Official Journal C 325 Volume 42 of the European Communities 12 November 1999

ISSN 0378-6986 Official Journal C 325 Volume 42 of the European Communities 12 November 1999

English edition Information and Notices

Notice No Contents Page

I Information

European Parliament

Written Questions with answer

(1999/C 325/001) E-2312/98 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: Directive 93/42/EEC (Supplementary Answer) ...... 1 (1999/C 325/002) E-3171/98 by Marlies Mosiek-Urbahn to the Commission Subject: EU aid for Hesse from the Social Fund and Regional Fund (Supplementary Answer) ...... 2 (1999/C 325/003) P-3175/98 by John Iversen to the Commission Subject: Directive on zoonoses (Supplementary Answer) ...... 2 (1999/C 325/004) E-3333/98 by Roberto Mezzaroma to the Commission Subject: Culture ...... 4 (1999/C 325/005) E-3336/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer to the Commission Subject: Experiments with the release of genetically modified plants into the environment and the ‘placing on the market’ of such plants ...... 5 (1999/C 325/006) E-3353/98 by Maartje van Putten to the Commission Subject: Cross-fertilisation of transgenic crops with related non-transgenic food crops ...... 6 (1999/C 325/007) E-3355/98 by Maartje van Putten to the Commission Subject: Guaranteed consumer choice of products free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) ...... 7 (1999/C 325/008) E-3372/98 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Crisis affecting the pigmeat and pigskin processing industry in the EU ...... 8 (1999/C 325/009) E-3375/98 by Quinídio Correia to the Commission Subject: Afforestation and woodland maintenance grants (Supplementary Answer) ...... 8 (1999/C 325/010) E-3400/98 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens to the Commission Subject: Specific gene research ...... 9 (1999/C 325/011) E-3417/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Rare diseases ...... 10 EN Price: EUR 29,50 (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/012) E-3481/98 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Transport of animals ...... 11 (1999/C 325/013) E-3483/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Implementation of the operational programme on industry ...... 11 (1999/C 325/014) E-3484/98 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Generalised system of immunity for Europol agents ...... 12 (1999/C 325/015) E-3514/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Globalization and the Information Society ...... 13 (1999/C 325/016) E-3515/98 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Globalization and the Information Society ...... 14 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3514/98 and E-3515/98 ...... 14 (1999/C 325/017) E-3531/98 by Daniela Raschhofer to the Commission Subject: Transport of breeding animals to third countries ...... 15 (1999/C 325/018) E-3583/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Suspension of funding for the Operational Programme on Telecommunications in Greece ...... 16 (1999/C 325/019) E-3602/98 by Alessandro Danesin to the Commission Subject: Funding of public television networks ...... 17 (1999/C 325/020) E-3605/98 by Quinídio Correia to the Commission Subject: Inclusion of Madeira in the ban on exports of Portuguese beef and veal ...... 18 (1999/C 325/021) E-3640/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Regional aid scheme D Upper Shannon, Ireland ...... 19 (1999/C 325/022) E-3652/98 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: Agenda 2000 proposals on oilseeds ...... 19 (1999/C 325/023) E-3659/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: The millennium bug ...... 20 (1999/C 325/024) E-3668/98 by Doeke Eisma to the Commission Subject: Applicability of the directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions to human research with embryonic tissue ...... 21 (1999/C 325/025) E-3679/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Hemp textile products in Europe ...... 22 (1999/C 325/026) E-4095/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Hemp products in Europe ...... 22 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3679/98 and E-4095/98 ...... 23 (1999/C 325/027) E-3688/98 by Bill Miller to the Commission Subject: The costs of and length of time taken by Court cases ...... 23 (1999/C 325/028) E-3708/98 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Human stem cells and tissue engineering ...... 24 (1999/C 325/029) E-3770/98 by Susan Waddington to the Commission Subject: Biodiversity D Honey Bees ...... 24 (1999/C 325/030) P-3773/98 by W.G. van Velzen to the Commission Subject: Telecommunications and universal service ...... 25 (1999/C 325/031) E-3808/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen to the Commission Subject: Guidelines for SMUs ...... 27 (1999/C 325/032) E-3811/98 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: VAT accounting for opticians ...... 28 (1999/C 325/033) E-3814/98 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of research and development in Catalonia (Supplementary Answer) .28 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/034) E-3815/98 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of agriculture in Catalonia (Supplementary Answer) ...... 29 (1999/C 325/035) E-3819/98 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of social policy in Catalonia ...... 29 (1999/C 325/036) E-3821/98 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Lithuania’s accession to the European Union ...... 30 (1999/C 325/037) E-3826/98 by James Janssen van Raay, Niall Andrews and José Girão Pereira to the Commission Subject: Audit of Community funding ...... 31 (1999/C 325/038) E-3834/98 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Impact of international financial turmoil on the European steel market D industrial policy ...... 31 (1999/C 325/039) E-3842/98 by Luciano Vecchi to the Commission Subject: Infringement proceedings brought against Italy in connection with trade in cocoa- based products ..... 32 (1999/C 325/040) E-3848/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Extra stop on the Madrid-Zaragoza high-speed rail link ...... 33 (1999/C 325/041) E-3859/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Progress in implementing subprogramme for tourism under the Community Support Framework for Greece 34 (1999/C 325/042) E-3878/98 by Philippe De Coene to the Commission Subject: Abolition of duty-free ...... 35 (1999/C 325/043) E-3882/98 by Eva Kjer Hansen to the Commission Subject: Implementation of Council Directive 92/117/EEC ...... 36 (1999/C 325/044) P-3914/98 by Bertel Haarder to the Commission Subject: Penalty duty on European exports to the USA ...... 37 (1999/C 325/045) E-3920/98 by Armelle Guinebertière to the Commission Subject: Extension of European Union regulations on organic production of agricultural products to livestock production without consultation of the European Parliament on the new proposal ...... 39 (1999/C 325/046) E-3940/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: Assessing the various consequences of abandoning the International Space Station ...... 39 (1999/C 325/047) E-3943/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Sustainable Cities and Towns campaign ...... 40 (1999/C 325/048) E-3947/98 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: UN World Food Programme ...... 40 (1999/C 325/049) E-3953/98 by Nuala Ahern to the Commission Subject: Euratom’s budget for 1999 ...... 41 (1999/C 325/050) E-3954/98 by Nuala Ahern to the Commission Subject: Radiological and environmental impact of French nuclear tests on the Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls ... 41 (1999/C 325/051) E-3971/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Community reference laboratory to monitor the quality and toxicology of processed industrial products in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors ...... 42 (1999/C 325/052) E-3972/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: EU action to alleviate the grave crisis affecting fishing for swordfish ...... 43 (1999/C 325/053) E-3974/98 by Frédéric Striby to the Commission Subject: Areas eligible for Objective 2 funding ...... 44 (1999/C 325/054) P-3992/98 by David Hallam to the Commission Subject: Ban on antibiotics ...... 45 (1999/C 325/055) E-3999/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Operation of Cedefop ...... 46 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/056) E-4005/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso to the Commission Subject: Investment in the city of Santander (Spain) ...... 46 (1999/C 325/057) E-4006/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso to the Commission Subject: Unfair competition from the shipyards of South Korea ...... 47 (1999/C 325/058) E-4013/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Replacement of old fishing boats ...... 48 (1999/C 325/059) E-4014/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Water supply on Aegean islands ...... 48 (1999/C 325/060) E-4033/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz to the Commission Subject: EU aid for Somalia and Ethiopia ...... 49 (1999/C 325/061) E-4042/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Export incentives in Turkey ...... 50 (1999/C 325/062) E-4053/98 by Nelly Maes to the Commission Subject: Misuse of humanitarian aid to countries at war ...... 50 (1999/C 325/063) E-4064/98 by Laura González Álvarez and Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Report of the European Ombudsman on the Itoiz dam (Spain) ...... 51 (1999/C 325/064) E-4077/98 by Caroline Jackson to the Commission Subject: Better lawmaking: a shared responsibility ...... 52 (1999/C 325/065) E-4080/98 by Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Abandoned villages in Aragon (Spain) ...... 52 (1999/C 325/066) E-4084/98 by Luigi Florio to the Commission Subject: Exclusion of SMIs from European trade union negotiations ...... 53 (1999/C 325/067) E-4087/98 by José Mendes Bota to the Commission Subject: Lagos and the Day of European Citizenship ...... 54 (1999/C 325/068) E-4094/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Projects in the delta of the River Nestos ...... 55 (1999/C 325/069) E-4105/98 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Possible infringement of the rules on free competition by the law governing ‘banking foundations’ in Italy .55 (1999/C 325/070) E-4110/98 by Bartho Pronk to the Commission Subject: EU number plates in Switzerland ...... 56 (1999/C 325/071) E-0002/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Citrus fruit restructuring programme in Greece ...... 57 (1999/C 325/072) P-0013/99 by María Izquierdo Rojo to the Commission Subject: Misinformation in the European Communities’ official publication concerning urban pilot projects ..... 57 (1999/C 325/073) E-0022/99 by Glenys Kinnock to the Commission Subject: Effects of exports in sensitive sectors ...... 58 (1999/C 325/074) E-0032/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Viagra and the ill-treatment of animals ...... 59 (1999/C 325/075) E-0033/99 by David Hallam to the Commission Subject: Veterinary checks by EU-veterinarians of third country poultrymeat-processing establishments ...... 59 (1999/C 325/076) E-0046/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Problem of computer compatibility in secondary education in Greece ...... 60 (1999/C 325/077) P-0048/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: European measures to combat specific forms of crime in Italy ...... 61 (1999/C 325/078) P-0052/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Exchange transactions between national currencies and the euro in the Member States which have joined the euro area ...... 62 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/079) E-0055/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Avoiding a contest for financial aid D priority for the business environment ...... 64 (1999/C 325/080) E-0056/99 by Laura González Álvarez and Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Acidic water spillage into the River Tinto marshes in Huelva (Spain) caused by a rupture in a storage pond 64 (1999/C 325/081) E-0081/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Register of contaminated land ...... 65 (1999/C 325/082) E-0083/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Environmental impact of motorcycles ...... 66 (1999/C 325/083) E-0084/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Environment aid granted to Indonesia ...... 66 (1999/C 325/084) E-0090/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Continued non-compliance by Greece with rules governing the liberalisation of telecommunications in the European Union ...... 67 (1999/C 325/085) E-0093/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Extension of the Erasmus programme to cover Latin America ...... 68 (1999/C 325/086) P-0103/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Obligation to go before the International Court of Justice for the peaceful resolution of disputes under the 1995 New York Convention on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks ...... 69 (1999/C 325/087) E-0107/99 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström, Raimo Ilaskivi, Jyrki Otila and Kirsi Piha to the Commission Subject: Bringing forward by one year the introduction of euro banknotes and coins ...... 70 (1999/C 325/088) E-0113/99 by José Barros Moura to the Commission Subject: Measures to prevent counterfeiting in the footwear industry ...... 70 (1999/C 325/089) P-0116/99 by Hugh McMahon to the Commission Subject: Environmental Impact Procedure (85/337/EEC) and infringement proceedings against the UK authorities .. 71 (1999/C 325/090) E-0119/99 by John Iversen and Freddy Blak to the Commission Subject: Youth team members in Denmark enslaved by contract terms ...... 72 (1999/C 325/091) E-0120/99 by Anna Karamanouto the Commission Subject: Use of unacceptable medieval methods of interrogation in Israel D ‘legalisation’ of torture ...... 72 (1999/C 325/092) E-0132/99 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne to the Commission Subject: Year 2000 problem ...... 73 (1999/C 325/093) E-0134/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Compensation to fishermen for replacement of fishing gear ...... 74 (1999/C 325/094) E-0135/99 by Bill Miller to the Commission Subject: Subsidies to the wine industry ...... 74 (1999/C 325/095) E-0136/99 by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz to the Commission Subject: The CFA franc ...... 75 (1999/C 325/096) E-0140/99 by André Fourçans to the Commission Subject: The Erasmus student exchange programme ...... 76 (1999/C 325/097) E-0154/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Lindane ...... 76 (1999/C 325/098) E-0162/99 by Antonios Trakatellis to the Commission Subject: Delays in the payment of Community agricultural subsidies ...... 77 (1999/C 325/099) E-0168/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Established right of undertakings and implications as regards compensation arising from the amendment of legislation in the European Union ...... 78 (1999/C 325/100) E-0171/99 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué to the Commission Subject: Agriculture ...... 79 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/101) E-0172/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Building work in Piazza Cavallotti in Livorno ...... 79 (1999/C 325/102) E-0174/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Law discriminating between Italian citizens in the province of Bolzano ...... 80 (1999/C 325/103) E-0175/99 by Amedeo Amadeo to the Commission Subject: Combating the use of drugs in sport ...... 80 (1999/C 325/104) E-0177/99 by Dietrich Elchlepp to the Commission Subject: Power supply line from Morocco to Spain ...... 81 (1999/C 325/105) E-0178/99 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer to the Commission Subject: BSE: comparison between Switzerland and the EU ...... 82 (1999/C 325/106) E-0183/99 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Authorisation/approval of genetically modified seeds ...... 82 (1999/C 325/107) E-0186/99 by Angela Sierra González to the Commission Subject: Development of the Charcas Ponds de San Lorenzo (Gran Canaria, Canary Islands) ...... 83 (1999/C 325/108) E-0187/99 by Angela Sierra González to the Commission Subject: Request for aid in connection with forest fires ...... 84 (1999/C 325/109) E-0196/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Environmental impact of shrimp farming in Asia ...... 84 (1999/C 325/110) E-0203/99 by Mark Killilea to the Commission Subject: Seals ...... 85 (1999/C 325/111) E-0209/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: Waste dump at Corliano (Florence) ...... 85 (1999/C 325/112) E-0210/99 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Alleged irregularities in the BIC assignment procedure in Salerno ...... 86 (1999/C 325/113) E-0212/99 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: Harmonisation of the right to strike in the public services ...... 87 (1999/C 325/114) E-0213/99 by Gerhard Schmid to the Commission Subject: Meat inspection fees pursuant to Directive 93/118/EC D my Question E-2988/98 ...... 87 (1999/C 325/115) E-0214/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Olive cultivation register in Greece ...... 88 (1999/C 325/116) E-0217/99 by Katerina Daskalaki to the Commission Subject: Rehabilitation of Lake Karla under the 2nd CSF ...... 89 (1999/C 325/117) E-0398/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Rehabilitation of Lake Karla ...... 89 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0217/99 and E-0398/99 ...... 90 (1999/C 325/118) E-0221/99 by José Mendes Bota to the Commission Subject: Portugal lagging behind in the European single market ...... 90 (1999/C 325/119) P-0222/99 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel to the Commission Subject: Problems encountered by Dutch building firms operating in Germany ...... 91 (1999/C 325/120) P-0225/99 by James Janssen van Raay to the Commission Subject: Fees for road use in the Netherlands ...... 91 (1999/C 325/121) P-0229/99 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: CE marking ...... 92 (1999/C 325/122) E-0230/99 by Doeke Eisma to the Commission Subject: Funding for the Network of Urban Forums for Sustainable Development ...... 93 (1999/C 325/123) E-0231/99 by Ana Miranda de Lage to the Commission Subject: Increase in tariffs on certain European exports to the United States ...... 93 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/124) E-0232/99 by Ana Miranda de Lage to the Commission Subject: Increase in tariffs on European exports to the United States ...... 94 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0231/99 and E-0232/99 ...... 94 (1999/C 325/125) E-0233/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Possibility of a new Eurotax in Italy ...... 94 (1999/C 325/126) E-0234/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Protection of the Macchia Tonda wildlife sanctuary (Rome) ...... 95 (1999/C 325/127) E-0240/99 by Ulf Holm to the Commission Subject: The UK’s rebate from the EU ...... 95 (1999/C 325/128) E-0249/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Port of Lavrion ...... 96 (1999/C 325/129) E-0255/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: The euro ...... 97 (1999/C 325/130) P-0259/99 by Anna Karamanouto the Commission Subject: Tragic situation of children in Albania D drugs, high mortality rate, trade in organs ...... 97 (1999/C 325/131) P-0262/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Greek operational programme for the environment ...... 98 (1999/C 325/132) E-0263/99 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: International Olympic Committee ...... 98 (1999/C 325/133) E-0266/99 by Joan Colom i Naval to the Commission Subject: European social aid in Catalonia ...... 99 (1999/C 325/134) E-0276/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: Borri Elettronica Industriale, a subsidiary of General Signal (USA) ...... 99 (1999/C 325/135) E-0277/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: German Institute of Art History in Florence ...... 100 (1999/C 325/136) P-0283/99 by Claude Desama to the Commission Subject: European identity card ...... 101 (1999/C 325/137) P-0289/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Protection for the European granite industry ...... 101 (1999/C 325/138) E-0298/99 by Kenneth Coates to the Commission Subject: Private prisons ...... 102 (1999/C 325/139) E-0303/99 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: Recognition of honorary European citizens ...... 103 (1999/C 325/140) E-0305/99 by David Bowe to the Commission Subject: Eco-Label Regulation ...... 103 (1999/C 325/141) E-0315/99 by Patricia McKenna to the Commission Subject: BSE cases in Ireland ...... 104 (1999/C 325/142) E-0321/99 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Beef and veal exports from the EU ...... 104 (1999/C 325/143) E-0322/99 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Investment in the pigmeat sector in Ireland ...... 105 (1999/C 325/144) E-0323/99 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Price of lamb and sheepmeat ...... 105 (1999/C 325/145) E-0329/99 by Alexander Falconer to the Commission Subject: Costs of EU information services ...... 106 (1999/C 325/146) E-0330/99 by Alexander Falconer to the Commission Subject: Costs of EU information services ...... 106 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/147) E-0333/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Plan for the construction of a port on the island of Ginostra ...... 107 (1999/C 325/148) E-0344/99 by Ursula Schleicher to the Commission Subject: Environmental protection in respect of specific products ...... 108 (1999/C 325/149) E-0347/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Restructuring of the Greek postal service ...... 108 (1999/C 325/150) E-0348/99 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Operational Programme on the modernisation of the public administration in Greece ...... 109 (1999/C 325/151) P-0354/99 by Marco Formentini to the Commission Subject: Irregularities in allocating grants for Structural Fund objectives in the region of Liguria ...... 110 (1999/C 325/152) P-0355/99 by Giacomo Leopardi to the Commission Subject: Numerus clausus for dentistry degree courses in Italy ...... 110 (1999/C 325/153) P-0356/99 by Luigi Florio to the Commission Subject: Violation of the freedom of companies in Italy ...... 111 (1999/C 325/154) P-0357/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Privatisation of the Rome milk marketing board ...... 112 (1999/C 325/155) E-0362/99 by Esko Seppänen to the Commission Subject: Human rights in Latvia ...... 112 (1999/C 325/156) E-0364/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: New experiments in training and employment ...... 113 (1999/C 325/157) E-0370/99 by Edgar Schiedermeier to the Commission Subject: Measures to combat social exclusion (promoting actions relating to the family and children) ...... 114 (1999/C 325/158) E-0416/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Rights of Greenlanders and Danes ...... 114 (1999/C 325/159) E-0417/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Free movement of Greenlanders in the EU and the EEA ...... 114 (1999/C 325/160) E-0443/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: EU-Morocco Fisheries Agreement and cooperation relations ...... 115 (1999/C 325/161) P-0462/99 by Peter Skinner to the Commission Subject: Export of hazardous waste in the form of obsolete ships ...... 116 (1999/C 325/162) E-0466/99 by Georg Jarzembowski to the Commission Subject: Abandoned building project for a further training centre in Agios Dimitrios, Pelion, Greece ...... 116 (1999/C 325/163) P-0471/99 by Gaetano Carrozzo to the Commission Subject: EU footwear imports and infringement of Community directives ...... 117 (1999/C 325/164) E-0490/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: Preventive measures at work ...... 117 (1999/C 325/165) P-0492/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Inclusion in the budget of public aid used to subsidise the electricity sector’s transition costs ...... 118 (1999/C 325/166) P-0499/99 by Pierluigi Castagnetti to the Commission Subject: Humanitarian representations and gesture of solidarity in support of Edwin Husovic, a Bosnian student at the Nobili Industrial Technology Institute, Reggio Emilia, Italy ...... 119 (1999/C 325/167) E-0520/99 by Rainer Wieland to the Commission Subject: Planned prohibition of the advertising of such products as alcohol, sweets, military toys and fast cars .... 120 (1999/C 325/168) E-0556/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: Young people’s addiction to games machines ...... 121 (1999/C 325/169) E-0577/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Proposal to include city police among the high-risk groups ...... 121 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/170) P-0584/99 by Giacomo Santini to the Commission Subject: Freedom to practise medicine in France ...... 122 (1999/C 325/171) E-0585/99 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Non-Italian EU nationals lecturing in Italy ...... 122 (1999/C 325/172) P-0598/99 by Ilona Graenitz to the Commission Subject: Closure of the Bohunice, Kosloduj and Ignalina nuclear power stations ...... 123 (1999/C 325/173) P-0605/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Clashes between farmers and the police ...... 124 (1999/C 325/174) E-0657/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 124 (1999/C 325/175) E-0658/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 125 (1999/C 325/176) E-0659/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 125 (1999/C 325/177) E-0660/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 125 (1999/C 325/178) E-0661/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 126 (1999/C 325/179) E-0662/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 126 (1999/C 325/180) E-0663/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 126 (1999/C 325/181) E-0664/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 127 (1999/C 325/182) E-0665/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 127 (1999/C 325/183) E-0666/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 127 (1999/C 325/184) E-0667/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 128 (1999/C 325/185) E-0668/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 128 (1999/C 325/186) E-0669/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 128 (1999/C 325/187) E-0670/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 129 (1999/C 325/188) E-0671/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 129 (1999/C 325/189) E-0672/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 129 (1999/C 325/190) E-0673/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 130 (1999/C 325/191) E-0674/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 130 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 325/192) E-0675/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 130 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0657/99, E-0658/99, E-0659/99, E-0660/99, E-0661/99, E-0662/99, E-0663/99, E-0664/99, E-0665/99, E-0666/99, E-0667/99, E-0668/99, E-0669/99, E-0670/99, E-0671/99, E-0672/99, E-0673/99, E-0674/99 and E-0675/99 ...... 131 (1999/C 325/193) E-0696/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 131 (1999/C 325/194) E-0748/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: EC development aid to countries of South Asia ...... 131 (1999/C 325/195) E-0793/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Freedom of treatment ...... 132 (1999/C 325/196) E-0957/99 by Willy De Clercq to the Commission Subject: Free movement of workers ...... 132 (1999/C 325/197) E-0974/99 by Nelly Maes to the Commission Subject: Failure to apply the right of freedom of movement for workers to foreign language lettori at Italian universities 132 (1999/C 325/198) E-0978/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Discrimination against foreign-language lecturers at Italian universities ...... 133 (1999/C 325/199) E-1053/99 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Foreign language lectors in Italy ...... 133 (1999/C 325/200) P-1161/99 by Winifred Ewing to the Commission Subject: Europe that puts citizens first ...... 133 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0957/99, E-0974/99, E-0978/99, E-1053/99 and P-1161/99 ...... 134 (1999/C 325/201) E-1026/99 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Pesticide Lindane ...... 134 (1999/C 325/202) P-1051/99 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen to the Commission Subject: Discrimination against foreign construction companies in Germany ...... 134

EN 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/1

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(1999/C 325/001) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2312/98

by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Directive 93/42/EEC

On the 15 June 1998 Directive 93/42/EEC (1) concerning medical devices came into force. The Italian government’s interpretation of this legislation as regards its application to opticians is as follows: ‘the legislation in question does not apply to those carrying out the auxiliary profession of optician’ (ministry of health circular of 12.6.98), which completely contradicts the ministry’s earlier interpretation. The auxiliary medical profession of optician is perfectly compatible with the above directive because opticians entirely match the description of ‘manufacturer’ in that they are professional technicians who produce only tailor- made devices with a view to their being placed on the market under their own name. All countries except for Belgium have interpreted Directive 93/42/EEC as covering opticians by virtue of their manufacturing or assembly activities.

Does the Commission consider it necessary to take steps in order to press for the Italian government to adopt an interpretation of Directive 93/42/EEC that is more in accordance with its content?

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993, p. 1.

Supplementary answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 1999)

An optician’s professional activity is to prepare and assemble, under his own responsibility, corrective lenses on a suitable frame, as prescribed by a qualified practitioner for a particular person, to make the necessary adjustments and adaptations to take into account this person’s specific needs and then to place the final product at his disposal.

The period for implementing Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices came to an end on 14 June 1998. The provisions of this Directive are applied throughout the Community, and Custom-made devices fall within its scope. Insofar as opticians manufacture this type of device, they have to comply with the provisions for custom-made devices set out in the Directive, as implemented in the national law of the Member States. C 325/2 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/002) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3171/98 by Marlies Mosiek-Urbahn (PPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: EU aid for Hesse from the Social Fund and Regional Fund

Can the Commission provide information on economic and regional aid from the EU to the Federal German Land of Hesse:

1. What was the level of EU structural aid fundingreceived by this regionin 1997, broken down by fund and Community initiatives?

2. How much of this went to the agricultural sector?

3. How many jobs were created in Hesse in 1997 with the aid of economic and regional aid from the EU?

4. What EU structural aid fundingwas received by comparable regionsin other Member States of the Community in 1997?

5. How many jobs were created in comparable regions in other Member States of the Community in 1997 with the aid of economic and regional aid from the EU?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1999/C 325/003) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3175/98 by John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission

(12 October 1998)

Subject: Directive on zoonoses

By 1 September 1997 the Member States were supposed to have adopted the necessary laws and administrative provisions to comply with the directive on zoonoses. Which Member States met this requirement or have in the meantime done so?

What action has the Commission taken to discharge its duty to ensure implementation of EU rules in those Member States that have not satisfied this requirement?

By 1 November 1997 the Commission was supposed to have submitted to the Council a report accompanied by appropriate proposals for combatingzoonoses. Why has it not complied with this provision?

When does it intend to submit the report and proposals?

By 1 January 1998 the Member States were supposed to have implemented the minimum measures laid down in the directive on zoonoses. Which Member States met this requirement or have in the meantime done so? What action has the Commission taken to discharge its duty to ensure implementation of EU rules in those Member States that have not satisfied this requirement?

By 1 March 1998 the Member States were supposed to have submitted to the Commission a plan settingout the national measures which they have implemented or intend to implement in order to achieve the objectives laid down in the directive on zoonoses. Which Member States met this requirement or have in the meantime done so? What action has the Commission taken to discharge its duty to ensure implementation of EU rules in those Member States that have not satisfied this requirement? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/3

By 31 December 1998 at the latest, the Commission should have taken a decision on third countries’ plans indicating the guarantees provided by those countries with regard to monitoring of zoonoses; if no decision is taken concerninga third country, that country is suspended from the Community list of countries allowed to export to the EU. With what third countries has a decision been taken? Does the Commission intend to respect the deadline for all third countries?

Zoonoses are one of the gravest threats to public health in the EU: how many people have fallen ill in the individual Member States from zoonoses and from which ones, and how many people have died from zoonoses and from which ones?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

The Commission has followed attentively the implementation of Directive 97/22/EC (1) to which the Honourable Member refers and which amended Council 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’) (2). As from the expiry of the period allowed to Member States for transposition, the Commission opened infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty against the 11 Member States which had not discharged their obligation. At present France, Italy and the Netherlands have not yet adopted the implementation measures but, accordingto information available to the Commission, the publication of the necessary national texts is imminent.

The Commission has held a number of consultations with interested parties concerninga review of the zoonoses directive. These consultations indicate that establishingsolid rules for controllingzoonoses is a complex issue and requires in depth scientific assessment. Due to the restructuringof the Commission services it has been difficult to allocate enough resources to this important area. A revision of Directive 92/117/EEC within the time limit prescribed by Directive 97/22/EC has therefore not been possible. The Commission will therefore present shortly a proposal in order to grant more time for the Commission to complete its work. The Commission expects that the report and subsequent proposal will be ready in 2000.

Accordingto Article 10(1) of Directive 92/117/EEC the Member States shall implement as from 1 January 1998 the minimum measures laid down for salmonella control in poultry breedingflocks. Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, Luxembourg, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom have fulfilled this requirement. Infringement proceedings are under way against those Member States which have not yet sent their notifications.

Accordingto Article 8(1) of Directive 92/117/EEC the Member States shall submit their national measures taken to achieve the objectives of the Directive in respect of the zoonoses listed in Annex I, points I and II. Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom have communicated their measures. However, pendinga fundamental review of the zoonoses directive the Commission has not deemed it necessary to begin any action against the Member States which have not communicated their measures.

Accordingto Article 14 of Directive 92/117/EEC third countries should submit a plan givingdetails 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. The situation should mean that the trade from the third countries concerned should be stopped. However, takinginto 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, would lead to unforeseen consequences in the 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 Directive 92/117/EEC.

The data collected concerningmorbidity and mortality of zoonotic diseases givecertain information which is needed in targeting the control measures. At the current stage data collection in the Member States varies concerningseveral factors, such as case definitions and whether the reportingis based on mandatory or voluntary systems. Therefore the data available do not allow comparisons between the Member States. The Commission is forwardinga copy of the report ‘Trends and sources of zoonotic agentsin animals, feeding stuff, food and man in the European Union in 1996’ to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general C 325/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

of the Parliament. The report includes data on cases of selected zoonotic infections in man in the Member States in 1996. No data are available on how many people died.

The reporting system referred above is based on Article 5 of the Directive 92/11/EEC. An analysis will begin in 1999 of the Member States’ monitoring systems on zoonoses in animals and in humans. Recently, the Parliament and the Council adopted the Decision setting up the Community network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases (2119/98/EC (3)). Together these databases, in addition to those collected at national level and in other international organisations, such as WHO, will serve as important tools in gathering the surveillance data and assisting the control of zoonoses. The accuracy and the comparability of the data should be increased in order to allow more precise evaluation of trends and sources of zoonoses.

(1) OJ L 22, 30.4.1997. (2) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993. (3) OJ L 268, 3.10.1998.

(1999/C 325/004) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3333/98

by Roberto Mezzaroma (PPE) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Culture

The Italian press has reported that degree courses at Italian universities are to be harmonized and made equivalent to those in other countries, in particular an initial course lasting three years and called a ‘first degree course’ and a one-year postgraduate specialization course corresponding to a European Master’s degree course.

Can the Commission say how this equivalence is to be achieved and how long it will take, and can it also say whether there is a specific project for this purpose and how it is being structured?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 1999)

The Commission assumes that the article in the Italian press refers to the joint declaration on the harmonisation of the European higher education systems signed in Paris on 25 May 1998 by the higher education ministers of Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom on the occasion of the 800th anniversary of the Sorbonne.

The declaration underlines the exciting prospect of an open higher education area. To create this, various obstacles need to be demolished and a common education framework developed, although national differences must be respected. The declaration also indicates that a system appears to be emerging in which two main phases undergraduate and postgraduate should be recognised in order to facilitate international comparison and equivalence.

The Commission welcomes this declaration. However, as the organisation of higher education comes under the responsibility of the Member States, the Commission merely announced that it was at the Member States’ disposal to share the experience it has acquired in the context of these European programmes and facilitate the exchange of information.

The education ministers of the Member States concerned are planning another meeting in 1999, open to other Member States, to examine in greater depth the subjects covered by the declaration. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/5

(1999/C 325/005) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3336/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Experiments with the release of genetically modified plants into the environment and the ‘placing on the market’ of such plants

1. The people of Rauischolzhausen in the district of Marburg-Biedenkopf, Germany, have questioned the legality / in the light of recent case law in other federal Länder (Administrative Court of Appeal, Berlin 2S 9.97) / of the experiments carried out in their locality with the release of genetically of modified plants into the environment. What opportunities do citizens affected by such release have to take legal action against it?

2. The people of Rauischolzhausen also question the legality of the ‘placing on the market’ of genetically modified plants by the Giessen University Plant Growing and Breeding Institute. What opportunities do citizens affected by such actions have to take legal action against them?

3. Were the experiments with release into the environment carried out so far in Rauischolzhausen properly authorised? If so, what was the legal basis for this authorisation, and how is the relevant legal text worded?

4. Has the present ‘placing on the market’ of genetically modified plants been properly authorised? If so, what was the legal basis for this authorisation, and how is the relevant legal text worded?

5. What dangers are there for humans and animals in experiments with the release of genetically modified plants into the environment and their ‘placing on the market’?

6. What consequences, changes and damage will result, in the vicinity of genetically modified oilseed rape, for:

/ plants,

/ the water table

/ the air, and

/ the soil?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 1999)

1. to 4. Council Directive 90/220/EEC (1) on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) lays down in Part B the provisions for undertaking a deliberate release of GMOs for research and development purposes. Part C regulates the placing on the market of products consisting of or containing GMOs.

According to information supplied by the German authorities the release experiments mentioned by the Honourable Member make use of a genetically modified herbicide-resistant swede-rape line, for which consent for placing on the market was granted already in 1996 (2). According to Article 13(5) of the Directive, once a product has received consent, it may ‘be used without further notification throughout the Community in so far as the specific conditions of use and the environments and/or geographical areas stipulated in these conditions are strictly adhered to’.

The Court decision mentioned by the Honourable Member is linked to an experimental Part B deliberate release experiment and is not related to the experiments described above. The Administrative court of appeal Berlin confirmed the legality of the consent for a national deliberate release experiment given by the German authorities.

5. and 6. According to Article 4 of the Directive the Member States shall ‘ensure that all appropriate measures are taken to avoid adverse effects to human health and the environment which might arise from the deliberate release of GMOs’. Deliberate releases of genetically modified organisms as or in products are only authorised following a thorough risk assessment. A comprehensive risk assessment takes into account all the issues set out by the Honourable Member under point 6 including any direct or indirect effect related to a release of GMOs. Accordingly consent for placing on the market of GMOs is only granted if there is no reason C 325/6 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

to believe that there will be any adverse effect on human health and the environment. This is in accordance with the precautionary principle as set out in Article 130 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJL 117, 8.5.1990. (2) OJL 37, 15.2.1996.

(1999/C 325/006) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3353/98 by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Cross-fertilisation of transgenic crops with related non-transgenic food crops

Is the Commission aware of the possibility that field experiments can be conducted with transgenic crops in which use is made of gene constructs that might well represent a potential danger to human health if consumed?

Is the Commission aware of the possibility that such gene constructs could accidentally find their way into related non-transgenic food crops by way of cross-fertilisation?

Will the Commission propose measures as part of the review of Directive 90/220 (1) that will prevent cross- fertilization at the stage of field experiments for as long as any uncertainty remains concerning the food-safety of the relevant gene construct and the expression products in different varieties?

(1) OJL 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) lays down the provisions for undertaking a deliberate release of GMOs for research and development purposes (field experiments). Under the Directive the Member States have a duty to ensure that all appropriate measures are taken to avoid adverse effects to human health and the environment which might arise from the deliberate release of GMOs.

Deliberate releases for research and development purposes of genetically modified organisms are only authorised following a thorough risk assessment. In accordance with the Directive the risk assessment takes into account all the issues mentioned by the Honourable Member. Consents for the release of GMOs are only granted if there is no reason to believe that there will be any adverse effects on human health and the environment. If it is deemed necessary from the risk assessment to require measures to minimise gene transfer, such as an isolation distance, these are made a condition of the consent.

Since 1986 the Commission has spent ECU 31 million on biosafety research, which has addressed the potential risks for human health and the environment with regard to GMOs. The results from this research indicate that the technology of genetic modification is not inherently dangerous. Any risks arising from the application of the technology depend upon the characteristics introduced into the plant. The data from that research will contribute to the scientific basis required for a full and sufficient risk assessment of GMOs.

Article 4 (3) requires the authorities to organise inspections and other control measures to ensure compliance with the Directive and consents issued under the Directive.

The Commission proposal for amending Directive 90/220/EEC (1) aims to maintain the high standards for a complete risk assessment for deliberate releases in order to ensure safety for the environment and human health. It also aims to harmonise the risk assessment and increase efficiency and transparency in order to build up long term confidence in the regulatory system with the public.

(1) COM(98) 85 final. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/7

(1999/C 325/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3355/98

by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Guaranteed consumer choice of products free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

Does the Commission agree:

1. That free consumer choice must be guaranteed by ensuring a supply of foodstuffs produced without the deliberate use of GMOs;

2. That products bearing the ECOquality symbol must as yet continue to be GMO-freeto avoid confusing consumers;

3. That there must be reliable monitoring of GMO-free product claims; can the Commission state how it intends to conduct any such monitoring operation?

4. That the costs arising from organisation and monitoring must not be passed on to sectors that have no intention of using GMOs, in particular the biological sector.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

The Commission agrees that it is desirable that consumers retain a free choice between foodstuffs produced with and without the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Current Community legislation in the area of authorisation of products consisting of, containing or derived from GMOs does not impose any restrictions on the free choice of economic operators to use, or not to use, approved products for the purposes for which they have been authorised.

