Official Journal C 142 Volume 42 of the European Communities 21 May 1999

ISSN 0378-6986 Official Journal C 142 Volume 42 of the European Communities 21 May 1999

English edition Information and Notices

Notice No Contents Page

I Information

European Parliament

Written Questions with answer

(1999/C 142/001) E-0406/98 by Phillip Whitehead to the Commission Subject: Prescribed Quantity systems (Supplementary Answer) ...... 1

(1999/C 142/002) P-1655/98 by Antonios Trakatellis to the Commission Subject: Pollution of the River Axios by industrial plants in FYROM ...... 2

(1999/C 142/003) P-1894/98 by Esko Seppänen to the Commission Subject: EU involvement in covert electronic communications interception ...... 3

(1999/C 142/004) E-1986/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Problems relating to the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin ...... 3

(1999/C 142/005) E-2019/98 by Edith Müller to the Commission Subject: Budget expenditure on human rights ...... 4

(1999/C 142/006) E-2128/98 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo to the Commission Subject: United Kingdom v. Commission, C-106/96 ...... 5

(1999/C 142/007) E-2338/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström to the Commission Subject: Wider implications of the European Court of Justice’s judgment in case C-106/96 ...... 6

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2128/98 and E-2338/98 ...... 6

(1999/C 142/008) E-2177/98 by María Sornosa Martínez to the Commission Subject: Authorization of hunting by the ‘parany’ (trapping) method in the Valencia region (Spain) ...... 7

(1999/C 142/009) E-2178/98 by Angela Sierra González to the Commission Subject: Sects in the EU ...... 8

(1999/C 142/010) E-2200/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso to the Commission Subject: Impact of the judgment in Case C-106/96 ...... 9 EN Price: EUR 34,50 (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 142/011) E-2268/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz to the Commission Subject: Hunting of migratory birds in France ...... 10 (1999/C 142/012) E-2282/98 by Raimo Ilaskivi to the Commission Subject: Hunting of bears and the habitats directive ...... 10 (1999/C 142/013) E-2365/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Project in Stemnitsa (Arkadia) as part of the regional operational programme for the Peloponnese ... 11 (1999/C 142/014) E-2369/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Outcome of the bilateral meeting between the Director-General for Fisheries at the Commission and the Canadian Deputy Minister for Fisheries ...... 11 (1999/C 142/015) E-2370/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso and Juan Colino Salamanca to the Commission Subject: Calves eligible for premiums in Spain ...... 12 (1999/C 142/016) E-2376/98 by Eryl McNally to the Commission Subject: Language learning ...... 13 (1999/C 142/017) E-2394/98 by María Sornosa Martínez to the Commission Subject: Unjustified and unfair treatment of flight passengers and fraudulent flight contracts issued by the Iberia airline ...... 13 (1999/C 142/018) E-2400/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström to the Commission Subject: Packaging of fish products ...... 15 (1999/C 142/019) E-2451/98 by Paul Lannoye to the Commission Subject: Dumping of toxic and hazardous waste near Bilbao airport ...... 16 (1999/C 142/020) E-2454/98 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Recognition of the locksmith profession ...... 17 (1999/C 142/021) E-2459/98 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Bad weather and damage to agriculture in Portugal ...... 18 (1999/C 142/022) E-2496/98 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Article 169 ...... 18 (1999/C 142/023) E-2515/98 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Pollution from the Ostiglia and Sermide-Carbonara Po electrical power stations (Italy) ...... 19 (1999/C 142/024) P-2520/98 by Hugh McMahon to the Commission Subject: Projects in Tarija, Bolivia (Supplementary Answer) ...... 20 (1999/C 142/025) E-2531/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: EU funding for projects designed to benefit orphans in third countries ...... 21 (1999/C 142/026) E-2533/98 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Commission information campaign spending ...... 22 (1999/C 142/027) E-2550/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso to the Commission Subject: Protection against asbestos ...... 23 (1999/C 142/028) E-2564/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer to the Commission Subject: Special category waste incineration plant in Biebesheim, Hesse, Germany ...... 23 (1999/C 142/029) E-2597/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Progress with Greek national land register ...... 24 (1999/C 142/030) E-2608/98 by Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop to the Commission Subject: Criteria governing budget headings A-3 0 and A-3 1 ...... 25 (1999/C 142/031) P-2621/98 by Nel van Dijk to the Commission Subject: Threat to the badger (meles meles) in the United Kingdom ...... 26 (1999/C 142/032) E-2631/98 by Nel van Dijk to the Commission Subject: Threat to the badger (meles meles) in the United Kingdom ...... 26 Joint answer to Written Questions P-2621/98 and E-2631/98 ...... 27 EN (1999/C 142/033) E-2639/98 by Mihail Papayannakis to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds and Community law ...... 28 (1999/C 142/034) E-2649/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz to the Commission Subject: Shooting tests using live animals in Spain ...... 28 (1999/C 142/035) E-2653/98 by Friedhelm Frischenschlager to the Council Subject: EU drugs policy ...... 29 (1999/C 142/036) E-2657/98 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Plan to extend the airport of San Giuseppe in Treviso ...... 30 (1999/C 142/037) E-2673/98 by Gerhard Hager to the Council Subject: Assistance to applicant countries as regards external border checks ...... 31 (1999/C 142/038) E-2685/98 by Gerhard Hager to the Council Subject: 1999 drugs strategy ...... 32 (1999/C 142/039) E-2689/98 by Doeke Eisma to the Commission Subject: Limitation of citizens’ rights in involvement in the decision-making process surrounding the completion of the Khmelnitsky 2 and Rovno 4 nuclear plants in Ukraine ...... 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/1

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(1999/C 142/001) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0406/98

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(24 February 1998)

Subject: Prescribed Quantity systems

Which Member States have a Prescribed Quantity system which has been investigated, and why did the Commission feel that the existence of a PQ system in the British break market posed a threat to inter- Community trade?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

In 1993, the Commission, following Parliamentary question H-228/93 by Mrs von Alemann (1) on the difficulties faced by importers of prepacked bread from Germany, raised the question of the compatibility of the United Kingdom regulations on ranges (Weights and Measures (Miscellaneous Foods) Order 1988 SI 1988/2040) with Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty concerning the principle of the free movement of goods. Since bread is not covered by Directive 80/232/EEC relating to the ranges of nominal quantities and nominal capacities permitted for certain prepacked products (2), Articles 30 to 36 apply to national measures likely to obstruct trade in the products concerned.

The disputed regulations prescribe for prepacked bread the nominal quantity of 400 grams and multiples thereof, thereby excluding the nominal quantity of 500 grams normally used in other Member States.

The Commission regards these regulations as being incompatible with Article 30 of the EC Treaty, since consumer protection and fairness in trading relations can be adequately ensured by a measure which is less obstructing to trade, involving, for example, the indication of the net quantity on the prepacked product. Following a formal notice of complaint in December 1996, the United Kingdom authorities indicated their willingness to amend the regulations in question with a view to including the quantities of 500 grams and 1 kilogram. The procedure to amend the legislation is now under way.

(1) OJ Annex 3-429, 10.3.1993. (2) OJ L 51, 25.2.1980. C 142/2 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/002) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1655/98 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) to the Commission

(18 May 1998)

Subject: Pollution of the River Axios by industrial plants in FYROM

The recent study by the Danish Kruger Institute and reports in the media point out that huge quantities of toxic and chemical waste from industries in the region of Veles in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) are being discharged into the River Axios. The quantities of chemicals being poured into the river are 644 times greater than the internationally allowed limits for phosphorus compounds, 177 times the limit for chlorides and 15 times the limit for nitrogen compounds. Liquid waste is being tipped into the River Axios at the rate of 1 500 cubic metres an hour, whereas the limit in Europe is 135 to 200 cubic metres an hour. Bearing in mind that the River Axios runs through Greek and Community territory and finally flows into the Thermaic Gulf and that its wetland is protected by the Ramsar Convention.

Will the Commission say:

− whether it is aware of the major disaster which is taking shape in the region and, in particular, on Community and Greek territory,

− by what means it will protect public health and the environment which are being affected by industrial activities in FYROM,

− what policy and measures it will pursue in cooperation with the FYROM authorities to halt the pollution of the River Axios,

− what obligations are incumbent on FYROM under international agreements and conventions and under its agreements with the European Union (EU) in regard to environmental protection, and

− what financial aid has been granted by the EU to FYROM in recent years and for what purposes and whether financial aid can be used in the future to clean up the River Axios?

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

(11 June 1998)

The Commission is fully aware of the problems of pollution of the River Axios (Vardar) referred to by the Honourable Member, although it has not seen the specific study he mentions. For several years the waste from industries in the region of Veles in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) has posed a serious problem in both FYROM and Greece.

This matter is frequently raised in the PHARE context of cross-border cooperation between Greece and FYROM, in which the Greek authorities play an active part. This year’s programme already provides for setting up an ECU1,6 million system to monitor the water quality of the River Axios (Vardar). The system is part of an overall strategy to manage water (including lakes) shared between the two countries in question. Since 1996 under the PHARE national programme for FYROM, ECU 2 million has been allocated to setting up a special environmental fund with a view to institutional strengthening and water and waste management. An additional ECU 3 million will be available in 1998/1999.

Under the Cooperation Agreement between the Community and FYROM, which came into force on 1 January 1998, the two sides undertake to exchange information on the environment and to foster cooperation by carrying out specific measures. In this connection the PHARE national programme for FYROM could be used in the future to identify specific schemes to reduce the quantity and toxicity of industrial waste in the region of Veles.

With regard to the conventions and agreements that could be applied to the case in question, according to the Commission’s information, FYROM is neither a contracting party to the United Nations Convention 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/3

on the protection and use of transboundary watercourses and international lakes, nor to the Ramsar Convention and is therefore not bound by their requirements.

(1999/C 142/003) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1894/98 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 June 1998)

Subject: EU involvement in covert electronic communications interception

The European Parliament’s STOA (Scientific and Technological Option Assessment) delegation, which promotes the exploitation of knowledge and research, has commissioned and published a report by Steve Wright, a British researcher for the Omega foundation, on the use of modern technology for political surveillance.

The report mentions a joint surveillance plan between the European Union and the FBI with the aim of tracing (inter alia) international criminals. According to the report, in 1995 the EU countries concluded a secret agreement whereby their undercover services could also send their own code words to the American NSA for the purposes of Echelon electronic precision espionage. Again according to the report, the EU countries might possibly also be required to install the equipment needed for electronic monitoring in all EU telephones.

Has the Commission put into practice the measures mentioned in the STOA report on the standardization of telephones for the purposes of Echelon monitoring, and does it have any information on whether EU countries will be required to use the FBI or NSA electronic communications interception services?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 1998)

The Commission has noted with interest the interim study: An appraisal of technologies of political control from the scientific and technological options assessment from the Parliament. The Commission is not in possession of any evidence or complaint that a particular Member State is infringing the EC Treaty in this respect.

Nonetheless the Commission remains vigilant to defend Community interests and continues to make efforts to improve the security of its data networks. Furthermore, the Commission condemns all attempts to breach the integrity and confidentiality of information held or transmitted by the institutions.

(1999/C 142/004) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1986/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Problems relating to the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin

Almost a year has elapsed since the Food and Veterinary Office of the Commission’s DG XXIV became established and began operating in Dublin.

Will the Commission say:

1. Leaving aside increased expenditure owing to the recruitment of new staff, have the operating costs of the Food and Veterinary Office increased since it became established in Dublin?

2. What are the reasons for this increase compared to previous years and what percentage increase is involved? C 142/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

3. Is the increase in operating costs of the Office matched by an increase in productivity?

4. If the productivity/effectiveness of the Office has not improved in keeping with the increase in operating costs, what is the reason for this and what measures is the Commission considering to remedy this situation?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

1. and 2. The relocation of the Food and veterinary office (FVO) from Brussels to Dublin has engendered certain costs. In particular, a temporary building has been rented at ECU 250 per square metre and equipped. If the FVO had remained in Brussels, similar office space would have had to be rented and fitted out. It should be noted that recent estimates suggest the average cost of comparable temporary office space in Brussels and Dublin is similar, around ECU 250 per square metre.

In addition, mission costs of FVO staff are higher as a result of their attendance at meetings in Brussels. The total FVO missions budget for 1998 is estimated at ECU 900 000, but only a relatively small part is due to missions from Dublin to Brussels.

3. and 4. The mission of the Office is to monitor observance of a wide range of food, veterinary and plant health legislation and to contribute towards the maintenance of confidence in food offered to the European consumer. Because of the nature of this mission the Commission is of the opinion that any detailed assessment of the performance of the Office could only be made in the medium to long term.

The Office is in a transitional phase of its development. It is housed in temporary premises and staff are being recruited and provided with initial training on an on-going basis. It is estimated that it will be a further year or two before this phase is complete. Notwithstanding the practical difficulties, it is estimated that in its first year of operation the Office will have completed some 360 inspection missions worldwide.

(1999/C 142/005) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2019/98

by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Budget expenditure on human rights

1. In the budget for the 1999 financial year the separate heading for a Special Programme for Democracy in Nigeria (EUR 3 million in commitment appropriations and EUR 1,5 million in payment appropriations in 1998) has disappeared. Has the amount allocated in 1998 been spent? If so, on what activities? If not, why not? What programmes are envisaged by the Commission and how are these to be implemented?

2. What steps has the Commission taken to establish the European Agency for Human Rights and Democratization, as referred to in the report by Mrs Lenz on setting up a single coordinating structure within the European Commission responsible for human rights and democratization (A4-0393/97) adopted at the end of last year? Will this agency be established within and monitored by the Commission and when is it due to start its activities?

3. In the budget for the 1999 financial year the heading inserted by Parliament (EUR 2million in commitment appropriations and EUR 1 million in payment appropriations in 1998) on support for election processes (B7-709) has been reduced to a ‘p.m.’. Why is this so? What steps has the Commission taken to implement this budget heading? If no activities were undertaken, what was the reason for this? What are the Commission’s plans for the future? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/5

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

(21 September 1998)

1. The Commission has not proposed a separate budget line for Nigeria, but included the financing of activities for this country in the budget line B7-7020 ‘Democratisation, human rights in developing countries’, where the amount has been increased from ECU 17 million to ECU 20 million. The Commission has not yet spent the ECU 3 million foreseen in 1998, nor committed them. It has collected projects to be financed and started the decision making process. The Commission intends to commit the entire credit despite the delays resulting from the May 1998 Court of justice ruling in Case 106/96. The Commission decided in July 1998 to rescind the suspension of all human rights budget lines which had resulted from the ruling. It is therefore only from July that the Commission has once more had the power to take decisions on the use of this budget.

2. The possible adoption of a European network for human rights as suggested in the report of Mrs Lenz requires careful preparation and doubtless a competition process to determine the organisation which would assist in its implementation. The recommendation that there should be more extensive recourse to the internet for human rights co-ordination is noted and will certainly be followed by the Commission.

The separate proposal by Mrs Lenz of a structure internal to the Commission to coordinate human rights and democratisation activity was responded to at some length by a member of the Commission on 18 December 1997 at the plenary session of the Parliament. The Commission has sought to maintain unity of competence and management of resources at a geographical level while actively pursuing coordination. The responsible Commissioner has been assigned responsibility for the thematic and horizontal aspects of the subject and uses both a steering committee and a human rights inderdepartmental group to improve the coherence of human rights strategy globally.

3. The ‘token entry’ for budget year 1999 is in line with the general approach towards streamlining the structure of the budget (deletion of small headings), insofar as the activities envisaged for budgetary year 1998 against heading B7-709 may also be covered from the appropriations entered in Chapter B-8 Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

Since the budget comments for 1998 were published, the Commission has repeatedly approached the subcommittee on human rights for clarification on the comments of budget line B7-709 imposing the condition that an inter-institutional agreement be concluded and stressing the need to unblock the budget line B7-709 quickly. On these occasions the Commission has learnt that the Parliament has to date not agreed on a detailed proposal on the content of a inter-institutional agreement.

At the same time the Commission has systematically informed the human rights subcommittee about how it intended to use the budget line concerned. It was to be used for horizontal actions to prepare election support missions and to improve the readiness for election monitoring and supervision by implementation of training activities, activities aiming to professionalize legally and logistically a European approach by setting up intervention units capable of rapid deployment.

Given the financial volume of specific actions of election monitoring or supervision missions, these should continue to be financed under the relevant geographic Community instruments, where appropriate in support of common security and foreign policy (CSFP) joint actions.

(1999/C 142/006) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2128/98 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: United Kingdom v. Commission, C-106/96

The judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 May 1998 that certain Commission expenditure was illegal because it lacked a legal basis, has had repercussions for a large number of EU programmes and actions, especially in the social and human rights spheres. In its judgment, the Court stated that only non- significant actions could be undertaken without the prior adoption of a legal basis. C 142/6 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

What does the Commission understand by non-significant actions?

How does it propose to react to this situation?

What future strategy does it intend to pursue in the light of this judgment?

Will it seek an interinstitutional agreement on this matter?

(1999/C 142/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2338/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Wider implications of the European Court of Justice’s judgment in case C-106/96

On 12 May 1998, the Court of Justice of the European Communities handed down a judgment in case C-106/96 as a result of which the Commission froze the implementation of numerous budget headings on 10 June.

On 1 July Commissioner Liikanen said in a Commission communiqué on the Court’s judgment concerning the legal basis for the budget that the Commission would reach conclusions on the matter on 14July.

I should like to ask Commissioner Liikanen, therefore, what conclusions the Commission reached at the meeting of that date and how the Commission intends to proceed in this matter so as to ensure that the issues and problems relating to the legal basis for budget headings are resolved as quickly as possible.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2128/98 and E-2338/98 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1998)

The Commission adopted an immediate protective measure after the Court of Justice ruled that only for non-significant measures could expenditure be charged to the Community budget without an instrument of secondary legislation having first to be adopted. As guardian of the proper implementation of Union legislation, the Commission could not ignore the Court’s ruling. As the authority responsible for implementing the budget, it had to ensure that it could implement with complete legal certainty the headings apparently lacking a legal basis in the 1998 budget, and therefore embarked on a detailed examination of all the headings concerned. Once the check was complete, and taking account of the outcome of the Council meeting (Budgets) on 17 July 1998, a number of cases could be identified.

