aware of the number of national designs on the euro coins of the 11 Member States of the European Union which are to participate in the euro?

2. Austria and Italy have no fewer than eight different designs. Does the Council agree that the large number of national designs will cause confusion among users? If not, why not?

3. The European Central Bank has stated that not only euro banknotes but also euro coins could be forged. Does the Council agree that the large number of national designs will facilitate forgery? If not, why not?

4. Why did the Council not decide that each country participating in EMU should adopt a single national design for the euro coins?

5. What measures will the Council take to induce mintmasters to reduce the number of national designs to one per Member State?

(26 April 1999)

Council Regulation 975/98 of 3 May 1998 on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation (1), at last amended by Council Regulation 423/1999 of 22 February 1999 (2), lays down uniform rules for the issue of such coins which are applicable to all Member States concerned. The only noteworthy exception to these otherwise uniform rules concerns the design of the national side which will be different according to the Member State of issue.

In this context the Council considered that ‘giving these coins one European and one national side is an appropriate expression of the idea of European monetary union between Member States and could significantly increase the degree of acceptance of the coins by European citizens’ (10th recital of Regulation 975/98).

The Council is therefore of the opinion that the different designs of the national sides rather than creating confusion for consumers, will increase their degree of acceptance by paying tribute, at least partially, to the different design traditions of Member States.

Furthermore, the Council does not consider that the fact of there being more than one design of the national side of the euro coins will facilitate forgery. In this respect it should be borne in mind that, given their high value, uniform special security features are applicable for the issue of the one and two euro coins.

In conclusion, the Council sees presently no need to modify Regulation 975/98 in this respect.

(1) OJL 139, 11.5.1998, p. 6. (2) OJL 52, 27.2.1999, p. 2. C 297/156 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/213) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0373/99 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) tothe Council

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Worrying state of health of Mr Ukshin Hoti and disappearances and arrests without charge in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

In an urgent resolution adopted on 14 May 1998 (1) Parliament called on the Council to do everything in its power to persuade the Belgrade authorities to release Mr Ukshin Hoti, a Kosovan university professor imprisoned by the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for crimes of conscience in 1995. Since then, the state of health of Mr Hoti, who is still in prison, has deteriorated very seriously as a result of the very harsh conditions in which he is being held.

Can the Council Presidency, through its ambassador in Belgrade or by any other means, check on the spot the conditions under which Mr Hoti is being held and the medical treatment available to him and take every possible step to ensure that Mr Hoti is released not at the end of his sentence, in May 1999, but immediately?

More generally, can the Council Presidency give the number of prisoners of conscience and an estimate of the number of persons who have been arrested without charge or have disappeared (desaparecidos) in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia since the beginning of 1998?

(1) OJ C 167, 1.6.1998, p. 197.

(26 April 1999)

The Council fully shares the Honourable Member’s worries about the health state of Mr. Ukshin Hoti.

Consequently, the Presidency has instructed its Ambassador in Belgrade to enter into contact with the local representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in order to verify the medical and detention conditions of Mr. Hoti and to assess the possibilities for an early release. Representatives of the ICRC have been able to meet with Mr. Hoti on 1st March 1999. The Presidency endeavours to keep Parliament informed of any information that the representatives of the ICRC will make available to its Ambassador in Belgrade.

The Council does however want to caution the Honourable Member against undue optimism as the relations between Belgrade and the European Union are seriously strained notably due to the current crisis in Kosovo and the demands the Council has addressed to the Belgrade authorities in that respect.

The Council is not in a position to give an accurate account of the number of persons currently incarcerated for their beliefs, that have been arrested without inculpation or that have disappeared. According to figures released by the ICRC in August 1998, the organisation was investigating the cases of 138 Serbs and Montenegrins reportedly abducted by the Kosovo Liberation Army, and over 400 Albanians reportedly detained by Serbian forces. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) gave a total of 400 gathered during its registration of those reported as unaccounted for. The UNHCR believes that around 200 of these are currently in police detention.

(1999/C 297/214) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0384/99 by Ursula Stenzel (PPE) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: Selection procedure

Further to its answer to my question E-3079/98 (1) concerning the competition held on 14 September 1998 and the cheating that occurred during it, can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What security measures were taken or what checks were made in connection with the competition held on 6 February 1999?

2. Can the possibility of cheating be ruled out in this case? 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/157

3. What has the Commission to say about press reports that the police have searched homes and offices and confiscated documents and diskettes?

(1) OJ C 118,29.4.1999,p. 165.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1999)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that on 6 February 1999 the preselection tests for the main A competitions were held under excellent conditions at all 47 centres in the fifteen Member States. The new rules on conduct and discipline operated very efficiently,no candidate had to be asked to leave and the on- the-spot organisation was very well received,winning the entire trust of the candidates who sat the tests.