However, the Community’s labelling policy for foodstuffs is expected to facilitate the development of market segments which are differentiated according to whether or not genetically modified products have been used. The Honourable Member is referred to the answer the Commission gave to her Written Question E-3354/ 98 (1) for an overview of the state of work on implementing Regulation (EC) 1139/98 concerning the labelling of foods and food ingredients produced from genetically modified soya and maize (2).

Voluntary label claims are in general permitted on condition that they respect the requirements of Directive 79/112/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs (3). Thus, voluntary label claims must be truthful, based on objective criteria and should not mislead the consumers. This possibility for voluntary label claims is explicitly recalled in current Community law laying down mandatory label requirements for GMOproduce ( 2)(4).

In light of the Agriculture Council held on 14-15 December 1998, it appears likely that final adoption of a Council regulation to amend the existing Community framework for organic production of agricultural products (Regulation (EEC) 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (5)) could occur early in 1999 and thus establish the principle of a prohibition on the use of genetic modification technology in organic farming.

The Commission is currently examining the need and possibility for a Community framework intended specifically to establish more detailed standards for voluntary production and labelling of foodstuffs without use of genetically modified inputs.

(1) OJ C 289, 11.10.1999. (2) OJ L 159, 3.6.1998. (3) OJ L 33, 8.2.1979. (4) Regulation (EC) 258/97 on novel food and food ingredients (Recital 10), OJ L 43, 14.2.1997. (5) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991. C 325/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3372/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Crisis affecting the pigmeat and pigskin processing industry in the EU

The financial instability in Russia has resulted in numerous problems for pigmeat and pigskin processing enterprises trading with Russia. In the past five years, the total value of food products purchased by Russia from EU undertakings increased fourfold so that EU exports increased from PTA 218 000 million in 1992 to PTA 880 000 million in 1997.

As a result of the devaluation of the Rouble due to the financial crisis, companies which had made large investments in order to be able to meet the demand from the Russian market can no longer maintain the volume of exports to Russia and are thus incurring severe financial losses.

In view of the possible consequences in terms of plant closures and concomitant job losses, does the Commission plan to intervene in any way to alleviate the temporary effects on these companies of the closure of the Russian border as a result of the crisis?

Does the Commission not consider it necessary to adopt measures to allow the undertakings concerned to renegotiate loans or to take up special loans to help them overcome this financial slump?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

The exports of pigmeat from the Community to Russia have increased rapidly over the last few years, and in 1997 they amounted to 359 000 tonnes (product weight). In the first half of 1998 exports were still increasing, but were sharply reduced in August after a financial crisis hit the Russian economy. Since then the exports seem to be recovering slowly.

The rapid reduction in exports to Russia increased the pressure on the Community pigmeat market, which was already experiencing very low prices.

The Commission has taken several measures to help the European pig industry overcome the difficult situation. On 28 September 1998 the Commission introduced an aid for a private storage scheme (over 60 000 tonnes have been taken to the scheme during the first two months). In October the export refunds were raised for fresh and frozen products. In November, the Commission made an extra increase for the refunds with Russian destination (from ECU 40 to 70 per 100 kilograms for carcasses and certain cuts).

Also in November, the Commission agreed on a food supply programme to Russia, which includes 100 000 tonnes of pigmeat.

These measures should help the European pig industry to re-enter the Russian markets.

(1999/C 325/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3375/98 by Quinídio Correia (PSE)to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Afforestation and woodland maintenance grants

According to information contained in the explanatory statement of the report A4-0346/98 of 30 September 1998, the Autonomous Region of Madeira is said to have received the highest afforestation and woodland maintenance grants of all EU countries, amounting to ECU 6 000 per hectare per year. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/9

The Commission:

1. Can it confirm the accuracy of these statements, which the report attributes to outside sources in the industry?

2. How many hectares have received grants under Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 (1) instituting a Community aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture, and can the Commission provide a full list of the beneficiaries?

3. How have the grants in question been implemented on the spot?

4. In what way have the regional authorities been involved in observing and monitoring their implementation?

(1) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992, p. 96.

Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

1. Under Council Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 it falls to Member States to implement the aid scheme for afforestation of agricultural land by means of multiannual programmes setting maximum eligible amounts for the aid granted. The Community part-financing rate set by the Regulation is 75 % in Objective 1 zones.

For afforestation aid the multiannual programme for Madeira adopted by a Commission Decision of 27 March 1994 provides reimbursement at 100 % for operations by groupings or public entities and at 90 % for those of other recipients. The maximum eligible amounts set by the Portuguese authorities were €3 000 per hectare for conifers and €4 000 per hectare for broadleafs and mixed plantations at least 75 % broadleaf. These were the maxima allowed by the Regulation for eligibility for Community part-financing.

The Portuguese authorities have confirmed that the Madeiran programme is being implemented in line with the provisions laid down. No aid has been granted in excess of the maximum of €4 000 per hectare, hence no Community part-financing payment can have exceeded that amount. The Commission has no knowledge of the content of Parliament report A4k-0346/98 of 30 September 1998 mentioning aid in Madeira of €6 000 per hectare.

2. Only one project in Madeira has been aided under Regulation (EEC) 2080/92. The recipient is the Polyclinic in Santa Cruz. So far 0,85 hectares have been planted with conifers (Cryptomeria) and broadleafs (Quercus) at a cost of €3 096 per hectare.

3. The Commission has not been informed exactly how the aid granted for the project has been used on the spot.

4. Monitoring of project implementation by the regional authorities falls to the Regional Forests Directorate, which regularly inspects each project eligible for a premium for maintenance or compensation of income loss. The Directorate keeps the Instituto Financeiro des Apoio ao Desenvolvimento da Agricultura e Pescas informed of the state of projects.

(1999/C 325/010) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3400/98 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Specific gene research

Can the European Commission promote specific gene research under the European Programme for Research and Development? C 325/10 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Under the fourth framework programme (1994-1998) the Commission supported genetics research under numerous specific programmes including Life Sciences and Technologies,International Cooperation,Human Capital,Standards,Information Technology and BRITE-Euram (Industrial and material technologies). The research relates to the genetics of many different living organisms including microbes,plants,farm animals and man. The research aims to enhance frontier biological knowledge,to improve health care and medicine, and to strengthen the scientific and technological bases of Community industry.

This type of research will be strongly enhanced under several thematic programmes of the fifth framework programme but particularly in the key actions and activities of a generic nature of theme 1 relating to quality of life and management of living resources. The objectives of this research will be to meet key socio-economic needs in the areas of health and food,control of infectious diseases,cell factory and sustainable agriculture, fisheries and forestry.

Gene research has also been introduced in the specific part of the framework programme that defines the activities of the Joint research centre. The objective is to assist the European legislative framework. The Institute for health and consumer protection (IHCP) in Ispra is mainly developing analytical methods to contribute to the detection of genetically modified organisms. The Institute for prospective technological studies (IPTS) in Seville analyses the socio-economic impacts of life sciences in general and is in particular involved in the assessment of biotechnology and genetic engineering. IPTS studies focus on the relevance and impacts of genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms on European policy areas. The main areas of interest are health care technologies and genetically modified crops.

(1999/C 325/011) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3417/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Rare diseases

At last,the subject of rare diseases and ‘orphan’ drugs is being discussed at European level. Few people realise that rare diseases (such as rheumatoid arthritis,lupus eritematosus,etc.) are actually well-known diseases despite their low incidence.

Does the Commission agree that it would be appropriate to conduct a comparative study of the situation in the various Member States on the basis of which to launch a series of joint initiatives to address all the scientific and social issues involved?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

The Commission communication and proposal for a public health action programme 1999-2003 on rare diseases (1),aimed to provide knowledge about rare diseases especially for patients,health professionals and researchers; to establish,foster and strengthen voluntary organisations involved in supporting people directly or indirectly affected by rare diseases; and to ensure an efficient handling of the problem of clusters,which is of key importance for rare diseases.

The proposal is still under the codecision procedure (conciliation). Subject to approval by Council and Parliament,the Commission will be in a position to start implementation of the programme in 1999,as foreseen in its proposal. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/11

The Commission was unable to conduct in 1998 a comparative study of the situation in Member States concerning rare diseases since execution of budget line B3-4304 (health and wellbeing) was blocked by the budgetary authority as regards preparatory actions on rare diseases.

(1) COM(97) 225 final.

(1999/C 325/012) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3481/98 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD)to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Transport of animals

The Commission has submitted to the Council a number of proposals for amendments concerning the transport of live farm animals for periods of up to 24 hours, when journeys of eight hours are currently the rule. Such long journey times are incomprehensible, because long journeys can easily be avoided and because livestock are now less able to withstand being transported than they used to be when they had more exercise. There is no reason for long journey times either for animals kept for production or for breeding stock. Frozen sperm for insemination purposes and frozen ova are the alternative to transporting live breeding stock. Battery hens have such fragile bones that they cannot be moved at all without their legs or wings being broken. Tethered sows also suffer very badly. Horses, pigs and calves suffer from stress when transported. Owing to the high cost of lairage, space is used so as to obtain the maximum financial return, and animals have very little freedom of movement. This ought to mean that permitted journey times are reduced so as to prevent unnecessary suffering. On-farm killing of animals is now a technical possibility, and the aim must be to end the transport of live farm animals altogether.

How does the Commission justify these amendments relating to journey times for live animals, and will it work towards abolishing the transport of live animals altogether?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The proposals drafted by the Commission for submission to the Council are based on scientific evidence. There are in principle no differences in needs between animals transported for slaughter and those transported for other purposes, like breeding and fattening. The scientific information does not provide evidence for a ban on transport of animals designated for slaughter. What is important is that the conditions in which animals are transported comply with the needs of the animals.

The present Community standards will, when correctly enforced in practice, improve the welfare of the animals.

General slaughtering of animals on the farm is not allowed from an animal welfare, animal health and public health point of view. In this context it is important to take into account the need of special equipment and facilities and skills of those involved in slaughtering animals.

The Commission agrees that there are alternatives to transport of live animals, like transport of meat, semen, ova and embryos. Community legislation has been established in these areas.

(1999/C 325/013) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3483/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the operational programme on industry

The Second Community Support Framework for Greece contains the operational programme on industry which seeks to promote a steady improvement in the competitiveness of undertakings and the mutually C 325/12 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

beneficial interaction of competitiveness and development; it has a total public budget endowment of ECU 1 188 million. This programme comprises the following subprogrammes: 1. Infrastructures; 2. Promotion of private investment; 3. Modernization of undertakings; 4. Small and medium-sized undertakings; 5. Human resources; and 6. Implementation of the programme.

Given that the subprogrammes have been running since 1994, will the Commission say:

1. What is the state of progress and take-up rate of funding for each of the subprogrammes?

2. What is the take-up rate specifically for: a) subprogramme 1, measure 1.1, measure 1.2 2 action 1.2.2, measure 1.4 and 1.5; b) subprogramme 3, measure 3.3; and c) subprogramme 4, measure 4.2?

3. Where there have been delays in take-up, what are the chief causes of these delays?

4. In the recent review of the Second CSF for Greece, were any changes made to the above programme and, if so, what was the scale of these changes and which actions were affected?

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

(28 January 1999)

On 1 December 1998, out of the overall Community contribution for the ‘industry’ operational programme in the Greek Community Support Framework (CSF) for the period 1994-99 76 % had been committed and 55 % paid out.

At the end of September 1998 the national funding committed for each subprogramme was 74 % for subprogramme 1 (infrastructure), 80 % for subprogramme 2 (private investment), 75 % for subprogramme 3 (modernisation of undertakings), 80 % for subprogramme 4 (small and medium-sized enterprises), 65 % for subprogramme 5 (human resources) and 75 % for subprogramme 6 (implementation), with an average 78,8 % committed for the programme as a whole.

It is hoped that all national funding for the programme will have been committed by the end of 1998, except for the human resources subprogramme where national funding is to be committed during 1999.

The monitoring committee for the programme will meet in March to incorporate the latest decisions by the CSF committee. Transfers between subprogrammes and measures cannot be ruled out but should not affect the key aims, namely the modernisation of undertakings and of industrial infrastructure, quality policy and strengthening the fabric of small and medium-sized enterprises. New environment and equal opportunities measures are in preparation.

(1999/C 325/014) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3484/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Generalised system of immunity for Europol agents

The Europol Convention, which entered into force on 1 October 1998, establishes a new body responsible for cooperation between the police forces of the 15 Member States of the European Union in the area of the collection and analysis of information about crimes such as drug trafficking, money laundering, illegal immigration and terrorism. The agreement includes a Protocol on the privileges and immunities of Europol staff, which is a source of concern. Article 8 of the Protocol states that staff are to enjoy immunity from legal process of any kind in respect of words spoken or written, and of acts performed by them, in the exercise of their official functions and that this immunity is to continue after staff have ceased to be employed by Europol.

Can the Commission say:

2 whether it considers that these provisions might constitute a threat to citizens’ fundamental freedoms and rights, given that all decisions on exemptions and waiving the near-total immunity of staff are to be taken by Europol itself and its Director; 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/13

whether the provisions of the Protocol, which also grant immunity from legal process in respect of the arrangements for collecting and processing data which may have been acquired by unauthorised means, are in danger of contravening the laws on privacy and data protection;

and lastly, whether it regards concern about the lack of proper democratic scrutiny of this new organisation as justified, given that, in common with many other Community structures, it has been set up on the basis of an intergovernmental agreement and is therefore not likely to be subject to supervision by institutions such as Parliament.

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 1999)

Article 41 (1) of the Europol Convention states that the members of Europol’s organs, its deputy directors and employees shall enjoy the privileges and immunities necessary for the performance of their tasks in accordance with a protocol setting out the rules to be applied in all Member States. Pursuant to paragraph 3 of the same Article, the protocol is to be drawn up by the Council by unanimous vote according to the procedure laid down in Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, and adopted by the Member States in accordance with their various constitutional provisions.

The Commission considers that neither the provisions of the protocol in general nor the provisions of Article 8 of the protocol constitute a threat to citizens’ fundamental freedoms and rights. The practice of granting immunity from legal process to international and intergovernmental organisations is well established under international law. A wide range of international organisations has been granted such immunity. In this context, the most relevant example in the field of law enforcement is Interpol, which has also been granted similar immunity.

Furthermore, the Commission notes that the provisions of the protocol which grant immunity from legal process in respect of the arrangements for collecting and processing data are not in danger of contravening the laws on privacy and data protection. In this context, the Europol Convention provides in its Titles II to IV (Articles 7 to 25) very comprehensive provisions for the collection, storage, utilisation and processing of data and the establishment of data systems. According to Article 14of the Europol Convention, each Member State had to take the necessary measures in relation to the processing of personal data in data files in the framework of the Europol Convention to ensure a standard of data protection which at least corresponds to the standard resulting from the implementation of the principles of the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981, and, in doing so, taking account of Recommendation No R (87) 15 of the committee of ministers of the Council of Europe of 17 September 1987 concerning the use of personal data in the police sector. Europol has to take account in the same way of the two above-mentioned regulations in the collection, processing and utilisation of personal data. In addition to this, Article 24of the Europol Convention provides for the joint supervisory body. This independent body has the task of reviewing the activities of Europol in order to ensure that the rights of the individual are not violated by the storage, processing and utilisation of the data held by Europol.

On the subject of democratic scrutiny of Europol the Commission recalls that in line with Article 34of the Europol Convention, the Council Presidency shall each year forward a special report to the Parliament on the work of Europol.

(1999/C 325/015) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3514/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Globalization and the Information Society

With reference to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Globalization and the Information Society The need for strengthened international coordination (COM(98) 50 final), it should be pointed out that the legal framework covering electronic communication as a whole is vast and concerns a number of different aspects: the application of VAT, conflict of jurisdiction and laws, labour law, copyright, protection of data and of the markets, consumer rights, validity of contracts, protection against fraud and crime, the problem of the content of communications, especially with regard to the protection of minors, etc. C 325/14 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

There is a need for European rules because 90 % of trade is intra-Community.

Can the Commission therefore endeavour to ensure that the legal framework is drafted realistically, given that the more detailed it is the less likely it is to be recognised outside the Community, and that in other words the rules should do no more than lay down basic universally acceptable principles?

(1999/C 325/016) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3515/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Globalization and the Information Society

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 0 Globalization and the Information Society 0 The need for strengthened international coordination (COM(98) 50 final), the Commission mentions, in connection with access to the market, the significant obstacle of the high cost of telecommunications, whilst recognising that considerable price reductions have occurred as a result of falling costs and greater competition.

Whilst it is not the task of the authorities to regulate prices, which must be left to the interaction of free market forces, can the Commission endeavour to ensure compliance with the principles of transparency (including inter alia the ability to compare prices and services) and of the provisions governing competition and dominant positions?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3514/98 and E-3515/98 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

All markets need rules of the game in order to function effectively. The electronic marketplace is no exception. A clear and stable regulatory environment will enable businesses to exploit new market opportunities and generate trust and confidence in this new medium for consumers. In principle, there should be no discrimination between off-line and on-line regimes. Public authorities need to remove or update old rules where they create undue barriers to market developments, and need to set up new rules where a legal vacuum gives rise to uncertainty. Governments increasingly have to acknowledge that where voluntary codes of conduct or technological solutions developed by businesses and users prove to be effective, it may be unnecessary to introduce regulations.

In a global electronic marketplace where services do not stop at frontiers, national or regional rules can no longer be introduced in isolation if they are to be correctly enforced. Similarly, conflicting national rules will create uncertainty. The borderless nature of the Internet means that any internal solution within the Community should take into account this global dimension. Currently, 90 % of trade in the Community is intra-Community. However, growth of electronic commerce is likely to give rise to an increase in the proportion of extra-Community trade. Consumers will increasingly be comfortable buying on-line from foreign providers. This points to the need to build consensus on guidelines at a global level as underlined in the communication on globalisation and the information society (1).

This is not to say that securing the internal market for electronic commerce is a secondary goal. In fact, solving the trans-national problems inherent in guaranteeing the free movement of services throughout the internal market places the Community in a strong position to lead discussions at international level.

The need to take the global dimension into account in the policy-making process can already be seen in the Community. For instance, even where international guidelines exist, for example the Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD) guidelines on privacy, European-wide regulation may be required to fill in gaps or to provide a higher level of protection. On the other hand, the proposed directive on electronic signatures (2) foresees cooperation mechanisms with third countries to ensure the mutual recognition of certificates under strict conditions. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/15

The creation of a sound and stable Europe-wide regulatory environment for electronic commerce reinforced by the introduction of the euro will provide European companies with a major competitive advantage in the global electronic marketplace. In April 1997, the Commission adopted a communication on a European initiative in electronic commerce (3) which outlines key measures which are still needed to boost the growth of electronic commerce in Europe. These regulatory and accompanying measures are to be implemented by the year 2000. At regulatory level, the required directives have now been tabled by the Commission (4). It is hoped that they will make speedy progress through the Parliament and the Council in order to meet these deadlines.

In general, the approach has been to generate more certainty in the market by removing obstacles to the free flow of services throughout the internal market and, where appropriate, to encourage the implementation of self-regulatory codes of conduct. This means that companies established in the Community wishing to order goods or sell services by electronic means in the Community will have to comply with the legislation of only one Member State, rather than 15 different sets of rules.

The Community must also continue to participate actively within international fora in order to arrive at globally agreed regulatory principles. This requires strengthened international cooperation in policy-making, not only between governments and international organisations, but increasingly among the global business community. Therefore initiatives such as the Bonn conference, the World trade organisation (WTO) work programme on electronic commerce, the OECD ministerial conference, as well as the creation of the global business dialogue, following the round table meeting with global business leaders organised by the Commission in June 1998, should be welcomed.

(1) COM(98) 50 final. (2) OJ C 325, 23.10.1998. (3) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the Parliament and the Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the regions 4 A European initiative in electronic commerce 4 COM(97) 157. (4) COM(97) 628 final, OJ L 144, 4.6.1997, OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, OJ L 24, 30.1.1998.

(1999/C 325/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3531/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Transport of breeding animals to third countries

Within the EU a strict distinction is made between breeding cows and cows for slaughter. This distinction has an impact on payments granted by the Union.

On the subject of aid payments:

1. What national bodies are responsible for issuing breeding cow certificates; what is the appropriate body in Austria?

2. What authorisation does this institution have and from what Community institutions does it receive instructions, and to which ones must it report?

3. What criteria are used to distinguish between breeding cows and cows for slaughter?

4. What monitoring facilities does the EU have for checking the age of cows for slaughtering and hence the level of aid?

5. Is it possible, in theory, to circumvent or abuse these criteria?

6. If so, what action has the Commission taken to prevent such circumvention?

7. Is it possible for breeding cows issued with a certificate in Austria to be exported to third countries and used immediately for slaughtering?

8. Would this be in line with European aid criteria?

9. How does the Commission ensure that breeding animals exported from the EU are actually used for that purpose when imported into third countries? C 325/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Provisions on export refunds for pure-bred breeding animals are contained in Commission Regulation (EEC) 2342/92 on imports of pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine species from third countries and the granting of export refunds thereon (1).

1. and 2. According to Article 3 (a), the pedigree certificate shall be issued by the association, organisation or official body of the Member State keeping the herd book.

3. According to the Community legislation, a pure-bred breeding animal of the bovine species is any bovine animal the parents and grandparents of which are entered or registered in a herd-book of the same breed, and which is itself either entered or registered and eligible for entry in such a herd book. Furthermore, in accordance withAnnex III of Commission Regulation (EC) 2469/97 of 11 December 1997 amending Regulations (EEC) 1964/82 laying down the conditions for granting special export refunds on certain cuts of boned meat of bovine aniumals, (EEC) 3846/87 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds and (EC) 1445/95 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector (2), export refunds on female pure-bred breeding animals shall be subject to the presentation, in repect of each animal, at the time customs export formalities are completed, of the original and a copy of the pedigree certificate showing in particular the results of performance tests and the results of the assessment of the genetic value of the animal concerned and its parents and grandparents.

5. and 6. The control measures mentioned above were adopted in order to avoid fraud.

7. to 9. Community legislation cannot oblige a third country buyer not to slaughter a pure-bred breeding animal immediately after arrival at the third country of destination. Slaughter immediately after arrival is, however, highly unlikely since pure-bred breeding animals are high value animals and there is therefore no economic incentive for immediate slaughter. The control that the exported animal is a pure-bred breeding animal is carried out at the time customs export formalities are completed when each animal is subject to the presentation of the pedigree certificate.

Furthermore, under Article 3 (b), at the time customs export formalities are completed, there must be presented the health certificate for pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine species required by the third country of destination.

(1) OJ L 277, 11.8.1992. (2) OJ L 341, 12.12.1997.

(1999/C 325/018) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3583/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Suspension of funding for the Operational Programme on Telecommunications in Greece

In its answer to my Question H-0859/98 (1) the Commission stated that, in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of the decision on financial support for the operational programme on telecommunications, it had announced to the Greek authorities its decision to suspend payments for the above programme. Article 4 of the above decision specifically states that, in the event of a failure to respect the timetable for the transposition of certain directives, ERDF funds will be suspended. Will the Commission say whether subprogramme 5 ‘Human Resources’ in the programme on telecommunications which is funded exclusively by the ESF is affected by this suspension of payments?

(1) European Parliament debates (October 1998). 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/17

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

(28 January 1999)

As indicated in its answer to oral question H-859/98 by the Honourable Member during question time in the October 1998 part-session (1), the Commission has announced its decision to suspend payments for the operational programme on telecommunications, which forms part of the infrastructure priority in the Community Support Framework for Greece.

The training activities in subprogramme 5 are strictly tied to the infrastructure measures and new services envisaged under this operational programme. These training activities constitute a separate subprogramme for purely administrative reasons, namely to achieve better financial management under each fund. The decision to suspend payments therefore applies to any Community fund involved in financing the above operational programme.

(1)European Parliament debates (October 1998).

(1999/C 325/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3602/98 by Alessandro Danesin (PPE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Funding of public television networks

Most Member States have objected to the recent Commission (DG IV)guidelines on the funding of public television networks, especially after six private television companies (Telecinco, Mediaset, TF1, VPRT, BSkyB and Sic)reported the public networks of their respective countries to the Commission.

The charge is misuse of State aid and competition with the private networks over advertising revenue. What they are asking the Member States for is a case-by-case analysis and not the adoption of Community guidelines even though the need for greater transparency in the funding of public networks is widely recognised.

A public network is entitled to State aid either in the form of licence fees or advertising revenue but on condition that the money is used to provide a public service, in other words programmes in the public interest. But that does not happen; ultimately public TV is commercial TV to all intents and purposes, and as such ought to be considered in the same way as private TV, especially from the point of view of funding.

Since the EU Treaty includes a protocol to guarantee the role of public broadcasting, and since it is up to the Commission to ensure that the public funding of such services does not alter trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent that it is contrary to the common interest, does the Commission not think it should quickly take a decision on the adoption of guidelines for the assessment of State aid to public television in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

In order to adopt a coherent framework to deal with the various cases of state financing to public broadcasters, the Commission services proposed a a discussion paper to seek the opinions of Member States on the subject. However most of the Member States preferred a case-by-case approach and did not like the idea of guidelines.

Following this opinion of Member States, the Commission will take, within a reasonable time, the necessary action to assess the various complaints lodged by private broadcasters against public broadcasters in some Member States. This is the more necessary since the Court of first instance has condemned the Commission under Article 175 of the EC Treaty for not having adopted a position within due time. This is the first time that this has occurred in the state aid domain. C 325/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In its action the Commission will take into proper account the protocol agreed in the context of the draft treaty of Amsterdam that, although not yet in place, represents an important element when assessing cases in the broadcasting sector. Under this protocol, the provisions of the EC Treaty shall be without prejudice to the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service broadcasting in so far as such funding is granted to broadcasting organisations for the fulfilment of the public service remit as conferred, defined and organised by each Member State, and that such funding does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent which would be contrary to the common interest, while the realisation of the remit of that public service shall be taken into account.

(1999/C 325/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3605/98 by Quinídio Correia (PSE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Inclusion of Madeira in the ban on exports of Portuguese beef and veal

Unlike the Azores, Madeira has been included in the ban on exports of Portuguese beef and veal.

In this connection the following points should be taken into consideration:

/ the off-the-bone meat consumed in Madeira is imported direct from Brazil and Uruguay (and, to a lesser extent, from Australia and New Zealand), countries in which there is no BSE;

/ virtually all on-the-bone meat comes from slaughterhouses which are approved and certified by the EU;

/ all other beef and veal consumed comes from the Azores and (to a very small extent) from local producers in Madeira, regions in which no case of BSE has ever been detected;

/ the animals in question are not fed on meal containing potentially risky products, in particular ones derived from the processing of the meat and bones of contaminated animals;

/ the imposition of the ban will have a detrimental effect on producers, traders, consumers and the tourist industry in Madeira.

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions?

1. On the basis of what facts was a decision taken to extend the ban on Portuguese beef and veal to Madeira?

2. Did Community inspectors carry out any inspection in Madeira with a view to confirming or refuting the above points?

3. Is there really any risk that consumers may contract the disease?

4. Has the Commission any plans to compensate Madeira for the damage suffered as a result of the ban?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 1999)

1. Commission Decision 98/653/EC, of 18 November 1998, concerning emergency measures made necessary by the occurrence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Portugal (1) applies to the entire territory of Portugal, with the exception of the territory of the autonomous region of the Azores. During the legislative process the Portuguese authorities requested the exclusion of the autonomous region of the Azores from the embargo, on the basis of its favourable epidemiological situation. The Portuguese authorities did not request a similar exclusion for the autonomous region of Madeira.

2. The missions of the Commission have not yet targeted the epidemiological situation specific to the autonomous regions of Portugal. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/19

3. With respect to the protection of consumers from exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the Community is taking a precautionary approach. This is dictated by the fatal nature of the disease, the lack of diagnostic tools, the resistance of the agent to processing techniques in food and feed and the poor understanding of the details of its transmission to man and animal. Both the scientific committees and the International office of epizootics (OIE), charged with assessing methods to protect against transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, have recently issued recommendations on measures to reduce the BSE associated risks. Based on these recommendations and the evolution of the occurrence of BSE in Portugal, the Community has adopted the above emergency measure. This aims at protecting consumers and stopping further spread of the agent, by reinforcing the protective measures already in place and introducing complementary measures in Portugal and banning the dispatch of certain products.

4. The Commission is not envisaging specific support measures for the autonomous region of Madeira, other then those that are, or are about to be, adopted in the general framework for financial support to Portugal for the eradication and control of BSE.

(1) OJ L 311, 20.11.1998.

(1999/C 325/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3640/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Regional aid scheme 4 Upper Shannon, Ireland

Will the Commission state whether the application from the Irish Government for a special tax concession scheme for a Rural Renewal Programme in the Upper Shannon region is being currently processed and whether it is being treated separately from other applications made by the Irish Government? What other applications are currently from the Irish Government before the European Commission?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

The Commission is currently examining the tax relief scheme provided under the rural renewal programme, notified to the Commission in compliance with the EC Treaty. The scheme is indeed being treated separately from other Irish aid schemes which are currently under examination.

The Commission is currently examining the tax reliefs scheme under the Urban Renewal Act 1998, the application of capital allowances in a new geographical extension within the Customs house Dublin docks area in Dublin, as well as the granting of double rent relief, rates remission and capital allowances on the basis of the 1994 and 1995 Finance acts.

(1999/C 325/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3652/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Agenda 2000 proposals on oilseeds

With reference to the Agenda 2000 proposals on oilseeds:

1. does the Commission not consider that world market conditions no longer justify the measures proposed;

2. does it not consider that the United States has unilaterally contravened the agreement, in that it has not in fact ended subsidies for oilseeds under the new ‘Fair ACT’ agricultural policy; C 325/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

3. in view of the United State’s failure to comply with the agreement would it not be appropriate to renegotiate the Blair House agreements;

4. does it not consider that the Community’s agricultural industry needs to focus more on crops that are an alternative to cereals,and that it must lay claim to its rightful share of the growing market in oils and vegetable proteins,in both the EU and third-country markets?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

With reference to the Agenda 2000 proposals on oilseeds,the Commission does not consider that market conditions have altered so much as to warrant changes in the measures proposed. Market prices for oilseeds have remained at a level that is well above the reference price of €196,8 per tonne.

US agricultural policy was amended by the Fair Trade Act. It is for the WTO (World Trade Organisation) to verify whether that policy complies with the provisions of the Uruguay Round.

The Commission’s views as regards the objective of allowing European producers to have a share in the expected growth of the markets are in tune with those of the Honourable Member. This objective is reflected in Agenda 2000 by an amount of aid common to oilseeds and other arable crops,such as cereals,and the set aside of land so as to abolish the specific nature of the current aid for oilseeds. The provisions which had been introduced as part of the arrangements for arable crops under the Blair House memorandum will as a result no longer need to be applied and the restrictions imposed on producers will thus be lifted. The European agricultural industry will in this way have its fair share of the growing market in the oilseeds and vegetable oils market.

(1999/C 325/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3659/98 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: The millennium bug

It has been established that the ‘millennium bug’,a problem also known as the ‘year 2000 effect’,may affect all types of programmable electronic systems (PESs),ranging from mainframe computers to microchips.

These systems are employed for all nature of industrial purposes at the various stages of the production process,in the transport sector,in the public services and so forth. Furthermore,the said systems are date- dependent and their reaction on the first day of the new millennium will be critical. For those reasons,it would advisable to pinpoint the risks involved.

In the Commission’s view,what role can the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work play in preventing and/or lessening the potential impact of computer errors on safety at the workplace?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

One of the tasks of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work is to collect and disseminate technical, scientific and economic information in the Member States in order to inform Community bodies,the Member States and interested parties,as well as providing technical,scientific and economic information on methods and tools for carrying out preventive activities,with particular attention to the specific problems of small and medium-sized undertakings.

The Commission particularly asked the Agency to raise industry awareness of the potential health and safety implications of this problem. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/21

In this regard, the Agency is undertaking the following actions:

establishing a special year 2000 information activity on the Agency’s Web site with links to information available in the Member States as well as e.g. in the United States and Australia.

establishing in connection with this activity an interactive e-mail forum for exchanging information on this subject.

(1999/C 325/024) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3668/98 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: Applicability of the directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions to human research with embryonic tissue

1. Is the Commission familiar with the latest breakthroughs in medical technology in which two research teams at the University of Wisconsin and John Hopkins University have succeeded in growing embryonic stem cells in the laboratory?

2. Can the Commission confirm that this invention of a method of growing embryonic stem cells is not patentable in the EU by reason of Article 5 of the Directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (COM(97) 0446 (1) because the method was invented using embryonic material?

3. If Article 5 of that Directive is not applicable to this invention can the Commission state why not, and whether there exist other restrictions that would rule out the patentability of such scientific research with embryonic tissue in the EU?

(1) OJ C 311, 11.10.1997, p. 12.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 1999)

The Commission is aware of the research of the University of Wisconsin and The Johns Hopkins University.

As regards the patentability of the methods developed by such research, Directive 98/44/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (1) lays down in Article 5 (1) that ‘the human body, at the various stages of its formation and development, and the simple discovery of one of its elements, including the sequence or partial sequence of a gene, cannot constitute patentable inventions’. The simple discovery of embryonic stem cells is not, therefore, patentable in itself.

However, Article 5 (2) states that ‘An element isolated from the human body or otherwise produced by means of a technical process, including the sequence or partial sequence of a gene, may constitute a patentable invention, even if the structure of that element is identical to that of a natural element’. Consequently, it cannot be ruled out that a method for growing embryonic stem cells as an element isolated from the human body, which observes the conditions for patentability, may have the right to protection. However, as far as the Commission is aware, no application for a patent has been made in this respect in Europe.

Apart from the provisions of Article 5, Article 6 (2) c) rules out the patentability of uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes because their commercial use would be contrary to ordre public or morality. Recital 42 states that this exclusion does not affect inventions for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes which are applied to the human embryo and are useful to it. It is probably primarily in this context that the patentability of the methods developed by the two US universities should be considered. However, the Commission is not in a position to judge in this matter. Should the case arise, it would be the patent offices of the Member States and the national judges before whom the matter was brought that would decide. C 325/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies, which was given the task under Article 7 of Directive 98/44/EC of evaluating all the ethical aspects of biotechnology, issued Opinion No 12 on 23 November 1998 concerning the ethical aspects of research involving the use of human embryos in the context of the fifth research framework programme. Basically the Group stressed that respect of the pluralism of cultures and ethical approaches in Europe, which had led to an extreme diversity of national regulations, meant that the granting of EU financial aid for embryo research in countries where it was allowed could not be totally ruled out. However, the Group said that observance of pluralism did not mean there should be no restrictions. It was therefore important to make the financing of such research subject to the observance of strict legal and ethical conditions, particularly regarding the prior agreement of any ethical committees and observance of the fundamental ethical principles common throughout Europe, such as the respect of human life from its beginnings and the need to obtain the consent of the women or couples who produced the embryos that might be used for research.

Finally, the Commission wishes to stress that if the patent system comes up against a difficult question concerning the patentability of human embryo tissue or the methods concerning it, the Commission will report on it in the annual reports on the development and implications of patent law which it has to submit to the Parliament and the Council as of 30 July 2000.

(1) OJ L 213, 30.7.1998.

(1999/C 325/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3679/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: Hemp textile products in Europe

The Greek police has recently begun to take action against many business selling clothing and other products made from hemp (cannabis sativa), which are generally imported from other EU Member States where trade in these products is legal and not subject to sanctions.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Are there any grounds for suspecting that these products could in any way lead to increased drugs use or drugs dependence in the EU?

2. If so, what steps will the Commission take to prohibit trade in these products in Germany, Denmark, the UK and other EU Member States?

3. If not, what steps will it take to remove obstacles to trade in this these products in Greece? Could it provide aid for hemp textile production in Greece?

(1999/C 325/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4095/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Hemp products in Europe

The Greek police recently prosecuted a large number of shops selling clothes and other products manufactured using hemp (Cannabis sativa) as the raw material. These products were mostly imported from other EU countries where they are marketed legally and not subject to prosecution.

Will the Commission say:

1. Does the EU have any information to support the suspicion that these products could in any way lead to an increase in the consumption of, or addiction to, drugs? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/23

2. If so, what action does it intend to take to have the sale of such products banned in Germany, Denmark, the UK and other EU countries?

3. If not, how does it intend to ensure that they can be sold without obstruction in Greece? Could aid be made available to support the production of hemp in Greece?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3679/98 and E-4095/98 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission received, during the last two months, complaints regarding the marketing prohibition of hemp-based products in Greece. These products, mainly garments, are according to the plaintiffs legally produced and marketed in other Member States (Denmark, Germany, United Kingdom).

The marketing prohibition in Greece was based on three reasons: a) the promotion of the use of illegal and dangerous drugs; b) the violation of market regulations and c) the lack of official state approval on the sale of certain products. The Commission is currently investigating the case on the basis of a possible infringement of Article 30 of the EC Treaty. For that purpose, letters have been addressed to the plaintiffs requesting further information on the facts and on the reasoning of the Greek authorities for the prohibition of the products. If the measures of the Greek authorities are proved to be an unnecessary and unjustified barrier to intra- Community trade, the Commission will open infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty.