In the case of headings where normal operation resumed in full, the temporary suspension will have led to no more than a momentary slowdown in implementation. Following the Commission’s decision to suspend operations on 10 June 1998, the Commission acted to resume implementation of the headings concerned gradually, at the latest by 14July 1998. Similarly, the implementation of measures acknowledged to be politically sensitive, such as measures to combat violence against children, adolescents and women, measures to deal with illegal and harmful content on the Internet, support for and monitoring of electoral processes, and measures relating to human rights and democracy, resumed immediately after the conciliation meeting on 17 July when the Council (Budgets) was meeting.

In the case of headings which are still partly or totally suspended, those for which a legal basis has been proposed will be implemented as soon as the legal basis is adopted. The level of utilisation of 1998 appropriations will depend on the date of adoption of the legal basis. In any event, if the legal basis is adopted at the end of the year, the corresponding appropriations could in principle be carried over and used next year. The headings where spending cannot resume because no legal basis has been proposed and because they relate to measures which cannot be regarded as autonomous or as preparatory measures or pilot schemes will be examined individually to determine to what extent they can nevertheless be implemented on the principle of catering for the legitimate expectations of potential beneficiaries and safeguarding existing investments. Authorising departments affected by partly or totally suspended headings were contacted to determine how they propose to implement the budget in accordance with the 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/7

ad hoc measures. The findings were notified to the budgetary authority, in particular Parliament’s Committee on Budgets at the plenary meeting in Strasbourg in September.

There remains the special case of the headings concerning the fight against poverty and social exclusion for which the Treaty of Amsterdam could supply the necessary means of establishing the requisite legal bases. These headings were the subject of a joint declaration by the Council and the Commission at the Council meeting (Budgets) on 17 July 1998. On 16 September 1998 the Commission took steps to redirect these measures along truly innovatory lines in relation to the approach developed hitherto, and which will enable them to be regarded as preparatory to Community action in new areas provided for by the Treaty of Amsterdam. New measures can then be implemented.

(1999/C 142/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2177/98 by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Authorization of hunting by the ‘parany’ (trapping) method in the Valencia region (Spain)

In 1997, the Spanish Congress of Deputies amended Law 4/89 on the conservation of areas of natural beauty and wild flora and fauna to authorize the hunting of certain species on a small scale, in traditional hunting-grounds and in a controlled and selective fashion, should the regional governments so decide.

A few days ago, the ecological organizations represented on the Advisory Committee on the Environment rejected the draft law on hunting by the ‘parany’ (trapping) method as drawn up by the government of the Valencia region, on the grounds that the pro-nature organizations considered this to be a non-selective method, involving as it does the use of a trap that replicates the natural habitat and indiscriminately immobilizes the birds that enter it.

In 1997, the Commissioner responsible expressed her disagreement with the amendment of Law 4/89 and advocated infringement proceedings against Spain should the measure go ahead. After examining the law, the Commission concluded that it was in fact compatible with Council Directive 79/409/EEC (1), since Article 34(b) of the Spanish law institutes a general ban on the hunting of migratory birds pursuant to Article 7(4) of the directive. The new eighth article permits exceptions, but these must meet the conditions laid down in Article 28 of the Spanish law, which are exactly the same as those specified in Article 9 of the directive.

In the light of the above:

1. Does the Commission consider that the ‘parany’ method of hunting can be included among the exceptions permitted by the above-mentioned legislation, or does it consider that it does not qualify for exemption and is therefore in breach of Directive 79/409/EEC?

2. Can the Commission request a copy of the draft law on hunting drawn up by the Valencian regional government with a view ro examining it to ensure that, if necessary, action is taken to prevent any breach of the EU directive before the law is adopted?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 1998)

1. Hunting with lime, a non-selective hunting method, is forbidden, in principle, by Article 8 of Directive 79/409/EEC on the protection of wild birds (1).

However, a derogation could be granted should the conditions of Article 9 of the said Directive be satisfied. Such derogation might be granted where there is no other satisfactory solution to prevent serious damage to crops or to permit under strictly supervised conditions and on a selective basis to capture, keep or otherwise judiciously use of certain birds in small numbers. C 142/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The derogation must specify the species which are subject to the derogation, the means, arrangements or methods authorized for capture or killing, the conditions of risk and the circumstances of time and place under which such derogation may be granted, the authority empowered to declare that the required conditions obtain and to decide what means, arrangements or methods may be used, within what limits and by whom and the controls that will be carried out.

Each year the Member States are obliged by the Directive to send a report to the Commission on the implementation of Article 9.

2. The Commission has asked the Spanish authorities to provide the draft hunting law of Valencia mentioned by the Honourable Member.

The Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed on its findings following examination of this draft.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(1999/C 142/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2178/98 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 July 1998)

Subject: Sects in the EU

The Spanish police recently discovered the presence in the Canary Islands of a group of members of the sect known as the ‘Order of the Solar Temple’.

This group of persons, most of them German, intended to commit suicide on the island before the supposed ‘end of the world’ arrived.

This event has highlighted the existence of a proliferation of ‘self-destructive’ sectarian groups on the eve of the new millennium, in addition to those sects which proselytize for their leaders’ personal gain.

Among the Spanish regions, the Canary Islands have one of the largest concentrations of such groups, which are estimated to number some 300 in the Canaries and approximately 3000 in the whole of Spain. The total number of members of such groups in Spain is over 250 000.

The growing scale of the problem makes it necessary to adopt methods impacting on the origins of such behaviour and of organizations which take advantage of the right of free association to proselytize and ‘brainwash’ their members.

However, such an approach has to be combined with an absolute guarantee of the right of every individual to freedom of association and freedom of belief.

Is the Commission aware of the events referred to and the relationship of the group concerned to the ‘Order of the Solar Temple’ sect?

What measures does the Commission intend to take to prevent the proliferation of such ‘self-destructive’ groups in the EU?

Does the Commission consider it necessary to adopt legislation at international level to prevent the multiplication of such groups in the EU?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1998)

The Commission has not officially been informed of the events mentioned by the Honourable Member.

Appropriate measures could possibly be taken under Title VI of the Treaty on the European Union to improve judicial cooperation and police co-operation in this issue. However, according to the provisions of Title VI as they currently stand, such measures at the level of the Union would have to be initiated by the Member States. The Commission has no right of initiative in this field. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/9

Moreover, the activities of these groups are subject to relevant applicable national law, for example in the areas of taxes, family law and labour law.

(1999/C 142/010) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2200/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(14 July 1998)

Subject: Impact of the judgment in Case C-106/96

Does the Commission believe that the judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 May 1998 (Case C-106/96) annuls projects co-financed by the European Union concerning:

− action by NGOs to assist developing countries?

− Community participation in action to combat anti-personnel mines?

− the European initiative for democracy and the defence of human rights?

If the impact on these projects does indeed prove harmful, what action does the Commission intend to take to offset or redress it?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 1998)

The Commission has taken a precautionary measure in response to the ruling by the Court of Justice that only in the case of non-significant action does Community expenditure not require the prior adoption of an act of secondary legislation.

As guardian of the correct application of Community legislation, the Commission could not ignore the Court’s judgment. Given its responsibility for implementing the budget, it therefore launched a comprehensive study of all headings in the 1998 budget that were apparently without legal basis, to check whether it could continue to implement them with complete confidence as to their legality. It has now completed these checks and its findings as regards the areas to which the Honourable Member refers are as follows.

On 17 July 1998 the Council adopted the basic regulations for budget heading B7-6000 ‘Community contribution towards schemes concerning developing countries carried out by non-governmental organizations’ and B7-643 ‘Decentralized cooperation in the developing countries’ (1), with the result that their implementation may be resumed immediately.

In the case of Item B7-661 ‘Community participation in action concerning anti-personnel mines’, the Commission considers that the majority of the activities in this field can be implemented on the basis of specific regulations (one on rehabilitation and reconstruction of developing countries, one on humanitarian aid and one on action in the field of aid to displaced persons in developing countries in America and Asia).

In addition, an ad hoc agreement was reached with the budgetary authority at the Budget Council on 17 July 1998 for all operations concerning human rights and democracy, including those financed through Article B7-702 ‘Human rights and democracy in the developing countries’.

This made it possible to continue implementing the measures referred to by the Honourable Member under the 1998 budget after a temporary interruption.

As regards future budgets, at the Budget Council of 17 July 1998 Parliament, the Council and the Commission were also able to reach a general agreement resolving the problems of legal bases in the implementation of the budget. This will help to prevent a recurrence of the sort of differences of opinion that have led to the current situation.

(1) OJ L 213, 30.7.1998. C 142/10 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/011) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2268/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Hunting of migratory birds in France

The French National Assembly recently decided to extend the hunting season for migratory birds. In doing so, it is knowingly flouting European rules and it is presenting its blatant disregard for the rules in force as proof that France can act independently with regard to European rules.

1. Has the Commission already responded to this disregard for European rules and, if so, how? Or is it planning to do so and, if so, how and when?

2. In its opinion, if action is taken before the European Court of Justice which could result in penalty payments being imposed on France, what chances of success does such action have, how long would the proceedings take and how long would it take for such penalties to be paid?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 1998)

1. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Oral Question H-726/98 by Mr Elliott (1).

2. Articles 169 and 171 of the EC Treaty deal with the procedure concerning States which fail to fulfil their obligations. The Court of Justice can only impose the penalty payments stipulated by Article 171 in its second judgment, in which it recognises that a Member State has failed to comply with its first judgment.

If, following the reasoned opinion mentioned in the preceding point, and having examined the French reply, the Commission decided to bring the matter before the Court of Justice, it would fall to the latter to give a ruling in its own time. This tends to take between one and two years.

If the Court were to find that France had failed to fulfil its obligations in respect of the hunting season for wild birds, and if France failed to comply with that judgment, the Commission could institute proceedings on the basis of Article 171 of the EC Treaty. Like the Article 169 procedure, this involves a preliminary phase (formal notice, reasoned opinion) and a litigation phase before the Court of Justice. Experience shows that, from start to finish, this can take several years.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (September 1998).

(1999/C 142/012) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2282/98 by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Hunting of bears and the habitats directive

Abear recently killed a man who was out walking on land close to an inhabited area in Finland. Bears have started to approach human settlements more frequently, giving rise to discussions on how safely people can walk in the countryside and in thinly-populated areas. At the same time, however, the Commission has urged Finland, referring to the nature protection provisions of the habitats directive, to reduce the number of hunting licences. This has led to a lively discussion in the media. The Commission is effectively placing a higher value on a bear’s life than on a human being’s.

In the light of the above, what does the Commission propose to do to ensure a more sensible interpretation of the habitats directive and permit people to hunt bears which prove dangerous? If the Commission’s inflexible line on this issue does not change, it will have to be held responsible for the loss of human lives. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/11

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1998)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that a specific derogation in the interest of public safety is included in Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the habitats directive) (1). According to Article 16, Member States are allowed in such a case to derogate from the provisions to protect animal species, including the brown bear.

The Commission has as a priority checked the conformity of the Finnish hunting legislation, and it has invited Finland to revise its transposition in order to reach a full compliance with the habitats directive. The question of the number of hunting licences falls outside of the framework of this exercise and has thus not yet been assessed. The Commission is of the opinion that Finland has all the necessary discretion, according to the habitats directive, to allow the killing of bears to protect human life.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 142/013) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2365/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Project in Stemnitsa (Arkadia) as part of the regional operational programme for the Pelopon- nese

The ROP for the Peloponnese includes a road improvement and development project in the municipality of Stemnitsa with a budget of DR 200 million. However, local residents have complained that the projected works will greatly detract from the traditional architectural character of the area, a view upheld by expert opinion. In view of the fact that Stemnista is a scheduled historical site, what steps will the Commission take, having considered the above allegations, to ensure that the works are carried out without detracting from the historical or traditional architectural character of the area?

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

(25 September 1998)

The Commission can confirm that part-financing of the Stemnitsa road network has recently been included in the Regional Programme for the Peloponnese. This was decided by the Monitoring Committee for the Programme on the basis of a proposal from the Greek authorities and in view of the fact that the procedures for awarding public contracts and for assessing the environmental impact were followed correctly.

(1999/C 142/014) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2369/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Outcome of the bilateral meeting between the Director-General for Fisheries at the Commission and the Canadian Deputy Minister for Fisheries

Following the recent summit meeting between the EU and Canada held in Brussels on 14 May 1998, at which the Canadian authorities undertook to reconsider the extraterritorial aspects of the controversial Canadian fisheries bill C-27, a meeting was held in Brussels on 23 June 1998 between the Director- General for Fisheries at the Commission and the Canadian Deputy Minister for Fisheries.

Can the Commission report on the outcome of that meeting and, in particular, on the progress made as regards reconsideration by the Canadian authorities of the extraterritorial aspects included in the above Canadian fisheries bill C-27? C 142/12 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Specifically, can the Commission say whether any new commitment was given by Canada in relation to the withdrawal or modification of the extraterritorial aspects of the above bill, and to any timescale and dates set for doing so?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 1998)

High level consultations on fisheries, which were held in Brussels on 23 June 1998, offered yet another opportunity to express concern about the extraterritorial aspects of pending Canadian legislation (Bill C-27). This very same matter was raised earlier at the Community-Canada Summit on 14 May 1998, on the occasion of which the Canadian side undertook to ‘take another look’. Furthermore, the matter was discussed in the light of the debate before the Canadian House of Commons committee on fisheries on 28 May 1998, in the course of which government officials had opposed motions which aimed at aggravating certain provisions of the intended Canadian legislation. It was emphasized that this continued to be a matter of grave concern for the Community. The Canadian side took note of the Community’s demand to give this matter serious consideration.

Since then, no further developments concerning the fate of the intended Canadian legislation have become known. Deliberations on this within the Canadian House of Commons will continue in autumn after the summer recess.

The aforementioned high level consultations touched upon all relevant fisheries issues, be they bilateral or multilateral. In the latter context, discussions of topics pertaining mainly to the Northwest Atlantic fisheries organisation (NAFO) showed that many of the past difficulties have been overcome. In the bilateral context, it was agreed to promote business-to-business contacts in 1999. This aims at bringing interested people together. Furthermore, this should serve as a precursor for renewed enhanced cooperation through mutually beneficial joint ventures or other partnership relationships.

(1999/C 142/015) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2370/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Calves eligible for premiums in Spain

Why has the increase in the number of bull calves eligible for premiums in Spain promised by the Agriculture Council in October 1997 (650 000) been cut to 603 000 as decided by the Agriculture Council in June 1998?

Is the Commission aware that these figures, that originally promised and that finally decided, are nowhere near the actual number of calves slaughtered in Spain?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

The number of 603 674 male bovine animals eligible for premiums corresponds to the figure agreed by the Agriculture Council in October 1996, which implies an increase of 9.5 % in relation to the ceiling applied previously. This figure has to be seen against a decrease of about 20 % in the Member States as a whole. The same Agriculture Council also undertook, as part of the long-term reform and with a view to entry into force on 1January 1997,to examine, in particular, the case of those Member States which have applications significantly in excess of their regional ceilings and where the ratio between the ceiling and the number of animals slaughtered is lower than the average in the Community.

In order to comply with the deadline established by the Council, the Commission proposed in the 1998/99 price package and related measures that the ceiling for calves eligible for premiums be raised to 649 896. This figure represents an overrun of at most 10 % on the number of applications for premiums for bovine animals notified by Spain. The Agriculture Council of June 1998 withdrew that proposal by once again deferring a decision on the matter, in the case of Spain and Portugal, to discussions within the framework 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/13

of Agenda 2000 (1) and it established as the deadline for implementation the marketing year commencing 1 July 1999.

The Commission is well aware of the situation in Spain, hence its proposal in the abovementioned price package.

(1) COM(97) 2000 final.

(1999/C 142/016) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2376/98 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to theCommission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Language learning

Could the Commission tell me whether there are any current European initiatives in place which help adult citizens of Member States learn the language of other Member States?

If not, are there any intentions to do so, bearing in mind the importance of good communication between Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 1998)

The Lingua actions within the Socrates programme are horizontal measures designed to improve the quality and quantity of the teaching and learning of languages, addressing all levels and sectors of education. The language learning of adult citizens is therefore targeted by the Lingua actions. These actions are complementary to the measures enhancing language learning provided in the framework of the Leonardo Da Vinci programme.

Within the Socrates programme adult citizens are targeted as learners of foreign languages explicitly through Lingua action D which supports the development of language teaching and learning materials and curricula, and where priority is given to projects which promote self-learning tools and make pertinent use of open and distance learning approaches. Within the same action instruments for the assessment of linguistic competencies are developed which enable adult learners to evaluate their language skills.

Within the Leonardo Da Vinci programme the language learning needs of adults in the professional context are targeted through projects which develop didactic materials and training curricula.

The European project Lingu@net which receives funding under Socrates and Leonardo Da Vinci is developing a virtual resource centre which will provide information on language learning facilities for adult learners among others.

(1999/C 142/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2394/98 by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Unjustified and unfair treatment of flight passengers and fraudulent flight contracts issued by the Iberia airline

Flight passengers have been feeling the effects of a constant and rapid deterioration in the services rendered by airlines and airport management bodies. Although the current situation is largely the result of the growth in air transport, the deregulation of that sector and the increased number of carriers, the fact remains that the legislation in force must be complied with and the existing Regulation (EEC) 295/91 (1) C 142/14 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

on a denied-boarding compensation system updated and extended, in order to tackle the serious problems encountered at airports with regard to information provision, the failure to display prominent and legible notices on passengers’ rights, the acceptance of liability and respect for consumer rights.

The international flight contracts on offer from various airlines − Iberia being a prominent case in point − are alarming because they leave passengers entirely helpless in unforeseen circumstances and fail to make the airline liable for functional or organisational breakdowns. These contracts are legally bound by the WarsawConvention (the Convention on the Unification of Certain Rules relating to International Carriage by Air, signed in Warsawon 12 October 1929) or, whereappropriate and indicated in the contracts, by its amended version signed in The Hague on 28 September 1955. Paragraph 9 of the said contracts stipulates the following: ‘Times shown in timetables or elsewhere are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract. (...) Schedules are subject to change without notice. The carrier assumes no responsibility for making connections’. The chaotic scenes witnessed at Barajas airport in the second half of June after large numbers of passengers were left stranded and more than 200 flights cancelled, support the aforementioned criticisms.

Given these abuses of consumer rights:

1. Does the Commission intend to formulate a Community policy on air transport establishing a regulation on passenger protection?