Answers to the specific questions are as follows: 1. A raft of measures had been taken to tighten security during the preparation of the tests and to reinforce order and discipline at the test centres. Measures had been taken to keep access to a minimum during the preparation of the tests and to ensure that maximum security was maintained when the tests were being translated. Fewer people were involved and the test papers were translated on computers unconnected to the network,in secure rooms. The invigilator teams were strengthened in terms of number and rank in order to ensure that the tests on 6 February 1999 would be carried out properly: over 900 invigilators were present and high-level officials were mobilised for the occasion. Training sessions were held beforehand for all the invigilators and for all those in charge of centres. All candidates had been informed,in the letter inviting them to attend,of the new rules of conduct to be observed at the test centres. They were notified that mobile phones were forbidden in the examination rooms and that they were not allowed to move around at any time during the tests,from the moment the test papers were distributed until they had all been collected. It was also made known to the candidates that anyone who contravened these rules would be immediately required to leave the room,all their test papers would be null and void and their participation in the competition would be annulled. 2. No cheating was observed. The new measures relating to security and supervision appear to have operated extremely well. 3. Following the leak which preceded the preselection tests of 14 September 1998,the Commission immediately launched an enquiry in order to identify everyone responsible for the breach of confidentiality. A preliminary report included sufficient evidence for the file to be handed over to the Belgian judicial authorities,who are now handling the case. The internal administrative enquiry has been closed; a final report was drawn up on 20 November 1998 and transmitted to the Belgian judicial authorities. Following receipt of the report,the Belgian Public Prosecutor requested that,in order to avoid any confusion or ambiguity,all internal enquiries be suspended while the national authorities investigated the matter. The judicial authorities requested that the immunity of certain Commission officials and the inviolability of certain Commission premises should be waived. This request was duly complied with. Other officials were authorised to give evidence on the basis of their responsibility for the organisation of the competition in question. Subsequently,certain premises (including Commission premises) were searched. There is nothing abnormal in that. The judicial investigation is continuing.

(1999/C 297/215) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0388/99 by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission (1 March 1999)

Subject: Objective 5b projects in Bavaria

1. What projects have been funded under the Objective 5b programme in Bavaria (in the various administrative districts) from 1994 to date,and what sums were involved in each case?

2. What projects have been funded from the European Union research budget in Bavaria (in the various administrative districts) from 1994 to date,and what sums were involved in each case? C 297/158 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

3. What projects have been funded by the European Social Fund (not Objective 5b) in Bavaria (in the various administrative districts) from 1994 to date, and what sums were involved in each case?

4. What projects have been funded by European Union initiatives (listed separately) in Bavaria (in the various administrative districts) from 1994 to date, and what sums were involved in each case?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (7 April 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1999/C 297/216) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0439/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (4 March 1999)

Subject: Programmes rejected by the Commission’s DG X

Will the Commission’s DG X say how many and which of the proposals submitted by natural and legal persons from Greece have been rejected by the selection committees for all the programmes, initiatives and actions managed by this DG?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (9 April 1999)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1999/C 297/217) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/99 by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission (5 March 1999)

Subject: Marche regional law discriminating against Freemasons

Article 5(e) of Regional Law No 341/1996 adopted by the Marche Regional Council, on the rules governing nominations and appointments coming within the Regional Council’s sphere of competence, stipulates that all applications must be accompanied by a report including a declaration to the effect that the applicant does not belong to a masonic lodge.

Italian law does not consider Freemasons to belong to a secret association and places no bars on membership.

The aforementioned Article 5 is in clear violation of the right to privacy and discriminates between Freemasons and members of other associations by obliging the former, and not the latter, to declare their membership.

Does the Commission intend to take action to put an end to the flagrant discrimination inherent in the above law, which also violates the right to privacy and the right of association enshrined in national law and in the fundamental principles of the European Treaties?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1999)

The matter to which reference is made does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Community. 15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/159

(1999/C 297/218) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0501/99 by James Nicholson (PPE)to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: International Year of the Older Person

What measures has the Commission undertaken to give European Union recognition to 1999 as the International Year of the Older Person?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question No 0149/99 by Mr Sisó Cruellas (1).

(1) See page 147.

(1999/C 297/219) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0561/99 by Graham Mather (PPE)to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Competition policy in the retailing sector

Can the Commission please provide details of any initiatives recently taken or shortly to be taken in this sphere?

Is the Commission policy in this area being reviewed and if so, on what basis?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

In 1997, following the publication of the green paper on vertical restraints (1), the Commission launched a policy review exercise with a view to reconsidering the Community competition rules applicable to distribution agreements, including the retailing sector. In the light of the indications arising from the wide public consultation, the Commission adopted on 30 September 1998 a communication on the application of Community competition rules to vertical restraints (2) which describes the policy the Commission intends to adopt in this field.

The main aim of the proposed new policy is a shift to a more economic oriented approach, resulting in a much broader coverage of vertical agreements by one block exemption regulation. Such a policy will lead to a reduced regulatory burden, a simplification of the applicable rules, a reduction of the notification requirements and a more effective control of vertical restraints implemented by companies holding significant market power.

The Commission also follows the developments in the retailing sector, with particular reference to the implications that the exercise of buying power may have on the application of Community competition rules.

(1) COM(96) 721 final. (2) COM(98) 544 final. C 297/160 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.1999

(1999/C 297/220) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0787/99 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission (6 April 1999) Subject: Competition policy in the retailing sector Can the Commission please provide details of any initiatives recently taken or shortly to be taken in this sphere?

Is Commission policy in this area being reviewed and if so, on what basis?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1999) The Commission would point out that this question is exactly the same as the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-561/99.

The Commission would therefore refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has already given to that question (1).

(1) See page 159.

(1999/C 297/221) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0828/99 by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Commission (22 March 1999) Subject: Recruitment of officials without tests According to Agence Europe of 5 March 1999 the Council intends to recruit a group of staff from the so-called Schengen secretariat without requiring them to sit tests or undergo a probationary period, which seems to conflict with the Staff Regulations. The use of a possible alternative recruitment procedure based on Article 24 of the 1967 ‘merger treaty’ means that, on specific terms and on the basis of a proposal from the Commission and after consulting Parliament, the Council will be able to recruit external staff as officials without testing them. But the Council has presumably not thought of using this procedure in this connection.

What steps does the Commission 7 as the guardian of the treaty 7 intend to take to oppose this manifest infringement of the Staff Regulations and the equally obvious disregard for the Commission’s right of initiative which is confirmed by Article 24 of the ‘merger treaty’?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (8 April 1999) The matter in question does not come within its jurisdiction of the Commission (which is unfortunately unable to supply the information requested).