Council Regulation (EEC) 1308/70 of 29 June 1970 introduced the common organisation of the market in flax and hemp (1). Commission Regulation (EC) 2814/98 of 22 December 1998 (2), modifying Regulation (EEC) 1164/89 of 28 April 1989 (3), lays down detailed rules concerning the aid for fibre flax and hemp. Any Greek hemp textile producer complying with these rules can benefit from the Community aid.

(1) OJ L 146, 4.7.1970. (2) OJ L 349, 24.12.1998. (3) OJ L 121, 29.4.1989.

(1999/C 325/027) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3688/98

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: The costs of and length of time taken by Court cases

The recent court case involving a British sugar company, I understand, took over 10 years from start to finish. Could you explain why it took this length of time? Were costs awarded against the company?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Without fuller information, which the Honourable Member is asked to provide, the Commission has been unable to find any case involving a sugar company on which a Community court took over ten years to reach a verdict. C 325/24 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/028) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3708/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Human stem cells and tissue engineering

Recent reports state that US and British research institutions are involved in the cloning and redesign of ‘master’ stem cells obtained from human embryos in order to produce body components.

1. Can the Commission please confirm that no EU funds are being used, either directly or indirectly, in such research?

2. Will the Commission also please indicate in which EU Member States such research is permitted and what legal and ethical controls exist?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 1999)

1. The Community is not funding any research project on the use of embryonic stem cells to produce body parts under the current framework programme.

2. Research involving the use of embryonic stem cells is part of the wider issue of human embryo research, which is regulated differently in the individual Member States. Information on the legal situation regarding human embryo research in Member States, as known to the Commission from available sources, is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

The Commission shares Parliament’s reservations concerning research on human embryos, which raises some very complex issues. Rapid advances are being made in knowledge and technologies, and the interests of couples and the sick must be taken into account. However, there are obviously certain limits that should not be crossed.

(1999/C 325/029) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3770/98 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Biodiversity 4 Honey Bees

Bee breeders in the United Kingdom are increasingly concerned about the importation of bees into the UK from other Member States and countries around the world. They are concerned that a combination of hybridisation and infection from the varroa and Kashmir viruses will lead to the extinction of the indigenous Apis Mellifera Mellifera honey bee population.

Breeders have therefore called for imports to be banned, on the grounds that such action would be justified under the Habitats Directive and the International Convention on Biological Diversity. The UK Government argues, however, that any such ban would contravene existing EC law, namely Directive 92/65/EC (1) concerning the free trade in bees.

Does the Commission agree with the UK Government that Directive 92/65/EC takes precedence in this case and that any ban designed to protect the indigenous sub-species would be illegal? Is the Commission aware of any other similar cases or legal challenges in other Member States?

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/25

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Health protection of honey bees is covered by Council Directive 92/65/EEC, which lays down animal health requirements for Community trade in and imports of animals.Member States must ensure that trade in bees is not prohibited or restricted on animal health grounds other than those resulting from application of the Directive or other Community legislation and, in particular, from any protective measures taken.That provision relates only to animal health requirements and does not place a general obligation on Member States to ensure that bees can be traded freely within the Community.However, such an obligation derives from Article 30 of the EC Treaty.

Zootechnical protection of bees is not covered by Council Directive 91/174/EEC laying down zootechnical and pedigree requirements for the marketing of pure-bred animals (1), since detailed rules for implementing the Directive have not yet been adopted.National legislation continues to apply in accordance with the Treaty’s general provisions.

In the absence of specific Community rules, the sector remains subject solely to Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty.In Case C-67/97 concerning the protection of brown bees from Læsø island in Denmark, the Court of Justice ruled on 3 December 1998 that measures to preserve an indigenous animal population with distinct characteristics contribute to the maintenance of biodiversity by ensuring the survival of the population concerned.By doing so, they are aimed at protecting the life of those animals and can be justified under Article 36 of the EC Treaty.From the point of view of such conservation of biodiversity, it is immaterial whether the object of protection is a separate subspecies, a distinct strain within any given species or merely a local colony, so long as the populations in question have characteristics distinguishing them from others and are therefore judged worthy of protection.

The Community and its Member States are contracting parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (2), which stipulates that ‘each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate [...] prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate those alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species’. The Community Biodiversity Strategy (3) states: ‘The presence or introduction of alien species or subspecies can potentially cause imbalances and changes to ecosystems.It can have potentially irreversible impacts, by hybridisation or competition, on native components of biodiversity.’

It follows from the judgment mentioned above that national legislation which prohibits keeping and introducing onto an island such as Læsø any bees other than those of the subspecies Apis mellifera mellifera must be regarded as justified, under Article 36 of the EC Treaty, on grounds of animal health protection.The Commission is currently examining whether the principles which the Court of Justice established for islands such as Læsø can be applied to a Member State such as Austria in order to enable it to reserve all or most of its territory for bee-keeping based on a single subspecies of bee, in the light of the requirements deriving from the Convention on Biological Diversity.

(1) OJ L 85, 5.4.1991. (2) Council Decision 93/626/EEC of 25 October 1993 concerning the conclusion of the Convention on Biological Diversity (OJ L 309, 13.12.1993). (3) COM(98) 42.

(1999/C 325/030) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3773/98

by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission

(4 December 1998)

Subject: Telecommunications and universal service

The European Bureau of Consumers’ Unions (BEUC) has recently published a report entitled ‘Universal service in the telecommunications sector: European consumers’ right to telecommunications services’.This study shows that many countries in the European Union have not done enough to compel telephone companies to provide an adequate universal service. C 325/26 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

1.What is the Commission’s view of the BEUC’s findings?

2.What impact does this have on the definition of ‘universal service’ as set out in Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 (1)?

3.What does it mean with regard to the financing of universal service in the various Member States, and what conclusions will the Commission draw from this?

4.Pan-European numbers, including the European 112 emergency number, are also included under universal service.Have European rules in this area now been transposed in the national legislation of all Member States and, if not, what action does the Commission intend to take to achieve this objective?

(1) OJ L 199, 26.7.1997, p. 32.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

1.The Commission welcomes the detailed and comprehensive report by the European bureau of consumer unions (BEUC) which states that BEUC and its related consumer organisations support liberalisation because they believe the long term effects will be beneficial, although they undertook the study because of concern about the immediate effects on consumers.

The report tackles a range of consumer and market issues, and in particular examines transposition of both the 1995 and the 1998 voice telephony directives (1).However, the 1995 Directive was designed for a monopoly environment and has been entirely replaced by the 1998 Directive, which is adapted for a competitive market. Whilst some consumer measures are strengthened or made more specific in the 1998 Directive, others, such as quality of service targets, are now at the discretion of the regulator.BEUC calls for more detail in Community law, whereas the current trend is towards competition providing the means to improve services and consumer choice, backed up by specific consumer protection measures.The Commission currently has 7 infringement cases open concerning this Directive.

On the issue of tariffs, the BEUC report examines changes between the beginning of 1995 and the beginning of 1997 (based on the tariff survey published by the Commission).The average tariff increase quoted (37 %) is the average nominal increase for (the highest published) rental charges in the 15 Member States and was due to very high nominal increases (over 100 %) in Greece, Luxembourg and Finland.The Commission’s recent fourth implementation report (2) gives a more up to date picture on tariffs.It shows that the lowest residential telephone charges are in Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom, essentially the group of Member States which liberalised first (for Luxembourg, results are not immediately comparable because of the size of the Member State).

2.BEUC makes some specific suggestions for future change in the definition of universal service, such as specifying in the legislation a minimum bandwidth or rate for data transmission and integrating calling line identification in the universal service definition (provided the service is optional and consumers have the possibility to suppress calling line identification).The Commission will consider such issues in its review of the regulatory framework in 1999, based on the two year’s experience of liberalised markets in most of the Community.In this context, it will address a range of consumer policy concerns as indicated in the Commission’s recent consumer policy action plan 1999-2001 (3).

3.There are no immediate consequences for the financing of universal service because this depends on the net cost (costs less revenues and other benefits) of provision.More widespread provision of low user and social schemes may raise net costs whilst tariff re-balancing and lowering of unit costs are likely to decrease them. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/27

4. Concerning the common European emergency call number 112, this has now been implemented in all Member States apart from Greece. Infringement proceedings have been opened against Greece.

(1) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998 and OJ L 321, 30.12.1995. (2) COM(98) 594. (3) COM(98) 696.

(1999/C 325/031) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3808/98

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Guidelines for SMUs

In its press release on the proposal to revise the EMAS regulation the Commission states that it wants to take special measures for small and medium-sized undertakings by drawing up guidelines to ensure that approving authorities respect and show an understanding of their practices.

As the guidelines have not yet been finalised, how does the Commission contemplate drawing them up? Who will participate in any working party? How will the Commission ensure rational dialogue with the SMUs? Could consideration perhaps be given to inviting a number of SMUs from all the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 1999)

On 30 October 1998 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Regulation allowing participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (1) (EMAS) which revises Council Regulation (EEC) 1836/93 of 29 June 1993 allowing voluntary participation by companies in the industrial sector in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (2). Article 10 of this proposal provides for a number of measures that are designed to promote participation by organisations in this voluntary system and that are geared, in particular, towards small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The measures envisaged are spread among the Member States and the Commission.

As far as the Commission is concerned, special provisions are in place for drawing up guidelines for the benefit of certified environmental inspectors responsible for verifying that an organisation is in compliance with all the requirements laid down under the EMAS Regulation and that the information produced is true and reliable. To the extent that these inspectors are required to operate at the sharp edge when it comes to implementing this Regulation at organisational level, with special reference to SMEs, it is crucial that they are fully conversant with the functioning of SMEs, so as to ensure that verification reflects the realities of the situation.

These guidelines have been drawn up jointly in collaboration with certified environmental inspectors and the European Union of Crafts and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (UEAPME). The degree of European representativeness of this organisation will ensure that proper account is taken of the position of SMEs in the various Member States. It is therefore entirely feasible to use the UEAPME as a channel for undertakings wishing to participate in the elaboration of these guidelines.

(1) COM(98) 622 final. (2) OJ L 168, 10.7.1993. C 325/28 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3811/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to theCommission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: VAT accounting for opticians

Given the problems identified in the UK with VAT accounting for opticians, has the Commission studied VAT accounting for opticians in other Member States, and does it believe that the substantial VAT refunds obtained in the UK could be replicated in other Member States?

Would the Commission explain briefly the ways in which the various Member States require opticians to account for VAT?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 1999)

The Commission has not received any complaints from opticians regarding difficulties in accounting for VAT.

In accordance with Article 13(A)(1)(e) of the sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes 3 Common system of value added tax: uniformbasis of assessment( 1), the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical profession as defined by the Member State concerned is exempt from VAT. The Court of justice has ruled (2) that this exemption did not extend to the supply of corrective spectacles prescribed by a doctor or by other authorised persons.

The substantial refunds of VAT in the United Kingdomto which the Honourable Memberrefers are due to the British courts finding against the interpretation by the British administration (HM Customs and Excise) that the supply of spectacles constituted a single supply and was therefore fully taxable rather than being two supplies 3 that of the dispensing (measuring and fitting) service and the supply of the spectacles. In 1995 opticians in the United Kingdom were invited to submit claims for repayment of VAT overpaid from 1 September 1988.

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977. (2) Case 353/85, Commission of the European Communities v. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

(1999/C 325/033) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3814/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of research and development in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policy of transparency pursued by the Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission say what projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each type of aid available in the area of research and development for the period 1994-99?

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects?

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question P-3790/98 (1).

(1) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999, p. 150. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/29

(1999/C 325/034) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3815/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of agriculture in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policyof transparencypursued bythe Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission saywhat projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each typeof aid available in the area of agriculture and fisheries for the period 1994-99?

Can the Commission further specifywhat amounts were finallyallocated to each of the above projects?

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question P-3790/98 (1).

(1) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999, p. 150.

(1999/C 325/035) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3819/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of social policyin Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policyof transparencypursued bythe Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission saywhat projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each typeof aid available in the area of social policyfor the period 1994-99?

Can the Commission further specifywhat amounts were finallyallocated to each of the above projects?

Answer given by Mr Flynn On behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Objective 2 of the European Social Fund (ESF) covers areas seriouslyaffected byindustrial decline. The total amount allocated to Catalonia under this Objective during the period 1994-1999 is €263 662 237.

Objective 3 combats long-term unemployment, facilitates the integration into working life of young people and of persons at risk of exclusion from the labour market, and promotes equal opportunities for men and women. The total amount allocated to Catalonia under this Objective during the period 1994-1999 is €403 782 193.

Objective 4 helps workers adapt to industrial changes and to changes in production systems. The total amount allocated to Catalonia under this Objective during the period 1994-1999 is €133 801 800.

Objective 5b covers the development and structural adjustment of rural areas. The total amount allocated to Catalonia under this Objective during the period 1994-1999 is €23 850 154.

The total amount allocated for all Objectives during the period 1994-1999 is €825 096 384. C 325/30 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Details of the ESF programmes for Catalonia (1994/1999):

(in euros)

Programme 940230ES2 Plurirégional (1994/96) 8 982 160 940233ES2 Objective 2 (1994/96) 107 413 794 970230ES2 Plurirégional (1997/99) 17 995 283 970233ES2 Objective 2 (1997/99) 129 271 000 Total Objective 2 263 662 237 940311ES3 Plurirégional: Instituto Nacional de Empleo (INEM) 256 415 540 940312ES3 Plurirégional: Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia (MEC) y migraciones 402 294 940313ES3 Plurirégional 3 794 725 940314ES3 Plurirégional: varios ministerios 46 456 710 940323ES3 Objective 3 96 712 924 Total Objective 3 403 782 193 940401ES4 Objective 4 133 801 800 940503ES5 Objective 5b 23 850 154

For further details about the European Social Fund in Catalonia, the Honourable Member may contact Joseph Ma. Puig I Vidal, Cap de Servei de Planificació I Ocupacional, Sepùlveda, 148-150, E-08011 Barcelona, tel. + 34 93 228 57 57, fax + 34 93 228 57 38. For projects funded under other budget lines in the social policy area, information by region is not available.

(1999/C 325/036) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3821/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Lithuania’s accession to the European Union

The assessment reports drawn up by the Commission on the progress made over the past year by the countries applying to join the European Union conclude that Latvia might begin the accession process at the end of 1999 but that Lithuania will have to continue its efforts to fulfil the Copenhagen criteria. Is the Commission aware of the possible economic and political repercussions if Lithuania is the only one of the three Baltic countries to be excluded from this process, despite the progress made, which the Commission itself recognises?

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

(19 January 1999)

The Commission’s regular reports on the candidate countries’ progress towards Community accession have been prepared according to the conclusions of the Luxembourg and Cardiff European Councils which asked in particular the same criteria to be applied to all candidate countries. The Vienna European Council confirmed that each country would continue to be judged on its own merits.

The conclusions of the 1998 Commission’s regular report on Lithuania do not prejudge the possibility of proposing by the end of 1999 the opening of negotiations with Lithuania. This, however, will depend on Lithuania’s commitment to address the issues identified in the report rapidly and effectively. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/31

(1999/C 325/037) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3826/98 by James Janssen van Raay (UPE), Niall Andrews (UPE) and José Girão Pereira (UPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Audit of Community funding

1. Is the Commission aware of the criticisms against the Dutch Senator, Mr Jan Nicol Scholten, in his capacity as chairman of the Association of West European Parliamentarians for Action Against Apartheid, the Afrika-Europa Instituut (Africa-Europe Institute), the Vluchtelingenwerk Nederland (Netherlands Refugee Action) and the Refugiado (Refugee) Foundation, made in several reports published in Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Ireland in which cases of misappropriation and embezzlement of funds for personal ends were revealed?

2. Has the Commission granted funding to any of the abovementioned bodies?

3. Is it true that, despite the criticisms made in the above countries, the Commission’s assessment of those bodies was favourable?

4. Does the Commission intend to carry out a thorough investigation to discover the truth and ensure that the activities of these bodies are carried out openly?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

1. The Commission is aware of criticisms in various newspapers, and in at least one evaluation of Association of west-european parlementarians for action against apartheid (AWEPA) initiated by a group of donors to AWEPA and the Afrika-Europa Instituut (AEI).

2. The Commission has provided funds to AWEPA/AEI for specific projects.

3. and 4. The evaluation report, produced by independent consultants for the Commission, was completed in early December 1998. Copies are sent direct to the Honourable Members and to Parliament’s Secretariat. The evaluation has shown that several significant reforms need to be made by AWEPA/AEI, but there is no finding of fraudulent use of funds. This conclusion confirms the results of the financial audit carried out in 1997 and the recommendations which are gradually being put into place.

The Commission has already taken steps to ensure that AWEPA fully respects all the conditions applicable to the funds it has provided for specific projects to AWEPA/AEI. As is normal in this type of case, it will insist that AWEPA takes on board the recommendations of the evaluation as a precondition to any further funding.

(1999/C 325/038) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3834/98 by PaulRübig (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Impact of international financial turmoil on the European steel market : industrial policy

The international steel trade faces new challenges; three major regions of the world : Russia, South-East Asia and Latin America : are facing economic problems. The consequences of this are twofold: the shift in traditional trade flows has led to massive increases in imports into Europe, with a 520 % rise in imports from Asia and a 109 % rise in imports from the USA in 1998, and the concentration of markets has resulted in a fall in European exports, exacerbated by a tendency towards regional protectionism. European steel producers have so far coped successfully with this development. What is now needed above all is some prospect of an industrial policy for this sector.

What information is the Commission gathering for the European framework for the steel industry and its structures? How can the competitiveness of the steel sector be improved? C 325/32 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s view of the seriousness of the situation in the said three regions, whose economic difficulties are all the graver in that they first occurred one after the other, then compounded one another and their repercussions have been sudden so that the sectors most affected (especially the steel industry) have to act quickly to adapt to the new circumstances.

In particular, the sharp drop in demand in South-East Asia (traditionally an importer of steel products) and the dramatic slow-down in economic growth in other Asiatic countries have, together with Russia’s economic crisis, resulted in a surplus of steel products on the world market. This has led, as of early 1998, to major distortions of international trade, precipitating dramatic price reductions.

The markets in question are important outlets for European steel producers, which are going to suffer direct and indirect consequences in the form both of more imported products on their domestic (Community) markets and more competition on other export markets.

In addition, the likelihood of a drop in activity by user sectors in 1999, as a result of a general economic slow- down, would suggest a weakening of demand for steel on the Community market. In other words, both internal and external factor are going to impact industrial sectors in the Community generally and, in particular, steel companies, which are going to have to meet new challenges in order to adapt still further to the new situation through major reductions in costs and major increases in productivity, and through the development of new products (enhancing the competitiveness of steel products).

The steps which the European authorities can take to support the steel industry during this difficult phase are very restricted, being limited to promoting improvements in the frameworkconditions within which the European steel industry operates. Proposals to this end will be set out in a communication which the Commission is currently drawing up for discussion by the 29 April 1999 Industry Council and with the ECSC Consultative Committee and Parliament.

(1999/C 325/039) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3842/98 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Infringement proceedings brought against Italy in connection with trade in cocoa- based products

In recent months, the Commission has embarked on procedures to bring an action against Italy (as well as Spain) for alleged infringement of the principle of free movement of goods inside the EU, because Italy is preventing products containing vegetable fats other than cocoa butter from being sold as ‘chocolate’, in other words implementing correctly the provisions of the directive on cocoa-based products currently in force, which dates backto 1973.

It should be noted that legislation to amend that directive is in the pipeline.

The Commission is threatening to bring the matter before the European Court of Justice.

Would the Commission state:

whether it really intends to bring the matter before the Court of Justice?

why it considers that Italy and Spain should not apply the 1973 directive which is currently in force?

why it does not believe it should wait until the legislative process has run its course?

why it is continuing to promote the interests of a small number of multinationals at the expense of cocoa producers, ‘independent’ chocolate manufacturers and European consumers, and in so doing actually infringing Community law? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/33

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The Commission has actually launched infringement proceedings against Italy and Spain because of the rules in force in these two Member States concerning the marketing of chocolate products. In both Member States, a product legally manufactured in another Member State which contains vegetable fats other than cocoa butter can only be marketed as a chocolate substitute, which in effect excludes that product from the market.

Seven Member States currently allow vegetable fats other than cocoa butter to be used in the manufacture of chocolate products, up to a maximum of 5 %of their total weight. This practice is specifically permitted under Council Directive 73/241/EEC of 24 July 1973 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption (1), to which the Honourable Member refers (see in particular Article 14(2a)). Since such products have been legally manufactured in the Community, the principle of freedom of movement applies to them, unless the Member State intending to refuse free movement can demonstrate that the products constitute a threat, in this case to consumer protection.

With regard to the aforementioned infringement proceedings, the Commission sent reasoned opinions to the two Member States in accordance with the procedure provided for under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. The Commission is examining the replies and will decide what further action to take once its examination is complete.

The Commission considers that the Directive does not oblige Italy or Spain to prohibit (as they have done in practice) products from the seven Member States which allow the manufacture of chocolate products containing a maximum of 5 %vegetable fat other than cocoa butter. Since the Directive does not resolve the issue of the addition of these other ingredients, the general Treaty provisions on the free movement of goods apply, pending an amendment to the Directive. Nowhere does Community law state that the Commission must await the adoption of secondary legislation before asking a Member State to stop applying a national measure which it considers to be incompatible with the Treaty provisions. Furthermore, it should be noted that the draft Directive amending Directive 73/241/EEC (2) allows Member States to authorise a fat content of 5 %in chocolate and guarantees that such products can move freely in the Community if their labelling shows clearly that the chocolate contains these fats. The measures which the Commission has asked Spain and Italy to adopt in the course of the current infringement proceedings are therefore consistent with the draft Directive.

From the above, it is clear that by launching the current proceedings, the Commission is seeking to guarantee compliance with Community law in force and to ensure that the Internal Market works properly. In no way is it seeking to give preferential treatment to the economic interests of any industrial group or sector.

(1) OJ L 228, 16.8.1973. (2) COM(97) 682 final.

(1999/C 325/040) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3848/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Extra stop on the Madrid-Zaragoza high-speed rail link

The 14 priority trans-European transport network projects adopted at the Essen European Council include the construction of the southern European high-speed rail link between Madrid, Zaragoza, Barcelona, Perpignan and Montpellier.

The construction of this link will reduce the journey time between Zaragoza and both Madrid and Barcelona from the current three and a half hours to a little over one hour and fifteen minutes, which will have the effect of bringing those cities considerably closer together.

However, the project does not include the possibility of having trains stop at Calatayud, a city between Madrid and Zaragoza which is currently a major rail junction and whose future development potential could be reduced if it is not included as a stop on the high-speed rail link. C 325/34 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In view of the fact that the high-speed rail route is due to pass fairly close to the centre of Calatayud, which is Aragon’s fourth city in terms of size, population and importance, there have been calls from various quarters for the high-speed train to stop there.

Does the Commission not thinkthat it would be logical for, if not all, at least some of the high-speed trains which will pass through Calatayud each day to stop in the city?

Would this not help to ensure that the European transport network(of which the Spanish high-speed rail link is part) also benefits people living in small or medium-sized cities which on many occasions are excluded from European projects?

Does the Commission not thinkthat proposals such as this one contribute to European regional planning by preventing depopulation and offering development opportunities to towns which may not otherwise have any?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

The EC Treaty requires projects of common interest in the frameworkof the trans-European networksto be economically viable. In the case of the construction of new high-speed rail links, these projects can often reach competitivity only by reducing the travel time and stopovers between the main conurbations. The railway company has to calculate the economic viability of the project taking into account the potential market in terms of passengers between each stop. The Commission cannot influence the decision of the authorities in this respect.

The Commission agrees, however, that small and medium-sized cities should also be able to gain the maximum benefit from the trans-European high-speed networkand that complementary solutions are required in order to ensure accessibility for these cities too.

(1999/C 325/041) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3859/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Progress in implementing subprogramme for tourism under the Community Support Frameworkfor Greece

According to my information, there has been an exceptionally low take-up of Community funds 5 only ECU 34,5 million (i.e. 18,06 %) by October this year 5 for the subprogramme for tourism under the Community Support Framework(CSF) for Greece, the total budget for which is ECU 191 million. The take-up for the development of marine tourism is particularly low; the ECU 610 000 used represents only 1,8 % of the Community appropriations committed of ECU 33,3 million. I am also informed that there have been delays in paying the first instalment to tourist businesses which are covered by measures to assist small and medium- sized enterprises and in carrying out inspections of projects covered by measures to modernise existing hotels.

Could the Commission:

1. provide me with the latest data on the take-up of Community appropriations for the subprogramme for tourism under the CSF for Greece, in total and per sector; and

2. inform me of the reasons for the low take-up of the relevant funds and whether there is any possibility of carrying over the unused appropriations to the 3rd CSF?

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

(11 February 1999)

Under a Commission Decision of 8 December 1997 the tourism subprogramme has a total budget of €519 million, for which public commitments amount to €200 million. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/35

Total expenditure on the programme, public and private, amounts to around €108 million, a take-up rate of 20,8 % of the total budget.

Take-up bymeasure is as follows:

(in euros)

Take-up Measure Budget Payments (%)

1.1 Marine tourism ( port infrastructure 46 333 000 673 638 1,45

1.2 Eco-friendlymountain tourism 39 999 990 9 229 950 23,07

1.3 Investment aid 186 667 990 62 961 739 33,73

1.4 Integrated tourism development zones 220 003 760 34 952 900 15,89

1.5 Services to SMEs 13 734 830 5 916 0,04

1.6 Training 12 333 000 147 301 1,19

Total 519 072 570 107 971 444 20,80

The poor take-up for the programme is mainlydue to delayin adoption bythe Greek Parliament of the laws on privatisation of port infrastructure (marinas) and to legislative and administrative delays in specifying the integrated tourism development zones.

Greece will be able to make commitments under the subprogramme until 31 December 1999 and payments until 31 December 2001. The Commission will however on the occasion of the next monitoring committee scheduled for the first quarter of 1999 look verycarefullyat the take-up prospects for the subprogramme and mayrequest from the Greek authorities transfer of some of the uncommitted appropriations to other programmes of the present CSF. Carryover of appropriations to the CSF of the next programming period is not possible.

(1999/C 325/042) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3878/98

by Philippe De Coene (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Abolition of duty-free

A decision was taken in 1991 to abolish duty-free shopping within the European Union with effect from 1 July 1999. Onlytravellers to destinations outside the Union would be able to continue to benefit from duty-free.

However, I learn that even after 1 July1999 the members of the Commission will retain the right to buya number of goods duty-free: 20 000 cigarettes, 400 litres of alcohol of less than 21 % proof, 90 litres of whisky or vodka, 5 000 litres of cheap petrol for their first car and 2 000 litres for their second car.

Does the Commission not feel that its members should be subject to the same rules as ordinarycitizens of the Union and that theyshould therefore no longer be entitled to duty-freegoods?

Does the Commission intend to do awaywith this derogation? C 325/36 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1999)

Up to 30 June 1999, exemption from VAT and excise duty on intra-Community duty-free sales is granted under Article 28k of Directive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 and Article 28 of Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 respectively.

Belgium treats the Members of the Commission as diplomats and accordingly they enjoy certain financial benefits like any diplomat from another country serving in that Member State and any other persons afforded similar treatment. One of these privileges is the right to purchase duty-free goods for personal use provided that the total bill is at least BEF 10 000 (VAT not included) and within the annual purchasing limit for the following products (1998figures: purchasing conditions are laid down each year by the Belgian Ministry of Finance).

Alcoholic beverages 90 litres Tobacco 20 000 cigarettes Wine 450 litres Petrol for first car 5 000 litres.

Tax provisions relating to diplomats are to be found in particular in Article 34 of the Vienna Convention of 18April 1961, which lays down that ‘ A diplomatic agent shall be exempt from all dues and taxes, personal or real, national, regional or municipal, except: (a) indirect taxes of a kind which are normally incorporated in the price of goods or services...’ As a rule, however, it is customary for all countries to grant such exemptions in international relations.

At Community level, the tax benefits in question are covered by specific provisions: VAT by the first indent of Article 15(10) of Directive 77/388/EEC; excise duties by the first indent of Article 23(1) of Directive 92/12/ EEC; customs duties by Article 133(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EEC) 918/83. As the Honourable Member has stated, there is no time limit set by the legislation. Thus, if the relevant Community legislation is not amended, it will remain in force even after 1 July 1999.

The Commission has asked itself whether the tax exemptions (VAT and excise duties) granted to Member States’ diplomats serving in the Union and persons treated in the same way, such as Members of the European Commission, are compatible with the Union’s progress towards integration. The Commission has decided to make an in-depth evaluation of the situation with a view to identifying what legislative initiatives would be appropriate.

(1999/C 325/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3882/98 by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Commission (4 January 1999)

Subject: Implementation of Council Directive 92/117/EEC

Further to my Question No P-3253/96 (1), will the Commission say which Member States have still not implemented the minimum requirements in regard to salmonella pursuant to Annex III, Section 1 of Directive 92/117/EEC?

Has the Commission initiated the procedure under Article 169 against the Member States concerned?

When will the Commission submit the report on measures to combat and prevent zoonoses, which was to have been submitted before 1 November 1997?

Will the Commission take steps to halt trade in poultry from countries which do not meet the minimum requirements?

How will the Commission ensure that consumer protection is not neglected as a result of the slow process of implementation in some Member States?

(1) OJ C 138, 5.5.1997, p. 43. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/37

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Article 17(1) of Directive 92/117/EEC 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 (1) (the so-called Zoonoses Directive), required Member States to implement this Directive before 1 January 1994. Certain provisions of this Directive were amended by Directive 97/22/ EC (2), for which the implementation deadline expired on 1 September 1997. In the case of both Directives, the Commission, as soon as the expiry date expired, opened infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty against the Member States which had not notified national implementation measures, leading in one case 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 the notification of the measures of France, Italy and the Netherlands. The Commission undestands the publication of the national measures by these Member States to be imminent.

Article 10, Paragraph 1, of Directive 92/117/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/22/EC, to which the Honourable Member refers, requires Member States to implement as from 1 January 1998 the minimum measures laid down for salmonella in Annex III, Section I of the Directive. The Commission will use its powers to ensure implementation of the Community legislation. However, it should be noted that within Directive 92/ 117/EEC, there are no specific requirements for Member States to submit to the Commission plans or other measures adopted to fulfil the requirements of the Article.

Under Article 15a, Paragraph 1 of Directive 92/117/EEC, the Commission had to submit a report to the Council concerning the measures to be implemented for the control and prevention of zoonoses since it became apparent after entry into force of the Directive that an amendment was necessary. At the same time, reflection was needed on other measures needed at Community level to prevent zoonoses posing a threat to human health. Such a review deals with a range of complex and difficult issues and was expected to take an extended period of time. Upon a proposal from the Commission, the Council granted the Commission, through Directive 97/22/EEC, a period of 18 months to come up with new proposals. Unfortunately, the time limit of 1 November 1997 for submitting a report on a fundamental review could not be respected, due to the complex and difficult nature of organising uniform and efficient control measures and the need for a better scientific basis for such measures. The Commission will therefore present shortly a proposal in order to grant and additional time period. This proposal will include an interim report on the measures to be put in force for the control and prevention of zoonoses.

According to Article 12 of Directive 92/117/EEC the safeguard measures provided in Directive 90/425/EEC concerning veterinary checks to be carried out in trade with a view to the completion of the internal market (3) apply for the purposes of this Directive. According to Directive 90/425/EEC the authorities of the Member State of destination immediately notify the authorities of the other Member States and the Commission in writing, by the most appropriate means, of the findings, the decisions taken and the reasons for such decisions. Thus the Community legislation enables the use of safeguard measures if serious health problems emerge.

An important element for the evaluation of veterinary public health policies is also the control activity of the Commission. As a result of its missions, safeguard measures may be endorsed or infringement proceedings opened

(1) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993. (2) OJ L 113, 30.4.1997. (3) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.

(1999/C 325/044) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3914/98 by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Penalty duty on European exports to the USA

The USA has announced that it is imposing a penalty duty on a series of products including biscuits and ballpoint pens < and that it will publish the final list on 15 December 1998 < so that all EU countries are C 325/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

affected. The prohibitive 100 % duty is expected to come into force on 1 February or 1 March 1999 and will affect many firms through exports they are very dependent on. It is unfair that random firms should be held hostage because of the current banana trade dispute between the EU and the USA.

Will the Commission take steps to solve the problems vis-à-vis the USA by implementing the WTO agreement on less restrictive banana imports before 1 January 1999 so that the conflict on banana quotas does not cost random European firms exports and jobs?

What does the Commission estimate the extent of the drop in exports in the branches affected to be if the problem is not resolved?

What in the Commission’s view will be the employment consequences in the branches concerned?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 1999)

The Commission is making maximum efforts to solve the problems which have been caused by the United States announcement that it intends to unilaterally determine that the Community implementing measures in the bananas case do not comply with World trade organizations (WTO) rules, and impose trade sanctions against Community exports not later than 3 March 1999.

These United States actions clearly violate the provisions of the dispute settlement understanding, which state that any disagreements regarding the conformity of measures taken to implement recommendations from the dispute settlement body (DSB) must be resolved through recourse to a new, accelerated panel ruling, and not through unilateral action.

The Commission considers that the new Community regime for imports of bananas is a correct implementation of the DSB recommendations in the bananas case. This implementation has been achieved in two stages, by Council Regulation (EC) 1637/98 of 20 July 1998 on the common organization of the market in bananas (1) and Commission Regulation no 2362/98 of 28 October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) 404/93 regarding imports of bananas into the Community (2), well in advance of the expiration of the reasonable period of time for implementation, which expires on 1 January 1999.

The Commission is entirely willing for this regime to be examined in a new panel procedure. For this purpose, the Commission conducted detailed discussions with the United States to explore the possibilities of further accelerating the timeframe for such a procedure. The United States has, however, insisted that any timeframe must meet its arbitrary and unrealistically short domestic time limit of 3 March 1999 and appears intent on pursuing its unilateral course of action. The Commission cannot accept that a WTO member considers that it can be judge and jury in its own cause and proceeds with sanctions in the absence of any multilateral condemnation of our implementing measures. The Community has therefore initiated dispute settlement action against the United States section 301 legislation on which the unilateral actions are based.

At this stage, it is not possible to know the fall in exports that could result from the United States sanctions that may enter into force on 3 March, as the WTO has not yet determined any level of concessions that could be suspended. For the same reason, any consequences for employment in the sectors concerned cannot be known yet. In any case, the Commission’s entire efforts are geared towards preventing those measures from entering into force. It is important that those likely to be affected in European industries and businesses make their concerns known directly to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

(1) OJ L 210, 28.7.1998. (2) OJ L 293, 31.10.1998. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/39

(1999/C 325/045) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3920/98

by Armelle Guinebertière (UPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Extension of European Union regulations on organic production of agricultural products to livestock production without consultation of the European Parliament on the new proposal

The European Parliament delivered an opinion in May 1997 on the Commission’s proposal for a European regulation on organic livestock production. A newproposal is to be submitted to the Council on 14 December of this year, but it has still not been placed on the European Parliament’s agenda, although it includes measures which are contested by the relevant professional associations at European level.

Under these circumstances can the Commission prevent the Council from taking too rapid a decision, which would be made without the European Parliament having given its opinion on the new proposal?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 1999)

In response to Parliament’s opinion of 14 May 1997 on the Commission’s proposal (1) bringing livestock production within the scope of Council Regulation (EEC) 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (2), the Commission prepared a newproposal ( 3) incorporating the amendments proposed by Parliament that it agreed to.

This proposal was submitted to the Council, which is continuing to examine it under Article 43 of the EC Treaty, this being the legal basis for it.

(1) OJ C 293, 5.10.1996. (2) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991. (3) COM(97) 747 final.

(1999/C 325/046) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3940/98

by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Assessing the various consequences of abandoning the International Space Station

The first section of the International Space Station was launched successfully from Baikonur (Kazakhstan) on 20 November 1998. It is designed to turn into reality things that have for decades been science-fiction dreams. On 3 December the module Zarya (Sunrise) will be joined by the connecting module Unity launched from the United States. There have already been delays owing to economic problems in Russia, but the most serious problem is that there is a newtimetable for Russia’s launching of the service module, nowscheduled for July 1999. In the meantime there is growing criticism. A significant example is the editorial in the 14 November issue of The Economist, which says ‘With Russia’s contribution to the project fast dwindling to nothing, the station is nowlosing even symbolic value..., should it be going ahead at all? The answeris no.’ Nothing is said about assessing the consequences of abandoning the project.

All this is symptomatic of the growing difficulties of international cooperation in various fields of megascience, space, nuclear fusion, etc. Can the Commission say what the European position is and what is at stake for the European Space Agency and its members? C 325/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1999)

Although the United States have staked a considerable amount in the Station, in terms of image and of capacity to be allotted to extensive international cooperation, this has only been modestly reflected in Europe since involvement by the Member States, Norway and Switzerland only accounts for roughly 8,5 % of the total estimated development cost, of EUR 35 000 million, or in other words some EUR 3 000 million.