2. Will the Commission look into the case of Iberia in order to clarify whether or not the existing EU regulation has been complied with and remedy the current total lack of protection of the passenger’s interests?

(1) OJ L 36, 8.2.1991, p. 5.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 1998)

The Commission understands and shares the concerns of the Honourable Member that actual departing and arrival times of airlines often deviate from the scheduled times, and that the number of cancellations seems to be increasing. However, these unfortunate problems do not amount to any violation of Community lawas it stands, and it is consequently not possible for the Commission to take any action in the case of any airline on such matters.

The Commission has however, been examining the possibility of strengthening the protection of air travellers under Community law. It therefore launched a comprehensive study to assess the conditions included in air transport contracts on the basis of the consumers interests. The Commission is currently considering the recommendations of that study in the light of the competition rules and existing Community consumer law. The question of possible new initiatives from the Community side in this area can only be considered and decided upon after when this evaluation is finalised. The points made by the Honourable Member will certainly be considered in the further process.

In relation to the Honourable Member’s suggestion to update the existing Regulation on denied-boarding compensation, the Commission submitted a proposal (1) in January 1998, which it hopes will improve the position of passengers. The main objectives of the proposal are to improve information to passengers; increase compensation limits; adapt the Regulation to newdevelopments in the air transport market (e.g. newforms of ticketing, code-sharing); and to provide for the regulation to cover seat-only charters. Were there to be any infringements of the current Regulation, these would, as infringements of directly applicable Community law, be subject to remedies before national courts.

(1) COM(98) 41. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/15

(1999/C 142/018) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2400/98

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Packaging of fish products

The Commission has taken the decision to prohibit the packaging and preservation of fish products in anything other than plastic containers. However, there are traditional specialities which have for many years been prepared, packed and preserved in particular kinds of container, often made of wood. One such product is the Swedish surströmming (fermented Baltic herring) which has been prepared for centuries in a verysmall area according to an old tradition. Its production and sales capacityare verysmall; it could almost be classified as a small enterprise, which is now in danger of dying out as a result of the Commission directive which prohibits commercial production in this traditional manner.

Has the Commission considered granting an exemption for surströmming and other similar traditional delicacies? Has the Commission taken into account the problems which arise for such specialist products when it drafts a directive, and the effects of the directive on the production and sale of traditional foods? What does the Commission propose to do to prevent these small undertakings and the people indirectly employed by them − e.g. fishermen − from being unjustifiably placed in difficulties?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 1998)

The provisions of Directive 91/493/EEC laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fisheryproducts ( 1) contain no explicit requirement to use plastic barrels, nor to provide a cement floor. It is for the national authorityto judge whether the floor meets the Directive’s hygiene objectives.

Chapter III of the Annex to this Directive, which sets out general conditions for establishments on land states at point 2(a) that these establishments must have, ‘in areas where products are handled, prepared and processed: a) waterproof flooring which is easyto clean and disinfect and laid down in such a wayas to facilitate the drainage of the water or provided with equipment to remove the water.’

Chapter IV(6)(c) and Chapter VI(2) of the Annex state, respectively, that ‘6 Salting c) Any container used for salting or brining must be constructed in such a wayas to preclude contamination during the salting or brining process’ and 2 Packaging materials and products liable to enter into contact with fisheryproducts must complywith all the rules of hygiene,and in particular:

− theymust not be such as to impair the organoleptic characteristics of the fisheryproducts;

− theymust not be capable of transmitting to the fisheryproducts substances harmful to human health;

− theymust be strong enough to protect the fisheryproducts adequately.

There is no intention in Communitylegislation in this area to undermine production of a traditional Swedish delicacy, as long as it complies with the rules on food hygiene. The above cited provisions leave the Swedish authorities sufficient scope for interpretation in applying these rules, and the Commission therefore believes that the principle of subsidiarityhas been respected.

(1) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991. C 142/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2451/98

by Paul Lannoye (V) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Dumping of toxic and hazardous waste near Bilbao airport

Following a complaint filed by a number of Bizcaya town councillors about the siting of a dump for toxic and hazardous waste and a leachate treatment plant near the runways of Bilbao airport, representing a huge danger to the neighbouring areas, and in view of the scale of the work.

Could the Commission say whether:

1. the enlargement work at Bilbao airport complies with the requirements of Directive 85/337 (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment;

2. the toxic waste dump and the leachate treatment plant comply with Directive 85/337, Directive 91/ 689 (2) on hazardous waste and Directive 76/464 (3) on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community;

3. the toxic waste dump, which is situated less than 100 metres from landing strips complies with the distances laid down in international conventions on aircraft safety;

4. Community assistance (ERDF, Cohesion Fund, etc.) was received by these projects?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. (2) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991, p. 20. (3) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 1998)

1. and 2. The Commission has received two complaints concerning the matter referred to by the Honourable Member. In investigating the complaints, the Commission asked the Spanish authorities for their comments.

The Spanish authorities recently sent extensive documentation in response. As this has yet to be studied, the Commission is not yet in a position to answer the questions asked by the Honourable Member.

In the course of the investigation of the complaints, the complainants will be duly informed as to the conclusions reached after examination of the information sent by the Spanish authorities.

3. International rules on air safety fall within the competence of the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The Commission is not aware of any regulations on the dumping of waste near airports. At all events there are no Community rules on the subject.

4. The projects involving the dumping of hazardous toxic waste and the leachate treatment plant near Bilbao airport were included in the operational programmes cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the Basque Country − Objective 2, for the programming periods 1994- 1996 (first phase) and 1997-1999 (second phase). However, the Spanish authorities have withdrawn the two projects in question from the above programmes. Consequently they will not receive cofinancing under this Fund or, indeed, under the Cohesion Fund. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/17

(1999/C 142/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2454/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Recognition of the locksmith profession

Some occupational groups are still not recognised or properly regulated in Italy and other Member States. According to press reports, the proposal being put forward in certain quarters to do away with the present Italian professional registers is the subject of intensive national debate, but it is not clear what alternative rules will be laid down to replace the existing arrangements. Clarification is accordingly required to enable the public to know who will be called upon to apply the European standards governing technology applications used in active and passive safety systems. The persons who observe the Italian laws now in force, for example Nos 646/90, 626/90, 242/96, and 675/96, act in good faith but cannot accept legal liability for their work. The professions concerned in this instance include closure and lock experts, who, through their Italian national organisation, ERSI, and the European Locksmith Federation, have long been endeavouring to ensure that their members can provide the appropriate expertise. If they were to be incorporated into a career structure based on proof of qualifications, all potential customers would be able to benefit from their services.

1. Are there any Directives on the recognition of professions in the Member States?

2. Has Italy complied with those Directives or is it about to do so?

3. Could closure and lock experts be covered by such Directives?

4. What is the Commission’s general view on the matter?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Member States are responsible for regulating access to the occupation of locksmith and the manner in which that occupation is practised. It is thus up to each Member State to determine the preparatory training required and conditions for access to the occupation, as well as its status as a profession.

To facilitate the free movement of professionals who do not possess the qualifications required by the host Member State, Community law imposes on the latter a number of obligations towards migrants.

As regards professional recognition, the profession of independent locksmith is covered by Directive 64/ 427/EEC (1) on industry and small craft industries (ISIC Major Groups 23-40), which lays down measures to facilitate the full exercise of the right of establishment and the freedom to provide services. Article 3 of the Directive lays down the minimum length of relevant professional experience effectively and lawfully acquired in a Member State other than the host country. In cases where this requirement is met, Community nationals may establish themselves without being required to fulfil the conditions laid down by regulations in the host Member State.

However, where migrants do not fulfil the conditions laid down by the Directive, the host Member State is required, under the EC Treaty and in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice, to recognise their professional experience and other qualifications.

As far as the Commission is aware, Italy has correctly transposed the Directive into national law. However, it is prepared to examine any additional information which the Honourable Member may have which could bring to light a problem of Community law.

(1) OJ 117, 23.7.1964. C 142/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2459/98 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Bad weather and damage to agriculture in Portugal

Recent weather conditions in Portugal (torrential rain, hail and wide fluctuations in temperature) have caused serious damage in some of the country’s main agricultural sectors.

The collapse in production of pears (by around 70 to 80 % at national level), cherries (around 70 % in the Beira Interior and Trás-os-Montes regions), grapes (around 60 % in the Ribatejo, Douro-Minho and Trás- os-Montes regions) and olives (above all in the Alentejo and Trás-os-Montes regions) are some of the most serious examples. It is thus clear that there will be a sharp fall in income, especially for small farms and small family farms.

Can the Commission provide information on the following:

1. Has the Portuguese Government already submitted to the Commission a detailed quantitative and qualitative assessment of the damage arising from the bad weather for the purpose of requesting EC administrative measures and exceptional financial support to tackle the adverse consequences? If so, is the Commission prepared to grant the request?

2. Does the Commission consider it appropriate to consider the possibility of contributing additional appropriations to mitigate the damage to agriculture arising from the bad weather in Portugal?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 1998)

1. The Portuguese Government did not submit any request to the Commission for financial aid to cover the losses of farm income mentioned by the Honourable Member, because the Commission does not have a legal basis making it possible to provide compensation for losses of agricultural production caused by bad weather.

2. Article 5(h) of Council Regulation (EEC) 4256/88 of 19 December 1988 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) 2052/88 as regards the EAGGF Guidance Section (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) 2085/93 (2), provides that the EAGGF Guidance Section can take part financially in restoring agricultural and forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, drawing upon the total appropriation for the structural measures in the Community support framework (CSF).

With regard to the bad weather in November and December 1997, the Portuguese authorities asked for financial aid for restoring the production potential damaged on this occasion. The Commission complied with this request by granting an amount of ECU 20 million from the appropriations still available for Objective 5(a).

Moreover, in July 1998 the Azores benefited from an extra ECU 26,38 million from the EAGGF Guidance Section and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), from the 1998 CSF deflator for Portugal, to cope with the damage caused by the earthquake of 9 July 1998.

(1) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988. (2) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(1999/C 142/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2496/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Article 169

Will the Commission publish its rules of procedure governing the handling of cases under Article 169 of the Treaties? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/19

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

The rules in question were published in the Introduction to the Tenth Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community law. (1) The Introductions to subsequent Reports record the improvements made since then. (2)

The Commission has reviewed the operation of these procedures and has taken new measures to improve them. Parliament will be informed of the outcome shortly.

(1) OJ C 233, 30.8.1993. (2) Eleventh annual report on monitoring the application of Community law: OJ C 154, 6.6.1994. Twelfth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law: OJ C 254, 29.9.1995. Thirteenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law: OJ C 303, 14.10.1996. Fourteenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law: OJ C 332, 3.11.1997.

(1999/C 142/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2515/98 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Pollution from the Ostiglia and Sermide-Carbonara Po electrical power stations (Italy)

In the localities of Ostiglia, Sermide and Carbonara Po (Mantua province, Italy), two electrical power stations belonging to ENEL (the national electricity company) operate at a distance of about 10 km from one another, each having a power of approximately 1 300 MW. The Ostiglia station, which has existed since the early 1970s, burns dense combustible oil at 50 %, despite not using any type of filter on its flues (for practical reasons relating to lack of space). The Sermide-Carbonara Po station, which has been in operation since the beginning of the 1980s, has a single electrostatic filter and burns dense combustible oil at 80 %. An agreement has existed since 1975 between ENEL and the municipalities of Sermide and Carbonara Po obliging ENEL to install a complete set of filters, but the company has never done so. Between 1988 and 1996, according to figures supplied by the Inter-authority Health and Prevention Office of Mantua (PMIP), the two power stations together emitted an annual average of 37 100 tonnes of SO2, 21 500 tonnes of NOx and 1 600 tonnes of dust. They are also responsible for the following annual quantities of heavy metals: 41 tonnes of vanadium, 35 tonnes of nickel, several hundred tonnes of zinc, some dozen tonnes of lead and a few tonnes of chromium and cadmium. These quantities alone accounted for 30 % of the sulphur dioxide and 100 % of the heavy metals produced in 1996 by the 299 Italian chemical companies which are members of ‘Federchimica’. The local health authorities have drawn attention to unusually high levels of chronic bronchial and lung diseases involving tumours and of birth defects. Annex 3 to the Italian ministerial decree of 12July 1990 incorporating Directive 88/609/EEC of 24 November 1988 (1) allows ENEL an extremely long transitional period for adapting its installations: it is obliged to comply with the emission ceilings of the decree at all its plants only by the end of 2002. As a result, the Sermide power station is still authorised to emit as much as 3 100 mg/mc of SO2, 1 050 mg/mc of NOx and 100 mg/mc of dust, although the maxima laid down in the decree are, respectively, 400, 200 and 50 mg/mc (data supplied by the PMIP in February 1998).

Does the Commission not consider the length of the transitional period for adapting these two ENEL plants to be contrary to the spirit of Directive 88/609/EEC? Does it intend to take action to speed up the adaptation of the two power stations to the permitted emission limits and to demand, to this end, an assessment of the impact of the two plants on the environment and on human health, pursuant to Directive 85/337/EEC (2)?

Does the Commission not consider it necessary, under Article 169 of the EC Treaty, to take out infringement proceedings against Italy for failure to comply with Article 130r of the EC Treaty in relation to the protection of human health and the principles of precautionary action against environmental damage and preventive action in the environmental field?

(1) OJ L 336, 7.12.1988, p. 1. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. C 142/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Ms Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Directive 88/609/EEC on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants imposes limit values on emissions for new plants only, i.e. those authorised after

1July 1987.For plants that existed before that date, the only constraints concern sulphur dioxide (SO 2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions, on which there are national ceilings for all the ‘existing’ plants concerned (Article 3).

It is for the national authorities to impose on each plant, in the light of its specific characteristics, the emission level they consider best complies with the national reduction programme drawn up to ensure that the ceilings are not exceeded. From this strict viewpoint, the Commission cannot call into question the adaptation programme for individual plants where an overall national programme has been established leading to compliance with the emission ceilings provided for by Directive 88/609/EEC. This is the case where Italy is concerned.

It is also the national authorities’ responsibility to ensure that the emissions of each industrial plant do not impair the quality of the air in the vicinity of these plants.

The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that Council Directive 85/337/ EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment concerns only projects approved after 3 July 1988 and cannot be applied retrospectively. Consequently the project mentioned cannot be considered as covered by the Directive.

As to the last question, the Commission would stress that Article 130r of the EC Treaty cannot be taken as a legal basis for the initiation of infringement proceedings under Article 169. As stated by the Court of Justice in case C-379/92, Article 130r is confined to defining the general objectives of the Community with regard to the environment.

(1999/C 142/024) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2520/98 by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission

(28 July 1998)

Subject: Projects in Tarija, Bolivia

Can the Commission provide Parliament with an up-to-date breakdown of the finances of the projects in Tarija, Bolivia, in each of the following categories:

− improving economic access to food;

− improving physical access to food;

− improving availability of food

In addition, can the Commission inform Parliament of the administrative costs of the project, including the personnel costs for the eight directors over the past four years and the cost of transport shipped from Europe?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 1998)

The Commission has implemented a nation-wide food security programme in Bolivia, with the aim of improving economic access to food, physical access to food and availability of food. The global budget for 1996-2000 is ECU 80 million, and the programme covers the whole of Bolivia. The programme has a sectorial axis, where horizontal programmes are financed (example: national seeds programme). The other axis is territorial, and covers 78 out of the 311 local communities in the country. These communities are 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/21

amongst the poorest, the total population being 800 000 persons. The territorial axis includes parts of Tarija.

The break-down of the 128 projects approved so far under the food securityprogramme is irrigation 23 %; rural roads 35 %; training 18 %; support to agricultural production 14 % and others 10 %.

The Prodizavat is a separate agricultural development project aiming at increasing the revenue of farmers in the Tarija region. The project is managed bya project management unit, composed of two directors, a European and a Bolivian. Over the last four years, there have been two European and four Bolivian directors. The Communitycontribution does not cover the cost of the Bolivian co-directors.

The Communitybudget for European technical assistance is ECU 1,68 million and covers 4 European experts for 4 years (the European director, an agronomist, an engineer and an administrator). The Communitybudget has also financed the wages of a Bolivian legal counsellor and a Bolivian sociologist (ECU 0,065 million). On the other hand, the Bolivian authorities have financed a local staff of about 60 people (including the Bolivian directors).

The project has bought vehicles in Europe, given that the Communitytendering rules specifythat goods bought for anyproject under Communityfinancing should be of national or European origin. Since Bolivia does not produce vehicles, theyhad to be imported in the country.The cost of vehicles is ECU 0,28 million.

(1999/C 142/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2531/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: EU funding for projects designed to benefit orphans in third countries

1. How much funding is available annuallyfrom the EU to projects designed to benefit orphans and orphanages in third countries?

2. Through which funding mechanisms is this moneychannelled?

3. Which third countries are involved and how much does each receive?

4. Which UK-based charities and organisations are involved?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

Projects financed bythe Commission in developing countries mayoccasionallycover the specific needs of orphans, but more often theytarget children or youngpeople as a whole. Such projects maybe financed either from the European Development Fund (EDF) and its counterpart funds, or under specific budget headings, for example chapter B7-70 (the European initiative for democracyand the protection of human rights) and heading B7-6000 (co-financing with non-governmental organisations).

Several projects targeting children were supported in 1997 under budget heading B7-7020 (human rights and democracyin the developing countries), amounting to a total of ECU 368 060. These were: rescue and rehabilitation of girls sold into prostitution in Nepal (ECU 86 800); support for girl labourers, single mothers and children in Togo (ECU 150 000), and a programme to prevent child sexual abuse and help abused children in Sri Lanka (ECU 131 260). The latter project was run bythe British NGO International Catholic Child Bureau. C 142/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Details of all projects financed under budget heading B7-6000 are given in the Commission’s annual report on cooperation with NGOs.

(1999/C 142/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2533/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Commission information campaign spending

In document COM(98) 39, the Commission states that ECU 21 million is available for the information strategy on the Euro during 1998.

1. What is the breakdown of this figure by the amount spent in each Member State and, in particular, what proportion of it will be spent in the UK?

2. What is the breakdown of this figure by the amount spent in different media?

3. Regarding television advertising, what is the estimated number of viewers that the commercials funded by the Commission will reach, and what is the nature of these commercials?