Europe’s contribution to the international space station basically derives from decisions taken within the European Space Agency. That contribution currently takes up 16 % of the current Agency budget and should not exceed 20 % over the next five years. No development funding for the station is planned under the fifth framework programme for research and development.

The station should enable a large number of the techniques needed to continue the conquest of space to be tested and may, in view of its legal and financial aspects, be considered to be the prototype for the international associations needed for this type of venture. However, in view of the restricted European commitment, shutting down the station would have no impact on Europe’s space industry.

(1999/C 325/047) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3943/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (4 January 1999)

Subject: Sustainable Cities and Towns campaign

What steps has the Commission taken to ensure that a legal basis exists to safeguard the future of the Sustainable Cities and Towns campaign?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 March 1999)

The Commission has, on several occasions, recognised the usefulness of the activities of the European Sustainable Cities and Towns Campaign in promoting the application of Agenda 21 at local level.

In its communication entitled ‘Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A Framework for Action’ (1) adopted on 28October 1998,the Commission affirmed its intention to continue to provide aid to local authority networking operations and referred specifically to the European Sustainable Cities and Towns Campaign. The communication also states that the Commission will draw up the necessary legal instruments to ensure the financing of activities of this type on a multiannual basis.

The main points contained in this communication were the subject of a presentation given by the Commission at the Urban Forum held in Vienna on 26 and 27 November 1998. The initial exchange of views that took place on this occasion helped to underline the urgent need to develop an appropriate legal basis for the continuation and consolidation of activities of this type.

The Commission will take the initiative in drafting a proposal along these lines in the coming weeks.

(1) COM(98) 605 final.

(1999/C 325/048) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3947/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (4 January 1999)

Subject: UN World Food Programme

How does the Commission intend to respond to the UN World Food Programme’s assessment of the worsening situation in southern Somalia? What assistance has the European Union provided to date, and what further commitments will it be making? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/41

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 1999)

The Commission is monitoring closely the food situation in Southern Somalia and works in close co-operation and co-ordination with the United Nations world food programme (WFP).Based on reports of the food security assessment unit, co-funded by the Community, it shares WFP concern about the deterioration of the food situation due to poor harvests, increased insecurity in Southern Somalia and the effects of El Niño floods. The Somalia aid co-ordination body in which the Commission is actively participating has also confirmed the imminent crisis and has launched an emergency appeal.It will co-ordinate the response of the international community.The Commission has already pledged 10 million euro in food aid.10 899 metric tons of food, including 9 130 tons of cereals, 1 000 tons of beans, and 559 tons of vegetable oil, will be distributed through WFP to the most vulnerable people in the worst affected areas in Southern Somalia.

(1999/C 325/049) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3953/98 by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Euratom’s budget for 1999

Why has the Commission proposed to reduce by 15 % the resources to be made available to Euratom for the application of ‘specific safeguards for large-scale plutonium processing plants’ (Item B4-2021) in the 1999 budget?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The reduction under budget line B4-2021 amounts to only 1,5 % in terms of commitment appropriations.It is mainly due to the fact that two major investment projects will be finalised early in 1999, namely the on-site safeguards laboratories at the reprocessing plants at La Hague and Sellafield.

Since the large scale plutonium processing plants are already in production or undergoing the commissioning phase, the focus of spending will change in the coming years from investments in safeguards equipment to maintenance activities and the recruitment and training of qualified inspectors for the highly complex inspection activities to be performed in these plants.

(1999/C 325/050) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3954/98 by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Radiological and environmental impact of French nuclear tests on the Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls

What were the main findings of the study undertaken by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on behalf of the Commission and the French authorities into the radiological and environmental impact of French nuclear tests on the Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls? To whom has the report been circulated, and what further studies into the problem does the Commission plan to support?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 1999)

The Mururoa study was conducted by an international advisory committee (IAC) established by the International atomic energy agency (IAEA) at the request of the French government.The Commission was C 325/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

represented in the IAC as one of a number of international organisations which each provided an ex-officio member. The results have been published by the IAEA in several forms representing successive levels of technical detail, all under the title ‘The radiological situation at the atolls of Mururoa and Fangataufa’, including a 16 page brochure (1), a 62 page ‘summary report’ (2), a 282 page ‘main report’ (3), and a ‘technical report’ in 6 volumes totalling some 950 pages (4).

The findings were presented in two preliminary meetings in the Pacific basin and at an IAEA conference in Vienna from 30 June 1998 to 3 July 1998. The proceedings of that conference have also been published as IAEA-MFCP.

The overall conclusions as summarised in the brochure were as follows:

In light of the measured and predicted levels of radionuclides 2 and the assessed doses both in the present and in the future 2 the Study concluded that no remedial action is justified on radiological protection grounds, either now or in the future. There is also no need for further monitoring at the atolls for the purposes of radiological protection. However, the Study recommended that a programme of measure- ment of radioactivity in the environment could be useful, not only scientifically but also in assuring the public about the continuing radiological safety of the atolls.

In view of these conclusions the Commission does not plan any new initiatives.

(1) 98-00958 IAEA/PI/A60E. (2) ISBN 92-0-101298-5. (3) ISBN 92-0-101198-9. (4) IAEA-MFTR-1 to 6.

(1999/C 325/051) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3971/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Community reference laboratory to monitor the quality and toxicology of processed industrial products in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors

Community Directive 91/493/EEC (1) and the Regulations specific to fishery products, namely No 2136/89 (2) laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines and No 1536/92 (3) laying down common marketing standards for preserved tuna and bonito, amongst others, apply to the production and marketing of preserved food, yet differ from the standards in Community legislation governing other products. Likewise, the current COMand generalised systems of preferences constitute a suitable framework for maintaining the quality of fishery products on the Community market for the benefit of consumers, and it would also be desirable for the new COMin fishery and aquaculture products in the EU to envisage doing the same.

Consequently, does the Commission not think that the new COMin fishery and aquaculture products should make provision for a reference laboratory in each of the Member States and a Community reference laboratory to monitor the quality and toxicology of processed industrial products in the fishery and aquaculture sectors, whose tasks would consist of coordinating diagnostic techniques following consultation with the Commission; making an active contribution towards identifying potential toxic sources; encouraging training and retraining in laboratory diagnosis; and cooperating with the sector on diagnostic techniques and with the competent laboratories in the third countries involved, participating as an advisory body in setting standards for the sector governing quality control tests on raw materials and similar products in keeping with the EN 45000 international standards, defining and developing R&D lines, defining quality parameters for raw materials and finished products in physicochemical, microbiological and organisational terms alike, establishing supervisory guidelines for production processes which guarantee the prevention of risks to hygiene and health, and, lastly, strengthening a connecting structure which makes information transfers possible amongst the business sector, administrative bodies, consumers and the scientific community, by encouraging them to engage in interaction?

(1) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991, p. 15. (2) OJ L 212, 22.7.1989, p. 79. (3) OJ L 163, 17.6.1992, p. 1. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/43

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Commission believes that the safety of processed fishery and aquaculture products is adequately assured through existing legislation and controls. This includes several networks of Community reference laboratories such as for marine biotoxins (1), fish (2) and bivalve (3) diseases, zoonoses (4) and residues (5). The networks are integrated by one laboratory (at least) per Member State and designated as national laboratories in the first instance by the Member State. Each network is co-ordinated by a Community reference laboratory (CRL) designated by the Council. The Commission grants financial assistance to these CRLs to improve the efficiency of food and veterinary control. There is also a network of laboratories for food control (6).

The Commission does not see any need for a new reference laboratory in each Member State and a Community reference laboratory to monitor the toxicology of processed fishery and aquaculture products, because those questions are already covered by the existing laboratory networks.

The Honourable Member refers to quality as well as safety issues. While public authorities have a responsibility to ensure product safety in the interest of consumer protection, quality issues are the responsibility of the private sector. As regards improvement of quality there is nothing to prevent the growth of voluntary exchanges and co-operation between laboratories operating in the processed fishery products field throughout the Community and such exchanges are to be encouraged. Industry and representative organisations in the sector have a prime responsibility to see to it that such networking takes place.

(1) Council Decision 93/383/EEC (OJ L 166, 8.7.1993). (2) Council Directive 93/53/EEC (OJ L 175, 19.7.1993) . (3) Council Directive 95/70/EC (OJ L 322, 30.12.1995). (4) Council Directive 92/117/EC (OJ L 62, 15.3.1993). (5) Council Directive 96/23/EC (OJ L 125, 23.5.1996) . (6) Council Decision 90/424/EEC (OJ L 224, 18.8.1990).

(1999/C 325/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3972/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: EU action to alleviate the grave crisis affecting fishing for swordfish

Written Question E-0906/98 (1) of March 1998, addressed to the Commission, condemned the fact that fishing for swordfish by vessels flying flags of convenience was giving rise to a grave crisis in the form of a depletion of stocks, unfair competition, distortions on the markets, and so forth. In its answer, the Commission stated that it was ‘fully aware of the problem’, and in response to the call for trade sanctions to be adopted at ICCAT, it declared that ‘at the appropriate time, and on the basis of the information that will be presented at the next annual meeting (...), the Commission will be in a position to discuss this matter’.

Given that, as matters stand at present, the indecisive results of the recent annual meeting will neither lead to a recovery in stocks nor bring the market out of crisis, thereby seriously jeopardising the viability of the Community sector and in particular of the Spanish longliner fleet.

Given the information already available:

1. Does the Commission not believe that putting an end to the illegal and irresponsible activity of fleets flying flags of convenience continues to present the only valid and effective way out of the crisis currently besetting the swordfish market?

2. Does it not regard the ICCAT recommendation on a possible ban on landings by vessels from non- contracting states, where infringements of ICCAT rules can be proved, as entirely inadequate and ineffective in practice, since most of the fish entering the market have been caught by merchant vessels which can sidestep any potential ban on landings merely by stating that they have been fishing outside the ICCAT regulatory area? C 325/44 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

3. What new measures does it therefore intend to adopt to alleviate the grave crisis affecting the sector?

(1) OJ C 354,19.11.1998,p. 38.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

At the annual meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) held at Santiago de Compostela,Spain,from 16 to 23 November 1998 the Commission proposed the adoption of measures to prohibit imports of swordfish from countries which grant flags of convenience. Unfortunately, this proposal was opposed by other members of ICCAT and could not be adopted.

The measure to prohibit landings by non-contracting party vessels identified as having committed an infringement,which was adopted by ICCAT at the Community’s instigation,can be very effective in the case of direct landings,which make up a large proportion of imports.

There remains the more difficult problem of swordfish imports by other means. The Commission has taken an active part,within the regional fisheries management organisations,in the adoption of measures in respect of vessels flying flags of convenience. It will continue its efforts,in particular within ICCAT,to find a satisfactory solution to this problem.

The Commission has also suggested that the Spanish authorities apply Council Regulation (EC) 1093/94 of 6 May 1994 setting the terms under which fishing vessels of a third country may land directly and market their catches at Community ports (1),which makes it possible to prevent third country vessels from landing swordfish directly and marketing it in the Community at less than the reference price.

(1) OJ L 121,12.5.1994.

(1999/C 325/053) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3974/98 by Frédéric Striby (I-EDN) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Areas eligible for Objective 2 funding

Against the backdrop of the future enlargement towards the East,the Structural Fund reform being implemented by the Commission and the reform of the French Government’s regional aid measures will bring about major changes in the way European funds are allocated to various areas.

Given the Commission’s desire to concentrate structural operations,some areas run the risk of not being declared eligible for the regional planning grant (PAT) by the French Government,which would decrease the likelihood of their being eligible for funding under the future Objective 2. This would lead to imbalances between regions and would be a severe blow to a pro-active regional planning policy.

Would the Commission not agree that it should increase the margin for manoeuvre by 2 % so as to enable areas not covered by regional aid measures to become eligible for Objective 2 funding?

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

(3 March 1999)

The communication from the Commission to the Member States on the links between regional and competition policy (1),adopted on 17 March 1998,called for consistency between the two policies to be reinforced. The Commission believes that national measures and Community structural measures should be directed at the regions and areas which are most in need. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/45

It will be principally for each Member State to ensure consistency between the map of areas which are eligible under Objective 2 and the map of areas which qualify for national regional aid under Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.

The Commission considers that the possibility of proposing, under Objective 2, areas which are not covered by the exceptions provided for in Article 92(3)(c) and containing overall not more than 2 % of the national population not covered by Objective 1 gives each Member State sufficient flexibility.

However, it should be borne in mind that this question is being discussed in the negotiations which are taking place on the legislation contained in the Agenda 2000 package. The final outcome will not be known until these negotiations have been concluded and the new regulations have been formally adopted.

(1) OJ C 90, 26.3.1998.

(1999/C 325/054) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3992/98 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(21 December 1998)

Subject: Ban on antibiotics

The Commission is planning on the basis of scientific advice to ban the following four products:

5 Zinc Bacitracin

5 Virginiamycin

5 Spiramycin

5 Tylosin.

There is considerable concern that whilst this leaves European agriculture less competitive, these products may still be used in animals and birds reared in third countries and may continue to constitute a threat to public health if over-used.

Can the Commission explain what steps it will take to prevent the importation of meat and animals and birds receiving these antibiotics?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

The Council meeting which took the decision to suspend the use for growth promotion of the substances mentioned by the Honourable Member also discussed the consequences on import from third countries of live animals and foodstuffs of animal origin.

The Council and the Commission recognised the importance of the external dimension of this dossier. They emphasised, in that respect, their joint resolve to ensure the protection of consumers’ health, whilst complying with the Community’s international commitments.

The outcome of that discussion was that the Commission was invited to present, before 30 June 1999, a report on the economic, legal, and public health implications of the antibiotics resistance issue with regard to the external dimension. C 325/46 OfficialJournalof the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/055) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3999/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(5 January 1999)

Subject: Operation of Cedefop

Since the end of 1995, Cedefop has been operating in Greece. An ancillary unit has also been operating in Brussels.

Will the Commission say:

1. how many permanent officials work at the Centre in Thessaloniki and how many in the ancillary unit in Brussels, and

2. what the operating costs (pay, publications, maintenance of buildings etc.) are for the Centre in Thessaloniki and for the ancillary unit?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) has had an information office in Brussels since 1991. This Brussels office is also an important contact point with all the Community institutions and the Centre’s partners at European level (e.g. social partners). The presence of an on-site expert allows the Centre to participate and be represented in a multitude of European-level activities.

1. The office in Brussels currently has three officials: one A5 (an expert responsible for representing the Centre and producing monographs on the vocationaltraining systems of the Member States), one B1 and one C1. These three officials are rotated every three years and represent 3 % of the total staff (97) of the Centre (officials (27), temporary staff, auxiliaries, local staff and seconded national experts).

2. The annual cost of running the Brussels office is EUR 259 800. This breaks down as follows: salaries (EUR 246 800), premises, heating, electricity and water (EUR 3 000) and telephone, fax, etc. (EUR 10 000). The Centre’s total annual budget for 1998 is in the order of EUR 13,3 million. This breaks down as follows: (a) personnel costs (EUR 6,5 million), (b) administration of buildings, infrastructure, etc. (EUR 1,4 million) and (c) operational costs of documentation, dissemination, projects, etc. (EUR 5,4 million).

(1999/C 325/056) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4005/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE)to the Commission

(5 January 1999)

Subject: Investment in the city of Santander (Spain)

What works, projects, initiatives, etc., have been financed since 1994 (or are due to be financed up to the end of 1999) in the city of Santander = the capitalof Cantabria (Spain) and an Objective 1 region = using money from the StructuralFunds and the Cohesion Fund?

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

(24 February 1999)

The city of Santander receives assistance from the StructuralFunds under two operationalprogrammes for the region of Cantabria: the operationalprogramme for Cantabria and the regionaloperationalprogramme for Cantabria, and under a nationalprogramme, the localenvironment operationalprogramme.

It should be noted that the financial resources providing assistance under the Structural Funds are allocated at programme level and that the projects to be part-financed under them are selected by the authorities responsible for their implementation, apart from those of a certain size, which are dealt with on an individual basis. The Commission is therefore unable to give a precise answer to the questions asked. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/47

However, from the implementation reports submitted at the last meetings of the Monitoring Committees for these programmes, the Commission has been able to identify some projects in Santander, although their total cost was not stated. A list of these projects is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

In addition to this assistance, Santander also receives, through the Urban Community Initiative, assistance from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund for an integrated development project in the ‘Barrio de la Calle Alta o Promontorio, El Cabildo, Barrio Castilla Hermida and Barrio Pesquero’ areas. The total cost of this project is EUR 10 million, to which the Community is contributing EUR 7 million.

Santander is also receiving finance for a large independent project, ‘First phase of the integral treatment system for Santander bay’. Total investment in this project amounts to ECU 25,32 million to which the ERDF is contributing EUR 17,72 million.

The Cohesion Fund is helping finance phase II of this project for waste-water disposal and a treatment system for Santander bay. The Fund is providing EUR 22,83 million towards a total investment of EUR 28,54 million.

(1999/C 325/057) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4006/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(5 January 1999)

Subject: Unfair competition from the shipyards of South Korea

The shipyards of Europe are suffering as a result of severe unfair competition from those of South Korea, a country which is using loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in order to undercut European prices by a considerable margin.

Does the Commission think it right that South Korea should use IMF loans in order to subsidise unfair competitive practices on the part of its shipyards?

What measures is the Commission prepared to propose or accept in order to prevent such competition from South Korean shipyards and to support the activities of European shipyards?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 1999)

The Commission is following developments in the Asian financial crisis and their impact on European shipbuilders closely. It is keeping particularly close watch on Korea’s use of financial aid from international institutions.

During his recent visit to Korea, Sir Leon Brittan reiterated that the government could in no circumstances grant special treatment to the industrial conglomerates with which Korea’s shipyards are associated.

On 16 November Mr Bangemann reported on this issue and what the Commission was doing about it to the Council meeting on industry. Backed by the Council on the need to act against any unfair competition, he proposed that the Member States use their influence with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to ensure that Korea complied with the conditions governing international aid.

The Commission has yet to receive any conclusive evidence that Korea has not complied with the international rules. None of the IMF’s reports suggest any use of IMF funds to finance Korean industry, and in particular shipbuilding.

The Commission would conclude by informing the Honourable Member that the new Regulation on aid to shipbuilding came into force on 1 January (1). There being no international (Organisation for Economic C 325/48 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Cooperation and Development)agreement in this sector, the Regulation is intended to improve the competitiveness of European shipyards by means of an appropriate aid policy and overcome the gap separating them from their international competitors, in particular Japan and Korea.

(1) Regulation (EC) 1540/98 of 29 June 1998, OJ L 202, 18.7.1998.

(1999/C 325/058) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4013/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Replacement of old fishing boats

The policy of regenerating the fishing fleet provides for the replacement of old fishing vessels with new ones. The old vessels are to be withdrawn and scrapped. In Greece, however, this means scrapping the traditional wooden caïques, many of which are literally masterpieces of shipbuilding. What is destroyed with them (and the process is extremely efficient: they are literally shattered by being dropped from cranes from a great height and then ‘carved’ up by chain saws, etc.) is centuries of craftsmanship and skill, cultural icons and symbols of co-existence with the sea and seafaring.

Could the Commission, therefore, seek ways of withdrawing these vessels from the fishing industry without destroying them in this terrible manner, possibly by giving them to recognised nautical clubs or similar non- profiting making organisations?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

In its recent proposal to the Council laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector (1) the Commission provides, among other things, for measures to adjust fishing effort, including measures to stop vessels’ fishing activities permanently.

These measures, which may be applied only to vessels more than 15years old, attract public aid for the scrapping of vessels, permanent transfer of vessels to third countries and permanent reassignment of vessels to uses in the Community other than fishing. In this connection, the proposal provides that where a vessel is definitively assigned for the preservation of historical heritage in the territory of a Member State, public aid may be granted on the same terms as for scrapping, i.e. the maximum public contribution is paid.

(1) OJ C 16, 21.1.1999.

(1999/C 325/059) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4014/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Water supply on Aegean islands

The islands of the Aegean are encountering an increasing number of problems with their water supply owing to the limited possibilities of pumping up ground water and the decline of traditional methods of collecting rainwater. At the same time, current needs and the pressure of tourism are bringing about an increase in demand for water. The problem is being tackled by using expensive methods of transporting water from other regions, though in this case too, supplies are precarious and the quality of the water is questionable.

Encouraging the trend towards support for renewable energy sources, could the Commission help to bring about a permanent solution to the water supply problem on the islands by means of desalination and the use of solar, wind and kinetic energy? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/49

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

(24 February 1999)

The Community has already part-financed substantial infrastructure works on the Greek islands in the Aegean Sea to solve problems relating to water, particularly drinking water. This part-finance has been provided through the Integrated Mediterranean Programmes, the Community support frameworks for 1989-93 and 1994-99, the special measures for these islands and certain Community Initiatives.

The bulk of these works concern traditional facilities such as dams, rainwater collectors, pipes for drinking water and irrigation networks; they are normally regarded as preferable to desalination since, in most cases, they also help solve the problem of water for irrigation by providing adequate quantities of good quality water at an acceptable price.

If proposals relating to the methods referred to by the Honourable Member were put forward by the Greek authorities, the Commission would consider them under the current programmes in the light of alternative solutions, other priorities and the budgetary resources available.

Again, if the Greek authorities so request and budgetary resources are available, the Cohesion Fund is still willing to part-finance water-supply projects on the Aegean islands, as it has already done on Mytilene and Crete.

It should be noted that this Fund has already financed a study on coordinated measures for the environment on Santorini and Thirassia so that the Greek authorities can submit to the Commission an application for finance for an integrated pilot project including measures relating to water supply, the production of drinking water by desalination, the treatment of waste water and waste disposal. If this pilot project succeeds, it may provide an example of how other islands could find permanent and reliable solutions to their problems.

(1999/C 325/060) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4033/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: EU aid for Somalia and Ethiopia

1. Are there any EU aid programmes in support of projects in Somalia and/or Ethiopia?

2. If so, what programmes? What projects have been or are being supported, and what level of funding is involved?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

The Community gives development aid to the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of countries under the Lomé Convention, an association agreement to which both Somalia and Ethiopia are party.

The Lomé Convention comprises a financial package, special arrangements for trade cooperation and investment promotion, and a scheme to stabilise commodity export earnings (Stabex). Using this instrument, the Community finances projects in both Somalia and Ethiopia.

To provide the fullest possible information on its aid programmes the Commission is sending copies of the latest annual reports covering its activities in Somalia and Ethiopia for the year 1997 direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. C 325/50 OfficialJournalof the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/061) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4042/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 January 1999)

Subject: Export incentives in Turkey

The Turkish Government has recently announced the introduction of an export incentive scheme consisting of:

% funding for export companies formed by joint ventures which open branches abroad,

% payments of $ 400 000 to $ 900 000 for export operations resulting from mergers and

% additionalexport subsidies.

Since such subsidies infringe competition rules, are detrimental to undertakings and products in the Member States and are contrary to Turkey’s undertakings to the European Union in connection with the Customs Union:

% can the Commission confirm the above?

% is the payment of export subsidies in accordance with the spirit and letter of Customs Union?

% in any event, the EU must be informed in advance of any export subsidies. Was this done?

% what steps will the Commission take to put an end to measures by the Turkish Government which infringe the Customs Union agreement?

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

(2 March 1999)

The Commission has recently been informed about the adoption in July 1997 by the Turkish government of a communiqué 97/9 on supporting the activities of opening and operating offices and stores and promoting trademarks abroad. This communiqué contains in particular a provision for the support by the Foreign Trade Undersecretariat of part of the establishment, operation and promotion expenses of companies, stores, warehouses and branch offices already established and operating or to be established abroad.

The Commission is examining the conformity of these provisions with the rules established by the customs union Decision 1/95 and especially its Article 34 on state aids. If these provisions were considered as incompatible with these rules, the Commission would ask for immediate consultation in the customs union joint committee under Article 38 of the customs union Decision.

(1999/C 325/062) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4053/98 by Nelly Maes (V) to the Commission

(13 January 1999)

Subject: Misuse of humanitarian aid to countries at war

On 18 September 1998, the President of the Commission said that the European Union should review its aid to countries at war and refuse to provide financialassistance if it was used for war purposes. Afterwards, the Commission is said to have instituted an internalinquiry to identify any diversion of European aid funds and determine what measures can be taken against those responsible. 12.11.1999 EN OfficialJournalof the European Communities C 325/51

1. What are the findings of this inquiry?

2. What measures has the Commission taken since September 1998 to review the rules on providing financialassistance to countries at war? How can countries be punished if they are found to have used European aid funds for war purposes?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission’s statement was an expression of its serious concern about the widening conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with some dozen countries directly or indirectly involved in a regional war.

The aim is not merely to weigh the risk of aid being diverted, nor is this purely an internal inquiry. The Commission wishes to review the situation of countries involved in armed conflict given the risk of serious destabilisation, humanitarian catastrophe and the destruction of years of effort spent on an economic, social and human development policy framed jointly by the Commission and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States. This is a legitimate question and is bound to be taken up by public opinion in Europe; why indeed should we continue providing needed assistance to poor countries if they are meanwhile using their own resources to settle political and territorial disputes by military means?

These issues are already being discussed in the Member States and the debate will surely spread to the international community as a whole. In any case the Commission has already put measures in hand. Clauses have been inserted in each new agreement on budgetary aid for an ACP country involved in armed conflict stipulating payment in tranches, with stringent checks on the way previous funds have been used before a new instalment is released. Financing agreements relating to budgetary aid for a country involved in armed conflict are accompanied by a letter from the Commission to the Head of State explaining these measures, expressing the Commission’s concern and urging the government to seek a negotiated settlement without delay.

Humanitarian aid, however, involves neither a preliminary signed accord nor a financing agreement with the recipient country. Operations are carried out by our partners, i.e. non-governmentalorganisations or UN agencies, and belligerents, who may be engaged in ethnic cleansing or other systematic human rights violations as well as military operations, often deliberately block access to victims by humanitarian organisations in areas where there is fighting. In 1998, for instance, the Commission, while continuing to denounce human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law, encountered increasing difficulty in safeguarding humanitarian operations in Sudan, CentralAfrica and Afghanistan.

(1999/C 325/063) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4064/98 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 January 1999)

Subject: Report of the European Ombudsman on the Itoiz dam (Spain)

In his report of 20 November 1998 the European Ombudsman criticised the decision to take no further action on complaint P/92/4758 concerning the Itoiz dam and concluded his remarks by noting that the fact that the Commission could give no proper justification for its decision (to consider the matter closed) constituted a case of maladministration.

The Itoiz dam is damaging two SpecialBird Conservation Areas (ZEPA) and three nature reserves.

1. Does the Commission know about the above-mentioned report by the Ombudsman?

2. What steps will it take to remedy this case of maladministration? C 325/52 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission is aware of the Ombudsman’s decision in this matter.

The Ombudsman’s critical remarks solely concern the extent to which the Commission had given adequate reasons for not accepting a legal argument put forward by the complainants (which essentially related to whether Spain could rely on a development consent process set out in Directive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna as against an earlier process set out in Directive 79/409/EEC (2) of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds).

However, the Commission considers that the information it provided was sufficient to address this legal argument, since it could be logically deduced from this information why the legal argument was not accepted. In particular, the Commission made quite clear the date from which it considered Directive 92/43/EEC to be applicable, and the facts made it clear that the Itoiz project would be carried out after that date. In any case, the Ombudsman did not question the correctness of the Commission’s legal stance.

Given this and given the fact that the Itoiz project has since been constructed, the Commission does not see any purpose in prolonging commentary on a Commission decision dating from 1994. The original complainant in this case has been fully informed of Commission’s views on this issue.

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

(1999/C 325/064) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4077/98 by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Better lawmaking: a shared responsibility

On 2 December the Commission announced that it is ‘planning to withdraw around 90 proposals which are no longer relevant for various reasons, including subsidiarity’.

Can the Commission now supply the questioner with a list of the proposals that it is planning to withdraw; can it state when this list will become official, and, when it does, will it undertake to publish the list in the Official Journal?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 1999)

The list to which the Honourable Member refers was sent to Parliament and the Council on 17 December 1998 (1).

The relevant decision will shortly be published in the Official Journal.

(1) SEC(98) 2143.

(1999/C 325/065) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4080/98 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Abandoned villages in Aragon (Spain)

Aragon is the Spanish Autonomous Community most heavily affected by depopulation: some 400 villages, hamlets and farms, above all in the Huesca Pyrenees and the Teruel mountain regions, a fact which clearly reflects the regional planning policies implemented hitherto. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/53

Certain individuals or groups are now opting for an alternative lifestyle and direct contact with nature as an escape from the big city rat-race, and seeking occupations in rural areas, either in villages which are still inhabited or even in abandoned villages. The ‘Colores’ collective in Sasé (Aragon, Spain), which is fully integrated into the Sobrarbe district, has attempted to do this, but the administration has not adopted measures which would facilitate the collective’s work in building stable settlements. The Aragonese administration has been parsimonious with regard to such settlements, and the only alternative which it has developed has been to reclaim abandoned villages for tourism purposes.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. Does the Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties, not believe that the development, promotion and rehabilitation of abandoned villages should be stepped up, and that associations or collectives such as the ‘Colores’ collective, which put forward stable schemes for settlement, should be helped to repopulate these villages?

3. To what extent are the rights of European citizens being violated when they are prevented from establishing a stable settlement in a depopulated region?

4. Has the Commission drawn up any draft directive or report on this issue, given the major migration from the countryside into large cities which is taking place?

5. Can the Commission make available any information it acquires when following up this matter?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 1999)

The Commission part-finances improvement of village infrastructure and services from the Structural Funds in order to help keep people living in the countryside and enjoying better living conditions.

In line with decentralisation and partnership principles the projects part-financed from Community funds are selected by national and regional authorities under rural development programmes approved by the Commission. In the case of Aragon Structural Fund assistance for village improvement is given under the terms of the single programming document for the Objective 5b area in which the village of Sasé is located.

The Commission has not so far discussed the situation of the Colores collective with the Spanish authorities and has no information about it.

It considers that national and regional authorities are in the best position to define policy (complying with civil and administrative law) on installation of persons and social groups in villages, as part of their rural development strategy.

Given the scope for action that already exists under the structural policies, the Commission sees no need for a specific Directive on this matter.

(1999/C 325/066) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4084/98 by Luigi Florio (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Exclusion of SMIs from European trade union negotiations

Organisations representing European SMIs are normally only consulted by the Commission and systematically excluded from negotiations, to which only organisations representing big business are invited.

Nevertheless, as the statistics clearly show, SMIs are the only ones to have created new jobs in recent decades, and the number of people employed by big business has continued to decrease. C 325/54 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Does the Commission not think that this state of affairs should be rectified and European organisations representing SMIs allowed to participate in trade union negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 1999)

Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) have a crucial role in contributing to wealth and jobs in the Community. The Commission has a duty to promote the European social dialogue and to ensure maximum representativeness in consultation and in the implementation of agreements according to the respective principles underlying these processes.

The Commission and the Council have the responsibility to control that the signatories to an agreement reached by the social partners, which is to be transposed into Community legislation, are sufficiently representative in relation to the scope of the agreement. However, the institutions have to fully respect the autonomy of the social partners and cannot intervene in the free choice of negotiating partner.

In its communication, ‘Adapting and promoting social dialogue at Community level’ of 20 May 1998 (1), the Commission gave a clear message urging the social partners to ensure that their dialogue remains strong and continues to attract widespread support by ensuring optimum representation. This message, which was very much in line with the position of the Parliament on the green paper which preceded the communication (2), led to a serious discussion between the Union of industrial and employers’ confederations of Europe (UNICE) and the European Union of crafts and small and medium sized enterprises (UEAPME) on the possibility for the latter to take part in all the relevant joint-action and negotiation processes within the European social dialogue. The two organisations concluded an agreement at the end of 1998 on cooperation between UNICE and UEAPME in the social dialogue meetings, including negotiations. The Commission welcomes this as an important step forward regarding constructive dialogue and broader participation in social partner negotiations at European level.

(1) COM(98) 322 final. (2) COM(96) 448 final.

(1999/C 325/067) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4087/98 by José Mendes Bota (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Lagos and the Day of European Citizenship

In October 1996, in a letter to Mr Pinheiro, Commissioner, the chairman of the Lagos (Portugal) town council suggested that 9 May should be designated as the Day of European Citizenship and he offered his attractive town as a setting for events organised to mark the occasion.

Following the European Parliament’s adoption, in July 1998, of a proposal for 9 May to be made a European public holiday, would the Commission provide information concerning the action taken in response to that proposal and the possibilities for arranging, under the aegis of the Commission and in association with Lagos town council, some socio-cultural events commemorating the day on which European integration was launched, to be held in Lagos in the course of 1999?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The Commission considers the time has come to review ways of commemorating 9 May in the light of recent and future changes in the European Union as a result of the Treaty of Amsterdam. This review must take into account the desire to bring Europe closer to the people and comply with the principle of subsidiarity.

Together with the Member States the Commission is considering the question before making specific suggestions. Naturally, Parliament’s views on the subject will be taken into account. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/55

For the immediate future, the Commission is not considering any particular measure associated with any one European Union town in 1999.

(1999/C 325/068) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4094/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Projects in the delta of the River Nestos

Further to my previous question on the construction and operation of dams on the River Nestos (E-1648/98), I should like to notify the Commission that at the beginning of October 1998 the DEI (Greek Electricity Board) stopped the flow of the river through the Platanovrysi dam; as a result part of the riverbed dried up and dead fish were washed up on the banks. This is having adverse ecological consequences for the narrows and delta of the River Nestos which are protected by national, Community and international law.

This action by the DEI is also in violation of the Joint Ministerial Decision 16492/1996 under which the DEI is obliged to ensure at all times, even during the filling of the dams, a minimum flow of 6 m3/sec throughout the length of the river, as a minimum precondition for the project.

Will the Commission say whether it is aware of this information and what representations it intends to make to the relevant Greek authorities so that they establish who is responsible? In its answer of 26 June 1998 to my previous question, it had stated that if violations were established, it would take the measures provided for under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. Does it consider that the above actions by the DEI could be viewed as a violation which is sufficiently serious to warrant initiating proceedings before the European Court Justice?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

The Commission brought an infringement action against Greece after a complaint had been made concerning the conditions under which the four dams on the River Nestos were being constructed by the DEI (Greek Public Electricity Board).

As part of the investigation of this matter the Greek authorities send a detailed report to the Commission in September 1998 on the current status as regards the work being carried out and above all on the launching of new studies in accordance with the Ministerial decision of 19 September 1996 approving the environmental terms (attached).

The Commission would like to thank the Honourable Member for the new information provided. Indeed, the Commission will take account of those new data when deciding how to pursue the matter.

(1999/C 325/069) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4105/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE)to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Possible infringement of the rules on free competition by the law governing ‘banking foundations’ in Italy

A law on the reform of ‘banking foundations’ was recently passed in Italy.

It allows such foundations to maintain holdings in banking companies, which means in practice that they can exercise control over them. The fact that they combine socially useful functions with economic objectives constitutes an inappropriate overlapping of roles and allows them to extend their sphere of influence to other business activities, whilst maintaining the status of non-commercial entities, with all the tax benefits that that C 325/56 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

entails. The absence of a clear distinction between the two types of activity could have an adverse effect on competition on markets, because of both the favourable tax provisions applicable to such foundations and the counterproductive effects on the ownership of companies and access to credit for non-banking firms. The tax concessions enjoyed by the foundations might give the companies held by them an unfair competitive advantage, which might lead to the foundations having a greater capacity than private shareholders to give financial support to the companies in which they have a share. This would distort competition by aiding certain firms at the expense of others.

Can the Commission therefore:

ascertain directly the scope of the reform and any infringements of the rules of the single market and competition which it might entail for the Italian and European economic systems;

say whether it does not consider, in particular, that the tax concessions enjoyed by the foundations which give the firms held by them an unfair competitive advantage and distort normal competition constitute a blatant infringement of the European rules on free competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 1999)

The Honourable Member’s Written Question raises concerns on the possible adverse effect on competition included in the provisions of the Italian law No 461 of the 23 December 1998. The law aims to restructure the regulations applicable to the ‘banking foundations’ public non-profit organisations that currently combine socially useful functions with economic goals. With the goal to make these entities fully regulated by the civil laws, the new regulation foresees, among other things, the establishment of an independent supervisory authority, provisions to change the legal nature of the ‘foundations’, and fiscal measures to facilitate the transition of these entities to the private regime.

The Commission will ask the Italian authority the necessary information to investigate the presence of any rule that may jeopardise the competition and the functioning of the single market. The Honourable Member will be held informed of the examination of this issue.

(1999/C 325/070) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4110/98 by Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: EU number plates in Switzerland

1. Does the draft agreement between the European Union and Switzerland include provisions concerning the mutual recognition of the number plates issued by the European Union’s Member States and Switzerland?

2. If not, does the Commission not feel that EU tourists may be at risk of being fined in Switzerland, since the Swiss authorities may continue to require tourists to display a sticker in addition to their national number plate (with the EU stars) and to enforce this requirement with fines? Such stickers are no longer used in normal traffic between EU countries.

3. What does the Commission intend to do about this situation?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

1. There is no provision covering recognition by Switzerland of number plates issued by Member States and conforming to the Annex of Council Regulation (EC) 2411/98 of 3 November 1998 on the recognition in intra-Community traffic of the distinguishing sign of the Member State in which motor vehicles and their trailers are registered (1). 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/57

2. The Council Regulation provides for recognition in intra-Community traffic of the distinguishing sign of the Member State in which motor vehicles and their trailers are registered (1).

Obviously, it does not cover Community vehicles circulating in third countries such as Switzerland. Therefore, the elliptical sticker provided by Article 37 of the Vienna Convention could be required, in principle, by the Swiss authorities.

3. The Commission has contacted the Swiss authorities asking them to recognise the distinguishing sign in line with the provisions of Regulation (EC)2411/98. Member States will be informed as soon as the Commission gets a reply from the Swiss authorities.

(1)OJ L 299, 10.11.1998.

(1999/C 325/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0002/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Citrus fruit restructuring programme in Greece

On 7 July 1998 the Greek Government submitted to the Commission of the European Communities a DR 77 billion restructuring programme for citrus fruits aimed at improving citrus fruit production in Greece.

Since the programme is considered vital for citrus fruit cultivation in Greece, will the Commission say: Has it adopted the above programme and, if not, what is the reason for the delay? What are its views on the above programme?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The Commission has not approved the restructuring programme for the citrus sector in Greece. The programme, however, is still under examination.

In January 1999, Commission staff visited the main citrus growing areas in Greece and the results of this visit are still being studied.

(1999/C 325/072) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0013/99 by María Izquierdo Rojo (PSE)to the Commission

(12 January 1999)

Subject: Misinformation in the European Communities’ official publication concerning urban pilot projects

In the European Communities’ official publication on Urban Pilot Projects, phase II, funded under Article 10 of the ERDF, the Granada-Albayzín project is illustrated with a photograph (p. 31)of a local craftwork company which has neither received nor requested financial support under the urban project in question.

Both the use of this photograph and the caption give the impression that there is a link with this European project, a fact which the owner denies; how does the Commission intend to correct these misleading statements? Does the Commission know whether this may have given rise to other irregularities? C 325/58 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

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

(8 March 1999)

The publication entitled ‘Article 10 European Regional Development Fund, Urban Pilot Projects Phase II, 1997-99 Project Descriptions’ (1) has been produced to give an introductory summary of the 26 Urban pilot projects selected in 1997. It is being produced in all official Community languages and is intended to inform a wide audience about the innovative actions taking place in European cities with Community support.

At the time of the preparation and publication of the document, the pilot projects were just beginning, so the document focuses on the aims and proposed actions, rather than the results of the projects. All the illustrative material has been supplied by the project managers to indicate the kind of activities that would be undertaken. In this instance, the project manager has confirmed that the image is intended to offer a general example of arts and crafts activities in the area, as is conveyed by the caption ‘Local crafts: the production of Granada’s traditional ceramics’, rather than a more explicit reference to specific action. The Commission considers that the document is indicative rather than misleading.

In addition to this general publication concerning project descriptions, the Commission also publishes annual reports on the pilot projects which give more information about the progress of the projects and the lessons and ideas emerging from the overall programme.

(1) ISBN: 92-828-3940-0.

(1999/C 325/073) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/99 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Effects of exports in sensitive sectors

In view of the EU suggestion that non-LDC ACP States should be offered the option of accepting GSP, does the Commission appreciate that some ACP States exporting into sensitive sectors such as fisheries would suffer a decline in relative preference?

If such a GSP offered to non-LDC ACP States excluded highly-competitive developing country exporters such as Thailand, would there not be a likelihood of a challenge being issued in the WTO?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

Under the Community scheme of generalised preference (GSP) market access conditions presently offered are indeed less advantageous than those granted under the Lomé Convention. This does include fisheries products for which African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries benefit from duty free access whereas non-least developed country (LDC) GSP countries face relatively high tariffs. Application of the GSP to ACP countries will lead indeed to a loss of preferential margin and therefore might have a negative impact on their level of exports in sectors where they have still to improve their competitiveness.

On the contrary, economic partnership agreements, as proposed by the Community, would allow the non- LDC ACP not only to maintain but even to improve market access to the Community. For those ACP countries which, for objective reasons, are not in a position to join such an agreement, the Commission would remind the Honourable Member that in the framework of the negotiating directives, the Community undertook to examine all the alternative possibilities in order to provide these countries with a new framework for trade between them and the Community which is equivalent to their existing situation under the Lomé Convention and in conformity with World trade organisation (WTO) rules. In particular, the Community will take into account their interests in the review of the GSP in 2004, making use of the differentiation permitted under WTO rules. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/59

Present WTO rules do not allow discriminatory differentiation within the GSP in favour of a particular group of countries, with the exception of LDCs, 39 of them being ACP. However, a discussion of the adequacy of these rules in the light of the evolution of the international context and development policies could be foreseen in the future.

The exclusion of Thailand from the preferential benefits of GSP for the fishery sector is a result of the application of the so-called graduation mechanism, which excludes sectors and countries from the benefit of the preferential margin if a certain level of development has been reached in that sector. This mechanism, which is applicable on the basis of non-discriminatory criteria to all benefiting countries, has so far never been challenged in WTO.

(1999/C 325/074) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0032/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Viagra and the ill-treatment of animals

Reports have recently appeared in the European press that the company which manufactures the well-known drug Viagra carried out experiments on dogs in its laboratory in the Sandwich area in the United Kingdom.

During these experiments many of the dogs were killed and scores of others suffered appallingly.

Will the Commission say whether its services were informed about the ill-treatment and killing of scores of innocent dogs and, if so, what action it has taken to identify those responsible so as to prevent anything similar occurring in future?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3349/98 by Mr Tamino (1).

(1) OJ C 297, 15.10.1999, p. 66.

(1999/C 325/075) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0033/99 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Veterinary checks by EU-veterinarians of third country poultrymeat-processing establishments

In view of the clear need to guarantee the safety of all meat products entering the EU from third countries, can the Commission confirm that, in the case of poultrymeat, it is EU-veterinarians and not the authorities in the third countries themselves, who now have responsibility for inspecting and approving all processing plants before they can be approved to export to the EU?

In this regard, can the Commission also indicate the exact number of poultrymeat processing plants in both Thailand and Brazil which are approved for export to the EU and indicate how many of these plants have been inspected by EU-veterinary inspectors within the last three years? C 325/60 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

Council Decision 95/408/EC of 22 June 1995 (1) sets out the conditions for drawing up,for an interim period, provisional lists of third country establishments from which Member States are authorized to import certain products of animal origin,including poultrymeat and poultrymeat products.

The Commission is responsible for initial inspections of the third country and particularly its veterinary inspection service. Member States discuss their reports within the standing veterinary committee and if the committee gives a favourable opinion,the initial list of establishments is laid down by a Commission decision. Additions,deletions or modifications to the initial approved list may be made by the Commission,following the procedure set out in Council Decision 95/408/EC.

The routine amendments to these lists and inspections of third countries,their veterinary services and processing plants are carried out by the Commission.

Both Brazil and Thailand currently have 22 fresh poultry meat premises approved for export to the Community. For poultry meat products,Thailand has 30 approved premises and Brazil has 24.

During the last three years,the Commission carried out one veterinary mission to Thailand,during which five establishments were inspected.

In the case of Brazil,three veterinary missions were carried out by the Commission in 1995,1997 and 1998, during which 15 poultry establishments were visited

(1) OJ L 243,11.10.1995.

(1999/C 325/076) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0046/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Problem of computer compatibility in secondary education in Greece

By the end of 1996 1 187 of the 1 777 secondary schools in Greece had been equipped with computers for educational purposes. However,the vast majority of these computers,which have not been upgraded,are second and third-generation computers (286 and 386,respectively) and cannot therefore use Windows or modern telecommunications applications based on this particular programme.

Will the Commission say:

1. What information does it have about the existing infrastructure in secondary education in Greece as regards data-processing and the telecommunications potential of this infrastructure?

2. What is the period of implementation of the programme for the introduction of data-processing in secondary education (under the EPEAEK > Greek Operational Programme ‘Education and Initial Vocational Training’),and will it say in particular whether pupils’ ability to use up-to-date telecommunications applications is compatible with the original objectives of the Operational Programme?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The structural funds support the introduction and use of information technology in secondary education schools in Greece through the operational programme ‘Education and initial training’. The operation is implemented progressively on the basis of an integrated plan,which includes actions referring to the purchase of hardware and standard software; the establishment of computer laboratories,mainly for the integrated lyceums; the development or adaptation of educational software; the training of teachers and students; and the 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/61

link to Internet and/or other networks. The Greek authorities have defined the specifications of the system so as to allow for the use of modern telecommunications applications.

Despite the considerable resources allocated to the introduction of information technology into secondary schools, it will not be possible to equip all schools with computer facilities within the current programming period (1994-1999). The effort should continue in the next Community support framework.

For further details, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the Greek ministry of Education.

(1999/C 325/077) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0048/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Subject: European measures to combat specific forms of crime in Italy

What steps does the Commission intend to take to combat the alarming growth of specific forms of crime in large European cities, as evidenced by the escalation of violence and murders in Milan and Rome?

What measures will it recommend to governments to break the international links of criminal organizations based outside the Community, such as those originating in Russia, Albania and China?

Does the Commission know about the existence of a Chinese mafia headquarters in Paris headed by a mysterious Mr Feng, who also controls the organization in Italy?

What is the Commission’s opinion of how the Italian Government is implementing the Schengen agreement?

Does the Commission intend to launch new initiatives to combat illegal immigration into Italy, in particular to prevent an increase in the numbers of criminals arriving from outside the Community?

Answer given by Ms Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission is concerned about the increase in urban petty crime of the sort recently experienced in the cities to which the Honourable Member refers. However, under the terms of the Treaties as they now stand the adoption of practical measures to counter such phenomena is primarily a matter for local and national authorities.

Nevertheless, under the programmes in the area of justice and home affairs, and in support of the resolution on the establishment of a comprehensive strategy on the prevention of organised crime, adopted by the Council on 21December 1998( 1), the Commission is prepared to support any initiative to reduce such crime, for example by using a multidisciplinary approach to promote the exchange of experiences and good practice between Member States in the field of crime prevention. Such support would complement the efforts to improve cooperation on crime prevention between European police forces.

The Commission also felt the need to include urban safety in its communication and action plan on sustainable urban development, adopted in November 1998 and currently under discussion in the Council, Parliament and the Committee of the Regions. (2) Action 21of this 24-point plan aims to improve safety in the cities by means of preventive measures. Member States developing schemes at urban level will be eligible for Structural Fund grants.

The Commission has supported a number of measures in the past aimed at improving safety in certain regions. Through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) it financed an operational project entitled ‘Security for the development of the Mezzogiorno’, presented by the Italian authorities on the initiative of the Interior Ministry. The project consists of specific measures such as computerisation, coordination between police C 325/62 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

forces and improvements in intelligence to enable the authorities to police the region more effectively. It is linked to other initiatives by the Italian authorities, for example under the Interreg II programme. This initiative implements recommendation 9 of the Action Plan to combat organised crime, adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997. (3)

The 1997 Action Plan and the two reports produced for the Cardiff and Vienna European Councils show how the different levels of authority (Member States, Commission, Europol) work together to combat international organised crime. Through its Oisin and Falcone programmes, in particular, the Commission supports cooperation between the police, customs and judicial authorities aimed at curbing the activities of organised criminal gangs.

The Commission cannot comment on the third question raised by the Honourable Member because it is outside its competence.

The Commission would point out that it is not currently responsible for the application of the Schengen agreement by the Member States that are a party to it. The Schengen acquis will be integrated into the institutional framework of the Union once the Treaty of Amsterdam comes into force.

Under the Treaty of Amsterdam, questions relating to immigration, including illegal immigration, will become the responsibility of the Community. The Council is required to take measures relating to illegal immigration and unauthorised residence within five years of the Treaty’s entry into force. The Commission intends to play a full part in implementing the Treaty of Amsterdam as a whole, including the provisions relating to this area, but insists that illegal immigration should not be equated with crime.

(1) OJC 408, 29.12.1998. (2) COM(98) 605. (3) OJC 251, 15.8.1997.

(1999/C 325/078) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0052/99 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Subject: Exchange transactions between national currencies and the euro in the Member States which have joined the euro area

The single currency has already been introduced in 11 Member States, although only for transactions which do not require the use of cash, it is as valid in those countries as the national currency and hence bank transactions between those countries should be comparable to those within each Member State.

The media have reported that banks are charging commission at a set rate of up to 4 % for exchange transactions between one currency and another or even between euros and national currencies.

Does the Commission not consider that this behaviour goes against the very concept of a single currency and can even be seen as improper speculation?

What steps does it intend to take to put an end to this situation, which is likely to compromise the image of the euro in the eyes of European citizens, as well as causing financial damage to consumers and businesses in the countries which have joined the single currency?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Honourable Member will no doubt be aware that the Commission issued its Recommendation 98/286/ EC (1) on banking charges for conversion to the euro in April 1998. The Commission also made public an initial evaluation on 8 December 1998 (2), which indicates that banks throughout the euro area intended to implement the Recommendation. This means that banks will not charge for converting accounts from the national currency unit of the individual participating Member State to the euro unit (e.g. from Italian lira to 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/63

euro in Italy) or for converting payments to and from the euro and the national currency unit. Furthermore, the Recommendation provides that banks cannot charge a different fee for services in the euro unit than that for otherwise identical services in the national currency unit. This is an important and significant contribution to public confidence in the changeover to the euro. This does not of itself mean, however, that bank transactions between participating Member States should be comparable to those within each participating Member State.

The Recommendation, therefore, does not ask that banks cease to charge for the services they provide, including the purchase or sale of banknotes of other Member States. The Recommendation does, however, require that full transparency is provided for all conversions and exchanges by showing clearly the application of the fixed conversion rates and identifying separately any charges of any kind which are applied.

Prior to the introduction of the euro, it was possible for banks to hide, partly at least, the charges for services such as banknote exchange in the (variable) exchange rate which was applied. In other words, banks were able to charge customers the difference, or ‘spread’, between their buying rate and their selling rate for a currency. Application of a ‘spread’ was a non-transparent method of charging, which the Commission has long called on banks to discontinue.

With the introduction of the euro, banks are no longer able to calculate their charges within an exchange rate ‘spread’, for transactions involving the currency units of participating Member States. This is because of the fundamental requirement that the fixed conversion rates are applied for all conversions and exchanges between participating national currency units. Banks must, therefore, alter their method of charging with effect from 1 January 1999 at the latest. The situation which the Honourable Member mentions of banks charging commission at a set rate of up to 4 % for exchange transactions, can be considered to reflect this alteration to a more transparent method of charging.

On 12 January 1999, the Commission asked the European banking federations for information on the situation in Member States, including a comparison between 1998 and 1999 figures on conversion charges and fees for cross border credit transfers. On 5 February 1999, the Commission again called on banks to further increase transparency by making publicly available information showing changes in the total level of charges (before and after the introduction of the euro) for exchanging euro zone banknotes and cross border cheques, transfers and card payments. Banks in the euro zone were requested to report the state of play to the Commission before 31 March 1999 through their European associations. The Commission has also recently launched investigations of possible infringements by banks of competition policy. The Commission will keep the Parliament informed of the results of these reports and investigations. However, the Commission’s expectation is that the overall level of these charges should fall, since the banks will no longer face the costs associated with exchange rate risk, and transparency will intensify competition between financial institutions. The Commission shares Parliament’s concerns that initial feedback and analysis from some banks in some Member States suggests the contrary.

On the separate but related issue of credit transfers, the Commission recognises the continued existence of substantial differences in the level of charges for cross-border transactions compared to domestic transactions. The Commission believes that the transitional period, up to the date of introduction of euro notes and coin, provides a window of opportunity to create the conditions in which charges for cross-border transfers can be tackled. This means dealing effectively with weaknesses in cross-border payments infrastructure and the removal of other structural obstacles to cross-border competition. It requires that financial institutions in particular see the political importance and commercial opportunity that call for increased investment in cross- border linkages between domestic retail payment systems. In addition to exercising moral suasion, public authorities at national and Community level also have a role to play in tackling administrative requirements which add to the burden of banks when processing these transactions. The Commission firmly intends to be a catalyst for all these developments and plans to issue a communication in the spring of 1999 covering the policy relating to payment systems in EMU. This will set out a detailed framework which is aimed at achieving the goal of a single payments area.

The Commission’s press release IP/99/90 issued on 5 February 1999 contains further details on the Commission’s approach to this matter.

(1) OJL 130, 1.5.1998. (2) Available on the Internet at http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg15. C 325/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/079) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0055/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Avoiding a contest for financial aid priority for the business environment

The EU’s regional policy is intended to increase the competitiveness of regions whose development is lagging behind and those with structural adjustment problems. There is, however, a danger that regional rivalry in an unhealthy race for business sites and associated financial aid will distort competition. Such distortions can be kept to a minimum if we give priority to fostering the business environment rather than assisting individual firms. In this way we would support a more sustainable regional development. A way to implement this strategy in concrete terms would be, for example, for each programme’s total operations to include a 50 % commitment of ERDF funds, which are intended to support the business environment.

What is the Commission’s view of these efforts to avoid harmful competition for business sites?

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

(3 March 1999)

European competition policy ensures that aid given to eligible regions complies with Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty. Within this framework, a certain competition between different regions is welcome in order to increase the competitiveness of regions as well as the Community as a whole.

However, to avoid damaging or unfair competition between the regions for inward investment the Community’s competition policy includes measures such as the guidelines on national regional aid (1)or multisectoral framework on regional aid for large investment projects (2).

The Commission agrees with the Parliament on the need to give more importance to the improvement of the business environment rather than assisting enterprises themselves. In its working paper on ‘The Structural Funds and their coordination with the Cohesion Fund Draft guidance for programmes in the period 2000-2006’ (3) adopted on 3 February 1999, the Commission urges the need to focus more on the qualitative aspects of the business environment, such as for example business support services, while the importance of capital grants should be reduced.

However, the extent to which the European regional development fund assists productive investment or business related infrastructure is the responsibility of the regions drafting and implementing the programmes. Indeed, this question is at the core of formulating a region specific strategy for regional development. The Commission does not therefore in general give any specific quotas for individual priorities such as business related infrastructure.

(1) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998. (2) OJ C 107, 7.4.1998. (3) SEC(99) 103.

(1999/C 325/080) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0056/99 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Acidic water spillage into the River Tinto marshes in Huelva (Spain) caused by a rupture in a storage pond

A rupture in a phosphogypsum pond has caused 50 000 cubic metres of acidic water to spill into the Huelva estuary. The 70-hectare pond, which lies in Rincón Marsh on the outskirts of the provincial capital, Huelva, 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/65

burst during the storm which battered the city last December. The phosphogypsum ponds, situated in the River Tinto marshes some eight kilometres from Huelva’s urban area, together provide storage for more than 80 million tonnes of waste held in by 14-metre walls. This highly acidic waste contains fluorides and arsenic, and there is speculation that radioactive emissions may exceed the legal limit.

Written Question E-3984/96 (1) on the dumping of phosphogypsum waste previously expressed concern about the health implications of the dumped waste. In its answer, the Commission indicated that it had already instituted infringement proceedings against Spain for improper application in the River Tinto of Directive 76/464/EEC on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. What steps does it intend to take with a view to ensuring that the Spanish authorities implement Community environment legislation, and in particular Directive 76/464/EEC (2) on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community, Directive 92/43/EEC (3)on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, and Directive 91/689/EEC (4) on hazardous waste?

3. Will it provide comprehensive information on how this situation is being monitored?

(1) OJ C 186, 18.6.1997, p. 151. (2) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23. (3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. (4) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991, p. 20.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

1. The Commission had read in the press of the burst storage lagoon in the Rincón Marshes, Huelva, mentioned by the Honourable Members.

2. The Commission contacted the Spanish authorities and asked for detailed information on this incident. The Spanish authorities’ reply has still not reached the Commission. Once that information has been examined the Commission will ensure that the Community law applying in this instance is obeyed.

3. The Commission will not fail to inform the Honourable Members of any developments taking place as regards this matter.

(1999/C 325/081) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0081/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Register of contaminated land

Is there any register of contaminated land in the EU? If not, is there a possibility that the Commission might ask the Member States to compile such a register, one which would include the applicant countries?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that no legislation, specifically dealing with soil protection as such, has been passed at the Community level.

The European environment agency (EEA) is publishing a report by the European topic centre on soil according to which there are many hundreds of thousands of contaminated sites in the Community. A contaminated site can cause groundwater pollution, health hazards for on-site workers and the general public, and the restriction of future land uses. C 325/66 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

There is at present no register of contaminated land or sites at Community level. However, the Topic centre on soil, which is part of the EEA system set up by Council Regulation (EEC) 1210/90 of 7 May 1990 on the establishment of the European environment agency and the European environment information and observation network (1), is planning to carry out this work in the next two years in order to improve the level of reliable information under existing national programmes enabling the collection of comparable information at the European level. This could be the basis for a broader assessment of the extent of contaminated land, the level of contamination and the extent of remediation being achieved, as well as an evaluation of whether further action is needed.

This activity will be carried out in collaboration with the Environment institute of the Joint research centre in Ispra, which will contribute, in particular, to the development of indicators of contaminated sites in Europe.

(1) OJ L 120, 11.5.1990.

(1999/C 325/082) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0083/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to theCommission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Environmental impact of motorcycles

Will the Commission undertake a study of the environmental impact of motorcycles as compared to cars a study which should include energy and the materials used in production, the use of land [roads, car parks], congestion, noise and recycling?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission does not have any plans at present to carry out a general comparative analysis of all the environmental effects of motorcycles and cars.

Depending on the environmental impact in question motorcycles may be more or less environmentally harmful than cars. For example, whilst motorcycles consume less energy and road space, they can produce higher emissions of certain pollutants and can create noise problems. Noise nuisance is often more a result of bad driver behaviour and maintenance than construction and design.

As far as air quality impacts are concerned, the scope further to reduce emissions from motorcycles will be considered in the framework of the Auto-Oil II programme which compares the potential of different abatement options to achieve Community air quality objectives. The Commission intends to present a proposal in relation to motorcycle emissions by the end of 1999.

In relation to noise, Directive 97/24/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1997 on certain components and characteristics of two or three-wheel motor vehicles (1) contains the most recent reductions to be achieved.

Motorcycles will continue to be an important element in the transport system of the Community alongside other modes of transport.

(1) OJ L 226, 18.8.1997.

(1999/C 325/083) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0084/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to theCommission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Environment aid granted to Indonesia

What environmental and social conditions does the Commission attach to bilateral aid granted to Indonesia? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/67

How does the Commission monitor the use of such funds to ensure that they are not used for environmentally or socially damaging projects, such as the expansion of the commercial plantation sector?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

In Indonesia as in other partner countries the environmental and social impact of Community projects is fully examined in the preparation of the terms of reference. The Community gives special priority to the social consequences of the economic and financial crisis in Indonesia. The Commission representation in Jakarta monitors the environmental and social impact of Community projects and the Commission takes the necessary measures based upon the representation’s reports, which are prepared in coordination with the Community Member States represented in Indonesia.

(1999/C 325/084) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0090/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Continued non-compliance by Greece with rules governing the liberalisation of telecommunications in the European Union

Despite the fact that the beginning of the year is dedicated to the European Information Society, the OTE (GreekTelecommunications Company) is continuing to act illegally and obstruct the access of Greekusers to the Internet and the Information Society. On the one hand it is obstructing the allocation of four-digit numbers for calling Internet service providers other than its own subsidiary, while on the other it is increasing the cost of urban calls by 38,4 %, imposing unjustified sharp price increases on the Greekpublic and putting basic Internet connection charges beyond the purse of the average consumer. In both cases fundamental provisions of Community law are being violated.

In the first case (refusal to allocate/delay in allocating call numbers), the provisions on occupying a dominant market position in Article 68 of the Treaty are being violated. In the second (increase in urban call charges) there is a clear violation of the provisions of Directive 95/62/EC (1) and Directive 98/10/EC (2) on the application of open networkprovision (ONP) to voice telephony, which provide that charges may be restructured only after cost controls, something which the OTE has never undertaken.

Unfortunately, despite the assurances and promises it has repeatedly given the Commission about the gradual compliance by Greece with European telecommunications legislation and practice, Greece is in fact turning a deaf ear and is continuing to fail to honour its commitments. As the Commission recently informed me, eleven major violations of Community law have already been noted, leading to the suspension of funding for the GreekOperational Programme for Telecommunications. Greece is still pursuing its tactic of non-compliance with Community legislation and allowing the OTE flagrantly to flout fundamental provisions of European legislation.

Will the Commission say what measures it intends to take to address the two cases of violations referred to above and say what measures the relevant Community authorities intend to take to protect Greek consumers from the consequences of these two cases?

(1) OJ L 321, 30.12.1995, p. 6. (2) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998, p. 24.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 1999)

Under Community law, problems related to a possible abuse by a dominant undertaking as set out in Article 86 of the EC Treaty may also be dealt with at national level. C 325/68 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In the case of the allocation of call numbers for Internet service providers (ISPs), the Commission was informed that the case was dealt with at national level by the national commission for telecommunications (EET). The EET has informed the Commission that it has imposed a fine of GDR 80 million on OTE (Greek telecommunications company) for its failure to provide the single access numbers to Internet service providers. As far as the Commission is aware two ISPs have not signed a contract with OTE relating to the granting of such a number.

As regards the increase of the rates for urban calls, there is under Community law a general obligation on Member States to allow their operator to rebalance their telephone tariffs, when these tariffs are out of line with the underlying costs. Directive 98/10/EC, however, requires Member States to ensure that the voice telephony service remains affordable.

The principle of cost-orientation does nevertheless not prevent costs being recouped in different ways for two services provided using partly the same infrastructure when this is justified by the nature of the respective services or the demand patterns. The relevant Greek authorities could therefore allow OTE to apply a lower tariff for Internet access, as far as the same rate would apply to all Internet service providers.

(1999/C 325/085) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0093/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE)to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Extension of the Erasmus programme to cover Latin America

The Erasmus programme has become a real example of what Community policy can achieve when it has been well thought out and closely coordinated. By taking part in exchanges enabling them to study at other Community universities, thousands of students are helping many young Europeans to feel more European.

The logical conclusion is that the Erasmus programme, which has proved to be a significant venture, should extend beyond Community frontiers, for instance to Latin America, which already has a wealth of experience in the same field because countless thousands of students have crossed the Atlantic to study either in Spain or in Latin America.

Does the Commission believe that it should consider how the Erasmus programme might be extended to cover Latin America, either directly or by implementing a similar programme, with a view to ensuring that young people in the EU and Latin America will each have the opportunity to study in the other geographical area?

Answer given by M. Marín on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The Erasmus programme has proved to be a model of academic cooperation in Europe. On the basis of the Erasmus venture and after several studies, the Commission decided to launch a similar initiative and in March 1994 it therefore created the ALFA programme on the basis of Council Regulation (EEC) 443/92 of 25 February 1992, on financial and technical assistance to, and economic cooperation with, the developing countries in Asia and Latin America (1).

ALFA (translated into English as Latin American Academic Training) is the programme of cooperation in higher education between European and Latin American institutions designed to improve management within institutions and the training conditions of qualified staff.

Eligible countries include all the Member States and 18 Latin American countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela).

The partners are institutions of higher education officially recognised by the governments.The final beneficiaries will be high school and university students, administrative staff, teachers and researchers at the institutions involved. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/69

ALFA is divided into two sub-programmes. Sub-programme A: cooperation on institutional management and sub-programme B: cooperation on scientific and technological training (mobility of students and postgrad- uates).

For the first stage of the ALFA programme 846 projects were approved, including 183 projects (21,6 %) for sub-programme A and 663 projects (78,4 %) for sub-programme B.

In all, 530 European institutions and 373 Latin American institutions participated, and the Commission awarded 366 part-financed grants for European students in Latin America, 1089 for Latin American students in Europe and 243 for Latin American students in other Latin American institutions.

On the basis of programme evaluation reports, the Commission prepared a further stage of the programme which was approved by the Commission on 4 December. Internal Commission procedures to set up the programme are presently underway.

(1) OJ L 52, 27.2.1992.

(1999/C 325/086) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0103/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Obligation to go before the International Court of Justice for the peaceful resolution of disputes under the 1995 New York Convention on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks

In her reply to my Oral Question H-1189/98 (1) at the plenary sitting of 12 January 1999, Commissioner Emma Bonino stated that EU ratification of the 1995 New York Convention on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks would mean that the compulsory dispute-settlement procedure established in that Convention ‘would clearly prevent Canada from withdrawing from the Court’s jurisdiction as it did in 1994/5’.

On what legal precepts does the Commission base its view that Canada would be obliged to go before the International Court of Justice to resolve a dispute arising between the EU and Canada within the framework of that Convention once both were party to the 1995 New York Convention and once that Convention had entered into force?

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (January 1999).

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The concept of compulsory and binding dispute settlement has indeed become a cornerstone of the 1995 United Nations agreement on straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. This very concept is enshrined in part IX and more particularly in the provisions of article 30 of the agreement, which refer back to the provisions relating to the settlement of disputes set out in part XV of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the law of the sea.

In this context, compulsory and binding dispute settlement means that, for international disputes arising within the purview of these legal instruments, states remain free to choose the means to settle such disputes, but that the chosen procedure must ultimately entail a binding decision for the parties to the dispute. Under this system, there is, in principle, no room for reservations and exclusions and, therefore, this contrasts with a system of optional jurisdiction over legal disputes such as that laid down in article 36 of the statute of the International court of justice.

It is clear that compulsory and binding dispute settlement under the 1995 agreement will not become available until this agreement has entered into force, and only for those states which have actually ratified it. C 325/70 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/087) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0107/99

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE), Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE), Jyrki Otila (PPE) and Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Bringing forward by one year the introduction of euro banknotes and coins

Some Member States have, with good reason, proposed that the introduction of euro banknotes and coins should be brought forward by one year. In order for the requisite notes and coins to be produced in time, the question of the timetable needs to be reviewed without delay. Will the Commission take measures to reduce the euro transition period by one year, and will it make the necessary arrangements to enable the requisite decisions to be taken before the Finnish Presidency begins?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Council stipulated in Articles 10 and 11 of Council Regulation (EC) 974/98 of 3 May 1998 (1) that banknotes and coins denominated in the euro unit shall be put into circulation as from 1 January 2002. The date of introduction of euro banknotes and coins was defined following intensive consultations of all involved.

Following a suggestion by some Member States, the issue was re-examined at the meeting of the Ecofin Council of 18 January 1999. The discussion in the Council, involving the European central bank, revealed considerable reluctance to advance the introduction of euro banknotes and coins as this was considered neither technically feasible nor desirable, given that those concerned have defined their changeover strategy on the basis of the timeframe set by the Council. The Commission was mandated to explore the subject further and will report in due course.

(1) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998.

(1999/C 325/088) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0113/99

by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Measures to prevent counterfeiting in the footwear industry

The counterfeit goods business is thriving on the single European market and as a result of world-wide trade liberalisation.

Trade mark owners may accordingly decide to terminate contracts with factories manufacturing the genuine article in order to isolate manufacturers involved in counterfeiting in the same country or region. In some cases such decisions naturally have adverse effects on employment, as can be seen in the footwear industry and the municipality of Felgueiras in particular.

The Portuguese Press has recently reported a problem of this type concerning the multinational company Kickers (which provides work for some 16 factories and 2 500 people in Felgueiras, generating a turnover of approximately ESC 15 billion). The danger is that the innocent will be punished instead of the guilty.

Since the steps being taken by national authorities are proving insufficient to prevent and punish counterfeiting, what action could the Commission and the EU take, not least with a view to safeguarding legal business activity and employment? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/71

Answer by Mr Monti On behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

The Commission shares the honourable Member’s concern with regard to safeguarding employment. Combating counterfeiting helps to safeguards jobs. Indeed, counterfeiting has adverse economic and social consequences for firms as well as for the economy. The number of jobs lost as a result of counterfeiting is estimated to be at least 100 000 a year for the Community. Innovative and creative firms are the first to be affected by this phenomenon. The reaction of trade mark owners can take a variety of forms. The Commission is not in a position to comment on how effective they are.

In order to measure the economic impact of counterfeiting in the internal market, examine legislation in this area and suggest possible solutions that may be implemented to improve the fight against this phenomenon, the Commission on 15 October 1998 adopted a green paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market (1). The publication of this green paper marked the starting point of a wide-ranging consultation of all those concerned, which has not yet been completed. In connection with this consultation, the Commission and the German Presidency of the Council jointly organised a meeting in Munich on 2-3 March 1999 to hear the views of those concerned. More than 250participants were able to voice their concern on the matter.

As for the initiatives that the Commission might take at the end of this consultation, it is too early at this stage to provide the honourable Member with any precise answer. However, the Commission does not exclude in principle any form of action or favour any method of combating counterfeiting in relation to any other. In view of the great variety of methods mentioned in the green paper, any measures that the Commission might be prompted to take would not necessarily be limited to legislative measures but could also comprise actions for the financial support of activities to combat counterfeiting, organisational or administrative actions or even incentive or facilitation measures.

(1) COM(98) 569 final.

(1999/C 325/089) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0116/99 by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Environmental Impact Procedure (85/337/EEC) and infringement proceedings against the UK authorities

Will the Commission specify which infringement procedures have been implemented for breach of Directive 85/337/EEC (1) in the UK since 1994? In particular, can the Commission specify whether Pilmuir Quarry, Newton Mearns, and Sheephill Quarry, Milton, Dunbartonshire (both Scotland) have been included in action taken by the Commission against the United Kingdom authorities?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 1999)

The Commission has opened four infringement proceedings against the United Kingdom under Article 169 EC Treaty with respect to Directive 85/337/EEC. These procedures concerned a development of a dock, a landfill site, the implementation of Article 7 and the scope of the Directive.

As regards Pilmuir Quarry, proceedings were opened under Article 169 EC Treaty. However, following the Court of justice judgement in case C-431/92, it was considered that Directive 85/337/EEC did not apply to this project as the application for planning permission was before July 1988. The Commission closed this case in July 1997 and a letter was sent to the Honourable Member informing him of this decision. C 325/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/090) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0119/99 by John Iversen (PSE) and Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Youth team members in Denmark enslaved by contract terms

There have unfortunately been examples in Denmark of young football players under 18 years of age signing contracts with football clubs under which they are treated like serfs. The numbers of junior and youth contracts have increased in recent years. At present, a player must be 16, but the age limit is to be lowered to 15 next summer. The likely result ofthis is more unfortunatecases ofyoung people being tied to their employers.

Some of the youngsters who break off their contracts before they expire end up having to pay hefty fines, and high transfer fees prevent them from furthering their footballing careers.

Does the Commission consider such contracts, under which youths are treated like serfs, to be compatible with European legal practice in this area following the Bosman judgment?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 1999)

The question asked by the two Honourable Members would seem rather to come under Danish national law. As Community law would not seem to cover the contracts concerned, the Danish authorities must examine the compatibility ofsuch contracts with national law. The latter should take account ofthe terms ofCouncil Directive 94/33/EC of22 June 1994 on the protection ofyoung people at work ( 1).

The effects of the Bosman judgement (2) apply only to transfers between Member States. The Court of Justice ruling requires that in such cases the contracts must not contain clauses limiting freedom of movement.

(1) OJ L 216, 20.8.1994. (2) Case C-415/93, [1995] ECR I-4921.

(1999/C 325/091) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0120/99 by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Use ofunacceptable medieval methods ofinterrogation in Israel < ‘legalisation’ oftorture

Amnesty International has recently alleged that unacceptable, anachronistic methods oftorture are being used in Israel. The Israeli Supreme Court is reviewing the unacceptable, medieval methods ofinterrogation used by the Israeli security service, Shin Bet, such as the violent shaking ofdetainees, depriving them ofsleep fordays on end, forcing them to adopt uncomfortable positions for hours, to listen to shrill noises incessantly, confining them in rooms the size of cupboards and exposing them alternately to excessive heat and excessive cold.

In what way will the Commission intercede to protect human rights and prevent the ‘legalisation’ oftorture in Israel?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Commission is aware that the Israeli Supreme Court has accepted the use ofso-called ‘moderate physical pressure’ by Israeli security services while questioning detainees. Such practices are subject to guidelines and conditions mainly laid down in the report, ofwhich at least parts remain secret, ofthe Landau Commission of enquiry following the death of two Palestinian militiamen who had been arrested alive by the preventive security service after highjacking an Israeli bus. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C325/73

The Union has repeatedly expressed its condemnation of such lax standards regarding human rights, both publicly in appropriate international fora as well as through diplomatic channels with the Israeli government.