4. What was the total amount spent by the Commission promoting the EU and its policies in each of the last three years, and what is the breakdown for this amount by Member States and by media?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

1. The provisional figures for the 1998 budget total ECU 17,3 million, broken down between Luxembourg, ECU 0,1 million, Ireland, ECU 0,7 million, Austria, Finland, Netherlands, Portugal, ECU 1,0 million, Spain ECU 2,0 million, France, Italy, ECU 3,0 million and Germany, ECU 4,5 million. To this figure can be added the 1997/98 complement of ECU 2,9 million (Belgium, ECU 0,4 million, Netherlands ECU 1,5 million, Spain ECU 1,0 million), making the grand total of ECU 20,2 million to which the Honourable Member refers. These figures represent sums allocated to co-financed joint communication programmes based on conventions signed by the Parliament, the Commission, and the Member States concerned. All Member States were invited to avail themselves of this opportunity. The United Kingdom chose not to, and therefore no proportion of the overall figure will be spent in the United Kingdom.

2. The ECU 20,2 million is combined with national exchequer contributions together amounting to ECU 46,0 million for the joint programmes operated in the eleven Member States. The breakdown of this expenditure is as follows: television and radio, ECU 19,8 million, other actions (brochures, internet sites, exhibitions, etc.), ECU 12,1 million, written press, ECU 7,1 million, information programmes through non governmental organisations, ECU 6,5 million, contribution to national call centres, ECU 5,0 million.

3. No exact figures can yet be given. A full record of estimated viewing figures will be compiled as part of the final activity report to be presented by each participating Member State upon completion of the annual programmes (as foreseen by the conventions). The nature of television activities funded varies considerably, from short ‘spots’ to participation in existing information programmes, to magazine shows, quizzes, infortainment, and so on.

4. Given the decentralised nature of its information activities, the Commission is unable to provide overall statistics of this sort. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/23

(1999/C 142/027) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2550/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Protection against asbestos

Which Member States are preventing the Council ofMinisters fromadopting legislative measures relating to the protection ofpersons against asbestos?

Has the Commission any statistics for the last few years concerning deaths caused by the absorption of asbestos in the workplace in each ofthe Member States?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 1998)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the replies given by the Commission to written questions P- 1451/98 by Mr Skinner (1), E-1742/98 by Mr Whitehead (2), E-1950/98 by Mrs Pollack (3), E-2736/98 by Mrs Oddy (4) and P-2972/98 by Mr Skinner (5) on Community legislation, and measures in preparation, concerning the protection of the health of workers and the public from the health effects of asbestos.

The Commission has no such statistics. In the framework of harmonising statistics on health and safety at work and in particular on occupational diseases (EODS project), the Commission has launched a pilot project on the possibilities for establishing comparable data on recognised cases of occupational diseases. Data has been collected for the reference year 1995 with respect to 31 items chosen from the European schedule ofoccupational diseases including asbestosis, mesothelioma followingthe inhalation ofasbestos dust and complication ofasbestosis in the formofbronchial cancer. In total 6,698 cases ofasbestos related occupational diseases have been recognised in the Community in 1995. This Eurostat data base, however, holds no information on the number of cases ending in death.

(1) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 34. (2) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 75. (3) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 123. (4) OJ C 135, 14.5.1999, p. 108. (5) See page 64.

(1999/C 142/028) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2564/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Special category waste incineration plant in Biebesheim, Hesse, Germany

What is the situation in the various Member States ofthe EU regarding hazardous waste (special category waste) with respect to:

1. the amounts involved each year for the period 1993-1997?

2. existing or planned treatment and/or incineration capacities and landfill space?

3. free capacities in tonnes per year?

4. exports to other countries in tonnes per year?

5. imports from other countries in tonnes per year?

6. strategies to prevent or process waste (existing and/or planned)?

7. To what extent are there Commission directives, regulations or planned initiatives on avoiding special waste in Europe?

8. To what extent are there Commission directives, regulations or planned initiatives on recycling special waste in Europe? C 142/24 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 1998)

Statistics on the generation of hazardous waste and other waste, on landfills and incinerators in Member States as well as on imports and exports of hazardous waste are contained in ‘Europe’s environment: the second assessment’, by the European environment agency (1998). Data on free capacities for disposal are not available. Further data on the import and export of waste are contained in the annexes to the first report (1) on the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) 259/93 on the supervision of shipments of waste into and out of the Community (2). These data were not published together with the report due to their volume but the Commission will be pleased to make them available upon request.

Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste (3) states that Member States shall adopt measures to promote the prevention or reduction of waste production and its harmfulness (in particular by developing clean technologies and clean products) and the recovery of waste (particularly by means of re-use and recycling). This provision applies to all waste, and it is the responsibility of Member States authorities to put it into practice, through the adoption of waste management plans. In this context, the Commission would also refer to the implementation report of four waste directives published in 1997 (4).

Concerning specific categories of hazardous waste, Directive 91/157/EEC as amended by Directive 93/86/ EEC of 4 October 1993 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances (5) contains measures which have an impact on waste prevention and recycling. Directives 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT) (6) and 75/ 439/EEC of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of waste oils (7) also affect the handling of hazardous waste.

The Commission has recognised, in its review of the Community strategy for waste management, that the Community achievements in the prevention of waste generation are not satisfactory. In order to reinforce the principle of waste prevention, particularly as regards hazardous waste, the Commission adopted a proposal for a directive on end of life vehicles (8) on 9 July 1997 with specific measures aimed at preventing waste generation and its harmfulness and at recycling this waste. Finally, a communication on the competitiveness of the recycling industry (9) was adopted on 23 July 1998. This aims at promoting recycling and improving the competitiveness of the recycling industry. The Commission proposes a wide range of essential actions, to be discussed within a recycling forum.

(1) COM(98) 475 final. (2) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993. (3) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. (4) COM(97) 23 final. (5) OJ L 264, 23.10.1993. (6) OJ L 243, 24.9.1996. (7) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975. (8) COM(97) 358 final. (9) COM(98) 463 final.

(1999/C 142/029) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2597/98

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Progress with Greek national land register

The project to draw up a national land register in Greece, which is jointly funded by the Commission and the Greek Government, is posing a number of problems. Recently, in fact, the Commission wrote to the Greek Government asking for its comments on allegations that foreign surveyors wishing to take part in the project are being discriminated against in that the invitation to tender requires them to have formal qualifications and experience which is not required of their Greek counterparts. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/25

1. Will the Commission say what the take-up rate of appropriations for the project has been to date, what has been achieved with them so far, and what is the extent of the reduction in the project’s budget which has been decided?

2. Is the Commission in general satisfied with the management of the project by Ktimatologio A.E. and with the recruitment of a management consultant, given the continuing confusion over responsi- bilities?

3. Is the Commission aware that the law which is to govern the operation of the land register and which also provides for the possibility of land registry offices gradually to replace mortgage offices is two years late in being put before the Greek Parliament?

4. Does the Commission believe that the required transparency in the implementation of the project is being upheld given that a recent invitation to tender for land registry studies worth Drs 24 billion raised so many questions that the Minister responsible had to intervene and instruct Ktimatologio A.E. to comply with the principles of transparency, legality and equal treatment?

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

(10 November 1998)

1. At present, land registration is being carried out in 341 OTA (municipalities) with a total area of 8 000 sq. km. The cost of this work is GDR 37 283 million (about ECU 111 million). The budget for the µEnvironment¢ operational programme used for land registration was originally ECU 179,5 million but was reduced to ECU 145 million at the end of 1997.

Community commitment appropriations for land registration at present total ECU 64,4 million and payments to Greece amount to ECU 36,7 million. Expenditure on the spot is currently GDR 14 billion (about ECU 42 million), comprising 61 % of the amount for registration in the 66 OTA covered by the first allocation, 20 % of the amount for registration in the 54 OTA covered by the second allocation and 19 % of the amount for registration in the 221 OTA covered by the third allocation.

2. The Commission is in general satisfied with the management of the project, bearing in mind that the company¢s operations are still in their initial stages and it has not yet recruited all its staff.

3. The Commission is aware that the law on the operation of the land registry has just been placed before the Greek Parliament. It constitutes the second and final part of the legal framework required for completion and operation of the registry.

4. The Commission has received no complaints concerning the procedure for the award of the service contracts to which the Honourable Member refers and has no information concerning any irregularities during that procedure.

The Commission is, however, aware of a complaint concerning a procedure for the award of earlier land registry studies, one head of which was the treatment of foreign tenderers as compared with local ones. As a result of the answers given by the Greek authorities to the letter from the Commission mentioned by the Honourable Member, the commitments they gave and the withdrawal of the complaint by the complainant, the Commission is currently considering whether any further action on this complaint is required.

(1999/C 142/030) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2608/98 by Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Criteria governing budget headings A-3 0 and A-3 1

The headings under chapters A-3 0 and A-3 1 of the budget stipulate that, in order to qualify for the second half of their subsidies, the institutions of European interest listed therein should receive 10 % of the total cost of their activities from sources other than the European Union. C 142/26 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Various youth organisations have expressed concern at the Commission’s failure to define clearly the exact criteria determining the resources eligible for inclusion within that 10 %.

What is the precise nature of these criteria? Could the figure of 10 % be said to include non-cash assets acquired by these organisations, be they moveable or immoveable assets?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1998)

On the basis of the headings under Chapters A-30 and A-31, the Commission subsidises either beneficiaries’ specific projects or their overall activities. In both cases, the minimum cofinancing criterion of 10 % of the budget subsidised by the Community budget applies.

In the case of specific projects, this criterion specifically refers to the budget for the project itself and not the overall activities of the beneficiaries.

Where the overall activities of beneficiaries are subsidised, the organisation’s annual accounts are the official basis for calculating the cofinancing. Where the standard accounting rules are applied, duly recorded infrastructure costs are eligible for the calculation of the cofinancing.

(1999/C 142/031) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2621/98 by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission

(31 July 1998)

Subject: Threat to the badger (meles meles) in the United Kingdom

How can the Commission claim, in its answer dated 30 March 1998 (1) to Mr Doeke Eisma’s Question P- 0787/98, that the measures recommended in the Kreb report, namely the extermination of the badger in selected areas, would also benefit the badger population as a whole, given that only a very minute percentage of badgers is infected with TB and that partial extermination of the badger will not lead to the eradication of the disease among badgers?

Does the Commission regard total extermination of the badger in the United Kingdom as acceptable because the badger is indicated as the cause of TB?

Is not the credibility of European nature policy tarnished, given that the total or partial extermination of badgers constitutes an abrupt break with the current practice, based on European nature policy, whereby reserves are set aside in the United Kingdom for badgers, tunnels are built beneath roads to cut the number of badger deaths and entire badger families are provided with new habitats if they can no longer be managed in their old habitats because of urban developments?

Is the Commission prepared to reconsider its view that it is acceptable for a native protected animal species living in the wild to be exterminated because it may be involved in the spread of diseases among domestic animals?

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 129.

(1999/C 142/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2631/98 by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Threat to the badger (meles meles) in the United Kingdom

How can the Commission claim with so much certainty in its answer dated 30 March 1998 (1) to Question P-0787/98 by Mr Doeke Eisma that, since the early 1970s, the badger has become involved in the spreading of bovine tuberculosis in south-west England and Wales? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/27

Is the Commission aware that, according to the Kreb report, the involvement of badgers in the cycle of infection in cattle is not proven and that there is no indication of such involvement in any country other than the United Kingdom and Ireland?

On what evidence does the Commission base its claim that ‘serious public health concerns are at stake’?

Is the possible damage that might be caused by infected badgers proportionate to the number of badgers that would be killed if the recommendations set out in the Kreb report were applied?

Is the Commission not invoking too glibly in this case the provisions concerning derogations set out in the Berne Convention?

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 129.

Joint answer to Written Questions P-2621/98 and E-2631/98 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Tuberculosis (TB) is not widespread in all badger populations in the United Kingdom. However, where it is present, a high incidence is frequently found. During 1997, in badger removal operations, 27.8 % of culled badgers were affected overall, with 48 % in Sussex, 43 % in Hereford and 82 % in Gwent. The removal of these animals is clearly beneficial to the badger population as a whole. However, complete eradication of TBhas proven to be difficult.

The Kreb report was commissioned to obtain better information about the role of the badger in the epidemiology of TB, and to compare the efficacy of different disease eradication strategies. The report recommended that three options should be investigated: proactive culling before breakdowns occur, reactive culling in response to breakdowns and no badger culling. The British government has accepted these recommendations.

These trials will be carried out in areas at highest risk of repeated TBbreakdowns. It is likely, therefore, that a significant percentage of culled badgers will already be affected, and removal of them will reduce the level of infection, reducing the threat to other badgers, both inside and outside the culling area, and to humans through cattle. There is no suggestion that there should be a total extermination of the badger in the United Kingdom.

More importantly, it is expected that the resulting information will permit the United Kingdom to refine its policy towards eradication of TB. This will limit the extent of badger culling to the minimum necessary to achieve its objectives.

The Kreb report also concluded that the available evidence strongly supports the view that badgers are a significant source of TBin cattle, although it is not possible to state how large a contribution badgers make to cattle infection.

Although it has been assumed in the past that the strain of organism (mycobacterium bovis) carried by the badgers poses little threat to humans, further studies are needed to show this. At present, most diagnoses in humans are made on clinical grounds. This does not eliminate the possibility that some cases are caused by mycobacterium bovis. This gives rise to clear grounds for serious public health concerns, bearing in mind the severe, often fatal, nature of the clinical disease.

The Commission does not view the culling measures recommended in the Kreb report as contrary to or incompatible with European nature protection policy, in view of the limited areas involved, and the compensatory measures for badger protection which have been already taken in the greater part of the United Kingdom.

The Commission welcomes scientific studies that will assist in removing a source of disease for animals and man, and ensure that the extent of culling of a wild animal species during essential disease control operations is kept to a minimum. C 142/28 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/033) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2639/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Structural Funds and Community law

The fifteenth report on monitoringthe implementation of Community law (1997) states that there have been thirteen cases of violations (presumed and established) concerningthe implementation of projects receivingCommunity cofundingin Greece; these include five relatingto the environment and eight relatingto public contracts.

Will the Commission say precisely which projects are affected by the violations that have been established and what remedial measures have been taken so far?

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

(6 November 1998)

Of the five cases relatingto the environment, three involve a failure to carry out in time the environmental impact assessment for certain water treatment projects. The two other cases relate to waste treatment projects. They are currently beingstudied by the Commission.

The eight cases involving public contracts concern unusually low tenders and compliance with the principle of equality of treatment. The cases relate to infrastructure works in the fields of transport, health and water treatment in particular. Two of the cases have already been closed.

It is for the national authorities to propose and take corrective measures. The Commission is co-operating with the authorities so that such measures might ensure conformity with Community law.

(1999/C 142/034) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2649/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Shootingtests usinglive animals in Spain

In the Basque region of Spain munitions tests are being carried out using live animals, in order to investigate the effects of different types of ammunition on the animals’ bodies. In its answer to a question on this matter last year from Mrs González Álvarez, Mr Marset Campos and Mrs Sornosa Martínez (E-0561/97 (1)), the Commission states tersely that it is not aware of such incidents. The Commission goes on to explain that there is no Community legislation on this matter, and that Member States may therefore regulate it as they see fit. In the Protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam concerning the protection and welfare of animals, their protection is raised to the status of a Community task. It is stated therein that ‘full regard’ must be paid to the welfare requirements of animals in connection with agriculture, transport, the internal market and research. The only exceptions permitted in the Member States are those ‘relatingin particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage’.

1. Has the Commission taken the question from the above Members as an opportunity to seek information about the situation described therein, and if so, with what results?

2. Does the Commission share the view that shootingpractice usinglive animals has nothingto do with religious rites, cultural traditions or regional heritage?

3. What practical possibilities for the Commission to take action are provided by the above Protocol?

4. What view does the Commission take of the possibility of instituting proceedings against Member States for a breach of provisions of the Treaty on the basis of the above Protocol, and how does it judge such a possibility of bringing proceedings in respect of the actual case of shooting tests?

(1) OJ C 367, 4.12.1997, p. 28. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/29

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 1998)

1. and 2. The information provided by the Honourable Member would indicate that these experiments are carried out for military or civil defence purposes. In that situation the Treaty does not apply to these experiments at all.

3. The Protocol on animal welfare to the Treaty of Amsterdam establishes animal welfare as a fundamental issue,which has to be addressed when formulating and implementing the Community’s agriculture,transport,internal market and research policies. As far as the Commission is aware the experiments mentioned by the Honourable Member fall outside these specified areas and are therefore governed only by the applicable national legislation.

4. In the Commission’s view it would not be possible to bring successful infringement proceedings, whether based on the protocol or otherwise.

(1999/C 142/035) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2653/98 by Friedhelm Frischenschlager (ELDR) to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: EU drugs policy

The debate about the European Union’s future drugs policy is scheduled to continue under the Austrian Council Presidency,which will also see a conference in Vienna this autumn. The archaic law-and-order approach,which is characterised by exclusively criminal,police and military measures to combat drugs (even soft drugs) increasingly appears to be giving way to a modern,problem-solving policy.

What are the key aspects of reforms relating to drugs policy that the EU Council Presidency intends to propose in the second half of the year? Where the de facto toleration of the consumption of soft drugs is concerned,will the Council Presidency propose such a policy to its EU partners,on the basis of the positive experiences gained in Austria,the Netherlands,etc.? Will these proposals also include decriminalising the consumption of soft drugs,which is regarded in many quarters as a necessary precondition for therapeutic measures vis-à-vis drug addicts?

Where hard drugs are concerned,given the positive experiences gained in Switzerland and other countries, will proposals regarding the issue of such drugs,or of substitute drugs,under medical supervision,for therapeutic purposes,form part of the European Union’s future strategy for dealing with drugs?

What practical police measures does the Presidency intend to propose to combat organised drug trafficking and the international crime associated therewith? Have any such measures already been decided or (which is more important) put into practice?

Does the Presidency recognise the development policy aspect of the drugs problem (poverty in the producer countries,lack of market access for alternative products,etc.),and will it put forward corresponding proposals in connection with development cooperation and also foreign trade arrangements?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Council’s work on the subject of drugs under the Austrian Presidency has in particular been conducted in line with the undertakings entered into at the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly held from 8 to 10 June 1998. On that basis,the Austrian Presidency has developed a programme of work giving priority to a comprehensive approach that strikes a balance between activities aimed at reducing both demand and supply. C 142/30 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Emphasis has also been placed on fine-tuning − and defining − regional cooperation strategies targeting Latin America and Central Asia respectively.

Priority has further been given to implementing the two acts adopted in 1996and 1997, viz. the Joint Actions on the approximation of laws and practices and on synthetic drugs respectively.

Regarding the Honourable Member’s specific questions, it should be noted that:

− the Council has not examined any proposals on the issue, under medical supervision, of hard or substitute drugs for therapeutic purposes;

− the entry into force of the Europol Convention on 1 October 1998 and the impending start-up of that organisation’s activities will afford a new dimension to the combating of international drug trafficking and related international crime;

− as emphasised by the Honourable Member, the drugs problem has a development policy aspect; accordingly, work on that subject features centrally in the action plan for Latin America.

(1999/C 142/036) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2657/98

by Gianni Tamino (V) to theCommission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Plan to extend the airport of San Giuseppe in Treviso

The ‘San Giuseppe’ airport in the communes of Treviso and Quinto was built as a military aerodrome in the nineteen twenties in an area which was then far away from residential districts. After the Second World War both NATO (with the airport of Istrana) and the Ministry of Transport (with the airport of Venezia- Tessera, which is 20 kilometres from San Giuseppe) did not develop the ‘Treviso runway’, which was gradually surrounded and hemmed in by the growth of buildings, industry and housing in Treviso. The urban centres of Treviso and Quinto di Treviso are under the flightpath for take-offs and landings and residential areas begin at either end of the runway. There is now a project worth Lit.12 billion, already financed by the Ministry of Transport, for an airport four times the size of the existing one, with parking space for thousands of cars. The only justification for this project offered by Aertre (the company which administers the San Giuseppe airport services) is of an economic nature, linked to the enormous (but hypothetical) development of traffic at Treviso airport, which is to be a source of new jobs and wealth for the local economy. At the same time the company is trying to persuade the local population that this is not a totally new project but only a modernization of the existing airport and that no increase in the number of flights per day is envisaged. All this is contrary to the wishes of the neighbouring local authorities, except the municipality of Treviso, which because it owes the company Aertre Lit. 7 billion, sees this project as the only way of recovering creditworthiness.

Quite apart from the risks run daily by the inhabitants of the area, because of the danger of an air crash, the airport is a source of noise and pollution because aircraft fly extremely low over residential areas, dump unspent fuel on people and houses, and make deafening noise and vibrations which harm people and buildings. In the first 300 metres after take-off every aeroplane disturbs and shakes as many as 50 000 inhabitants. Above all, the airport is near to the Parco del Sile, a nature reserve which contains various areas of European interest belonging to the Natura 2000 network set up under Directive 92/43/EEC (1). The project to extend the airport has not been subjected to an environmental impact assessment which might highlight its risks and contradictions, since it is considered as merely a modernization of the existing airport.

Does the Commission consider that the project for the airport of Treviso San Giuseppe is compatible with the environmental protection of the Parco del Sile, which constitutes part of the Natura 2000 network, set up to safeguard biodiversity by conserving natural habitats and wild flora and fauna in Europe? Does it also consider it correct that a project on this scale should be carried out without being first subjected to an environmental impact assessment? Finally, does it consider that the project is compatible with the directives on noise, not least in view of the statements contained in the European Union’s Fifth Framework 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/31

Programme on the environment, which specifies that nobody should be subjected to a level of noise which may endanger health and the quality of life?

(1) OJ L206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 1998)

In the opinion of the Commission, based on the information given by the Honourable Member, the works to which he refers appear to be projects of the classes listed in Annex II of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1). Such projects should be made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where Member States consider that their characteristics so require.

The Italian authorities, following a Commission request for information about the project, have communicated that the procedure, provided in Article 4(2) of Directive 85/337/EEC, is under way, and that the results will be notified to the Commission. In the light of the above, it can be concluded that no breach of Community law can be detected at present as regards the EIA aspect.

As for the sites ‘Sile Morto di Vallependola Alzaia (IT3240009)’ and ‘Sile: sorgenti paludi di Morgano e S. Cristina (IT3240011)’, proposed by Italy in the framework of the procedure under Directive 92/43/EC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora and possibly concerned by the project, since the list of proposed sites of Community importance has not yet been adopted by the Commission, it is the responsability of Member States to adopt the necessary measures to guarantee a favourable conservation status of the proposed sites.

However, given that these sites have been proposed by the Italian authorities for the Natura 2000 network, the Commission is of the opinion that the opportunity to apply the procedures of Article 6 of Directive 92/ 43/EC should be assessed. In any case, the Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

On the question of noise, the most recent Community legislation is Council Directive 92/14/EEC (2)as amended by Council Directive 98/20/EC of 30 March 1998 on the limitation of the operation of aeroplanes covered by Part II, Chapter 2, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on Iternational Civil Aviation, second edition (1988) (3). This legislation provides for the gradual phasing out in the Community, between 1995 and 2002, of the most noisy aircraft as soon as they reach 25 years of age. This measure has a positive impact on the global noise load around an airport, without, however, imposing a maximum noise threshold.

(1) OJ L175, 5.7.1985. (2) OJ L76, 23.3.1992. (3) OJ L107, 7.4.1998.

(1999/C 142/037) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2673/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Assistance to applicant countries as regards external border checks

It has been repeatedly stressed that, if they are to qualify for membership, applicant countries must take over the acquis communautaire and hence the EU standards governing external border checks. The effectiveness of the applicant countries’ border policing is currently attracting increasingly voluble criticism, and the doubts whether the above-mentioned criterion is being fulfilled are mounting. That was why, when it addressed Parliament in Strasbourg on 15 July 1998, the Presidency-in-Office of the Council expressly called on the Commission to seek ways of helping the applicant countries to secure their borders, pointing out that the external borders of the 11 countries in question, placed end to end, were 6 600 km long and it was necessary to comprehend that order of magnitude. C 142/32 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

1. What weaknesses does the Presidency see in the external border checks and how serious a problem does it consider them to be?

2. What specific forms of help is the Council proposing to offer?

3. How much funding is it envisaging, and which budget headings should be used to provide it?

4. How can such aid be justified, given that other Member States have recently had to rely solely on their own resources in order to meet the Schengen criteria, even though, as far as Austria on its own is concerned − to name but one example − the external border as defined for Schengen purposes is 2 400 km long?

Reply (18/19 January 1999)

The Council is aware of the difficulties raised by the Honourable Member concerning the effectiveness of applicant countries’ border checks. It is clearly in the interest of the European Union to ensure that countries applying for membership apply the same standards as the Member States, as indicated in the Union’s position communicated to the applicant countries in March 1998 at the opening of the accession process and accession negotiations. To this end, a seminar which a number of applicant countries were invited to take part in was organised in October 1998. This seminar was the first of a series of events designed to give all the applicant countries the opportunity of transposing into their legislation the major provisions regarding border checks, in stages if necessary, but in any event before accession. Under the ODYSSEUS programme, several projects involving cooperation and the exchange of information on external borders with the applicant countries have been adopted. In addition, the areas of Justice and Home Affairs are included among the priorities identified in the accession partnerships, adopted in March, and among the twinning arrangements established between Member States’ administrations and those of the applicant countries.

The Council is not in a position to reply to Questions 2 and 3 put by the Honourable Member, as they fall within the competence of the Commission in the framework of the implementation of the PHARE programme.

(1999/C 142/038) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2685/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council (1 September 1998)

Subject: 1999 drugs strategy

The Cardiff Summit adopted a report on operations to combat drug abuse, including a drugs strategy for 1999 and subsequent years, and the Council and Commission were called upon to devise a blueprint for further action.

1. How will the Presidency-in-Office answer the above call?

2. What specific proposals does it intend to submit, and what progress has it already made in drawing them up?

3. An international conference on drugs will take place in Vienna on 5 and 6 November 1998. Who will represent the Union at the conference?

4. What attitude will the representatives take?

5. How will policy be worked out, and what role will Parliament play in that procedure?

Reply (18/19 January 1999)

Discussion of the implementation of the strategy adopted at the European Council meeting in Cardiff began under the Austrian Presidency. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/33

The discussion will be continued in 1999, notably in the light of a contribution from the Commission and the imminent entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty.

The European Union was not represented as such at the flagship event of the European Drugs Prevention Week held in Vienna on 5 and 6 November 1998.

(1999/C 142/039) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2689/98 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Limitation of citizens’ rights in involvement in the decision-making process surrounding the completion of the Khmelnitsky 2 and Rovno 4 nuclear plants in Ukraine

Is the Commission aware that the Convention on the Environmental Impact Assessment in a Trans- boundary Context (Espoo Convention) requires the ‘Party of origin’ − in this case the project sponsors of K2/R4 − to provide the same opportunities for public participation in the environmental impact assessment process to the public of potentially affected States as it provides to its own citizens?

Is the Commission aware that the Environmental Procedures of the potential co-funder of the two nuclear power plants K2/R4 with the Commission, the EBRD, require compliance within the Espoo Convention?

Does the Commission agree that the project sponsors, including the Commission, have done little to facilitate meaningful participation of NGOs and the public at international level?

If it agrees with the foregoing, is the Commission prepared to guarantee that the Euratom loan will be approved only if the Espoo Convention is implemented in full, namely:

− requests from individuals, citizens’ groups and local and regional governments for notification of the public participation process are properly respected,

− appeals to the project sponsors for public discussions in potentially affected states are met in full,

− that the Commission appoints an independent auditor to review and monitor the public participation process,

− that the Commission guarantees that no final decision will be taken on Union funding for K2/R4 until the Commission has received the opinion of Parliament on the appropriateness of EU funding for the project?

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

(23 September 1998)

The procedures of the European bank for reconstruction and development (EBRD) and of the Commission provide that projects with environmental impact must follow the provisions of the Convention on the environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context (ESPOO convention) when applicable. However, this is not the case for the K2R4 project, as it consists in the completion of plants under construction and, more importantly, as Ukraine is not a signatory to the ESPOO convention.

However, the Commission as well as the EBRD have encouraged Ukraine to engage in a broad public participation and consultation process based on openness and transparency and to supply in a timely manner neighbouring countries with the results of the environmental impact assessments.

Hence, this public participation process, responsibility for which lies with the project owner, started on 18 August 1998 and will last 120 days. The Commission will assess the result in due course in the framework of its Euratom loan approval procedure.

Finally, the Commission reconfirms its readiness to continue to keep the Parliament fully informed about the status of the loan approval procedure. C 142/34 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/040) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2712/98 by Anneli Hulthén (PSE)to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Agricultural aid for small farms

Aid to agriculture in the Community seems to be geared mainly towards larger farms. There are regions in Sweden where small and medium-sized farms predominate. Such farms will find it difficult in future to compete with larger holdings which benefit from support schemes. What prospects does the Commission see for increasing the support provided to smaller farms?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

The size of an agricultural enterprise is not always the appropriate indicator of wealth. Small and medium sized farms may, for instance, be specialized in certain production systems or provide additional services which allow an income per hectare or per animal significantly higher than average. Furthermore, families running a small or medium sized farm very often have developed non-farm sources of income. The influence of agricultural income policy is therefore limited in the case of small or medium sized part time farms.

While the Commission has on many occasions expressed its dissatisfaction with the way expenditure is shared between producers, it has proved very difficult to modulate payments in favour of small producers at Community level. Criteria that seem adequate in some situations have negative side-effects in others. For instance, large farms may employ many people and in this case size would not be an adequate criterion of modulation.

What the Commission has proposed in the context of Agenda 2000 is that Member States should be given the power to modulate direct payments according to the specific situation in every Member State but respecting commonly agreed rules. This is an application of the principle of subsidiarity, based on the idea that Member States know the real situation better than the Commission and are capable of defining modulation criteria adapted to their specific problems. Member States may decide to reduce the amounts of direct payments in cases where the labour force used on their holdings falls short of limits to be determined by the Member States.

The Commission also has proposed to introduce a proportional reduction covering all direct payments granted under common market organizations when the sum of these payments exceeds a ceiling of ECU 100 000. This will lead to degressivity in the direct payments big producers can receive per hectare or per animal.

Furthermore, the Community will continue to support structural adaptations in the framework of a renewed rural development policy. In this context, eligibility of part-time farmers for Community support will be increased significantly.

(1999/C 142/041) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2716/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE)to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Threatened ban on an Egyptian peace movement

1. Is the Council aware of the existence of an Egyptian peace movement?

2. Is the Council aware that the Egyptian peace movement and the Israeli ‘Peace Now’ movement recently issued a joint declaration on the Middle East peace process and that this resulted in violent protests in Egypt? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/35

3. Is the Council prepared, during the negotiations it conducts with Egypt in connection with the Euro- Mediterranean agreements, to insist that the existence of the Egyptian peace movement must not be threatened in any way?

4. Will the Council consider granting financial support to the Egyptian peace movement from the budget items earmarked for support for human rights and/or the development of civil society in the region?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Council is aware of the existence of several Egyptian NGOs in support of peace in the Middle East.

It has to be kept in mind that Egypt, together with Jordan, is one of the only Arab countries which have concluded a peace agreement with Israel, and that the Egyptian government is still active in promoting the peace process.

The association agreement being negotiated with Egypt is to contain a clause on respect for human rights and democratic principles, and a non-fulfilment clause under which one party may, in cases of special urgency, take the appropriate measures without prior consultation if it considers that the other party has not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement.

In addition, the Union will continue its bilateral dialogue with Egypt, in the context of which individual cases can be raised as appropriate, as well as the dialogue under the Barcelona process.

Given that Egypt plays a full and active part in the Barcelona Process and subscribes to the principles contained in the Barcelona Declaration, the Council will keep a close eye on the measures taken by Egypt to ensure diversity and pluralism in its society, which includes permitting lawful activities by opinion movements.

The third chapter of the Barcelona Declaration recognises the contribution of civil society to the development of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership and to promoting greater understanding between peoples in the region. Activities in this field can receive funding in the framework of the MEDA regulation, subject to specific European Community procedures upon presentation of a specific proposal.

(1999/C 142/042) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2720/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Exclusion of the Moroccan dissident Ibrahim Serfaty

1. Is the Council of Ministers aware that the Moroccan Government has refused authorisation for Ibrahim Serfaty, a Moroccan dissident who was imprisoned for more than ten years in Morocco and who has been living in exile in France for the last seven years, to return to Morocco?

2. Is the Council prepared to condemn the exclusion order issued by the Moroccan Government in 1991 and to ask it to allow Mr Serfaty to return to Morocco now and to confirm his civil rights in Morocco?

3. What measures does the Council think it might be able to take, in connection with the signing of the Euro-Mediterranean agreements, if the Moroccan Government should persist in excluding Mr Serfaty from Morocco and refuse to acknowledge his civil rights in Morocco?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Council shares the concern of the Honourable Member on the fate of the Moroccan dissident Ibrahim Serfaty. C 142/36 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The Council would point out that Morocco has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 12 of which states that ‘no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.’

The Council recognises that human rights issues are increasingly becoming a salient subject of public debate in Morocco, which is sustained by the diversity and action of Moroccan non-governmental organisations.This public debate is unmistakeably a sign of progress and appears promising for future concrete action.

The Council is encouraged by the willingness of the new government of the United Kingdom of Morocco to address questions of human rights and democracy and to continue the process of economic reform.This willingness was apparent in the most recent decisions on political detainees and missing persons which were made public by the Moroccan Advisory Council on Human Rights.It also notes the effort which is being made, with Union support through the MEDA Programme, to reform the Moroccan judicial and penal system, although this effort is still inadequate.

It is expected that the Association Agreement with Morocco will enter into force shortly.It should be recalled that this Agreement clearly stipulates that the respect of human rights and democratic principles constitutes an essential element of the Agreement.

The final provisions also contain a non-fulfilment clause whereby one Party may take the appropriate measures if it considers that the other Party has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Agreement, without prior consultation, in cases of special urgency.

Against this background, the Union will continue to work closely with Morocco both bilaterally, enabling individual cases to be raised, and within the framework of the Barcelona Process with the aim of furthering the achievement of consistent progress in the field of human rights and also of strengthening democracy and the development of civil society in general.

(1999/C 142/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2747/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(3 September 1998)

Subject: Extension of the hunting season in France − failure to transpose the bird protection directive in France − request for immediate measures

France is the only EU Member State apart from Greece to have failed to transpose the bird protection directive (79/409) designed to protect migratory species of birds, although the directive was unanimously adopted by the Council of Ministers under a French presidency.Open season for the hunting of water fowl has now been declared in France from the third weekend in July to the last day of February, although this is a blatant violation of the abovementioned directive.The Member is aware that the Commission has already begun proceedings against France on this issue, but the question of immediate measures still remains.

1.What immediate measures does the Commission intend to take to provide protection at once for migratory birds which begin the journey to their winter habitat in mid-August and those that are still breeding?

2.Is the Commission aware that without immediate measures successful incubation and the undis- turbed migration of the birds to, as well as back from, their winter quarters is endangered?

3.What further urgent measures will the Commission be taking against this scandalous law? When can definitive proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Communities be expected? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/37

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

1. As the Honourable Member rightly points out, in 1997 the Commission began infringement proceedings against France for failure of its hunting seasons to comply with the provisions of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. (1) The opening and closing dates for hunting in France do not guarantee complete protection of bird species during their return to their breeding grounds and during nesting and rearing. On 24 June 1998, the Commission decided to notify a reasoned opinion against France, which is the second step in the infringement procedure under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. In announcing this decision, the Commission stated that the proceedings pre-date the legislative changes which have been adopted by the French Parliament and that it feared that these changes, which consolidate the shortcomings of the system, may exacerbate problems regarding the French hunting season. (2) The reasoned opinion was notified on 5 August 1998 with a period of two months for compliance.

In addition, the Commission does not have the power to introduce urgent measures itself. Under Article 186 of the EC Treaty ‘the Court of Justice may in any cases before it prescribe any necessary interim measures’. Since this case has not been brought before the Court, the Commission cannot ask for urgent measures to be taken at this stage.

2. Yes.

3. Article 169 of the EC Treaty gives a Member State the opportunity to comply with a reasoned opinion within the period laid down in it. It is only at the end of this period that the Commission may decide to bring the matter before the Court if no measures have been taken to comply with the opinion.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. (2) Press release of 24 June 1998 (IP/98/562). .