(1999/C325/092) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0132/99

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Year 2000 problem

It is a requirement in the USA that every product carry an indication as to whether it can cope with the changeover from 1999 to the year 2000, i.e. every electronic appliance, be it a computer or television set, must be marked to indicate whether or not it is year-2000 compatible. So far there is no such requirement in Europe.

What deliberations have taken place within the Commission with a view to resolving this problem in the light of the need to protect consumers?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Commission gave an initial analysis of the Year 2000 problem in its Communication of 25 February 1998 (1).

In the context of the attention which must be paid to the various consequences of the problem, the Commission is particularly interested in the possible repercussions for consumers.

An ad hoc working party of the Consumer Committee 1 the Commission’s advisory body for the management of consumer policy 1 has discussed the problem and issued an opinion on the identification of situations which consumers are likely to face and recommendations seeking to minimise the impact of the Year 2000 on the economic interests, health and safety of consumers.

Labelling schemes are voluntary initiatives of manufacturers or distributors, sometimes in collaboration with the public authorities.

The Consumer Committee believes that they can help protect consumers, especially when linked to the statutory guarantee regulations which already exist in the Member States. For example, in the Danish scheme ‘2000 Ready’, the seller declares that a particular product can cope with all dates in the 20th and 21st centuries and promises to deal with any complaints arising until 31 January 2001 (whatever the expiry date of the guarantee).

However, in the absence of a universal standard demonstrating that a product is 2000-compliant and given the difficulty of obtaining certification of products by an independent or public-sector body 1 because no-one wants to the assume the consequent legal responsibility 1 labelling should not be seen as the only response to the Year 2000 problem.

For the same reasons, the Commission does not envisage any proposals on a European-level labelling scheme.

(1) COM(98) 102 final. C 325/74 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/093) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0134/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Compensation to fishermen for replacement of fishing gear

Under Regulation 1626/94 (1),Greek fishermen are required,as of 1 January 1999,to replace their fishing gear,in particular their nets,with other types which will not allow small fish to be caught. The cost of replacement is high and will result in a further deterioration of the financial position of fishermen and an increase in unemployment in the fishing industry. Recently,the Commission adopted special measures requiring fishermen to stop using drift nets.

Will the Commission say:

1. whether it has,accordingly,adopted special measures to compensate for the replacement of fishing gear required by Regulation 1626/94,and

2. how it intends to help fishermen cope with the high cost involved in implementing Regulation 1626/94?

(1) OJ L 171,6.7.1994,p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

When Council Regulation (EC) 1626/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean (1) was adopted,it provided for derogations allowing fishermen to continue certain activities until 31 December 1998. The purpose of the derogations was to allow a gradual adjustment to take place over a four year period,so minimising the financial losses occasioned by the transition to the general rules.

As the circumstances involved in this transition are totally unlike those in the case of drift nets,the Commission does not believe that any possible financial consequences have to be treated in like manner.

That said,the Commission will see if the derogations applying to the fisheries concerned can be extended in the light of the better scientific information now available as to their impact on the resources.

(1) OJ L 171,6.7.1994.

(1999/C 325/094) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0135/99 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Subsidies to the wine industry

I refer to the answer given by Commissioner Fischler (E-3429/98) (1) with regard to the additional subsidies, over and above any in the Agenda 2000 package,to the wine industry.

In view of the bleak economic circumstances facing the Scotch whisky industry,could the Commission outline any plans to help alleviate the hardship facing this indigenous industry?

(1) OJ C 182,28.6.1999,p. 84. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/75

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

To supplement the answer already given to Written Question E-3429/98 from the Honourable Member about the financial aspects of the reform of the common organisation of the market in wine as part of the Agenda 2000 package, and in particular in response to his final question about possible support measures for the whisky industry, the Commission would like to state the following:

The common organisation of the market in wine as currently in force includes the possibility of granting aid to rationalise the table-wine market through the distillation of surpluses. The existing regime has not modified in any fundamental way the balance among the various products of distillation. In fact, the market share for distilled wine has shrunk somewhat.

The draft reform of the wine market organisation is designed to maintain this fundamental balance by supporting a traditional outlet (distilling of wine to alcohol products for human consumption) without which this balance would be compromised.

Spirit drinks, however, because they are not listed in Annex II to the EC Treaty, cannot be given direct agricultural support.

The Commission wishes to point out, finally, that whisky does qualify for export refunds under the common organisation of the market in cereals.

(1999/C 325/095) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0136/99 by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: The CFA franc

With the arrival of the euro, the French franc and the French Central Bank will disappear. At the 27th ACP-EU Joint Assembly of 21 to 24 September 1998, a final resolution was adopted on the issue of the euro and the CFA franc, calling on the Commission to study the potential effects of including the CFA franc in the euro.

What currency will the CFA franc have in future, and who will control this franc, which is used in all the former French colonies? Which bank will take receipt of and hold payments made by companies importing African products, when the companies concerned are located outside the ACP countries and France?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

France had concluded a number of exchange rate agreements with the ‘Union économique et monétaire ouest- africaine’ (UEMOA), the ‘Communauté économique et monétaire de l’Afrique Centrale’ (CEMAC) and with the Republic of the Comores. Given that since 1 January 1999, the Community has exclusive competence for exchange rate matters for Member States which have adopted the euro, a Council decision was required to confirm the continuation of the present arrangements concerning the CFA franc and the Comorian franc.

Following consultations with Member States, the Commission has on 1 July 1998 adopted a recommendation for a Council decision to confirm the future relations between the euro and the CFA franc and the Comorian franc. Following consultation of the European central bank, the Council has adopted the decision on 23 November 1998.

The decision confirms that France may continue its present agreements with the UEMOA, the CEMAC and the Comores. It also stipulates that France and the African signatories to the agreements shall retain sole responsibility for the implementation of these agreements. This implies that the legal status of the CFA franc and the Comorian franc has not been altered by the introduction of the euro and that the central banks of the UEMOA, the CEMAC and the Comores continue to be obliged to hold a part of their foreign assets in their operations accounts with the French Treasury according to the provisions of the agreements. C 325/76 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/096) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0140/99 by André Fourçans (PPE)to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: The Erasmus student exchange programme

Under the Erasmus student exchange programme students obtain grants to fund part of their time abroad. It would appear that these grants are paid late, not before the February of the respective academic year. It is obvious that such late payment can complicate the situation for many students who therefore have to find other ways offinancingtheir studies.

What does the Commission intend to do to remedy this state of affairs and ensure that grants are more promptly paid?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The Commission would draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that student mobility under the Erasmus programme is a decentralised action managed by the national authorities designated for that purpose. The grant payment procedure is complex, involving various different partners, and is therefore subject to contingencies and delays which are beyond the Commission’s control. The payment schedule for grants also depends on the type of student (i.e. from a Member State or from one of the central or eastern European countries participating in the programme) and the type ofgrant (standard grant, disabled student grant, grant for intensive language course).

As the Honourable Member is not specific about the case in question, the Commission is not in a position to investigate the matter in the departments concerned. However, since the contracts between the Commission and the national agencies for implementation of the student mobility programme in 1998-1999 were sent out at the beginning ofJune 1998 and the bank accounts ofthese agencies credited between 15 June 1998 and 24 July 1998 (in the case ofFrance, the payments to the Centre National des Oeuvres Universitaires et Scolaires (CNOUS) were made on 6 July 1998 and the National Agency’s account was credited on 29 July 1998), this kind ofdelay certainly seems unusual, even given that the agencies have to redistribute the money to the various higher education establishments, which must in turn transfer the grants to the students concerned. In view ofuniversity vacations, this can mean in some cases that the student only receives the Erasmus grant shortly before departure abroad under the scheme, if he or she is leaving at the beginning of the academic year. The Honourable Member should also take into account the fact that some agencies distribute the funds in two stages, and there is a redistribution exercise during the year, which enables additional funds to be allocated to certain students.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concern about the late payment ofcertain Erasmus grants and the problems this can cause for the more disadvantaged students. This is why it has decided, for 1999-2000, to speed up its own internal procedures to enable the agencies to sign their contracts in March so that the Community funds can be paid in May at the latest, which will enable the agencies to distribute the funds before the summer vacation. It will also, as in previous years, urge the agencies to take into account the socio-economic situation ofstudents when awarding the grants.

(1999/C 325/097) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0154/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE)to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Lindane

Further to my Questions E-2417/98 (1) and E-2860/97 (2), has the Commission yet received the report from Austria on lindane?

Ifso, when is it likely to be able to make its results available? Ifnot, when does it expect to receive that report?

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 73. (2) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 84. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/77

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

The draft monograph on Lindane, which was prepared in the framework of the first review programme undertaken 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 (1) was submitted by the rapporteur Member State, Austria, on 17 December 1998 to the Commission and the Member States.

According to the usual procedures provided in Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 the draft report was immediately forwarded for an expert consultation (peer review) with specialised experts from five Member States to examine in detail the monograph in all areas of human health and environmental safety (physico-chemical properties, toxicology, residues, ecotoxicology, fate and behaviour in the environment).

Final results from this review are expected by November 1999. The results of this review will then be discussed within the scientific committee on plants, as well as with all Member States in the framework of the standing committee on plant health.

However, the Commission has also informed the Member States in the framework of the standing committee on plant health about the content of the Austrian documentation.

(1) OJ L 366, 15.12.1992.

(1999/C 325/098) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0162/99 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Delays in the payment of Community agricultural subsidies

There have been significant delays in the payment of Community subsidies to farmers in Greece under the present system. Recently the payment of Community subsidies for cereals, cotton etc. was twice postponed, harming producers of these crops. The Greek ministry of agriculture is preparing to implement in April 1999 a new system for the payment of Community aid to replace the present one.

1. Is the Commission aware that there have been long delays in the payment of Community subsidies to farmers in Greece, and will it say whether such delays have also occurred in other Member States?

2. What measures can the Commission take to prevent delays in the payment of subsidies to farmers in Greece and elsewhere in the EU, and how can they be protected from such practices?

3. What is the reason for the delays and how does it judge the present system for paying Community subsidies to farmers in Greece?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

1. The Commission is not aware that the situation as regards delays in the payment of agricultural subsidies is different in Greece from the situation in the other Member States.

2. In order to encourage Member States to make payments to farmers within the time limits laid down the Commission introduced a system, defined in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 296/96 of 16 February 1996 on data to be forwarded by the Member States and the monthly booking of expenditure financed under the Guarantee Section of the Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and repealing Regulation (EEC) 2776/ 88 (1), which provides for a financial penalty for Member States which do not abide by the deadlines set for the C 325/78 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

payment of agricultural subsidies to the beneficiaries. Greece is one of the Member States to which financial corrections have been applied on account of such delays.

3. The Commission considers that the system of administering and paying Community agricultural subsidies in Greece needs to be considerably improved. The Greek authorities are currently setting up new paying agencies, whose efficiency is being evaluated by the Commission, and this should shortly bring about an improvement in the situation in Greece.

(1) OJ L 39, 17.2.1996.

(1999/C 325/099) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0168/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Established right of undertakings and implications as regards compensation arising from the amendment of legislation in the European Union

Does the Commission take the view that the amendment of legislation or the introduction by the European Union of a new binding legal framework based on the interests of the internal market may give rise to established rights from the point of view of compensation for the undertakings affected?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Court of First Instance ruled on the question raised by the Honourable Member in its judgment of 29 January 1998 (in Case T-113/96 Dubois ECR II-125) (1), in which it summarised the applicable Community case-law.

The Court found that the Community’s non-contractual liability extends, under the terms of the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty, to the damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties. The Treaties establishing the European Communities and the agreements which supplemented or amended those Treaties thus constitute neither an act of the institutions nor an act of the servants of the Community and cannot, therefore, give rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the Community.

With regard to the acts of the institutions or of their servants, in order for the Community to incur non- contractual liability, the applicant must prove the unlawfulness of the alleged conduct of the Community institution concerned, actual damage and the existence of a causal link between that conduct and the alleged damage. In that connection, if the unlawful act complained of concerns a legislative measure, the liability of the Community can be incurred only if there has been a breach of a higher-ranking rule of law for the protection of individuals. Moreover, if the institution has adopted the measure in the exercise of a broad discretion, the Community cannot be rendered liable unless the breach is clear, that is to say, if it is of a manifest and serious nature. Those criteria also apply in the case of a wrongful omission.

Asked for its opinion on the consequences of an amendment to Community legislation required by the implementation of the Single European Act, the Court reiterated that, in cases where the Community authorities have a broad discretion, traders cannot claim a vested right in the maintenance of an advantage which they obtained from the Community rules in issue and which they enjoyed at a given time.

However, the possibility cannot be excluded that an obligation to provide compensation might arise under the domestic law of the Member State on whose territory the businesses affected by the implementation of the single market are located.

(1) An appeal against this judgment has been brought before the Court of Justice. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/79

(1999/C 325/100) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0171/99 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué(PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Agriculture

On Tuesday, 5 January 1999 the Commission Vice-President Sir Leon Brittan announced at the 53rd Oxford Conference on Agriculture that direct aid to European farmers needed to be cut so that the Union could approach the negotiating round for the sector within the World Trade Organisation, scheduled for December 1999, from a credible position.

Can the Commission say, if such steps are in fact taken, what measures will be adopted to compensate the sector, which is of great economic, social and ecological importance for the European Union as a whole and for Spain in particular?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 1999)

In his speech at the 53th Oxford farming conference, the Vice-President of the Commission responsible for commercial policy emphasised the importance of reaching an agreement on the Agenda 2000 proposals in agriculture before the start of the next World trade organisation (WTO) negotiations because this would allow the Community not only to enter the next WTO negotiations with a credible position but also to take initiatives. More specifically, he referred to the Agenda 2000 reform proposals for cereals, beef and dairy, which foresee a reduction of the intervention price combined with a system of direct payments to compensate farmers for the loss of income caused by lower prices. He also mentioned that a key issue for the Community in the next WTO negotiations will be the maintenance of the ‘blue box’, i.e. to maintain support measures under production-limiting programmes outside the reduction commitment because these payments are a central element of the Agenda 2000 reform proposals. He also touched upon the question of degressivity of direct aids in the context of the debate on the future financial framework (2000-2006) of the Community. This was in response to calls from several finance ministers, in the run-up to the Vienna European Council, to freeze the common agricultural policy (CAP) budget from the year 2000 at its 1999 level. It will be recalled that the Commission’s reform proposals foresee an increase of the costs in the first years after 2000 in order to make CAP reform possible and a decline in expenditure in real terms towards the end of the period.

(1999/C 325/101) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0172/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Building work in Piazza Cavallotti in Livorno

Work on the refurbishment of Piazza Felice Cavallotti in Livorno has caused considerable inconvenience to residents and shopkeepers, resulting in street traders’ stalls being moved. The citizens of Livorno were only given notice of the planned building work on 10 January 1999. The building work has caused serious inconvenience and a substantial decline in the turnover of the shopkeepers in the area. The building work is planned to last one year.

1. Can the Commission say: whether, in its view, the building work referred to above can be regarded as contravening the principle of free competition as regards the shopkeepers in the city of Livorno;

2. whether any economic aid and/or projects exist that may help the shopkeepers who have been adversely affected by what has happened;

3. whether it is able to give its overall view of the matter? C 325/80 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

After having examined the question submitted by the Honourable Member, the Commission has reached the conclusion that the work in question did not infringe Community provisions concerning public contracts. Indeed, the situation described cannot be said to have contravened the principles of non-discrimination, transparency and equal treatment which form the basis of the above-mentioned legislation. This legislation does not, moreover, make any provisions for specific compensation to shopkeepers adversely affected by public works being carried out.

(1999/C 325/102) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0174/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Law discriminating between Italian citizens in the province of Bolzano

With reference to the previous Written Question E-3040/98 (1) relating to discrimination against Italian citizens in the province of Bolzano, the Commission is hereby informed that the law referred to therein has since been approved (Provincial Law of 17 December 1998 No 13 on the rules governing subsidised public housing).

In view of the above, can the Commission say what its opinion on this matter is?

(1) OJ C 182, 28.6.1999, p. 40.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 1999)

After careful examination of Provincial Law No 13 ‘Ordinamento dell’Edilizia Abitativa Agevolata’ of the province of Bolzano, of 17 December 1998, the Commission was unable to find any discrimination against Union citizens which is prohibited under Community law. In fact, Article 4 of the law in question gives persons wishing to re-establish themselves in the province of Bolzano, after having lived there for a period of at least five years and then emigrated, the same legal status as persons residing in the province, regardless of their nationality. In addition, Article 5(6) of the same law guarantees equal treatment for nationals of other Member States who live in the province of Bolzano and pursue an economic activity there.

(1999/C 325/103) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0175/99 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Combating the use of drugs in sport

The existing national measures aimed at combating the practice of drug use in sport are no longer sufficient to effectively combat what has become an alarming phenomenon which goes beyond the frontiers of individual states.

The source of greatest concern is the fact that the use of drugs is now not confined merely to professional sport but also occurs in sporting activities in which amateurs take part during their free time.

What does the Commission think about issuing, as a matter of urgency, a directive aimed at harmonising the existing national measures in order to:

1. define minimum criteria to be applied during tests;

2. harmonise laboratory techniques through the establishment of a European testing agency; 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/81

3. include in the definition of narcotic drugs not merely those that are harmful to health but also those that, although apparently innocuous, may alter an athlete’s performance;

4. introduce a system of sanctions applicable throughout the territory of the EU in the event of drug use being uncovered?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The Commission shares the views of the Honourable Member on the international dimension to the use of drugs in professional sport as well as its repercussions on amateur sport.

The Commission has noted the Vienna European Council’s call to combat drug use, Parliament’s resolution of 17 December 1998 on the same topic and the declaration issued by the Council Presidency following the informal meeting of the Ministers for Sport which was held in Bonn on 18 January 1999. The Commission also took part in the World Conference on doping organised by the International Olympic Committee in Lausanne.

In view of the various stances taken, the Commission has set up a working party with the Member States and with the Council of Europe as an observer, in order to study possible Community action on such issues as those raised by the Honourable Member.

The Commission will present a report on the results of the working party’s deliberations at an informal meeting of the Ministers for Sport to be held in Paderborn from 31 May to 2 June 1999. The report will also be transmitted to Parliament.

(1999/C 325/104) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0177/99 by Dietrich Elchlepp (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Power supply line from Morocco to Spain

1. What is the Commission’s viewof the proposal to include in the list of projects for the trans-European networks an electricity supply line from Morocco to Spain, then feeding into the European grid, as a major factor in producing cheap. environmental energy from the large-scale wind energy plants in the Western Sahara, which is noted for its winds?

2. Could this project be financed under the MEDA programme?

3. Does the Commission see any possibility of (co)financing, in agreement with the government of Morocco, a feasibility study to look into all the economic, technical and constitutional aspects?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

1. This project has already been carried out. The Moroccan and Spanish national electricity grids were connected in 1998 and up to 700 MW per 20 minute block can be shifted in either direction.

2. An €80 million loan from the EIB under the fourth EC-Morocco financial protocol (1992-96) was used to finance the project.

The EIB loan comes under the heading of ‘horizontal’ financial cooperation, a financial instrument of the new Mediterranean policy designed to fund investment projects of mutual interest to Member States and southern Mediterranean non-member countries. C 325/82 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/105) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0178/99 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: BSE: comparison between Switzerland and the EU

1. What is the Commission’s opinion of the face that a relatively large number of cattle in Switzerland have been found to be infected with BSE?

2. How true is it that examinations for BSE are much less accurate in Germany than in Switzerland?

3. How true is it that diagnostic facilities are poorer in Germany than in Switzerland?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

1. The Commission is aware of the elevated number of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) cases in Switzerland. In relation to the size of the cattle population the situation is rather different from the situation in the United Kingdom. Moreover, the number of BSE cases shows a steady decline since the peak of the epidemic in 1995. This decline is considered to be indicative of effective eradication measures. The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament’s Secretariat, two tables containing information on the current BSE incidence over the past twelve months, and on the total number of BSE cases since 1988.

2. Since April 1998 the transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) surveillance and monitoring measures have been harmonized at Community level by Commission Decision 98/272/EC of 23 April 1998, on epidemio-surveillance for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and amending Decision 94/474/ EC (1). Most Member States, including Germany, have already reported in the framework of the standing veterinary committee on progress made with the implementation of this Decision.

There are no indications, neither from these progress reports, nor from inspections carried out by the Commission on the national surveillance systems, that the BSE examinations are much less accurate in Germany than in Switzerland.

3. The before mentioned Decision also lays down the conditions for sampling and laboratory testing for detection of the presence of a TSE following the recommendations of the manual of standards for diagnostic tests and vaccines of the International office of epizootics (OIE). The rapid tests for detection of BSE after slaughter, which are currently being developed by several laboratories amongst others in Switzerland, have not yet been accepted by the OIE. The Commission is at this moment evaluating a number of such tests but has not yet completed this exercise.

To conclude, several alternative means to diagnose TSEs are being recommended by various laboratories around the world. It is however, premature to draw conclusions as to the quality or accuracy of those tests.

(1) OJ L 122, 24.4.1998.

(1999/C 325/106) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0183/99 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Authorisation/approval of genetically modified seeds

1. What is the current state of approvals of genetically modified seeds in the EUMember States?

2. If there are already approved seeds, does the Commission have any detailed information (e.g. lists) concerning the varieties approved, the characteristics modified, and the dates of approval?

3. Does the Commission know which varieties (applicant companies, stating date of approval process, scheduled end of examination) are being examined at present? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/83

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 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 325/107) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0186/99 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Development of the Charcas Ponds de San Lorenzo (Gran Canaria, Canary Islands)

A number of environmental groups have condemned the proposals to build a golf course in the area known as the ‘Charcas de San Lorenzo’, which is located within the municipality of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and forms part of the ‘Pino Santo’ nature protection area, the status of which is recognised under Canary Islands environmental law.

The enclave possesses a wide range of natural and cultural assets. Its classification as a wetland merits its inclusion as a ‘priority natural habitat’ in Annex I of Directive 92/43 (1) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, under the category ‘Mediterranean temporary pond’. The Commission has particular responsibility for the conservation of such areas. The ponds are also home to an interesting variety of migratory birds which are included in Annex I of Directive 79/409 (2) on the conservation of wild birds in the European Community. The species in question include a number of birds which nest in the area (egret, heron, coot, etc.).

A citizens’ group has submitted an alternative plan for the recovery and rehabilitation of the ponds in an attempt to prevent a golf course from being built, which would inevitably result in the loss of the area’s natural assets.

Is the Commission aware of the above facts?

Does the Commission consider protection of the area in question to be compatible with the building of a golf course?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. (2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The Commission had not been aware of these facts.

The site referred to has not been designated as a special protection area (SPA) for birds under Directive 79/409/ EEC. Nor has it been scientifically listed as a major bird-conservation area.

This site was not put forward by Spain for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network in pursuance of Directive 92/43/EEC. The Honourable Member states that it contains a priority type of habitat as described in Annex I to that Directive (temporary Mediterranean ponds). Nevertheless, according to the reference list of habitat types and species in the Macaronesian region approved by the ‘Habitat’ Committee, that type of habitat does not exist in the Canary Islands.

The natural appeal of that site would thus appear more national than Community. C 325/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/108) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0187/99 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Request for aid in connection with forest fires

Spain recently submitted seven applications to the Commission for funding in the course of 1999 to prevent forest fires, the money to be provided under the regulation on the protection of Community forests against fire.

What are the basic details of the applications submitted? Which areas of Spain are affected?

Does any of the applications relate to the Canary Islands?

Has the Commission received any application for emergency funds to repair the damage caused by fires which have occurred in the Canary Islands during the years in which the regulation on the protection of Community forests against fire has been in force?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 1999)

Of the seven funding applications made by Spain under Regulation (EC) 308/97 of 17 February 1997 on protection of the Community’s forests against fire three are for projects in the Basque Country (aid requested €1 655 603), one is for a project in Catalonia (aid requested €30 351) and three are for projects proposed by the Directorate-General for Nature Conservation (aid requested €1 293 822).

The latter three projects are a national information campaign on forest fires, a national terrestrial and aerial monitoring scheme and a training course for personnel responsible for monitoring and initial intervention. The Catalan project is a study on protection of forests against fire and the Basque Country projects are a regional information and education campaign, creation of tracks, firebreaks and water supply points, and a regional monitoring scheme.

No application relating to the Canary Islands has been made.

(1999/C 325/109) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0196/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Environmental impact of shrimp farming in Asia

In view of the devastating environmental impact of uncontrolled shrimp farming in countries such as Thailand, Vietnam and Bangladesh, does the Commission plan any projects to assist shrimp farmers to convert to the ‘closed’ system which recycles and cleans waste-water and is, hence, less damaging to the environment?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

Projects which the Commission is undertaking are rarely directly assisting shrimp farmers. Rather, they try to address the totality of the coastal area economic, social and environmental situation. An example of such a project currently under preparation is the coastal habitats and resources management project (CHARM) in Thailand.

The object of CHARM, for which a preparatory mission will be undertaken during the first half of 1999, is to develop a sustainable balance between habitat conservation and economic development in the southern coastal areas of the country. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C325/85

The project will support integrated pilot actions focusing on the upgrading of coordination, policy formulation, regulatory and service functions of the public sector, the improvement of environmental sustainability of exploitation patterns, the support of alternative mariculture production and marine eco- tourism, and the enhancement of responsible participation of producers and local communities in the planning and management process. The project is being launched with the full co-operation of the Thai government.

(1999/C325/110) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0203/99 by Mark Killilea (UPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Seals

In April 1997, Bord Iascaigh Mhara, The Irish Sea Fisheries Board, submitted to DG XIV a report on the Physical Interaction between Grey Seals and Fishing Gear. The report was drawn up with financial assistance from the Commission.

Can the Commission indicate whether it circulated this report to fisheries organisations or to the fisheries departments of the governments of the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The Commission finances large numbers of research projects, which makes it difficult for the Commission to circulate or distribute reports resulting from such projects. However, copies of reports are available on request from the Commission.

The Commission believes that the results from research projects should be made available to as wide an audience as possible. Therefore, summaries of research projects funded by the Commission are accessible through Internet.

Furthermore, it is one of the conditions for funding by the Commission of research projects, including the one executed by the Irish sea fisheries board, that the recipient of the funds shall make an effort to distribute the results from the project as widely as possible, in recognised scientific journals or by any other suitable means.

For more information on this same report by the Irish sea fisheries board the Honourable Member is referred to the reply the Commission gave to the Honourable Member’s oral question H-72/99, during question time at Parliament’s February 1999 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of Parliament (February 1999).

(1999/C325/111) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0209/99 by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Waste dump at Corliano (Florence)

A 120 000 m2 waste dump is scheduled for construction between vineyards and olive groves at Corliano (commune of Cerreto Guidi, Florence).

The project does not seem to have included any study into the state of the ground water or any pollution caused to it by sewage from the old dump. Nor are there any plans to render the subsoil impermeable although the site is traversed by watercourses and subject to frequent landslides, as local maps show. C 325/86 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Since the project would cause tremendous unease among the local population and be an unbearable burden for the area, which is very scenic and prime agricultural land, does the Commission intend to take urgent action to verify the feasibility of the project and its conformity with the European environmental rules in force?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

In the opinion of the Commission, based on the information given by the Honourable Member, the work to which the questions make reference appears to be within the scope 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) and, in particular, appears to be a project of the classes listed in Annex II. Such projects should be made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where Member States consider that their characteristics so require.

Directive 75/442/EEC as modified by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991, on waste (2), could also be concerned on the basis of Article 4 which states that Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes or methods which could harm the environment.

Furthermore, Articles 4, 5 and 7 of Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protection of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances (3) might apply and require, under certain conditions, an examination of the hydrogeological conditions of the soil and an examination whether the soil contamination constitutes an environmentally acceptable solution.

Not being aware of the situation described by the Honourable Member, the Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to gather detailed information about it and to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (2) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. (3) OJ L 20, 26.1.1980.

(1999/C 325/112) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0210/99 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Alleged irregularities in the BIC assignment procedure in Salerno

As is known, the instruments at the disposal of Commission DG XVI, particularly for the promotion and launching of Business and Innovation Centres (BICs), involve applications from qualified parties and thus allocation of the earmarked resources. In this case the BICs launched by DG XVI and adopted in various forms throughout Union territory with varying degrees of success are still being pursued as one of the most valid means of promoting and assisting small and medium-sized businesses.

Can the Commission answer the following:

? what incidents marked the procedures and allocation of at least two phases of appropriations for launching the BIC in Salerno (Campania)?

? did this entail a doubling of expenditure?

? what initiatives, if any, were taken by the competent DG to renew the appropriation?

? who were the proponents at the time of the decision and were other applications ever taken into consideration? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/87

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

(31 March 1999)

There have been two separate projects to create a Business and Innovation Centre (BIC) in Salerno. The first project was proposed to the Commission in November 1988 by the Ageni/Terfin company. However, when the preparatory work had been completed as normal and the payments made in the proper manner, the centre could not be established because the main partner (Terfin) withdrew from the Ageni group. The second project was presented by ‘Bic Campania Sud’ in October 1996. No problems have arisen so far with the allocation of funding or the conduct of preparatory work, both of which are progressing normally.

Funding has not been awarded twice to the same beneficiary or to the same project; two separate cases of funding are involved. The second was justified because the first project failed. The Commission did not take any initiative to renew the funding; it approved the second project, which was presented by the local promoters.

The bodies promoting the first project were the Ageni company, acting through Terfin, the Associazione Industriali di Salerno, the Salerno Chamber of Commerce, Consorzio ASI, the Fondazione A. Genovesi SDOA, the University of Salerno and Vila Sud Srl. The promoter of the second project is ‘Bic Campania Sud’, whose main shareholders are the Province of Salerno, the Salerno Chamber of Commerce, Fondazione A. Genovesi SDOA, Consorzio ASI, three banks and about 25 small private enterprises.

(1999/C 325/113) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0212/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Harmonisation of the right to strike in the public services

Unfortunately, the gap between trade unions and citizens using public services is widening more and more, damaging the image of the unions and harming the lives of citizens, especially when it comes to health services, air, rail or sea transport. In order to improve this relationship, which is more or less the same in all the Member States, does the Commission not consider it advisable to put forward proposals for harmonising the legislation on the right to strike, at least in essential public services?

Does it think that the functioning of the internal market could be improved by such harmonisation?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The right to strike was explicitly excluded from the scope of Article 2 of the Agreement on social policy (Article 137(6) of the EC Treaty when the Amsterdam Treaty comes into force). The Commission has no plans to make any proposal on this issue.

(1999/C 325/114) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0213/99 by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Meat inspection fees pursuant to Directive 93/118/EC = my question E-2988/98

According to the Commission the lump-sum fees for meat inspections laid down in Directive 93/118/EC (1) can be exceeded when higher fees have in fact been incurred (see answer to my question E-2988/98 (2)). In Germany these fees are usually levied at district authority level. C 325/88 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Is each individual district authority entitled to set fees to cover its own costs, or can fees be set only on a uniform federal basis, with average rates that will cover costs?

(1) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 15. (2) OJ C 297, 15.10.1999, p. 40.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The question raised by the Honourable Member is the subject of a case pending before the Court of Justice (Case C-374/97 / A. Feyrer v Landkreis Rottal-Inn). The Commission must therefore await the judgment of the Court before replying.

(1999/C 325/115) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0214/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Olive cultivation register in Greece

According to the Commission’s answer to my previous question (E-1557/97) (1), the olive cultivation register in Greece was not established or notified by the statutory deadlines. In the same answer, the Commission states that ‘if the work plan proposed by Greece is respected, establishment of the olive cultivation register will be completed in December 1998 and ... could therefore be financed in the same way as in the other Member States’.

What stage has now been reached in establishing the olive cultivation register? Has the project received 100 % funding as in the other Member States? What was the cause of the failure to complete the register by the end of 1998?

(1) OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 70.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The olive cultivation register was not drawn up in accordance with the plans submitted by Greece to the Commission in April 1997 and referred to in the answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question No E-1557/97. (1) As described in the progress report on compilation (up to 30November 1998), submitted to the Commission at the end of January 1999, almost all the work remains to be done.

The work is divided into two stages. In August 1997 the Commission approved the use of a grove identification system, which Greece proposed in March 1997, for areas not covered by the integrated system. An invitation to tender for this work was published in March 1998, but no contracts have yet been signed. In April 1998 the Commission provisionally approved a work programme (based on proposals submitted in January 1998) for the next stage: collating and checking crop declarations and entering them into a database. An invitation to tender for a pilot project in four prefectures was published but subsequently cancelled. A new invitation was due to be published in February 1999.

Meanwhile, the reform of the market organisation has been adopted and Commission Regulation (EC) 2366/ 98 of 30October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for olive oil for the 1998/99, 1999/2000 and 2000/01 marketing years (2) has changed the regulatory requirements by replacing the olive cultivation register with geographical information system (GIS) terminology. At the Commission’s instigation, the olive cultivation register compilation method chosen by Greece had anticipated this development and the work programme previously drawn up is in line with the new rules. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/89

As is always the case for Member States, the eligible work undertaken by Greece qualifies for 100 % funding. The costs are to be borne by growers, in the form of a flat-rate deduction from the aid received. The Commission has so far been notified of expenditure of EUR 6 million for 1998 (allocated mainly to map- making), which will be subject to an accounts clearance procedure.

The work would seem not to have been completed primarily because the Greek Ministry of Agriculture has accorded the matter low priority. The authorities have to cope with slow procedures for publishing invitations to tender and awarding contracts, and are drastically short of specialist staff for drawing up technical specifications. In view of this, it is likely that Greece will continue for some time to be subject to financial corrections to production aid when accounts are cleared and, in accordance with the new rules, must redouble its on-the-spot checks on aid applications and crop declarations.

(1) OJ C 21, 22.1.1998. (2) OJ L 293, 31.10.1998.

(1999/C 325/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0217/99

by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Rehabilitation of Lake Karla under the 2nd CSF

At the north-eastern edge of the Plain of Thessaly in Central Greece lay Lake Karla, which was drained dry some 40 years ago, severely affecting the environment and the local economy : the change in climate affected crops, the level of the water table fell, the quality of the ground water deteriorated, tectonic phenomena appeared (subsidence and fracturing of the earth) and the Pagasitic Gulf was polluted. The Prefectures of Larissa and Magnesia are insisting that the plan to recreate Lake Karla should go ahead but European Union funding for this purpose would be essential.

Will the Commission say whether this project will be incorporated into the 2nd CSF and, if so, when? What further measures does it believe should be taken in this connection, given that the project is vital for the region as a whole?

(1999/C 325/117) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0398/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Rehabilitation of Lake Karla

The draining of Lake Karla in Thessaly in 1963 bears out the theory that nature punishes human intervention when it does not take account of all the environmental implications involved; it has caused enormous problems such as climate change in the area, a sharp fall in water table and groundwater levels, faults in the earth and severe pollution of the Pagassitic Gulf.

In order to tackle all these problems and restore the ecological balance in the area, the regional authorities of Larissa and Magnesia decided, with the approval of the public at large, to start work on recreating Lake Karla.

Greece has submitted a proposal to the Commission for the inclusion of the project to rehabilitate Lake Karla in the 2nd CSF. Is the Commission considering jointly funding the project and providing support immediately from the present CSF? C 325/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0217/99 and E-0398/99 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The Commission has recently examined an application from the Greek Government for part-financing of a large-scale project for restoration of Lake Karla, to form part of the Environment operational programme (OP) of the 1994-1999 Community support framework (CSF) for Greece.

The project as presented poses environmental problems and the Commission, aware of the consequences of the large-scale drainage work that caused the lake to dry up, has asked the Greek authorities for a revised and supplemented proposal focusing primarily on protection of the environment and at the same time obviating intensification of crop-growing in Thessaly.

This new proposal, aimed at restoring the Lake Karla biotope, will require fresh studies that can, if the Greek authorities request, be part-financed under the Environment OPof the present CSF.

If the new project is found acceptable for part-financing the work on the ground could fall within the CSF for the 2000-2006 programming period.

(1999/C 325/118) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0221/99

by José Mendes Bota (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Portugal lagging behind in the European single market

The Commission has issued a public warning to Portugal over the failure to transpose a number of Community directives aimed at the completion of the European single market into national law.

The legislation concerned includes the directive on public procurement in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors and the directive on the possibilities open to undertakings in those sectors.

Both directives were to have been transposed by 30 June 1997.

An even worse case is the failure to accede to the Rome Convention on the protection of authors and performers, copyright and related rights. In this case there is a time-lag of four years, going back to January 1995.

In the light of this situation, can the Commission say what reasons the Portuguese Government has given in order to justify its failure to act, which is not only causing direct harm to the rights of individuals and undertakings but is also giving Portugal a negative image in the process of European integration?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/91

(1999/C 325/119) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0222/99 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: Problems encountered by Dutch building firms operating in Germany

On 3 July 1998, in answer to my Question P-1529/98 (1) on the problems encountered by Dutch building firms operating in Germany, Mr Monti said that the Commission was currently examining the possibility of initiating infringement proceedings against Germany.

According to my information, the proceedings have now been initiated.

1. What stage has been reached in the proceedings?

2. Has anything concrete emerged yet?

(1) OJ C 50, 22.2.1999, p. 45.

Answer by Mr Monti On behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

1. In serving formal notice on the German Government in November 1998, the Commission gave it an opportunity to comment on various aspects of German regulations on the posting of workers in connection with the provision of services in the building sector.

2. The German Government said that it would reply by the end of February 1999. Consequently, the Commission is not yet in a position to say whether and to what extent the German Government is ready to alter its current position.

The Commission would remind the honourable Member that a number of problems in connection with the German regulations have already been referred to the Court of Justice, especially with regard to the holiday fund measures in Germany since 1998 (1).

(1) Case C-49/98, ‘Finalarte’.

(1999/C 325/120) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0225/99 by James Janssen van Raay (UPE) to the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: Fees for road use in the Netherlands

Following the repeated grand-scale infringements by the Netherlands of European rules of law (e.g. Securitel), is the Commission prepared to examine whether the disastrous idea of introducing a pay-as-you-drive scheme infringes European rules, not least in the light of fierce protests from the Netherlands at German and Belgium toll roads which, in fact, could only be introduced at a European level? Are not the proposed controls a violation of protection of privacy, which is guaranteed at European level?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

The Dutch government consulted the Commission at the beginning of 1998 on the possible introduction of a regulatory change on road use in the Randstad during peak hours. That consultation took place in accordance with Council Decision 308/62/EEC of 21 March 1962 as amended by Council Decision 73/402/EEC of 22 November 1973 instituting a procedure for prior examination and consultation in respect of certain laws, regulations and administrative provisions concerning transport (1) proposed in Member States. On 28 May 1998 the Commission delivered the opinion that the submitted draft law was compatible with Community law. C 325/92 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In accordance with Council Directive 93/89/EEC of 25 October 1993 on the application of Member States of taxes on certain vehicles used for the carriage of goods by road and tolls and charges for the use of certain infrastructures (2), Member States may decide to introduce road tolls in their territory.

The Commission has no reason to believe that the foreseen introduction of a regulatory charge by the Dutch government infringes any privacy rights of European citizens.

(1) OJ L 347, 17.12.1973. (2) OJ L 279, 12.11.1993.

(1999/C 325/121) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0229/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to theCommission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: CE marking

Given the recent criticism of the CE mark system, does the Commission agree that manufacturers/importers should be required to submit to their national authority (or to the national authority of the EU country of reception for imported goods) a technical file for scrutiny in advance of the placing on the market of the product?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

Products which are covered by directives adopted under the ‘new approach’ to technical harmonisation and standards (1) should only be placed on the market if they are in conformity with the essential requirements of the relevant directives, including those on safety. Conformity assessment of products under new approach directives is the responsibility of the manufacturer or the importer, according to procedures identified in the directives, with the aid of notified bodies (independent third parties) when so specified. CE marking is a confirmation by the manufacturer that this process has been completed.

The technical file is an element in this process. It is held by the manufacturer, but must be made available to the national authorities when required.

The Commission is of the opinion that the systematic notification of technical files to the authorities would be undesirable. In the first place, it would create important additional burdens for manufacturers and Member States. Further, for notification to be useful, the files would have to be systematically examined. It is unlikely that this could be achieved without major increases in resources and the risk of delays in the marketing of products, undermining competitivity. It would also undermine the principle that the burden of responsibility for conformity assessment lies with the manufacturer.

The Commission considers that problems of non-conformity are best tackled through better information to manufacturers and importers regarding their obligations and better market surveillance.

The requirements of the directives, including clarification of obligations on market surveillance, are set out in a guide, to be published shortly. Market surveillance is the responsibility of the Member States which should have the necessary powers to ensure the respect of the obligations of Community law, including the safety of the consumer. The Commission is also committed to initiatives to improve market surveillance as announced in the action plan for the single market (2). One such initiative is the programme of mutual visits between Member States, currently under way, which is intended to identify weaknesses and promote improvements in national market surveillance systems.

(1) Council Resolution of 7 May 1985 on a new approach to technical harmonisation and standards, OJ C 136, 4.6.1985. (2) COM(97) 184 final. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/93

(1999/C 325/122) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0230/99 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Funding for the Network of Urban Forums for Sustainable Development

The Network of Urban Forums for Sustainable Development was set up in response to the EC Green Paper on the Urban Environment (COM(90) 218) and the 5th Action Programme Related to the Environment and Sustainable Development: ‘Towards sustainability’ (COM(92) 23). Normally, the secretariat function would have been executed under a technical assistance contract with DG X; however such a contract was never finalised. In the absence of a secretariat, the International Institute for the Urban Environment performed the secretariat function.

1. Is DG X supportive of the work of the Network of Urban Forums for Sustainable Development?

2. How is it possible that the requisite coordination work for the network activities has been carried out on an unpaid basis since 1995?

3. How is it possible that the body carrying out the coordination activities never received an answer to its request for payment?

4. Why was a contract not concluded with the coordinating body for their work, despite an oral commitment from DG X?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

1. The Commission does appreciate the work of the network of urban forums for sustainable development. It is an experimental network with 19 members. In 1999 the Commission will evaluate the network with a view to taking the necessary decisions on its future.

2. The work of the of urban forums network is coordinated by the Commission, more particularly by the Information Relays Unit in DG X as in the case of the rural carrefours network (110 members) and the Europe Info-Points (85 members).

3. The International Institute for Urban Development in Delft submitted a financial proposal with regard to the management of the network to the Information Relays Unit in DG X. The proposal was not taken into consideration because the activities in question must be managed directly by the Commission. The Institute was informed orally of the situation. A written answer was not prepared at the time because oral exchanges with the Institute, like all the relays, were very frequent.

4. At no point did DG X give an oral undertaking to the Institute with regard to the management of the network for the reason given at 3 above.

(1999/C 325/123) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0231/99 by Ana Miranda de Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Increase in tariffs on certain European exports to the United States

As a result of the disagreement between the United States and the European Union caused by differences of opinion over the banana trade, a series of European products have been subject to tariffs of 100 %.

Will the Commission say how it intends to tackle this latest crisis? What measures will it take to protect European exports to the United States’ market?

In view of the export difficulties facing some of the sectors and products concerned, caused also by the crisis in Russia, what steps will the Commission take to prevent the unemployment likely to arise as a result of reduced production? C 325/94 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/124) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0232/99 by Ana Miranda de Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Increase in tariffs on European exports to the United States

The trade dispute between the European Union and the United States over the banana market is generating a wave of trade reprisals targeted at European production sectors which have nothing to do with the dispute in question. For instance, the market share of the Spanish biscuit sector is being severely threatened by the 100 % tariff increase introduced.

What will the Commission do to protect this European sector from arbitrary reprisals of this kind?

Will the Commission give details of the total number of products affected, the estimated volume of exports, the loss of market share and the countries which may stand to benefit from measures taken against European products?

Jointanswer to Written Questions E-0231/99 and E-0232/99 given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the statement it gave in Parliament’s plenary meeting on 9 March 1999 on the commercial dispute between the European Union and the United States of America concerning bananas.

(1999/C 325/125) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0233/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Possibility of a newEurotax in Italy

Is the Commission aware that the Italian Chief Government Accountant, Andrea Monorchio, has stated that, in order to balance the national budget by 2002, as required by the Stability Pact, Italy will need to take measures costing approximately ITL 60 000 billion and will be required to increase taxes?

Does it consider that an increase in taxes and the possible introduction of a newEurotax willbe damaging to the Italian economy?

Has the Italian Government ever discussed with the Commission the possible introduction of a second Eurotax?

Did the suggestions made by the Commission to the Italian Government as to howto ensure compliance with the Stability Pact include that of increasing taxation?

What would be the consequences for Italy of the d’Alema government failing to balance the national budget?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

The Commission assessed the Italian fiscal position on the occasion of the presentation of the Italian stability programme 1999-2001, which was approved by the Ecofin Council on 8 February 1999.

The stability programme indicates that the corrective measures required in 1999, 2000 and 2001 amount to 0,4 %, 0,2 % and 0,1 % of gross domestic product (GDP) respectively. If additional interventions are necessary, the Italian government has committed itself to ‘take such measures, if needed’. The budgetary targets for 2002 will be announced in May, when the ‘Documento di programmazione economica e finanziaria’ for 2000-2002 will be presented to the Parliament. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/95

The Italian government has never mentioned to the Commission the possibility of a new ‘eurotax’. The Commission has never indicated an increase of fiscal pressure as a desirable strategy to reduce the budget deficit. On the contrary, the Commission considers that a sound budgetary policy should be based on the control of current expenditure.

The economic consequences of non-compliance with the requirements of the Stability and growth pact are clearly indicated in the European Council Resolution on the Stability and growth pact (1) of 17 June 1997 and in Council Regulations (EC) 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies and (EC) 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit (2).

(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997. (2) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.

(1999/C 325/126) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0234/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Protection of the Macchia Tonda wildlife sanctuary (Rome)

Is the Commission aware that the Macchia Tonda natural wildlife sanctuary in the Province of Rome might be destroyed as a result of the Italian Government’s plans to put an end to the army’s use of land in the San Severa area, which currently ensures the sanctuary’s survival.

What action does it intend to take to protect the environment in one of the areas of the Latium coastline where pollution levels are still extremely low?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The site of Macchiatonda has been designated by the Italian authorities as a special protection area for the protection of birds according to Article 4 of Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1). The area has also been proposed as a site of Community importance for the protection of wild fauna and flora according to Article 4 of Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2).

The site is therefore fully covered by Community nature conservation legislation.

Finally, the site is also protected by the regional law no 54 of 23 July 1983 as a regional reserve.

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

(1999/C 325/127) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0240/99 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: The UK’s rebate from the EU

Why does the UK receive a rebate on its contributions to the EU?

Will the Commission say how much rebate the UK has received altogether since it was first introduced?

How big is the rebate expressed as a percentage of the annual contribution? C 325/96 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

The Honourable Member is referred to the own resource report (1). In particular, answers to the questions raised and many other related details can be found in chapter 2 and annex 4of that report.

(1) COM(98) 560 final ( http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg19/index_en.htm.

(1999/C 325/128) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0249/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Port of Lavrion

The EU is jointly funding the development of tourist and commercial facilities at the port of Lavrion to operate as a complement to the port of Piraeus.

An industrial area has been created next to the port of Lavrion which, provided the Lavrion local authorities agree, offers facilities for setting up craft firms and industries causing only low to medium levels of pollution. Among the investors applying for authorisation to set up are companies intending to trade in petroleum products (Lavroil Ltd., Aegean Oil Ltd.) which aim to install 15 oil tanks in the industrial area in or close to the port.

The Lavrion local authorities recently approved these investments, mainly on the grounds that they cover the port of Lavrion’s needs for supplies. However, there is no evidence in the study of these two investments of any aim to meet those needs; on the contrary, the port is to be used for the needs of the companies which intend to take delivery of petroleum products by sea and distribute them on the internal market.

The installations concerned are located:

( in the vicinity of classified antiquities (recent monuments)

( only 4km from the archaeological site of Sounion

( 2 km from the archaeological site of Thorikos

( in the immediate vicinity of residential areas

( at the very edge of the Sounion National Park

and one of the sites is in a coastal area which the planning permission study for the industrial area designates a ‘coastal protection area’

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1. whether it accepts the necessary finance ( and the works taking place ( being used as justification for setting up installations which are particularly damaging to the environment in an important historical, natural and residential environment, and

2. whether it will intercede with the relevant authorities to clear up the misunderstanding which is tarnishing the project and EU funding in order to come to an arrangement based on sound and balanced management of this sensitive area?

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

(15 March 1999)

Under the Attiki multifund operational programme of the 1994-99 Community support framework for Greece the Community is financing solely a range of infrastructure works for development of the port of Lavrio. The aid is EUR 5,5 million. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/97

As far as installations around the port are concerned, the Commission can act only if they are prohibited under environmental requirements pertaining to construction of the port or their creation violates Community law on environmental matters.

At the moment the Commission lacks the necessary information to decide whether either of the above cases applies. It will seek full details of the situation from the Greek authorities.

(1999/C 325/129) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0255/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: The euro

Can the Commission say whether account has been taken of the visually handicapped in the design of the new euro notes and coins, and if so, how?

If not, is the Commission to prepared to have measures taken to enable the visually handicapped and blind citizens of Europe to recognize the notes and coins and to tell one from the other in each case?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The Commission attaches great importance to the interests of the blind and visually handicapped and it consulted them at each stage in the design of the euro coins. The European Blind Union expressed its preference for the series of coins eventually selected.

Euro coins are differentiated by their size, composition, weight, colour and thickness. Several characteristics will make it easier for the blind and visually handicapped to identify the coins: different edges for each pair of consecutive coins, a smooth edge with a groove for the two cent coin, coarse milling for the 20 cent coin ( the form called ‘the Spanish flower’).

The European Monetary Institute, the forerunner to the European Central Bank co-operated closely with the European Blind Union on the design of the notes. On 16 December 1996, the European Monetary Institute issued a press release entitled ‘The euro banknotes and the visually handicapped’ which describes the technical specifications of the notes in order to facilitate identification by the blind. Euro banknotes will be characterised by the following: different sizes, increasing according to the face value of the note; different colours, each denomination having a single predominant colour (grey, red, blue, orange, green, yellow-brown or purple); good tactility with deep engraving and intaglio printing so that the symbols are recognisable by touch; clearly legible numerals, located in a standard position on each note throughout the series.

(1999/C 325/130) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0259/99 by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Tragic situation of children in Albania 8 drugs, high mortality rate, trade in organs

A report submitted to the recent Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe by Mrs Eliza Potsa Taska describes the tragic situation of children in Albania who are victims of trafficking, abandonment, prostitution, AIDS and drugs. According to UNICEF, there are as many as 8000 young users in Tirana! A further tragic revelation is the trade in children’s organs taking place between Albania and Italy. C 325/98 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Child mortality in Albania is the highest in Europe at 26 deaths per thousand, the rate being even higher in rural areas, and the number of women dying in child-birth is also high owing to the lack of monitoring during pregnancy. In what way does the Commission propose to intervene to put an end to all forms of child exploitation in Albania and effectively protect the human rights of children?

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

(8 March 1999)

The Commission is well aware of the prevalence of organised crime in Albania, which bears hardest on the most vulnerable members of the population, particularly children. The high crime rate is fuelled by the country’s security problems, weak government and poor economic prospects, coupled with cultural factors. A comprehensive programme to foster stabilisation and development in Albania has been in place since late 1997 with international backing; the Community is the major contributor, having provided aid in excess of €150 million, part of which is targeted on assistance for the police, the judicial system and the administration. Albania also receives humanitarian aid, which is used to repair medical facilities, including maternity units, and distribute medicines and food to the needy, including orphans and the poorest families.

(1999/C 325/131) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0262/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Greek operational programme for the environment

What is the take-up to date of appropriations earmarked for sub-programme 2 of the operational programme for the environment (management of the human environment and control of air pollution in Athens) and for precisely which projects, with particular reference to measures 2.3 (protection of the atmospheric environment in the country and Athens and noise control) and 2.5 (management of solid and toxic waste)?

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

(12 March 1999)

Take-up for sub-programme 2 of the operational programme (OP) for the environment under the 1994-99 Community support framework for Greece is at present 44,6 %. Take-up for measures 2.3 and 2.5 is 60 % and 40 % respectively and for the whole OP 58 %.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and the Parliament Secretariat a list of the projects so far included in measures 2.3 and 2.5.

(1999/C 325/132) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0263/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: International Olympic Committee

Is the Commission satisfied with the measures taken by the International Olympic Committee Executive Board following recent allegations of inappropriate behaviour by members of the IOC?

Does the Commission agree that arrangements for the Olympic Games might be better handled by a more transparent and accountable organisation? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/99

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 1999)

Commenting on the action of the members of the International Olympic Committee does not fall within the Community’s remit. The Commission has often expressed its respect for the autonomy of associations and does not, therefore, feel that it should intervene in this matter.

(1999/C 325/133) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0266/99 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: European social aid in Catalonia

Could the Commission provide information on the aid received by the department for social welfare of the Generalitat de Catalunya (Spain) in the years 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1999/C 325/134) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0276/99 by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Borri Elettronica Industriale, a subsidiary of General Signal (USA)

The company Borri Elettronica Industriale (Bibbiena-Arezzo-Italy), a subsidiary of General Signal (USA), has a long and outstanding tradition as an employer, having become one of the major firms in this sector (with 118 employees, of whom 60 % possess decrees and/or diplomas).

This company is to be taken over any day now by SPX (USA) a company operating in the vehicle components and services sector.

No guarantees have been given as regards maintaining jobs and making full use of the firm’s special potential.

Will the Commission take the necessary steps to protect both the jobs and the skills base developed by Borri Elettronica Industriale over its many years of operation?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

One of the priorities of European social policy is to ensure that workers are protected in the event of transfers of undertakings.

Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses (1) is intended to protect employees during a change of head of undertaking, in particular to ensure that their rights are safeguarded. To that end, Article 3 of this Directive states that the rights and obligations arising for the transferor from a contract of employment or from an employment relationship are, by reason of such transfer, to be transferred to the transferee. C 325/100 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Article 4 also provides for the workers concerned to be protected against any dismissal pronounced by the transferor or the transferee, but does not hinder any dismissals that may occur for economic, technical or organisational reasons leading to changes in the area of employment.

The Commission does not take measures in individual cases, as requested by the Honourable Member, and does not know about the case he mentions.

If the national provisions transposing Community law are not complied with, it is primarily the responsibility of the national courts and authorities to deal with any resulting dispute.

(1) OJ L 61, 5.3.1977.

(1999/C 325/135) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0277/99

by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: German Institute of Art History in Florence

The German Institute of Art History in Florence, a body under the control of the German Ministry for Research and Technology, has 33 permanent staff, 15 of German nationality and 18 of other nationalities.

Although they perform the same tasks, the non-German staff receive much lower salaries than the German staff, the latter being paid normal civil service rates, while the former receive a much lower salary based on the rate scales for the Germany Embassy in Rome.

This represents unacceptable discrimination on the basis of nationality.

Will the Commission take steps to tackle this clear case of discrimination?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1999)

The Commission considers that all staff employed at the Institute of Art History in Florence by the German authorities are subject to the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality. Any differences in pay between employees should therefore be based on objective reasons independent of nationality.

It is for the employer to establish the terms of employment, including pay, on the basis of the tasks and responsibilities of the employees.

However, it should be noted that Member States may make special arrangements for civil servants, where such arrangements are justified by the nature of the legal relationship between the government and the employee or civil servant. However, the category of civil servant must be open to all European workers without discrimination on grounds of nationality.

The Commission considers that it is the employer’s responsibility to apply these general principles of Community law to the different individual cases. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/101

(1999/C 325/136) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0283/99 by Claude Desama (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: European identity card

Given that Article 17, and in particular its second paragraph, of the Treaty of Amsterdam concerned with European citizenship establishes citizenship of the Union, that every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside freely on the territory of the Member States, that every citizen has the right to vote and to stand for election at local authority elections in the Member State where he resides, would it not be appropriate * since there is no European identity card * for every citizen of the Union to be able to use any other probative document, such as a residence permit? Should not the Commission modify Regulation (EEC) 1612/68 (1) accordingly?

(1) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 1999)

In conformity with the rules of international public law, Community legislation at present provides only for two documents which fulfil sufficiently the legal requirement for proof of nationality of citizens of the Union when travellingin exercisingthe rightof freedom of movement. These are identity cards and passports.

In the framework of the legislative recasting of the right of residence the Commission will however examine the suggestion made by the Honourable Member.

(1999/C 325/137) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0289/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(10 February 1999)

Subject: Protection for the European granite industry

In recent years, firms quarryinggranitein Europe, most of which are constituted as small or medium-sized undertakings, have had to cope with substantial changes. Competition on the domestic market, as well as 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 beingfaced 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 measures has the Commission taken to date with a view to counteractingthis trend? How does it intend to react to the new situation? Will it take anti-dumpingmeasures?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

The Commission is closely monitoring developments as regards the trade in granite products.

Indeed, India and China are two countries that are known for their massive granite exports to the Community, whether in the form of raw or processed products. In 1997 those two countries accounted for, respectively, 63 % of the raw granite and 21,5 % of the processed granite imported into the Community. As compared with the imports from those two countries in 1995 processed-granite imports have increased by 85 %. Other C 325/102 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

countries such as Brazil and South Africa are also major sources of processed granite. All of the granite imported into the Community represented 42 % of identifiable Community consumption in 1997(44 % in 1993). However, an initial analysis of the statistical data drawn from the Comext base on intra-Community trade in granite has shown that the pressure on prices referred to by the Honourable Member would seem not to be confirmed. Thus the Comext data concerning the processed granite traded at intra-Community level point to an average unit price of EUR 700 per tonne in 1997 as compared with EUR 723 per tonne in 1995, or in other words a drop of roughly 3 %.

The Community offers significant potential as regards extra-Community granite exports of all the qualities involved. In 19971,1 million tonnes were exported (representing 20 % of Community production) i.e. an increase of 14 % as compared with 1995. Of that total 54 000 tonnes were exported to China and India (+600 % as compared with 1995). Exports toward those two countries, more particularly of processed granite products, are subject to high customs duties. Thus, in 1998, China and India applied basic rates of 25 % and 40 % respectively to the latter.

Several means of reducing those tariff barriers are becoming available to the Commission. A substantial reduction in the tariff peaks and the removal of export taxes are Commission priorities as part of the negotiations concerning the accession of China to the World Trade Organisation (WTO). In the case of India, which has been a member of the WTO since 1 January 1995, it will be a matter of turning the next round of multilateral negotiations to account.

The Commission does not in general launch any anti-dumping procedures on its own initiative in order to deal with aspects of dumping. A survey intended to determine the existence, extent and effect of any alleged dumping will be conducted by the Commission following a complaint made in writing by any natural or legal person or any association not having a legal personality but acting on behalf of the Community’s industry. Any such complaint must contain items of proof as regards the existence of dumping, any disadvantage suffered by the Community’s industry and any causal link between the imports allegedly involved in dumping, and the alleged disadvantage. The complaint may be sent to the Commission or a Member State which will pass it on. The Commission will then examine whether the information contained in the complaint justifies any anti- dumping procedure.

The legal bases consist of (a) Council Regulation (EC) 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries that are not members of the European Community (basic regulation) and (b) by Council Regulation (EC) 2331/96 of 2 December 1996 amending Regulation (EC) 384/96 on protection against dumped imports from countries that are not members of the European Community (1) and Council Regulation No 905/98 of 27April 1998 amending Regulation (EC) 384/96 on protection against dumped imports from countries that are not members of the European Community (2).

(1) OJ L 317, 6.12.1996. (2) OJ L 128, 30.4.1998.

(1999/C 325/138) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0298/99

by Kenneth Coates (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Private prisons

The construction of private prisons has become a very general policy in the United States of America and is spreading to the United Kingdom.

How far is it extending throughout the European Union? How many private prisons have been opened in each Member State? How does their staffing ratio compare with that in corresponding public institutions? What statistics exist about self-injury and suicide amongst prisoners in these institutions? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/103

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission underlines the need for respect of human rights in compliance with the European Convention for the protection of human rights and the prison standard rules for treatment of prisoners adopted by the Council of Europe in 1973.

However the Commission does not keep an exhaustive database of private penitentiary institutions in the Union. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to other international organisations, such as the Council of Europe, which regularly publishes statistics on prisons situaton in Europe.

(1999/C 325/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0303/99 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Recognition of honorary European citizens

The recent granting of the title of ‘honorary European citizen’ once again raises the need for a regulation covering inter alia the privileges and immunities of those who are awarded this distinction, and those who have made a special contribution to the cause of the European Union.

The present generation and those to come need to be able adequately to channel their recognition of personalities who have made outstanding contributions to this historic undertaking, and who merit something more than the cold metal of a keepsake.

Does the Commission agree that it is its duty to take the initiative in proposing such a regulation?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Commission considers that the title of ‘honorary citizen of Europe’ does not require a regulation. It does not, therefore, intend to propose one.

(1999/C 325/140) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0305/99 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Eco-Label Regulation

Can the Commission give an explanation as to why the criteria for white pigments produced using the sulphate process by the titanium dioxide industry has been changed by the Regulatory Committee responsible for the implementation of the Eco-label Regulation for paints and varnishes?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-1202/98 by Mrs Hardstaff during question time at Parliament’s January 1999 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (January 1999). C 325/104 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/141) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0315/99

by Patricia McKenna (V)to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: BSE cases in Ireland

Is the Commission aware that a recent report by the Portuguese Ministry of Agriculture stated that Ireland has suffered 232 cases of BSE, second only to the United Kingdom, and that the Irish Agriculture Department’s own figures disclose fourteen cases of the disease this month?

In the light of this serious situation, and given that Portugal is currently subject to a European Union beef export ban after 168 recorded cases of BSE, does the Commission not consider a close examination of the Irish situation to be extremely urgent if we are to ensure the health of European Union citizens?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

The Commission believes that measures to control bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and to protect public health should be based on an assessment of not only the incidence, i.e. the number of BSE cases per 1 000 000 adult cattle, but also on the risk management measures applied in the affected area. The total number of cases alone in a certain Member State does not give a representative picture of the actual occurrence of the disease in that Member State as it does not take into account the size of the national herd. The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member, and to the Parliament’s Secretariat, tables containing this information.

In the case of Portugal, a combination of a high incidence of BSE (at present over 160 BSE cases per 1 000 000 adult cattle) and certain shortcomings in the enforcement of the measures to control the BSE risk factors, lead the Commission to propose restrictions on export and require reinforced implementation of protective measures inside Portugal. The corresponding incidence in Ireland is around 20 cases per 1 000 000 adult cattle and the missions of the Commission have not revealed problems in the risk management serious enough to envisage taking measures at Community level. Since 1996, the situation in Ireland appears stable as indicated by an incidence of roughly 20 BSE cases per 1 000 000 adult cattle, while the incidence in Portugal increased rapidly in 1998 from around 60 at the end of 1997 to over 150 BSE cases per 1 000 000 adult cattle at the end of 1998.

The Commission is keeping the development of the BSE situation in Ireland under close scrutiny, as it does in the other Member States, and will immediately propose further measures whenever it is deemed necessary in order to protect public or animal health.

(1999/C 325/142) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0321/99

by John McCartin (PPE)to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: Beef and veal exports from the EU

Can the Commission state how much beef and veal may be exported from the European Union under the current WTO rules, how much of this quota has been exported to date in the current year and how much has been paid in respect of this beef and veal in export refunds? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/105

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 1999)

For the current General agreements on tariffs and trades (GATT) year (1998-1999) the quantity of beef (expressed in carcass weight) which the Community is allowed to export with the benefit of export aid is 1 025 852,6 tonnes (including a carry over of 78 052,6 tonnes from the previous year).

On the base of the requests for export licences, until the end of January 1999, 388 157 tonnes (carcass equivalent) of beef were declared to be exported. The total amount of refund accordingly to be paid is €338 430 589,6.

(1999/C 325/143) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0322/99

by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: Investment in the pigmeat sector in Ireland

Given that EUR 100 million, 75 % of which is EU money, was spent in the Irish pigmeat sector in the last 15 years, can the Commission state whether it has carried out any studies to establish whether this investment has brought any benefit to farmers producing pigs, and will it agree that the European money has been used to create a monopoly of a small number of processors in the Irish market who are now abusing their position to make exorbitant profits?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

It is a condition of Community aid under successive legislation since 1977 that investments for processing and marketing must contribute to improving the situation of the basic agricultural production sector in question, and having regard to the specific nature of each sector, they must guarantee the producers of the basic products an adequate and lasting share in the resulting economic benefits (Council Regulation (EC) 951/97 of 20 May 1997 on improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products (1)). Each application for funding under the Regulation has been examined in the light of this requirement. The Commission can agree that there has been some concentration in pig processing capacity in Ireland, but this is mainly due to acquisition rather than undue aid allocated to a particular group.

(1) OJ L 142, 2.6.1997 (Article 12).

(1999/C 325/144) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0323/99

by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Price of lamb and sheepmeat

Will the Commission provide statistics on the average prices paid for sheepmeat and lamb in each Member State for the most recent period for which the information is available? C 325/106 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The average price in Euro per 100 kilogrammes paid in each Member State (1) to farmers for lamb carcasses in January 1999 (2) was:

Belgium 302,9 Denmark 250,7 Germany 316,1 Greece 363,9 Spain 328,0 France 357,4 Ireland 215,0 Italy 363,9 Netherlands 335,4 Austria 395,5 Portugal 324,2 Finland 174,3 Sweden 237,6 United Kingdom 208,2 Community 283,8

(1) Luxembourg: data not available. (2) Average for the first four weeks of the agricultural marketing year 1999-2000.

(1999/C 325/145) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0329/99 by Alexander Falconer (PSE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Costs of EU information services

What are the annual costs and total costs to the European Union since they started, including staff time, research, development, programming, hardware (distributors’ and users’), promotion, training, travel and overheads of all the 50-odd databases listed in document CB-58-90-425-EN-C as being produced by CEC, and of the transmission systems such as MIDAS, MIDAS-NET, CELEX, CELEX2and of the systems to replace CELEX?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(29 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 325/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0330/99 by Alexander Falconer (PSE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Costs of EU information services

What are the total costs to date of the European Library Plan and its successor information science funding programmes including e.g. INFO 2000 etc., including all administration and assessment costs and overheads? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/107

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

The cost of the library components of the Commission’s telematics programmes under the third and fourth research and development (R&D) framework programmes (1991-1998) amounts to 52,9 millions euro for over 100 projects and accompanying measures, including related publications and external support. In addition, it is estimated that the cost of internal staff involved in administering the work was approximately 4,4 millions euro.

While the INF0 2000 activities mentioned by the Honourable Member have not in fact covered libraries, it is true that under the IMPACT programme (1989-1991) approximately 2,1 millions euro was allocated to precursor projects and studies undertaken to prepare for the library activities under telematics.

(1999/C 325/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0333/99 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Plan for the construction of a port on the island of Ginostra

Ginostra is a small village of 30 inhabitants (with 300 to 500 tourists in the summer) on the south-west coast of the volcanic island of Stromboli. Residents and tourists arrive at the village by ferries and hydrofoils which are met offshore by a small launch which comes out from the little port and takes them to land via the Pertuso Strait. Since 1988 there has been a plan which was adopted by the Region of Sicily for the village of Secche di San Lazzaro, situated one kilometre as the crow flies from the centre of Ginostra, involving the construction of a 58 metre landing-stage and a mooring platform, both made of concrete and anchored on 34 piles, as well as a 1,5 kilometre road to the village with hairpin bends and a special departure area.

This plan is opposed by some of the residents, environmental organisations and many geologists and volcanologists because it would change the landscape of the coast irrevocably and affect the stability of the highly unstable slope. In addition, Under-Secretary Professor F. Barberi has pointed out the risk of volcanic eruptions, an opinion shared by the National and Regional Order of Geologists. These experts also point out that if the volcano erupted (the island is an active volcano of a similar size to Etna) the new road (replacing the boat service) would constitute a further danger for those escaping from the village. On 23 July 1998, the Commune of Lipari sent the Ministries of the Environment and of the Cultural Heritage and the Region of Sicily an application for confirmation that the project was compatible with the environment and could be carried out which does not seem to be accompanied by a study of the hydrogeological risks. In addition, many members of the EP requested as long ago as 14.10.1992 that the project be suspended on account of its considerable impact on the environment.

Does the Commission believe that in the case of a plan which has far-reaching effects on an area which is so environmentally and hydrogeologically sensitive and of such great historical and scenic value an environmental impact assessment is necessary rather than mere confirmation that it is compatible with the environment? Are European funds provided for this project?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

Based on the information given by the Honourable Member, the work to which he refers appears to be within the scope 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) and, in particular, appears to be a project of the classes listed in Annex II. Such projects should be made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where Member States consider that their characteristics so require (Article 4, paragraph 2).

Further to the information given by the Honourable Member, it is clear that a study on the environmental compatibility has been foreseen in this specific case. It is not clear whether an administrative procedure for the approval of the project has been introduced (in fact the project appears to be at an early stage). C 325/108 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In the light of the above, a letter requesting information on these issues has been sent to the Italian authorities. The Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

However, it should be noted that, Member States are not necessarily obliged to carry out an EIA procedure concerning projects in Annex II (they are obliged to make a pre-assessment in order to establish whether these projects need to be made subject to an EIA procedure). In addition, Member States cannot be considered obliged to carry out an EIA procedure under Directive 85/337/EEC, with reference to any project still at an early stage.

It appears that the project is not in receipt of structural funds.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 325/148) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0344/99 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Environmental protection in respect of specific products

It appears that the Commission’s DG XI ordered a study to be carried out on the available instruments in the field of product-linked environmental protection, which came to the conclusion that there should be a comprehensive product policy geared to the whole life cycle of the product.

1. Does the Commission support this conclusion?

2. What other conclusions does the Commission intend to draw from this study with a view to further environmental legislation?

3. Do proposals for legislation already exist on the basis of this study?

4. Does a summariy of this study exist which could be made available to the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

1. The Commission supports the conclusion that integrated product policy (IPP) should take into account the whole life-cycle of products.

2. IPP is still under discussion and definite conclusions have not yet been drawn. The Commission organised a workshop on this issue in December 1998 and IPP will be discussed at an informal meeting of environment ministers in Weimar on 7-9 May 1999. The Commission intends to present a green paper on IPP after the summer.

3. No legislative initiatives have yet been undertaken.

4. The executive summary of the study is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

(1999/C 325/149) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0347/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Restructuring of the Greek postal service

In its answer of 11 June 1998 to my Written Question E-1370/98 on the restructuring of the Greek postal service (ELTA), the Commission stated that ‘the launch of this operational programme is imminent’ (at the end of May 1998). 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/109

Will the Commission say whether the above programme has been launched and, if so, when? What has been the take-up rate so far in respect of the operational programme on postal services and how have the funds set aside for the ELTA been used so far?

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

(31 March 1999)

The ‘Postal services’ operational programme (OP) was launched in July 1998; on this date the special ELTA (Greek postal service) unit, set up to implement the projects planned as part of this OP, was fully in place and operational. Since then, the modernisation and training measures for the ELTA have got under way and satisfactory progress has been made in the preparation of specifications in respect of the calls for tender regarding nine projects and five strategic studies provided for under the OP. In the light of this, we can forecast that all the calls for tender will have been published before summer 1999 and the OP will be fully under way (as regards the conclusion of contracts and the Community funding) before the end of the year.

This situation is summed up, incidentally, in the last decision made by the monitoring committee for this OP, in which it stated that in its meeting of 17 November 1998 the monitoring committee noted with satisfaction both the modernisation measures initiated by the ELTA, which had resulted in the releasing of funds for the OP, and the progress made by the special unit in its work. It expressed its confidence that the whole programme would be completed within the limited time remaining.

The current take-up rate of the monies available under the Structural Funds is 25 %, i.e. €10,82 million of the €43,4 million earmarked for this OP have been committed.

(1999/C 325/150) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0348/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Operational Programme on the modernisation of the public administration in Greece

Will the Commission say what has been the take-up rate so far in respect of measures 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 of subprogramme 2 on the organisational and administrative modernisation and improvement of infrastructures and of measures 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 of subprogramme 3 on financial and social systems in the Operational Programme on the modernisation of the public administration in Greece?

Will it also say which specific projects have been carried out under the above measures?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

The operational programme for modernisation of public administration has an overall budget of €305,4 million of which €120,9 million is from the European regional development fund (FEDER) and €47,7 million is from the European social fund (ESF). According to the information provided by the Greek authorities, so far payments for the programme as a whole are €134,4 million, an absorption rate of 44 %. Budgetary commitments of €230,8 million, 76 % of the total, have been made.

With regard to the specific measures mentioned, a table indicating the financial situation is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

With regard to the progress of the implementation of specific projects under the above measures, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the Greek ministry of public administration. C 325/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/151) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0354/99 by Marco Formentini (NI) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Irregularities in allocating grants for Structural Fund objectives in the region of Liguria

On 30 March 1998 the commune of Chiavari (Genoa) asked the region of Liguria for a non-repayable Objective 2 grant for a project to upgrade the historical centre in terms of town planning, tourism and trade. The application was submitted within the deadlines indicated in the procedural provisions.

Managerial decree No 321 of 4 September 1998 approved the list of proposals submitted and the grant application. The proposals submitted by the communes of Genoa, Cairo Montenotte and Sarzana were deemed admissible although the project characteristics were inadequate according to the managerial decree. The Chiavari proposal, which was complete both in project and formal terms, was not considered suitable.

Consequently the commune of Chiavari presented a statement to the legal authority. An inquiry is now under way.

Does the Commission not think it should check whether the region of Liguria has adopted discriminatory criteria contrary to the principles of objectivity, honesty and transparency in the management of Community financial resources and initiate an inquiry into the matter?

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

(15 March 1999)

The Honourable Member’s query is primarily a matter for the Italian authorities in application of the subsidiarity principle.