(1999/C 142/044) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2757/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Subject: Riverside Housing Association, Merseyside

Can the Commission confirm that the Riverside Housing Association has received nearly £30 000 from the ESF apparently for training its own staff?

Is the Commission aware that RHAs Chief Executive is retiring early and has been given a ‘golden handshake’ of about £200 000?

Does the Commission consider, in light of the European funding that it has received, that this Association is making best use of its ESF grants?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

The Riverside Housing Association obtained £22,149 of European social fund (ESF) co-funding for one project that ran in 1997 under the 1994-1999 objective 1 programme in Merseyside. There is no indication that these funds were misused. The project involved the upgrading of the employees’ skills. C 142/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/045) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2758/98 by Richard Corbett (PSE)to the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Subject: Use of hired cars from third countries

Can the Commission confirm or deny that it has recently become illegal for a hire car from a non EU state to be driven in an EU country by an EU citizen?

Do EU tourists who have hired a car in Switzerland, but cross the border into Austria, France, Germany or Italy, face fines and prosecution?

If this is so, what possible justification can there be in such a Directive?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Under Article 719(11)(b) of Regulation (EEC) 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (1), persons established in a Member State may only place a hired vehicle registered in another country under the temporary admission procedure for the purpose of returning to the Member State in which they reside. This is not a new provision; it has been in force since 1993. The Istanbul Convention of 26 June 1990, approved by Council Decision No 93/329/EEC of 15 March 1993 concerning the conclusion of the Convention on Temporary Admission and accepting its annexes (2), contains similar provisions.

Persons using a vehicle registered in a non-Community country (such as Switzerland) in breach of the provisions described above may face prosecution and a fine as a result. The reason for this restriction is to prevent evasion of Community vehicle tax.

(1) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993. (2) OJ L 130, 27.5.1993.

(1999/C 142/046) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2766/98 by Giacomo Santini (PPE)to the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Subject: Application of a surcharge (’sovrapprezzo’) to imports of Community sugar

In its judgment of 21 May 1980, in Case 73/79, the Court of Justice of the European Communities ruled that Italy had infringed Article 95 of the EC Treaty by imposing a surcharge on imports of Community sugar, a provision introduced by the Interministerial Prices Committee (CIP No 3661 of 22 June 1968). The surcharge was deemed to discriminate between importers and domestic producers thereby entailing an unacceptable distortion of the principle of free competition. The surcharge was ruled illegal in that it constituted a charge which, ‘although levied at the same rate on sugar produced in Italy and sugar from other Member States, does not constitute a uniform imposition on those products’.

Will the Commission say:

1. whether it still considers the surcharge levied by the Italian state under provision CIP 3661 of 22 June 1968 to be illegal?

2. whether the surcharge paid by Italian importers should be refunded since it was illegally levied and could not be reclaimed? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/39

3. whether the body concerned (the Sugar Equalisation Fund) can, if necessary, ask importers to pay any difference between the surcharge paid and the amount of aid legally granted by the Italian state?

4. whether the state may determine the amount of direct or indirect aid granted to industry independently and without supervision by any other authorities?

5. whether the Sugar Equalisation Fund can, by means of retrospective application of the law, request a refund of the illegally levied tax if this has already been repaid to the importer?

6. whether importers will be subject to the burden of proof requiring them to show that the surcharge has not been passed on to other operators in order to secure the right to reimbursement as provided for in law 429/90?

7. whether the illegal nature of the surcharge can be deemed to be offset by the fact that it has been transferred to the consumer?

Will the Commission call on the Italian Government to annul/repeal Article 29(2) and (7) of law 128/90?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1998)

1. The Commission can only refer to the principles set out by the Court of Justice in its judgment of 21 May 1980, which stated that insofar as the ‘sovrapprezzo’ imposed a heavier burden on sugar imposed from other Member States than on sugar produced in Italy, it was a charge incompatible with Article 95 of the EC Treaty. However, according to the Commission’s information, Italy changed its method of financing the sugar sector in 1981 to comply with the Court’s judgment.

2. According to the Court of Justice’s rulings on this issue, Member States are, as a rule, obliged to refund taxes collected in violation of Community law. Such refund applications must meet the conditions laid down by the relevant national law as to their form and substance; however, these rules must be no less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (the equivalence principle) and must not render virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law (the effectiveness principle) (1).

3. The Honourable Member’s question is not clear; the Commission cannot give an answer.

4. The Honourable Member does not explain what he means by ‘direct or indirect aid’. As far as aid to the Italian sugar industry is concerned, the Commission is only aware of the aid which Italy is authorised to grant under Article 46 of Council Regulation (EEC) 1785/81 of 30 June 1981, on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector. (2) That aid was approved by the Council in April 1995, and is due to be gradually phased out by the 2000/2001 marketing year.

Italy must of course comply with Article 46, part of which states: ‘Pursuant to Articles 92, 93 and 94 of the Treaty, the Commission shall assess in particular whether such aid is consistent with the restructuring plans.’

5. In accordance with Court case-law on the recovery of undue payments, if the trader obtained a refund of the undue tax, the cost of which was borne by the trader, then the issue of repayment no longer arises as such.

6. With regard to the burden of proving whether or not the cost of a tax imposed contrary to Community law was passed on, the case-law of the Court suggests that it is for the national court, which is at liberty to evaluate the evidence in each case, to determine whether the charge was passed on in whole or in part. The Court has, nonetheless, stated that with regard to indirect taxes it is not acceptable to assume that any charge was passed on and to require the taxpayer to prove the contrary. (3) C 142/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

7. As the Court has stated, (4) there is an exception to the principle of reimbursement of taxes, charges and duties levied in breach of Community law where it is established that the person required to pay such charges has actually passed them on to other persons.

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that with regard to the Italian authorities’ interpretation of Article 29 of law 428/90, the Court has been asked in the ‘Dilexport’ case (Case C-343/ 96) which is currently pending, for a ruling as to whether a measure whereby a person requesting repayment is presumed to have passed the tax on (unless he or she can prove the contrary) is compatible with Community law. The Commission, for its part, has begun an infringement procedure under Article 169 of the EC Treaty, considering that Article 29(2) and (7) of law 428/90, as interpreted by the Italian authorities, is incompatible with Community rules on the recovery of undue payments.

(1) Judgment of 15 September 1998, in Case C-231/96, Edilizia Industriale Siderurgica Srl (Edis) v Ministero delle Finanze. (2) OJ L 177, 1.7.1981. (3) Cases C-192 to 218/95, (‘Comateb’), [1997] ECR I-165. (4) See especially Case C-199/82, Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v SpA San Giorgio, [1983] ECR 3595.

(1999/C 142/047) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2777/98

by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Prison sentence imposed on Akin Birdal, chairman of IHD, the Turkish human rights organisation

Is the Commission aware that Akin Birdal, chairman of IHD, the Turkish human rights organisation, has been sentenced to one year in prison for ‘inciting racial hatred’, although all he is guilty of doing is writing an article on a peaceful solution to the war with the PKK, on campaigning against torture at police stations and against the burning of Kurdish villages by the Turkish army?

Is the Commission prepared to ask the Turkish government for a clarification of this matter and to call for the release of Akin Birdal?

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

(15 October 1998)

The Commission is aware of the fact that Mr Akin Birdal was convicted and sentenced to a year in prison early this year by a State security tribunal. Following the judgment, Mr Birdal appealed to the Court of Appeal, and was not imprisoned. The Court of Appeal initially quashed the judgment. The case was sent back to the tribunal, which upheld its initial sentence. Mr Birdal appealed a second time to the Court of Appeal, and that case is currently pending. The Court’s decision will be final. At present Mr Birdal is in France, for medical reasons.

The Commission stresses that improvement of the human rights situation in Turkey and continuing democratisation are crucial to the development of relations. The Luxembourg European Council, held in December 1997, reiterated that strengthening Turkey’s links with the European Union also depended on that country’s pursuit of the political and economic reforms on which it had embarked, including the alignment of human rights standards and practices on those in force in the European Union. Despite Ankara’s decision to suspend all political dialogue with the EU, the Commission intends to continue to inform its Turkish interlocutors of the EU’s views on such issues, including that raised by the Honourable Member. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/41

(1999/C 142/048) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2805/98 by John Cushnahan (PPE) to theCommission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: Auto-Oil programme

Under the Auto-Oil proposals agreed in June 1998, leaded petrol will be prohibited in the EU from 1 January 2000, with the option of a derogation for Member States until 2005. Could the Commission inform me which Member States have requested a derogation and if Ireland is among those countries. Could the Commission also inform me of the criteria used to decide upon such derogations?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

Article 3, para 3 of the Directive 98/70/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 (1) relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Council Directive 93/12/EEC (2) provides that by way of derogation, a Member State may be allowed, upon a request to be submitted to the Commission no later than 31 August 1999, to continue to permit the marketing of leaded petrol, until at the latest 1 January 2005.

The Member State has to demonstrate that the introduction of a ban would result in severe socio-economic problems or would not lead to overall environmental or health benefits because inter alia of the climatic situation in that Member State.

So far, no Member State has submitted a request for such a derogation.

(1) OJ L 350, 28.12.1998. (2) OJ L 74, 27.3.1993.

(1999/C 142/049) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2818/98 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: Storage reservoirs in the catchment areas of the pyrite zone (Huelva)

In the wake of the disaster caused by the flood of toxic waste in Aznalcóllar (Spain), which has had extremely serious consequences for the Doñana area, does the Commission intend to urge the Spanish state to set up a second protection system for such reservoirs in other similar catchment areas in the European Union such as the pyrite zone in Huelva?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

The Commission will discuss the storage of pyrites at Huelva during the next ‘package’ meeting on environmental complaints and infringement procedures to be held in Madrid on 12-13 November 1998.

The Commission will not fail to inform the Honourable Member of the outcome of that meeting. C 142/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/050) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2819/98 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: EU-Japan cooperation in seismic engineering

The damage caused recentlybyearthquakes (Los Angeles, Kobe, Italy,etc.) has underscored the global nature of the problem of protecting structures from earthquakes.

During the visit made byCommissioner Edith Cresson shortlyafter the Kobe earthquake, the European Union and Japan decided to step up their collaboration in the area of seismic engineering.

On that occasion, an agreement was reached on collaboration between the Japanese Construction Ministry’s ‘Building Research Institute’ and the Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety of the European Union’s Joint Research Centre.

Collaboration has continued for three years, and has involved the exchange of information, scientific findings and personnel. Now the need to perform large-scale experiments for the harmonisation of design rules has been recognised.

In view of the damage caused recentlybyearthquakes, the need to tackle the problem of earthquakes by means of worldwide cooperation, the success of the current EU-Japan cooperation, and the fifth framework programme for research, which points out the strategic importance for the European Union of encouraging cooperation with third countries in the field of research and fostering inventions in order to bolster the EU’s international role, can the Commission saywhether there are anyspecific budget lines relating to the implementation of the fifth framework programme for research that ensure that cooperation will continue satisfactorily, or at any rate, how it intends to ensure that EU-Japan cooperation in this area continues?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

The problem of the protection of structures from earthquakes is recognised as veryimportant bythe Commission, which has funded substantial research within the 4th Research and development (R&D) framework programme.

It is foreseen to continue this support for the next framework programme through the generic activities on natural risks of the specific programme related to the environment. Moreover, as indicated bythe Honourable Member, an efficient cooperation with Japan exists presentlyin this field.

Until now, general scientific and technological cooperation with Japan is financed with the B67211 budget line (international cooperation in the 4th framework programme). The same possibilities will exist in the 5th framework programme with the B66211 budget line.

(1999/C 142/051) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2835/98 by Niall Andrews (UPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Sellafield

Is the Commission aware of the recent leakage into the Irish Sea from the Sellafield Nuclear Reprocessing Plant and has it made enquiries of the British Government on the matter? If so, what was the response from the British Government? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/43

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1998)

The Commission is not aware of any recent leakage into the Irish Sea from the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant.

Nevertheless, the Commission will seek further information from the British authorities.

(1999/C 142/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2838/98 by Niall Andrews (UPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Long-term unemployment

Will the Commission indicate what progress has been made in each EU State in tackling long-term unemployment?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Long-term unemployment in the Community has become an increasingly difficult problem to solve. Most Member States have experienced the emergence of a hard core of unemployed with prolonged unemployment periods resulting in loss of skill and motivation. The average Community rate of long- term unemployment increased from 4,6 % to 5,2 % between 1992 and 1997. In the majority of countries, long-term unemployment ahs increased during the same period. However, some Member States have achieved progress in tackling long-term unemployment, namely Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom and to a lesser extent the Netherlands. In all other Member States, the percentage of the labour force undergoing very long periods of unemployment has been increasing and in some cases (most notably Belgium, Greece, Spain and Italy) it has remained at very high levels (see table forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat General).

Successive European Councils meeting since Essen in December 1994 have agreed to intensify efforts in favour of groups particularly hard hit by employment. The long-term unemployed were pinpointed as one of these groups.

In 1998 Employment Guidelines, endorsed by the Luxembourg Joint Summit and subsequently adopted by the Council, two of the three Community-level operational targets deal with the prevention of long- term unemployment. They provide as an objective that every unemployed person should be offered a new start before reaching six months of unemployment in the case of young people and twelve months in the case of adults. The 1998 national action plans subsequently submitted by the Member States show for a large minority of Member States a clear shift towards prevention and activation policies with a view to tackling long-term unemployment. A more detailed description of policy tools in action and future policies to reduce the number of long-term unemployed is in the draft 1998 joint employment report.

(1999/C 142/053) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2839/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Future EU ports and maritime transport policy

In reply to Written Question E-3493/95 (1) of 15 February 1995, the European Commission stated that it had set up a task force on future maritime systems seeking to bring together research and industry in the maritime industries sector, which covers shipbuilding, maritime transport and marine resources (fisheries, aquaculture, energy). Furthermore, the Commission stressed the prime importance assigned to the C 142/44 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

regional aspect of the maritime industry and pointed out its close links with the regions via the AMRIE (Alliance of Regional Maritime Interests in Europe) and the CRPM (Conference on the Community’s Peripheral Maritime Regions). Likewise, the Commission’s Green Paper on ports refers to continued financial support for maritime transport projects under the 5th framework programme on RTD.

1. Can the Commission say whether the said task force still exists, and if so give details of its composition, working methods, aims and relations with the aforementioned regional organisations?

2. Can it say what guidelines maritime transport projects will be required to follow in order to qualify for Community funding under the 5th framework programme on RTD?

3. Can it say to what extent it took account of the CRPM’s position in drafting its Green Paper on ports, and whether it will do so in the future when formulating a port development policy for European maritime ranges?

(1) OJ C 137, 8.5.1996, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

The Commission set up the task force ‘maritime systems of the future’ in 1995. Its main goal is to ensure that research funding is closely focused on the needs of the sector. The task force is composed of Commission officials dealing with issues relevant to the maritime sector research programmes and is chaired by the Directorate general for industry.

The task force works closely with industry in identifying research and development (R&D) priorities for the sector and in participating in the preparation of the 5th framework programme. Thanks to the joint efforts of the task force and industry, a significant breakthrough for the maritime sector was achieved when marine technologies and transport became specific parts of key actions. The Alliance of maritime regional interests in Europe (AMRIE) participates as an observer in the work of the task force and it could be considered that the Conference de regions periferiques maritimes (CPRM), because of its privileged link with AMRIE and its frequent contacts with the Commission, is indirectly involved with it.

Access to Community financing for maritime transport projects within the 5th framework programme is ensured in particular through two key actions. ‘Land transport and marine technologies’ aims at encouraging the development and integration of knowledge and technologies specific to sea and land transport based activities, and ‘sustainable mobility and intermodality’ aims at ensuring the development of policy and operational options for an integrated, interoperable, European, waterborne, rail, air and road transport system, on a broadly intermodal basis, to ensure the mobility of people and goods.

The green paper for ports and maritime infrastructure (1) has taken into account, in many instances, both the specificity of peripheral regions in terms of port infrastructure development as well as the need to provide adequate accessibility to peripheral areas. This is specifically recognised in paragraph 17 by referring to one of the objectives of including ports in the TEN-T (Trans-European network − transport) which aims at ‘improving the accessibility of peripheral regions and strengthening the economic and social cohesion within the Community by enhancing the Community’s internal maritime links, paying particular attention to island and peripheral regions’.

Also in the field of the framework of port charges, it is recognised that a number of European ports are located in less developed and peripheral areas of the Community and they often constitute the only link to the rest of the Community, being centres of significant economic activity in their region. They are therefore important parameters in the Community’s cohesion policies which will need to be respected if the cost based charging system is to be given a more systematic application.

It is expected that the next steps to be taken by the Commission when developing the follow-up of the green paper will have to take account of these considerations.

(1) COM(97) 678 final. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/45

(1999/C 142/054) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2840/98 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Caulerpa taxifolia seaweed

Can the Commission say how the work to extract caulerpa taxifolia seaweed, funded by the Life financial instrument, has been progressing this year?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

In 1995 the LIFE instrument accepted a multinational project to monitor the expansion of Caulerpa Taxifolia in the Mediterranean (and not for its extraction). This was coordinated by the French scientific body known as the Posidonie Scientific Interest Group (SIG).

Up to 50 % of that project involving a total eligible cost of ECU 968 000, is funded by the Community. It comprises four activities covering the detection and monitoring of newly planted seaweed (public documents requesting evidence, predictive expansion model, progress reports on that expansion); the demonstration of seaweederadication techniques using in particular, hot brine, copper ions via electrolysis and ion-exchange membranes; the identification of caulerpenine decay products and of their possible accumulation throughout food chains, awareness campaigns directed at the public and decision-makers, and the training of scientists in Malta, Tunisia and Algeria to recognise and monitor the seaweed.

The project is progressing normally and is intended to end in February 1999. The project co-ordinator regularly publishes updating documents on their activities and on the expansion of the seaweed.

Of the most recent publications the following are likely to interest the Honourable Member:

− Meinesz A., Cottalorda J.M., Chiaverini D., Cassar N. & Vaugelas J. de, 1998 − Monitoring the invasion of the Mediterranean by Caulerpa Taxifolia seaweed: situation as at 31 December 1997 − LEML-UNSA Publ. − 238 pages (in print);

− Boudouresque C.F., Meinesz A. & Gravez V., 1998 − Scientific papers and documents dealing with the Caulerpa Taxifolia seaweed introduced into the Mediterranean. Tenth edition. GIS Posidonie publishers, Marseille, Fr − 66 pages.

It is also possible to contact the project co-ordinator direct (Professor C.G. Boudouresque − GIS Posidonie − Parc scientifique et technique de Luminy − Case 901 − F13288 Marseille cedex 09).

(1999/C 142/055) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2841/98 by Carlos Carnero González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Undertaking of July 1998 given by the Spanish Ministry for Development to the autonomous communities on the Madrid-Valladolid high-speed train route involving building a tunnel

According to reports in the El Mundo daily newspaper, on Monday, 27 July the Spanish Ministry for Development informed the Presidents of the Autonomous Communities of Castilla y León and Galicia that its preferred option for the Madrid-Valladolid high-speed train project involved building a tunnel more than 30 kilometres in length under the Sierra de Guadarrama. The ministry announced that it would thus be issuing a public call for tenders in October to enable the undertakings interested to submit their plans, undertake an economic and technical viability study and present clear conclusions. The President of the Community of Madrid expressed satisfaction with the central government’s decision. C 142/46 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

These revelations have once again caused great alarm amongst the general public, and particularly amongst various environmental groups, insofar as, like the options floated in the past, this route would affect natural areas of particular interest within the Community of Madrid. These same groups believe that thorough research into the environmental impact of building the tunnel along the proposed route should precede any economic and technical viability studies.

Having regard to Written Question E-0604/98 (1), the subsequent answers provided to it, and file No 98/ 2143 opened by the Commission, will the Commission say:

1. whether it is aware of the latest information as set out above? If not, does it take the view that the Spanish Government should have sent it that information in good time and in due form?

2. whether in any event, given the well-known characteristics of the outstanding natural wealth of the area concerned, it believes that an environmental impact assessment conducted in accordance with the relevant Community directives should take precedence and priority over a public request for economic viability tenders?

3. whether it takes the view that the conclusions of the assessment, rather than economic and technical considerations alone, ought to determine the Spanish Government’s ultimate decision on the Madrid- Valladolid high-speed train route involving building a tunnel more than 30 kilometres in length beneath the Sierra de Guadarrama?

4. whether it believes that both the Ministry for Development and the Government of the Community of Madrid should move swiftly to begin a public consultation with those groups affected and concerned by this problem?

5. what action it will take to look into the aforementioned facts and where appropriate guarantee full compliance with Community environmental legislation, in the light of the announcement that the said public call for tenders is to be issued?

(1) OJ C 386, 11.12.1998, p. 28.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1998)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that this project forms part of the Atlantic arm within the Trans-European transport network (TEN), of Essen priority project No 3, i. e. the southern high- speed train (Madrid-Vitoria-Bilbao-Dax).

The Commission is unaware of the new facts mentioned by the Honourable Member. Since it does not have in its possession any precise information on those facts the Commission is currently unable to answer the questions put by the Honourable Member.

In order to obtain all of the details on the facts mentioned in this written question the Commission has requested information from the Spanish authorities. In any case the Spanish authorities are required to implement Community law in respect of environmental impact.

(1999/C 142/056) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2847/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Update on Italian trading rules

With reference to Question E-0784/98 (1) concerning the legislative decree regulating trade approved by the Council of Ministers of the Italian Republic on 16 January 1998, which provides for the total abolition of the licence for small trading concerns of up to 300m2, the abolition of the registration requirement for traders setting up business and consolidation in just two sectors, foodstuffs and non-foodstuffs, of the 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/47

present 14 tables specifying types of merchandise, can the Commission say whether these measures violate the relevant Community directives and endanger free competition? In Mr Monti’s reply of 28 May, the Commission stated that it was looking into the question raised. Can the Commission say what the outcome of its investigations was?

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 129.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 1999)

In his question, the Honourable Member refers to his previous question No E-784/98 which dealt with four aspects.

1. With regard to the first point, the answer is no.

2. The new Italian trading rules liberalise the establishment of sales outlets of up to 250 m2 in towns with over 10 000 inhabitants and up to 150 m2 in smaller towns. This does not stop dynamic small trading concerns from cooperating with each other through joint purchasing groups or voluntary chains such as franchises in order to remain competitive in the market, as stated in the Green Paper on Commerce. It is this competitiveness which guarantees the survival of small trading concerns and thus secures employment. The regional adaptation and accompanying measures which are provided for in these rules will help support small trading concerns in their efforts to adapt to new competition.

3. In principle, the adoption of a legislative decree for the purpose of liberalisation is unlikely to constitute a restriction on competition between independent undertakings. According to the Honourable Member, the main purpose of the decree in question is to remove a barrier to entry into the retail distribution market. Leaving aside other considerations, and strictly from the point of view of competition, the removal of barriers to entry into a given market is a measure which generally has a positive impact on competition. In addition, Article 85 of the EC Treaty is in principle aimed at practices and decisions by undertakings (and not public authorities) which are liable to restrict competition between these undertakings and affect trade between Member States.

4. The new Italian trading rules aim to develop competition between small sales outlets. Insofar as they are compatible with the rules governing the freedom of establishment and the free movement of goods, as well as with competition law, the Commission has no specific remarks to make about them. It would also point out that it is the national, regional and local authorities which are responsible for regional development.

(1999/C 142/057) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2851/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Confidentiality of data in personal mobile telecommunications

Article 5(3) of the Italian Government’s legislative decree No 171 of 13 May 1998, published in the Official Gazette No 127 of 3 June 1998, concerning the confidentiality of personal data in telecommunications, states that, in all cases, the last figures of the number called are not shown in the documents sent to the subscriber.

However, this decree draws no distinction between fixed telephony and mobile and personal telephony, nor between families, individual citizens, companies or offices. C 142/48 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Replying to Question E-1462/97 (1) on 30 June 1997 Commissioner Monti stated that ‘where there are no good alternatives (...) allowing users private access to public telephone services without having their calls mentioned on bills addressed to other people (...), Member States may require the deletion of digits on telephone bills.’

Common Position (EC) 57/96 (2) of 12.9.1996 states that the aim of reconciling ‘the rights of subscribers receiving itemised bills with the right to privacy of calling users and called subscribers’ can be achieved by ensuring that sufficient alternative arrangements for communications and payments are available to such users and subscribers or by requiring ‘the deletion of a certain number of digits from the called numbers mentioned in itemised bills’.

Mobile telecommunications are, by definition, regarded as ‘mobile and personal’.

In view of the above:

1. Can the Commission say whether the provisions of the Italian law conflict with the rights of subscribers who receive bills with digits deleted for mobile phone contracts, despite the fact that they are already using a ‘personal’ system of communication, the confidentiality of which is also protected by the presence of the SIM (Subscriber Identification Module)?

2. Can it say whether, in this case of personal telephony, the ‘right’ to confidentiality has not been transformed, by the Italian law, into a ‘duty’ that prejudices the right to receive itemised bills?

3. What is the Commission’s view of digits from the numbers called also being deleted for fixed telephony subscriptions in the names of private individuals or families and not of offices or companies, given that there would be no possibility of their ‘having their calls mentioned on bills addressed to other people’?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 37. (2) OJ C 315, 24.10.1996, p. 30.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1998)

As explained in the answer to written question E-1462/97 by the Honourable Member (1) on the same topic, Member States have a certain margin of discretion with regard to itemised bills and the possible deletion of digits on such bills for the purpose of protecting the privacy of telecommunication services users.

The Italian authorities have recently notified to the Commission the Italian decree (2) implementing the provisions of Directive 97/66/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the telecommunications sector (3).

The Commission is examining this text and will seekclarifications from the Italian authorities on the questions raised in order to verify the compatibility of the provision to delete digits from itemised bills for telecommunications services with the requirements of both Directive 97/66/EC and of Directive 98/10/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 1998 on the application of open networkprovision (ONP) to voice telephony and on universal service for telecommunications in a competitive environment (4).

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998. (2) Decreto legislativo sulle disposizioni in materia di tutela della vita privata nel settore delle telecomunicazioni, in attuazione della direttiva 97/66/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, ed in tema di attività giornalistica del 13/05/1998 n. 171, Gazzetta Ufficiale − Serie generale − del 03/06/1998 n. 127 pag. 12. (3) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998. (4) Directive 98/10/EC − OJ L 101, 1.4.1998. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/49

(1999/C 142/058) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2857/98 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Inclusion of representatives from local and regional authorities in EUnational delegations

The Spanish Government has stated its view that representatives of the autonomous communities cannot be included within the governmental delegations which attend meetings of the EUCouncil of Ministers dealing with matters exclusively within the competence of the regions.

This view rules out the possibility of the closer involvement of local and regional authorities in EU decision-making, which should be achieved by enhancing the role of all local administrations in the EUin all decision-making at Community level.

Furthermore, this is tantamount to ignoring the principle of subsidiarity and stalling progress towards a new policy of transparency, both of which are vital to improving the Union’s decision-making procedure.

Is the Commission aware of the view expressed by the Spanish Government?

Does it believe that the opportunity exists to promote the involvement of the various regional authorities in intergovernmental decision-making in the Council and in the other Community bodies?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 1998)

The Commission takes the view that it has no jurisdiction in this matter. It feels that the question ought to be put to the Council.

(1999/C 142/059) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2859/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Regional cultural development

Measures in the field of culture help promote awareness of European cultural identity and instil a sense of European citizenship. Furthermore, they are a factor in endogenous regional development, which can play a prominent role in job creation.

Few resources are allocated to purely cultural programmes (at the end of 1997 the figure was a mere 8 % of all resources) or to Community initiatives to promote regional cultural development.

That being so, does the Commission not think that the budgets devoted to fostering and preserving European culture and to stepping up Community initiatives to promote regional cultural development should be increased?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Commission undertakes cultural activities under a variety of heads. It has been using specifically cultural programmes to support cultural projects with a European dimension for several years. Although the budgetary allocation for ongoing cultural programmes is small, as the Honourable Member points out, C 142/50 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

this has not prevented the Commission from prompting and supporting a large number of European projects (around 1400 projects for the period 1994-97), in relation to contemporarycultural creation Kaleidoscope programme), books and reading (Ariane programme) and to safeguarding the heritage (Raphael programme).

Article 128(4) of the EC Treatyfurther requires the cultural dimension to be integrated in other Communitypolicies. The Commission has accordingly,for the first time, launched pilot interregional cooperation projects in cultural matters in the context of programming under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund (1) for the period 1994-99, worth a total of ECU 15 million.

It must, however, be emphasised that the main reason for launching these pilot projects is to facilitate the exploitation of a cultural heritage that is in manyinstances underdeveloped bythe less favoured areas of the Communitybyhelping to bring them into networks with other areas in order to stimulate the learning process and transfer know-how and economic development. The pilot interregional cooperation measures in the cultural field thus find their place in the cohesion policy.

These projects are now running and therefore closed. No new calls for proposals are planned before the new programming period − 2000-06.

But it should be noted that the regional cultural heritage dimension as a means of creating or preserving jobs on a sustainable basis is integrated into other forms of interregional cooperation, in particular in the most recent call for proposals for ECOS-Overture (external interregional cooperation) dated 13 June 1998.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(1999/C 142/060) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2868/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Integrityof sites protected bythe Habitats directive

Do actions byLocal Authorities, such as new signposting systemsto encourage traffic to use a particular route, which lead to a significant increase in the usage of a road passing through an area protected bythe Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (1), constitute a development requiring an assessment of the impact on the site pursuant to the Habitats Directive?

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

(1999/C 142/061) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2869/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Integrityof sites protected bythe Habitats directive

Does an upgrading of a road that passes through a Protected Area under the Habitats Directive 92/43/ EEC (1), such that the road will be able for the first time to carry40 tonne heavygoods vehicles, constitute a development that might damage the integrityof the site and should it therefore require an assessment under the terms of the Habitat Directive?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/51

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2868/98 and E-2869/98 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Under Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive) ‘any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives’.

Only the Court of justice can provide a definitive interpretation as to whether actions of the kind mentioned by the Honourable Member fall to be assessed under this provision. However, it is evident from the wording of the provision that, before an assessment becomes necessary, there must at least be a likelihood of significant effects arising from the action. An action such as signposting or increasing the permitted tonnage of user vehicles which may have the effect of increasing the intensity of use of an existing road would not, in the Commission’s view, automatically require an assessment. Much would depend on the specific circumstances of the protected area concerned.

(1999/C 142/062) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2873/98

by Fernand Le Rachinel (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Substantial difference between the postage rates of the Member States of the European Union

The cost of subscribing to a newspaper or magazine can double according to whether the subscription is taken out in the country of publication and circulation or abroad; this difference, which is in no way justified by the distance, is said to be due to prohibitive postage rates.

Can the European Commission confirm this information, and, if so, how does it intend to correct these distortions of competition, which have an adverse effect on freedom of information and freedom to circulate ‘intellectual products’ such as newspapers and other publications?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Postage charges do account for a considerable proportion of the cost of subscribing to a newspaper or magazine, particularly when a daily newspaper is to be delivered.

The difference between national and intra-Community postal rates is due mainly to two factors. Firstly, high costs are involved in routing and delivering press material as priority mail outside national borders in such a way as to guarantee the requisite quality of service for such items, notably compliance with deadlines.

Secondly, some Member States grant preferential rates for the distribution of press material within the country. These special rates may therefore be reflected in the price of subscriptions taken out for that country.

Community rules are not contrary to the principle of preferential rates being granted in certain Member States for press consignments, provided that principle is not discriminatory. C 142/52 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/063) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2874/98

by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Action on illegal and harmful content on the Internet

Can the Commission define the concept of ‘ illegal and harmful content on the Internet’contained in budget heading B5-336 of the Community budget?

Can it also specify what action it intends to take in this connection?

Finally, does the Commission envisage extending the action with regard to the Internet to the field of publishing and the book trade?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

Illegal content is sometimes thought to be synonymous with child pornography. However, illegal content comprises more. It relates to a wide variety of issues including national security (instructions on bomb- making, illegal drug production, terrorist activities); protection of minors (abusive forms of marketing, violence, pornography); protection of human dignity (incitement to racial hatred or racial discrimination); economic security (fraud, instructions on pirating credit cards); information security (malicious hacking); protection of privacy (unauthorised communication of personal data, electronic harassment); protection of reputation (libel, unlawful comparative advertising); and intellectual property (unauthorised distribution of copyrighted works, e.g. software or music).

Harmful content means both content which is allowed but the distribution of which is restricted (adults only, for instance) and content which may offend certain users, although its publication is not restricted because of the principle of freedom of expression.

The actions that the Commission intends to take are defined in the proposed action plan on promoting safe use of the Internet − Communication to the Parliament, the Council, the Economic and social committee and the Committee of the regions (1). Four action lines are proposed: creating a safe environment; developing filtering and rating systems; encouraging awareness actions and support actions.

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission proposal for an action plan on promoting safe use of Internet. The Parliament voted on this in first reading on 2 July 1998 (A4-0234/98). Following a modified proposal by the Commission (2) and the common position of the Council on 24 September 1998 (3), Parliament will examine the proposal under the co-decision procedure.

The Commission does not envisage extending the action with regard to the Internet to the field of publishing and the book trade.

The Council has also adopted conclusions on 5 October 1998 insisting on the need, in order to ensure better prevention and action against child pornography on the Internet, to have coordinated measures with regard to technical, economic, audio-visual, social, judicial and police aspects. As regards in particular the last element, the Austrian Presidency has recently proposed a draft for a joint action promoting prosecution of offences and co-operation in this area. The Commission is fully associated with this work.

(1) OJ C 48, 13.2.1998. (2) COM(98) 518. (3) Not yet published. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/53

(1999/C 142/064) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2881/98

by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to theCommission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Need to establish a legal framework for integrated plant protection methods

A number of ecological and organic farming organisations have complained of the lack of a Community legal framework for integrated plant protection methods, a complaint upheld by the Greek Ministry of Agriculture.

What steps will the Commission take to remedy this shortcoming, given its harmful consequences for the health of greenhouse workers and of consumers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 1998)

The Commission is aware of the problems mentioned by the Honourable Member. The second workshop on a framework for a sustainable use of plant protection in the Union, organised in Brussels 12-14 May 1998 by the Commission and the Dutch ministry of environment, made specific recommendations for integrated plant protection methods, which are better known as ‘integrated pest management (IPM)’ or ‘integrated control’. In particular, the workshop identified the need to have better definitions for this concept, as well as integrated crop management (or integrated farming).

The Commission reminds the Honourable Member of Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1), which provides according to Article 2.13 ‘integrated control is the rational application of a combination of biological, biotechnological, chemical, cultural or plant-breeding measures whereby the use of chemical plant protection products is limited to the strict minimum necessary to maintain the pest population at levels below those causing economically unacceptable damage or loss’.

Since these integrated control methods are broadly acknowledged as environmentally-friendly agricultural practices, the Community gives financial support for a significant number of such initiatives, notably through the agri-environmental measures of the common agricultural policy, by Council Regulation (EEC) 2078/92 of 30 June 1992 on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside (2).

The legal framework for IPM does not yet exist at Community level but several Member States have already defined legal provisions for this production method. The linkages with the internal market and the quality policy must also be considered. The Commission is currently preparing a communication on the sustainable use of plant protection products which will take this issue into account.

It is broadly recognized -notably in the Organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) forum on pesticides (3)- that IPM or integrated control can contribute to pesticide risk reduction and more generally is a component of a sustainable agriculture. Concerning the health of greenhouse workers and of consumers, the Honourable Member may know that the Community legislation on plant protection products provides for a consistent framework aiming at a high level of protection.

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991. (2) OJ L 215, 31.7.1992. (3) OECD Pesticide risk reduction workshop, Uppsala, Sweden 1995 − OECD Food and agriculture organisation (FAO) Workshop on integrated pest management and pesticide risk reduction, Neuchâtel, Switzerland, 1998. C 142/54 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/065) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2894/98

by Wilmya Zimmermann (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Problems in implementing Article 8 ff. of the EUTreaty (citizenship of the Union,free movement)

The restrictive laws on foreign nationals of many of the Member States often run counter to the objectives of Article 8 of the EUTreaty. Foreigners are often discriminated against in relation to citizens of the country in question when it comes to rules on residence and social and labour law.

What is the Commission doing to eliminate the obstacles to freedom of movement represented by the Member States’ laws on foreign nationals?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Article 8a of the EC Treaty lays down the principle for the right for citizens of the Union to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. This right is subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the EC Treaty and in the secondary legislation enacted to give it effect.