Information received from the region of Liguria, and in particular with regard to the call for projects relating to measure 3.5 7 ‘Infrastructures to revitalise urban centres’ indicates that applications were rated according to a points system, the principal criteria being the incidence of the proposed infrastructure on the environment and local tourism, the improvement and conversion of existing infrastructure and employment creation. The project from the municipality of Chiavari was not rejected but was given a lower rating than the projects from the municipalities cited by the Honourable Member.

Applications for funding under measure 3,5 presently outstrip available resources. However a recent reprofiling of the objective 2 programme, currently being adopted by the Commission, has assigned further funds to the measure. The Chiavari project is the first on the list after those already funded and is therefore well positioned to benefit from these new funds.

On the basis of the information the Commission has, it does not seem that there are grounds for initiating an enquiry into the matter.

(1999/C 325/152) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0355/99 by Giacomo Leopardi (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Numerus clausus for dentistry degree courses in Italy

For three years now too many students have enrolled for dentistry courses at Italian universities; although they failed the test for admission to the degree course they appealed against their exclusion and the regional administrative court authorised them to enrol provisionally, postponing the final decision until a judgment was handed down on the substance.

In order to comply with Directives 78/686/EC (1) and 78/687/EC (2) on the mutual recognition of diplomas, the 1980 Presidential decree No 135 introduced the degree course in dentistry (odontoiatria e protesi dentaria) and laid down the number and terms of admissibility of students. Referring to Community requirements, 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/111

Constitutional Court judgment 383/98 recognised the legitimacy of adopting a numerus clausus.

What steps will the Commission take to uphold the planned number of enrolments, protect those who passed the test for admission to the degree course and guarantee them the possibility of following a course of study in accordance with European standards so that their degree is duly recognised throughout the Union?

Will the Commission take steps to determine whether the abovementioned courses are really available and how the Italian university authorities calculated the structures/students ratio to justify opting for a numerus clausus?

(1) OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 1. (2) OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 10.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The matter of the numerus clausus on access to studies in dentistry mentioned by the Honourable Member is, insofar as it complies with the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality, the sole responsibility of the national authorities and does not, under any circumstances, fall within the scope of Community law.

(1999/C 325/153) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0356/99 by Luigi Florio (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Violation of the freedom of companies in Italy

The Treviso Chamber of Commerce recently refused to provide many companies in the province with the financial certificates requested on the pretext that they were in arrears with the payment of the annual fee; Law No 449/97 provides that as from 1 January 1999 the fee must be paid before any certificate can be obtained from the companies registry office.

Does the Commission not consider this rule and the subsequent behaviour of the offices authorised to apply it to be in conflict with the principles of the freedom of companies laid down in Community regulations and in particular with Article 10 of Directive 69/335/EEC (1)?

(1) OJ L 249, 3.10.1969, p. 25.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

Article 24(35) of Law No 449 of 27 December 1997 (misure per la stabilizzazione della finanza publica) makes issue of certificates by the company registry subject to payment of an annual fee to finance chambers of commerce under Law No 580 of 29 December 1993(Riordinamento delle camere di commercio, industria, artigianato e agricoltura).

Regarding the possible incompatibility of this fee with Article 10(c) of Directive 69/335/EEC concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital, which prohibits Member States from charging taxes in respect of the registration of capital companies, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to rulings of the Court of Justice in Cases C-71/91 and C-178/91 (Ponente Carni and Cispadana Costruzioni) and Case C-2/94 (Denkavit). In the Denkavit judgment the Court interpreted Article 10(c) in a way that would not preclude a charge proportional to certain elements of a company’s assets

The company register provided for in Article 2188 of the Italian Civil Code would appear to apply to all enterprises regardless of their legal form. C 325/112 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

As the legislator has made chambers of commerce responsible for determining the criteria used for calculating this charge the Commission can only give its views on whether the charge is compatible with Article 10 of the directive if it is informed of the decisions taken in that regard by the various chambers of commerce have

(1999/C 325/154) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0357/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Privatisation of the Rome milk marketing board

What information can the Commission provide to Parliament on the infringement proceedings initiated against Italy on the privatisation of the Rome milk marketing board?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

On 25March 1998 the Commission opened the procedure indicated in Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty concerning aid granted by the Commune of Rome in connection with operation and privatisation of the Centrale del Latte di Roma. Its decision to do so was notified in the Official Journal. (1)

The Commission is analysing the observations and comments received under the procedure. On completion of this examination it will take a final decision on the aid in question.

(1) OJ C 206, 2.7.1998.

(1999/C 325/155) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0362/99 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Human rights in Latvia

I have been informed that, on 15February 1999, the civil rights activist Tatyana Zhdanok of Riga, Latvia, will be prosecuted in the Riga Appeal Court on the grounds of her membership of the Communist Party and that she may well be dismissed from her post of City Councillor in Riga. Will the Commission study the case and draw the Latvian Government’s attention to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and, in particular, Article 25thereof?

In the Commission’s opinion, can such a country be allowed to accede to the European Union when it cannot guarantee respect for the human rights of all the people living on its territory?

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

(18 March 1999)

The Commission has studied the case of Riga city council deputy Ms Tatyana Zhdanok.

On 15February 1999, the Riga regional court concluded that Ms Shdanok was active in the Communist party after 13 January 1991. Since people active in the Communist party after this date are not eligible accoding to Latvian election laws, Ms.Shdanok’s mandate will be revoked.

The Office for democratic institutions and human rights (ODIHR) of Organisation for security and cooperation in Europe (OSCE) expressed concern at the parliamentary elections in 1995that ‘aspects of the election contravene Article 7.5guaranteeing to respect the right of citizens to seek political or public office, individually or as representatives of political parties or organisations, without discrimination’ of the 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/113

OSCE commitments of the Copenhagen document 1990. Article 7.5 of the Copenhagen document corresponds to the provisions in article 25 of the International covenant on civil and political rights mentioned by the Honourable Member.

At the parliamentary elections in Latvia in 1998, the ODIHR concluded that ‘in general the various legal and administrative provisions provide the necessary framework for participation in the electoral process and for their proper conduct and administration’. It was,however, pointed out that the restrictive provisions as regards eligibility to stand and be elected on people who took part in support of the Communist party and related structures after 13 January 1991 were still applicable, meaning the spirit of the OSCE commitments ‘is still not fully upheld’.

A candidate country should fulfil the political criteria as defined in Copenhagen as a precondition for the opening of negotiations. In its regular report the Commission concluded that Latvia meets the political criteria, though there remain some issues where further work is required. As part of the assessment of the progress made by the candidate countries towards membership of the Community, the Commission will continue to monitor the human rights situation in Latvia. It will continue its dialogue with the Latvian authorities on human rights.

(1999/C 325/156) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0364/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: New experiments in training and employment

It appears that some experiments in jobrotation in the Sicilian tourist industry have yielded positive results. This system operates in such a way that a certain number of workers from selected undertakings are enrolled on retraining courses involving training both in their home country and abroad. They are then replaced at the said undertakings by unemployed workers who have also undergone prior training. Once they have completed their retraining course, the workers return to their original undertaking with better skills more suited to the undertaking’s requirements. The replacement workers return to the labour market, but with new work experience and additional skills.

Is the Commission aware of the jobrotation system referred to above?

Can it say whether this system has been introduced in other Member States besides Italy, and to what effect?

Is the European Union in any way involved in such interesting ‘experiments’ of this nature?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The Commission is well aware of the jobrotation system, and several projects addressing jobrotation have received financial support in the framework of the Community initiative ADAPT.

In 1996, the Danish initiators of the jobrotation system set up a core network called ‘A New track in Europe’, consisting of 11 organisations from different Member States who all received ADAPT funding for their individual projects and for their transnational co-operation on jobrotation. From 1998 onwards, the network as such has not received the European social fund (ESF) funding, but a number of individual projects have. The network now consists of 33 organisations having status as partners and representing 14 of the 15 Member States, including one organisation in Italy. In some Member States, job rotation projects have demonstrated their mainstreaming potential by influencing changes to existing training and job placement systems.

A copy of an interim report on the evaluation of Community jobrotation prospects is beingsent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament’s Secretariat. C 325/114 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/157) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0370/99 by Edgar Schiedermeier (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Measures to combat social exclusion (promoting actions relating to the family and children)

What is the Commission’s view of the demand from the English city of Reading with regard to the measures referred to above?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Article 137.2 of the Amsterdam Treaty envisages the possible adoption by the Council of measures designed to encourage cooperation between Member States through initiatives aimed at improving knowledge, developing exchanges of information and best practices, promoting innovative approaches and evaluating experiences in order to combat social exclusion.

The Commission will shortly publish a call for proposals designed to prepare for Community action along these lines. Issues relating to the exclusion of families and children could certainly be addressed by proposals submitted under this call.

The Commission will of course notify Reading borough council (and the other signatories to their letter) when this call is published. Information regarding this call plus other Commission calls and activities in this area will also be made available on the web: ‘http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg05/index_en.htm’.

(1999/C 325/158) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0416/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Rights of Greenlanders and Danes

What rights do Danes resident in Denmark have that Danes and Greenlanders in Greenland do not under the provisions on Union citizenship and the fundamental rights in the EU recognised by the Court of Justice?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 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 325/159) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0417/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Free movement of Greenlanders in the EU and the EEA

What is the position of Greenlanders under the rules on free movement in the EU and the EEA? 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/115

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 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 325/160) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0443/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Subject: EU-Morocco Fisheries Agreement and cooperation relations

The current EU Morocco fisheries agreement is about to end, and in view of its importance for the Community fishing industry and its implications for employment, I should like to know bilateral relations context in which the new fisheries agreement is to be negotiated.

Would the Commission therefore provide precise details of the current state of cooperation relations between the EU and the Kingdom of Morocco, the future outlook for these relations, the benefits granted by the EU to Morocco and the aid which that country receives?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

The Agreement on cooperation in the sea fisheries sector between the Community and Morocco entered into force on 1 December 1995 for a period of four years. It will therefore expire on 30 November 1999.

Under this agreement the Community obtained fishing opportunities in Moroccan waters in return for which it granted Morocco compensation of EUR 500 million over the four years, broken down into financial compensation (EUR 355 million), cooperation in the fisheries sector (EUR 121 million), scientific research in the fisheries sector (EUR 16million) and maritime training (EUR 8 million).

In accordance with the provisions of the agreement, the Community transferred EUR 126million to Morocco for the period 1 December 1998 to 30 November 1999 (financial compensation EUR 80 million; fisheries cooperation EUR 40 million; fisheries research EUR 4 million; maritime training EUR 2 million). Shipowners authorised to carry out fishing activities under the agreement also pay fees in relation to the value of the target species and the size of their ships.

The Community and Morocco signed a Euro-Mediterranean association agreement on 26February 1996.

On a commercial level, the Community exempts imports of industrial products originating in Morocco from customs duties or charges having equivalent effect and from import restrictions or measures with equivalent effect. A number of Moroccan agricultural products, including fisheries products, may also be imported into the Community duty free or at a reduced tariff.

With respect to financial cooperation, Morocco benefits from the MEDA programme which promotes Morocco’s integration into the Euro-Mediterranean economic area by supporting economic transition and facilitates harmonious development of the country by contributing to better socio-economic balance. A total of EUR 454 million was allocated to Morocco under this programme in the form of budget funds for the period 1996-98. C 325/116 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/161) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0462/99 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Export of hazardous waste in the form of obsolete ships

Does the Commission agree that dangerous waste in the form of obsolete ships, containing substances such as asbestos, should not be exported to countries with less stringent safeguards in order to avoid costs?

Would the Commission consider it appropriate to use such controls or legislation as exist to curtail this trade to other countries by companies which operate inside the EU?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

The export of wastes outside the Community is governed by Council Regulation (EEC) 259/93 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the Community, as amended (1). The export of obsolete ships for breaking up is governed by the Regulation to the extent that the ship in question constitutes waste. Generally speaking, a ship constitutes waste from the moment that the intention of the owner is not to use it as a ship anymore, but to export it to another country for breakingup.

The Regulation, which transposes the provisions of the Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their safe disposal, prohibits the export to non-Organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) countries of hazardous wastes listed in an Annex to the Regulation. Ships for breaking up are not explicitly listed in this Annex, but according to the terms of this Annex, the fact that a waste is not listed in the Annex, does not preclude, in exceptional cases, its characterisation as hazardous and therefore subject to the export ban.

All ships destined for demolition are subject to notification and control requirements established under the Regulation with regard to any cargo residues and other hazardous substances resulting from the operation of the ship such as oily slops. In such cases, under the Regulation, the export has to be notified and authorised by the authorities of the countries of dispatch, transit and destination before it can take place. In that context, it should also be noted that the underlyingcondition for export of waste is that the treatment in the country of destination must be environmentally sound. This principle is recognised in the Basel Convention.

To summarise, therefore, there is a bindinglegalframework in place in the Community which subjects these cases to tight control and supervision procedures.

The Commission is fully aware of the environmental and health problems occurringin third countries where ships are scrapped. There is also a real need for an efficient ship-scrappingindustry in order to remove sub- standard ships from the oceans, which in themselves pose a serious environmental threat.

(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.

(1999/C 325/162) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0466/99 by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Abandoned buildingproject for a further trainingcentre in AgiosDimitrios, Pelion, Greece

Work began on the construction of a further training centre, the EKTA (WZLS) building, for the local authority in Agios Dimitrios/Pelion, province of Magnesia in 1994. According to the signboards at the site, the ‘Community budget’ is funding the project, to the value of some DM 40 million (GRD 600 000 000). However, once the foundations had been laid, the project was halted in 1995, since when the condition of the site has deteriorated and buildingmaterials have been unlawfully removed. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/117

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Why was construction of this further training centre halted? Is the Commission contemplating a resumption of the work?

2. How much of the estimate of GRD600 million has been paid out, and under which budget heading?

3. What form of control is being exercised over the company responsible for planning supervision, ERGODYNAMIKI GmbH?

4. Does the Commission intend to initiate action for recovery against those responsible?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(20 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 325/163) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0471/99 by Gaetano Carrozzo (PSE) to the Commission

(24 February 1999)

Subject: EU footwear imports and infringement of Community directives

What measures will the Commission take to curb infringements of customs regulations by footwear exports to the EU from the Far East?

These illegal exports are causing a serious production crisis in various industrial areas in Italy with adverse effects on employment in the sector.

If the Commission is aware of these infringements, what steps will it take to tighten customs controls and provide adequate protection for European products?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

The Commission is actively taking the appropriate measures to combat fraud in importation of footwear products from Asia. In particular, the Council has recently mandated the Commission to conclude a double- checking system for the importation of certain footwear products from Vietnam. This system is designed to secure the genuine Vietnamese origin of the products in question and therefore to stamp out fraudulent practices of mis-declaration of origin or transhipment from other Asian countries. The system requires an international agreement with Vietnam. The Commission is negotiating the terms of such an agreement with the authorities of Vietnam and hopes to conclude an agreement by April 1999.

(1999/C 325/164) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0490/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Preventive measures at work

Everyone knows how much the application of preventive principles contributes to improving health and safety at work and this is recognised by the Commission in its Fourth Programme on health, hygiene and security at work. C 325/118 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

In view of the importance of ensuring that such principles are acquired at an early age, could the Commission say whether or not it has considered the possibility of informing schools (especially vocational training schools) of the existence and the objectives of the above programme?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s opinion on the importance of raising awareness among young people in the field of prevention, in order to improve health and safety at work.

In this connection the Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that the workshops of the vocational schools are covered by the provisions of framework 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), to the extent that they apply to all sectors of activity, both public and private (Article 2(1)), and that Article 3(a) includes trainees and apprentices under the definition of worker. Hence the rules set out in the Directive concerning the information and training of workers (Articles 10 and 12) are fully applicable to apprentices.

Besides, Council Directive 94/33/EC of 22 June 1994 on the protection of young people at work (2) also contains provisions designed to protect children and adolescents against the specific risks resulting from their lack of experience and absence of awareness of occupational hazards.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. (2) OJ L 216, 20.8.1994.

(1999/C 325/165) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0492/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(25 February 1999)

Subject: Inclusion in the budget of public aid used to subsidise the electricity sector’s transition costs

Amongst the new provisions introduced under Decision No 3632/93/ECSC (1) establishing Community rules for state aid to the coal industry was one to the effect that public financing mechanisms such as the aid provided by the Spanish OFICO (Electricity Compensation Office) which are used to compensate for coal producers’ operating losses and other exceptional costs by means of a percentage deducted from the amounts invoiced to electricity consumers ‘shall be authorised only if they are entered in the Member States’ national, regional or local public budgets’, in order to increase the transparency of the aid and hence improve the monitoring thereof.

Does the Commission not therefore consider that the same principle should be applied (on the basis of the principles of equal treatment and of the transparency and monitoring of public aid) to the transition costs incurred by the electricity sector in the process of opening itself up to competition?

How would the Commission legally justify different treatment of the two types of aid?

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1993, p. 12.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Commission is examining the notifications given by different Member States of the schemes they intend to apply in order to offset certain costs arising in connection with Parliament and Council Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (1). 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/119

The legal basis for examining such costs is different from that for aid to the coal industry (ECSC Treaty), and this may justify separate solutions. Under Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty, and unless specifically provided for, there are no particular rules on how aid that has been declared compatible with the common market should be financed. Accordingly, the financing arrangements involve, in principle, an economic policy decision falling within the remit of the Member State concerned.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.

(1999/C 325/166) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0499/99 by Pierluigi Castagnetti (PPE) to the Commission

(25 February 1999)

Subject: Humanitarian representations and gesture of solidarity in support of Edwin Husovic, a Bosnian student at the Nobili Industrial Technology Institute, Reggio Emilia, Italy

Edwin Husovic is a Bosnian student who for the last five years has been living with his family in Gustalla (Reggio Emilia) and, for the past year, attending the Reggio Emilia Industrial Technology Institute. Within the past few days, the British Embassy in Italy has refused to grant him the entry visa required for a study trip to London on the grounds that his passport is shortly due to expire, albeit after the trip is over.

Will the Commission draw the attention of the appropriate British diplomatic authorities to the special circumstances and the common principles of solidarity by which they are bound, in the same way as the other Member States already involved in humanitarian operations to aid victims of the war in former Yugoslavia, with a view to persuading them to reconsider their attitude and allow Edwin Husovic to visit the United Kingdom with his fellow students, without infringing the relevant international conventions?

Answer given by Ms Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

According to the Honourable Member, the person in question applied to the British consular authorities for a visa, the grant of which is at the discretion of the United Kingdom. Under the Treaty on European Union, the Commission has no powers to intervene in cases where a Member State has refused to grant a visa to a national of a non-member country.

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to another procedure which would have resulted in a different treatment of this case. On 30 November 1994 the Council adopted a Decision on a joint action under Article K.3(2)(b) of the European Union Treaty concerning travel facilities for school pupils from third countries resident in a Member State. (1)

Article 1 of the said Decision stipulates that a Member State shall not require a visa of a school pupil who is not a national of Member State but who is legally resident in another Member State and who seeks to enter its territory for a short stay if: (a) in the framework of a school excursion, the school pupil is travelling as a member of a group of school pupils from a general education school; (b) the group is accompanied by a teacher from the school in question who is able to present a list of the schoolchildren he or she is accompanying on the form contained in the Annex to the Decision; (c) the school pupil presents a travel document valid for crossing the border in question. According to Article 2 of the Decision, however, a Member State may refuse entry of a pupil if he or she does not fulfil the other relevant national immigration conditions.

The travel facilities provided for in the 1994 joint action are intended to improve integration of the nationals of non-member countries. The Commission regrets that in this case the school authorities did not make use of the procedure provided for under the joint action and that for their part the United Kingdom authorities did not draw the applicant’s attention to the possibilities opened up by the joint action.

(1) OJ L 327, 19.12.1994. C 325/120 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/167) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0520/99

by Rainer Wieland (PPE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Planned prohibition of the advertising of such products as alcohol, sweets, military toys and fast cars

According to the Economics Minister of the Land of Baden-Württemberg, Dr Walter Döring, the Commission is planning further restrictions on advertising (Stuttgarter Nachrichten, 30 January 1999; Mannheimer Morgen, 30 January 1999; Esslinger Zeitung, 30 January 1999).

Further to my question No E-3149/98 of 16 October 1998 (1) can the Commission say:

1. Is it true that the Commission is considering prohibiting or restricting the advertising of such products as alcohol, sweets, military toys and fast cars?

2. If so, what form do these deliberations take, on what legal basis are they to be placed, bearing subsidiarity in mind, and what justifies this proposal, which would threaten economic freedom and merely endanger jobs? Such prohibitions and restrictions of advertising also result in a threat to the freedom of expression, make it difficult for the consumer to form an opinion and obstruct competition among undertakings in the internal market.

(1) OJ C 96, 8.4.1999, p. 162.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

The Honourable Member requests information regarding German press reports alleging that the Economics Minister of the Land of Baden-Württemberg stated that the Commission was planning further restrictions on advertising on products such as alcohol, sweets, military toys and fast cars.

As regards the issue of fast cars, the Commission would wish to refer the Honourable Member to its previous answer to Written Question P-2587/98 by Mr von Habsburg (1) which addressed this issue.

As regards the advertising of alcohol, sweets and military toys the Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that it has no plans to impose further restrictions in these fields. The Commission’s policy in the field of commercial communications in general was clearly set out in its communication on the follow- up to the green paper on commercial communications in the internal market of 4 March 1998 (2). Amongst other measures this established a central contact point in DGXV (tel: Brussels 2951639, Fax 2957712 email [email protected]) to inform interested parties of the Commission’s actions in these fields.

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that certain Member States have strict advertising restrictions on the products cited and that some of these restrictions to cross-border trade in commercial communication services are the subject of complaints contesting the compatibility with Articles 59 and 30 of the EC Treaty of these restrictions to cross-border services. These are being processed by the Commission at the current time.

(1) OJ C 96, 8.4.1999. (2) COM(98) 121 final. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/121

(1999/C 325/168) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0556/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Young people’s addiction to games machines

The Saragossa Association of Reformed Gamblers (Asociación Zaragozana de Jugadores de Rehabilitación ) AZAJER) has reported an increase in the number of teenagers from rural areas addicted to games and slot machines. The Association claims that rural societies do not view slot machines as being particularly harmful, nor is it widely felt that addiction to games machines is an illness that should be treated.

Is there any EU initiative aimed at preventing and treating the problem of addiction to games machines?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that there is no Community initiative aimed at preventing and treating the problem of addiction to games machines.

(1999/C 325/169) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0577/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Proposal to include city police among the high-risk groups

On Tuesday, 23 February 1999 five Milanese police officers were admitted to hospital with symptoms of exhaust gas poisoning.

In the light of this latest incident, does the Commission believe that city police officers should be counted among the high-risk groups?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1999)

Article 2(1) of framework Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (1) states that the Directive applies to all sectors of activity, both public and private.

However, paragraph 2 of this Article states that certain specific public service activities, such as the armed forces, the police or the civil protection services, may be excluded, but only where ‘characteristics peculiar to [these] activities inevitably conflict with it’. In that event, it is necessary to ensure that the safety and health of workers is guaranteed, insofar as at all possible, in keeping with the objectives of the Directive.

In the light of these provisions, and where characteristics peculiar to the activities carried out by local police officers do not inevitably conflict with the application of the provisions of the framework Directive, the employer must evaluate the risks to which they are exposed and introduce appropriate measures to ensure enhanced protection of the safety and health of these workers. Their identification as a risk group will therefore depend on the type of activity carried out and on the specific conditions under which local police officers have to work.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. C 325/122 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/170) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0584/99 by Giacomo Santini (PPE) to theCommission

(3 March 1999)

Subject: Freedom to practise medicine in France

In addition to setting the seal on mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates, and other qualifications held by doctors in the Union, Council Directive 93/16/EEC of 5 April 1993 is intended to facilitate free movement (1).

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Given that no doctor may practise on any part of French territory unless he or she has previously registered in France, is it not the case that the peculiar provision to that effect in French national law infringes the Community legislation currently in force?

2. Is advance registration in another Member State, an arrangement admittedly applying to other professions, a necessary and justified condition to which entitlement to practise should be subject in the specific case of the medical profession?

3. What steps will the Commission take to deal with special needs of European citizens, for example visiting professional sportspeople from other Member States who cannot be treated in France by their accompanying medical teams, because the latter are prohibited, de facto, from exercising their professional prerogatives?

(1) OJ L 165, 7.7.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 1999)

1. No. The French legislation provides for registration with the Doctors Registration Board (Ordre des médecins) in the case of doctors wishing to exercise their right of establishment, and a simple prior declaration in the case of the provision of services involving a temporary stay in French territory, in accordance with Article 17 of Directive 93/16/EEC, quoted by the honourable Member.

2. Yes, if it is a prior declaration in the case of the provision of services.

3. In the case cited by the honourable Member, doctors accompanying professional sportspeople in a Member State other than the one in which they are established must be considered as being service providers. Under those circumstances, they are obliged to make a prior declaration to the authorities of each Member State in which they intend to provide services involving a temporary stay in their territory, in accordance with Article 17 of Directive 93/16/EEC.

(1999/C 325/171) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0585/99 by John McCartin (PPE) to theCommission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Non-Italian EU nationals lecturing in Italy

Can the Commission state what action has been taken in relation to allegations of unfair treatment of non- Italian EU nationals who are teaching in Italian educational institutions and whether it has received any assurances from the Italian authorities that the rights of all EU citizens working in Italy are being fully respected?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 1999)

Infringement proceedings have been launched against Italy with regard to the safeguarding of the acquired rights of language lecturers by Italian universities. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/123

Following the Commission’s intervention, the Italian authorities addressed an administrative letter to all universities in the summer of 1998 requesting them to implement the lecturers’ acquired rights. In December 1998, the Italian authorities supplied the Commission with additional information on the specific situation in a number of universities.

The Commission was not satisfied with this information and a reasoned opinion was addressed to Italy in January 1999.

(1999/C 325/172) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0598/99 by Ilona Graenitz (PSE) to the Commission

(3 March 1999)

Subject: Closure of the Bohunice, Kosloduj and Ignalina nuclear power stations

The nuclear power stations at Bohunice (V-1) in Slovakia, Ignalina in Lithuania and Kosloduj (Reactors 1-4) in Bulgaria are among the most dangerous in Europe. In its communication to the Council and the European Parliament on nuclear sector related activities for the applicant countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the New Independent States (COM(98) 0134 final of 31 March 1998) the Commission states that they cannot be upgraded (Chapter 5, section A, page 10).

1. Does the Commission still believe that these nuclear power stations cannot be upgraded and must be removed from the grid as soon as possible?

2. Over what period are these three nuclear power stations likely to be closed?

3. What measures will the Commission take within its terms of reference to bring forward the final closure of these nuclear power stations?

4. Is there are intention of possibly making the accession of these countries to the European Union conditional on the closure of these power stations, as Commissioner Papoutsis’s spokesman has said, referring to Ignalina (see European Voice, 11-17 February 1999, page 9)?

5. Does the Commission consider it necessary to have EU-wide uniform safety standards, particularly with a view to enlargement?

6. If so, does it think it possible for such standards to be adopted in the next few years?

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

(31 March 1999)

1. The Commission continues to consider that the reactors of Ignalina 1-2, Kozloduy 1-4 and Bohunice V1 are of a type which cannot be upgraded to a safety level in line with Western safety objectives and practices at a reasonable cost and that they should be closed and decommissioned.

2. The Commission considers that the dates for the closure of these reactors should be consistent with the priorities of the accession partnerships and the requirements of the nuclear safety account agreement and be part of comprehensive energy strategies to be developed and implemented by these countries.

3. The Commission is in discussion with the governments of the countries concerned to assist them to develop the necessary energy strategies and is in close co-ordination with the international financing institutions to help develop financing schemes on which international financial support could be based. It will specify its financial participation when satisfactory agreements have been reached.

4. The Commission will ensure that the promotion of nuclear safety continues to be given a high priority. In its dialogue with the governments of the applicant countries in the framework of the accession partnerships, but also of the Europe agreement, the Commission will also encourage the governments to take the necessary actions in this area. C 325/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

5. and 6. A comprehensive set of general nuclear safety guidelines has been developed and is regularly updated by the International atomic energy agency (IAEA). This set of requirements constitutes a basis for any individual country to prepare the necessary national rules and standards. The Commission promotes the introduction of national safety rules and practices to the highest level possible and assists candidate countries in building their own nuclear regulatory regimes compatible with the best Community practice.

(1999/C 325/173) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0605/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Subject: Clashes between farmers and the police

In their latest demonstration, farmers who had come from all parts of Europe clashed with the police in Brussels. Parliament acted as if it were under siege and stopped work on the day in question.

1. Does the Commission not believe that the unfortunate decision to close Parliament’s premises, a gesture of hostility to the protesters, may have caused the situation to degenerate into violence, leading eventually to the clashes with the police?

2. Does it not believe that the incident amounted to a denial of the right of persons representing one of Europe’s main occupational groups to stage a free and democratic protest?

3. What is the Commission’s general viewon the matter?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Commission is not in a position to comment on a decision taken by Parliament.

The Commission was not closed on 22 February 1999.

(1999/C 325/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0657/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

To determine whether or not this threshold has been exceeded, the draft Council Regulation COM(98) 131 final (1) laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds states that the figures corresponding to the last three years for which Eurostat has data available will be used.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for the Valencia Autonomous Community?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/125

(1999/C 325/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0658/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % ofthe average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Andalusia?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/176) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0659/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % ofthe average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Aragón?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/177) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0660/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % ofthe average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Asturias?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. C 325/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/178) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0661/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for the Balearic Islands?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/179) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0662/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for the Canary Islands?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/180) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0663/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Cantabria?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/127

(1999/C 325/181) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0664/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Castilla y León?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/182) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0665/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Castilla la Mancha?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/183) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0666/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Catalonia?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. C 325/128 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/184) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0667/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Extremadura?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/185) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0668/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Galicia?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/186) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0669/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Rioja?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/129

(1999/C 325/187) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0670/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Madrid?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/188) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0671/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Murcia?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/189) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0672/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Navarra?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. C 325/130 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/190) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0673/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for the Basque Country?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/191) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0674/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Ceuta?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 325/192) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0675/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 %of the average Community per capita income are described as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for Melilla?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/131

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0657/99, E-0658/99, E-0659/99, E-0660/99, E-0661/99, E-0662/99, E-0663/99, E-0664/99, E-0665/99, E-0666/99, E-0667/99, E-0668/99, E-0669/99, E-0670/99, E-0671/99, E-0672/99, E-0673/99, E-0674/99 and E-0675/99 given byMr de Silguyon behalf of the Commission (23 April 1999)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat a table containing the information requested.

(1999/C 325/193) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0696/99 byJosé García-Margallo yMarfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Community aid.

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account.

Currently, only the figures corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 are available.

When will the figures corresponding to 1994 be replaced by those from 1997 in the regions which are seeking to qualify as ‘Objective 1 regions’?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

Answer given byMr de Silguyon behalf of the Commission (19 April 1999)

Estimates, for 1997, of regional gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, expressed in purchasing power standards, should be available in December 1999.

(1999/C 325/194) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0748/99 byAnita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: EC development aid to countries of South Asia

Will the Commission please provide a list of total EC development aid to the following countries for each of the last five years:

India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives?

Can it also provide a list for the same countries of the EC development aid for each of the last five years on a per capita basis?

Answer given byMr Marín on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1999)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. C 325/132 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/195) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0793/99 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(6 April 1999)

Subject: Freedom of treatment

Ketha Berardi is a 10 year old girl with leukemia whose parents have decided no longer to subject her to chemotherapy because of the serious side-effects it has; they intend to resort to the treatment offered by Professor Di Bella.

At the request of the doctors treating her, however, juvenile court judges have ruled that the chemotherapy must continue and have threatened to deprive them of their parental authority.

Leaving aside any medico-scientific assessment of chemotherapy and the treatment offered by Professor Di Bella, does the Commission not think that the behaviour of the Italian doctors and judges conflicts with the principle of freedom of treatment which should be one of the rights of European citizens as mentioned by Parliament in recital C of its resolution A4-0075/97 (1) on the status of non-conventional medicine?

(1) OJ C 182, 16.6.1997, p. 67.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the question asked, which is a matter solely for the national authorities concerned.

(1999/C 325/196) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0957/99 by Willy De Clercq (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 April 1999)

Subject: Free movement of workers

Is the Commission aware that a number of Italian universities still do not respect free movement of workers as required by the Treaty establishing the European Community?

Is the Commission aware that since 1989 EU citizens have been complaining about the discriminatory practices at Italian universities, whereby foreign teachers are offered only one-year contracts, which is not the case for Italian teachers?

Is the Commission aware of the Allué and Coonan judgment of 2 August 1993 in which the Court of Justice ruled that such practices contravened Article 48(2) of the Treaty?

Is the Commission aware that these violations of a general principle laid down in the EC Treaty have still not ceased?

Will the Commission remedy the situation? If so, how? If not, why not?

(1999/C 325/197) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0974/99 by Nelly Maes (V) to the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Subject: Failure to apply the right of freedom of movement for workers to foreign language lettori at Italian universities

Parliament has already on a number of occasions declared itself against the current discriminatory treatment of lettori at Italian universities (in its resolution of 13 July 1995 and opinions of 15 April 1996 and 3 July 1996). 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/133

Does the Commission not consider that such discrimination violates the basic rules and principles of the European Union?

Would the Commission inform me of its position on this matter? Is it ready to take measures against the Italian authorities in order quickly to eliminate this discrimination?

(1999/C 325/198) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0978/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Subject: Discrimination against foreign-language lecturers at Italian universities

Under Article 48 of the EC Treaty, Union citizens are entitled to work, settle or move freely within the borders of the European Union without being discriminated against on grounds of nationality.

Contrary to this fundamental right, there have been loud complaints about alleged discrimination against foreign-language lecturers at Italian universities. Despite a judgment by the European Court of Justice on 2 August 1993, and a resolution adopted by Parliament on 13 July 1995, applicants for such posts are still being unjustifiably prevented from exercising their right freely to choose their employment.

1. Is the Commission aware of these incidents?

2. How does it propose to ensure that EU lecturers in Italy are able to exercise fundamental rights which are recognised throughout the European Union, and to prevent illegal discrimination?

(1999/C 325/199) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1053/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Subject: Foreign language lectors in Italy

What is the Commission’s view of the ongoing claims of discrimination made by foreign language assistants against the Italian authorities?

Is the Commission satisfied that the judgments handed down by the ECJ are being respected in full by the Italian authorities?

(1999/C 325/200) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1161/99 by Winifred Ewing (ARE) to the Commission

(27 April 1999)

Subject: Europe that puts citizens first

What action has been taken to guarantee the fundamental Community right of establishment for lecturers from other Member States who wish to exercise that right in Italian universities?

Can the Commission confirm what action it has taken to ensure, in the exercise of the right of establishment, that lecturers from other Member States are not discriminated against in relation to employment conditions relative to lecturers of Italian nationality?

Can the Commission confirm the status of infringement proceedings being brought against Italy concerning this matter? C 325/134 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12.11.1999

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0957/99, E-0974/99, E-0978/99, E-1053/99 and P-1161/99 given byMr Flynnon behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question E-0585/99 by Mr McCartin (1) and to the replies it gave to Oral Questions H-223/99 by Mrs McKenna and H-306/99 by Mr McMahon during question time at Parliament’s April 1999 part-session (2).

(1) See page 122. (2) Debates of the Parliament, (April 1999).

(1999/C 325/201) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1026/99 byGraham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Subject: Pesticide Lindane

In response to my Written Question 2860/97 (1), the Commission stated that Directive 91/414/EEC (2) concerning the placing on the market of plant protection products provides for the review of active substances which were already on the market when the Directive entered into force.

Concerning the active substance lindane, which is one of the 90 substances covered under the first phase of the review, the Commission confirmed that it was waiting for the report of the rapporteur Member State, Austria. Upon receipt of this report an intensive scientific and technical examination with all the Member States was due to take place. The Commission would then take a final position on this active substance and consider options for further progressing the work.

What stage has this process now reached?

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 84. (2) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

Answer given byMr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-154/99 by Mrs Pollack (1).

(1) See page 76.

(1999/C 325/202) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1051/99 byKarin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 April 1999)

Subject: Discrimination against foreign construction companies in Germany

In Germany an amendment to the tax legislation entered into force on 1 April 1999 which discriminates against foreign construction companies.

A German client who employs a foreign construction company must retain 25 % of the remuneration and pay it to the Inland Revenue in Germany.

The foreign company receives this sum only after the end of the calendar year if it can prove that it is not liable to taxation in Germany. There is a derogation provision, but at present the German tax authorities are refusing to apply it. 12.11.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/135

Can the Commission indicate whether this new tax law infringes the principles of the Treaty of Rome and in particular the principle enshrined in the Treaty which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of nationality and the principle concerning the free movement of goods and persons? If the Commission considers that this tax law is compatible with the Treaty of Rome and the principles referred to above, can it indicate the grounds for its opinion?

Answer given byMr Monti on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1999) The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its written reply to Oral Question H-332/99 put by Mrs Kjer Hansen during question time at Parliament’s May 1999 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (May 1999).