In order to draw all the consequences from the introduction in the Treaty of citizenship of the Union, the Commission requested, in January 1996, the high level panel on the free movement of persons, chaired by Mrs Simone Veil, to identify the problems still arising in this area, to evaluate them and propose solutions. The panel presented its report in March 1997 and it has also been transmitted to the Parliament. Two months later, the Commission gave its second report on citizenship of the Union (1) in order to assess the application in practice of Union citizenship. In June 1997 the Commission adopted an action plan for the single market (2), endorsed by the Amsterdam European Council, including proposals on the right of residence, social rights and labour mobility.

Since then, the Commission has announced several actions which are set out in detail in a communication to the Council and the Parliament (3) dated 1 July 1998. A series of new initiatives to facilitate the free movement of persons within the Community and to strengthen citizens’ rights were also announced in that communication. These initiatives concern entry and residence, access to employment, social rights and family status, tax and financial status, cultural rights, the situation of third-country nationals and protection of the rights of individuals.

As regards social and labour law, the Commission in 1997 adopted an action plan for free movement of workers (4). It shows how to develop co-operation and reinforce responsibility and how to improve knowledge and visibility of the right to free movement, including upgrading administrative co-operation and information mechanisms, creating specific contact points for workers, making co-operation with the social partners more efficient and improving knowledge and visibility of the right to free movement.

Moreover the Commission has already proposed the revision of Regulation (EEC) 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (5) and of Council Directive 68/360/EEC of 15 October 1968 on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers of Member States and their families (5).

(1) COM(97) 230 final. (2) CSE(97)1 final. (3) COM(98) 403 final. (4) COM(97) 586 final. (5) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/55

(1999/C 142/066) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2906/98

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Drug-taking in sport

For the last couple of months the issue of drug-taking in sport has dominated the lawreports in Europe, especially in Italy. In viewof the fact that professional sportsmen are in every respect workersand that, pursuant to Directive 89/391/EEC (1), employers are under a duty to evaluate the risks and, on the basis of that assessment, take all necessary measures for the safety and health protection of workers, does the Commission believe that the use of pharmaceutical products to improve the physical performance of sportsmen, often with serious side-effects, is incompatible with the Community provisions safeguarding the health of workers?

In addition, Article 129 of the Treaty on European Union protects the health of citizens, which obviously includes all sportsmen, and requires the Union to ensure ‘a high level of human health protection’. Howis this compatible with the practice, common in Italy, of testing the effects of particular substances on athletes belonging to amateur or junior teams, using them as ‘guinea pigs’ to test the benefits of certain pharmaceutical products designed to enhance physical performance and to find out the optimum dosage by weighing up the positive effects against the side-effects with a view to their use by professional athletes?

In order to ascertain the extent of this phenomenon, it would be advisable to investigate in addition the ‘improper’ use of many pharmaceutical products by comparing the data on the production and use of specific substances which could be regarded as drugs but are nevertheless indicated in certain circumstances with the quantity necessary for purely medical use.

In the light of the above, can the Commission say what measures it intends to take and whether it believes that it should take action on this issue by means of a legislative proposal at European level?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1998)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concerns about doping.

Sportsmen/women are only covered by the provisions of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (1) to the extent that they are regarded as workers within the meaning of Article 3, which defines them as ‘any person employed by an employer ...’. Under Articles 5 and 6, employers must ensure the safety and health of workers in every aspect related to their work and take the measures necessary for the safety and health protection of workers. In this connection, employers must observe the general principles of prevention set out in Article 6(2), particularly avoiding risks (a) and evaluating the risks which cannot be avoided (b). Therefore, the use by sportsmen/women of pharmaceutical products with often serious side-effects in order to improve their physical fitness may represent a risk to the health of workers which the employer should, in the light of the first general principle of prevention, take steps to avoid.

The Commission believes that the consumption of drugs for the purpose of enhancing physical performance should be regarded as harmful and therefore be strongly discouraged.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. C 142/56 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/067) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2908/98 by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission

(18 September 1998)

Subject: Non-implementation of Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of environmental effects in part of a Member State

In its answer to Written Question P-2070/95 (1) the Commission stated that the provision laid down in the German Unification Treaty that no environmental impact assessment had to be carried out for mining projects if the authorization procedure for such projects had already commenced by 3 October 1990 was incompatible withDirective 85/337/EEC ( 2). The Commission also indicated that it had taken formal steps against Germany.

1. What kind of steps were taken against Germany?

2. What stage has been reached in the procedure and what further action is likely, especially with regard to the case of the Heuersdorf brown coal opencast mine?

3. How long is it expected to take to deal withthismatter?

4. What measures will the Commission take if Germany does not comply with the demands within the prescribed period?

5. Does the Commission know of similar cases, and how were they dealt with?

(1) OJ C 273, 18.10.1995, p. 52. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

As stated in the reply to Written Question P-2070/95 by Mrs Schroedter (1), the Commission takes the view that the German legislation is not in conformity with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment as regards inter alia the transition clause set up by the German legislation to transpose the Directive. The Commission therefore opened infringement proceedings against Germany in 1992. The Commission brought the matter before the Court of justice on 20 September 1995. The Court has not yet taken a decision.

Given that the case is still pending the Commission does not have any further information concerning this matter.

If the Court finds that Germany has failed to fulfil its obligation under Directive 85/337/EEC, Germany, according to Article 171 of the EC Treaty, will have to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgement of the Court.

The Commission is not aware of other cases where national legislation provides for transitional legislation of Member States withrespect to theimplementation of Directive 85/337/EEC.

(1) OJ C 273, 18.10.1995.

(1999/C 142/068) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2909/98 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Waste incineration plant at Casares

Has the Commission yet received a reply from the Spanish Government concerning the proposed municipal waste incineration plant and to the Commission’s concern to ensure that waste going to the plant and dump would be disposed of without danger to human health and environment? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/57

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

The municipal waste disposal facility at Casares (Málaga) is not designed to incinerate this waste. The facility will consist of a plant for composting the biodegradable fraction of the waste and a repository for inert waste.

An environmental impact assessment has been carried out, and preventive and corrective measures have been taken in accordance with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1). A vigilance and monitoring plan forms part of this assessment.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 142/069) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2917/98 by Jean Baggioni (UPE) to the Council

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Island regions and the reform of the Union’s regional policy

Can the Council say whether it hopes that:

− the Union’s regional policy, the reform of which is currently under discussion, will take express account of the amendments made to the Treaty on European Union by the Amsterdam Conference with regard to island regions (Article 130a and Declaration No 30 annexed thereto)?

− the Commission will regard these new provisions as the legal basis for a policy in which Community legislation takes account of the permanent handicaps linked to their island status and which includes specific measures in favour of island regions in order to integrate them into the internal market on fair conditions, as requested by the European Parliament in its resolution (A4-0118/98) of 28 May 1998?

(18/19 January 1999)

1. The Council is fully aware of the paramount importance of economic and social cohesion as one of the key elements of its policies to promote overall harmonious development of the Community and to reduce the disparities in regional development and the backwardness of its least favoured areas, including islands. As the Honourable Member rightly points out, this principle was embodied in Article 130a of the EC Treaty as amended by the Amsterdam Treaty which is in the process of ratification and in the attached declaration on island regions.

2. The Council would like to point out, however, that considering the overall scope of these provisions and the specific acknowledgement that Community legislation must take account of structural handicaps linked to island status, where justified, in order to integrate such regions into the internal market on fair conditions, as stated in the declaration, a wide range of policy instruments can be called upon to attain these objectives. One of these instruments is the reform of the Structural Funds currently under discussion in the Council.

3. One of the key elements of the reform is the reduction of priority objectives to three. The Commission is proposing to include under objective 1 NUTS level II (Eurostat nomenclature) regions whose development is lagging behind and whose per capita GDP is less than 75 % of the Community average measured in purchase power parities. The Commission also proposes to include the most remote regions (the French overseas departments, the Azores, the Canary Islands and Madeira) and certain areas in Finland and Sweden currently eligible under objective 6. C 142/58 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

4. The Commission proposal does not include islands as such; however, without making innovations in this context in relation to the existing rules governing the Structural Funds, it includes island regions which fall in the category of outermost regions or NUTS level II regions which meet the criterion of less than 75 % of GDP. Islands not eligible under objective 6 may moreover benefit from structural appropriations within the framework of objectives 2 (areas undergoing economic and social conversion) and 3 (development of human resources).

5. The Council has not yet reached a common position on the proposal.

6. As for the second part of the question the Council is of the opinion that the Commission would be in a better position to reply.

(1999/C 142/070) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2926/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Restoration of a historical building in Arcadia

The ‘Sanatorio tis Manas’ maternity clinic situated in Magouliana in the Pelopponese (Arcadia), which is a typical example of pre-war hospital architecture and has particular historical associations concerning the outbreak of tuberculosis in the years following the Anatolian disaster, has been left in a state of disrepair since 1938. All plans put forward by the regional and local authorities for the improvement, conservation and restoration of the building have encountered financial problems.

Could EUfunding be provided to carry out the necessary conservation and restoration works if a suitable recommendation were made by the Greek authorities?

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

(16 November 1998)

Following an application by the Greek authorities, the European Regional Development Fund part- financed a study under the operational programme for the Pelopponese region to examine the feasibility and viability of creating a multi-purpose tourist centre on the site of the former clinic.

The study’s findings offer little encouragement for committing public funds to restore, maintain and use the abandoned building, or to build the new roads needed in order to facilitate access to the site.

Clearly, part-financing of such works by Community funds could be approved only if the building, once restored, were to be run for purposes compatible with the objectives of the operational programme.

(1999/C 142/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2935/98 by Christoph Konrad (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Compatibility of paragraph 7a of the Road Haulage Act (GüKG) with the EUcabotage Regulation No 3118/93 and other Community legislation

1. Does paragraph 7a, on liability insurance for damage to goods, in the Road Haulage Act comply with the principles of the EU’s cabotage Regulation No 3118/93 (1)?

2. If so, on what grounds? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/59

3. If not, how does the Commission intend to put the matter right?

4. Do the laws of other Member States of the European Union provide for similar liabilityinsurance for damage to goods?

5. Does the Commission believe such provisions to be compatible with other Communitylaw?

6. Does it constitute an obstacle to the free movement of goods or of services within the internal market?

(1) OJ L 279, 12.11.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1998)

1. to 3. Yes. Paragraph 7a of the relevant German law obliges the haulier, in cases where loading and unloading both take place on German territory, to take out insurance for damages for which he is liable during anysuch transport. Article 6.1(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) 3118/93 of 25 October 1993 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers mayoperate national road haulage services within the Member State (cabotage regulation) (1) expresslystates that, in the area of rates and conditions governing the transport contract, the performance of cabotage transport operations shall be subject to the laws, regulations and administrative provisions in force in the host Member State.

4. and 5. Yes.

6. No.

(1) OJ L 279, 12.11.1993.

(1999/C 142/072) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2937/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Problem of homelessness in the EU

There are a growing number of EU citizens facing serious difficulties in gaining access to affordable housing. Within the Community15 million poorlyhoused persons are obliged to live in housing which is over-crowded and of a distinctlyinadequate quality.Poor housing often leads to other problems such as unemployment, ill health, crime and ultimately poverty.

Does the Commission recognise and realise the right to decent and affordable housing for all, both as an essential element of social cohesion and as necessaryconditions for economic development?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question E-532/98 by Mrs Ferrer (1).

In addition, housing and homelessness issues will be among those raised in the forthcoming communication from the Commission on social inclusion. The Honourable Member mayalso be interested to read C142/60 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

the report on the implementation of the 1992 Recommendation on minimum income to be published shortly, which also makes reference to actions on homelessness and housing.

(1) OJ C323, 23.10.1998.

(1999/C142/073) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2953/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Enlargement − freedom of movement

The Commission has probably misunderstood my question E-1276/98 (1). I was asking not about negotiating positions, but about other aspects on which I hope for more enlightenment at the second time of asking:

1. Does the Commission have any studies on southwards enlargement and the migration of workers produced before that enlargement? If so, what studies, and what is their substance?

2. Does the Commission have any studies on the implications of southwards enlargement in respect of the pressure of immigration?

3. Does the Commission have any studies into potential immigration after the forthcoming enlargement?

4. What are the Commission’s realistic estimates of the transitional periods?

5. Is the Commission assuming varying expectations and where does the Commission expect to see the variations?

6. What types of people does the Commission assume will wish to migrate?

7. Why will they wish to migrate?

8. How are they expected to be distributed among the target countries?

In answering these questions will the Commission draw in particular on data from the period after the presentation of Agenda 2000 last July?

(1) OJ C354, 19.11.1998, p. 87.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

Transition periods were agreed for the entry into force of the provisions of Community law on free movement of workers for the accession of Spain and Portugal to the Community. These periods were seven years, with a longer period of 10 years for Luxembourg, during which free movement of workers was to be progressively implemented. When in practice no significant migration flows occurred, but rather the number of nationals from Spain and Portugal seeking employment in the other Member States decreased, the Council decided unanimously to reduce these periods to six years (eight years for Luxembourg). As in all previous enlargements there had been fears of a migration wave, and as in all previous enlargements these fears did not materialise.

A number of studies and articles have been published concerning the present enlargement which attempt to assess the impact on future migration flows. The Commission is sending copies of two studies (1) direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament’s Secretariat. These explain the pull and push factors which influence migration as well as the difficulty of assessing in a scientifically and methodologically correct way the impact of the enlargement. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/61

As for the details of an eventual transition period the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to his Written Question E-1276/98. It is the Member States that formulate collectively the Community negotiation positions. No decision has been taken so far on transition periods with respect to the free movement of workers.

(1) ‘Ostmitteleuropa auf dem Weg in die EU − Transformation, Verflectung, Reformbedarf’ by the Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, published in 1997, and ‘Auswirkungen der EU-Osterweiterung auf den österreichischen Arbeitsmarkt’ by the ‘Osterreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung’, published in 1998.

(1999/C 142/074) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2955/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Viclas System

According to press reports, during its Presidency Austria intends to break new ground in the fight against crime, by the introduction throughout Europe of the Viclas System installed in Austria in 1997 for the identification and detection of serial offenders.

Can the Council answer the following:

1. On what legal basis is it to be introduced?

2. What actual form does the system take?

3. What legal data protection precautions does it contain?

4. What progress has been made in the negotiations?

5. Has there been any opposition to the plan?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Council has not been seized with any proposal relating to the so-called Viclas system and has no information on the subject other than that the Austrian Presidency organised a seminar in Vienna from 23 to 27 November 1998 to explain the features of the system to experts of the Member States.

(1999/C 142/075) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2957/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Destruction of ancient monument in Izmir

One of the most important buildings of the late Hellenist/early Roman period in Izmir has been totally destroyed by work to build an underground railway in that Turkish city.

During tunnelling work in the Tsangaya district of Izmir, an ancient public building was discovered at a depth of some 20 metres with fluted columns and Corinthian-like capitals made of white marble.

This building (which in all probability was the Temple of the Goddess Athina) is now a pile of rubble, as not even the archaeologists were allowed to intervene.

This incident demonstrates − yet again − how little the Turkish authorities are interested in preserving the culture of the peoples who once flourished on the territory of present-day Turkey, and it attests to the contempt in which they hold the monuments that are part of the European cultural heritage. C 142/62 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

What action will the Commission take to ensure that Turkey finally begins to respect and protect all the monuments of ancient and later European civilizations located within its boundaries, which are under severe threat from the disastrous policies pursued by that country in its total indifference towards their conservation and preservation?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concern about the monument of the late Helenistic or early Roman period found during the excavations for the construction of the metro in the district of Tsankayia of the city of Smyrna.

As the Commission has no competence in the field, it can only recall that Turkey, like all signatories of United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organisation (Unesco) conventions, has specific obligations as to the protection of antiquities. The Commission, therefore expresses the wish that the Turkish authorities undertake all appropriate measures to ensure the protection of the monument in question and its preservation for future generations.

Furthermore, the Commission has raised the issue in its regular contacts with the Turkish authorities.

(1999/C 142/076) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2963/98 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Drawing pensions in pesetas in Spain

Under the plans for the launch of the euro drawn up by the Spanish Secretary of State for Social Security, Spanish pensioners will, from January 1999, receive information relating to their pensions in euros and pesetas and those who wish to do so will be able to continue to draw their pensions in pesetas until 6 June 2002.

This measure has been greeted with widespread satisfaction by Spanish pensioners who have, in various ways, expressed their concerns about the new currency and their difficulties in understanding the whole process which will require them, in the last years of their lives, to alter age-old customs concerning their currency and methods of payment.

Does the Commission agree that it should introduce measures of this nature in order to reassure this section of the community, give them confidence in the changeover to the single currency and encourage them to believe that they will not suffer any disadvantage and that, at the end of the day, the Commission has not forgotten pensioners and is considering the impact the arrival of the euro may have on their lives?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1998)

The needs of the pensioners are particularly important and the Commission thanks the Honourable Member for bringing the example of dual display to its attention.

The Commission does indeed consider that dual displays of prices and other monetary amounts will greatly facilitate the transaction to the euro for consumers of all sorts, and issued a recommendation on dialogue, monitoring and information to facilitate the transition to the Euro (1). The intention was to lay down a standard of good practice and to describe when dual display should be used. For example the Commission recommends that dual displays should form part of an overall communications strategy to facilitate the switchover of consumers and employees to the euro. Furthermore dual displays on ‘benchmark indicators’should begin early in the transition period. The idea of putting the euro equivalents of pensions paid in national currency units is a natural application of these recommendations made by the Commission.

(1) C(1998) 961 final. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/63

(1999/C 142/077) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2966/98 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Electronic eavesdropping

According to the French magazine Marianne,the French secret service carries out electronic eavesdropping in America and Europe. The magazine reports that the Germans buy these services from the French.

Is the Commission aware of such activity,which is reminiscent of the Echelon system operated by the US NSA and used by GCHQ in England and is likely to constitute a violation of laws on individual liberty? What will the Commission do to safeguard citizens’ rights?

Will the Commission soon reply to the priority question which I tabled several months ago (time limit for reply: 1 month) concerning the Echelon system?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1998)

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission’s answer to his written question P-1894/98,( 1) which was given on 29 September 1998.

(1) See page (à compléter svp).

(1999/C 142/078) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2970/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Infringement of the Directive on the award of public service contracts

With reference to my earlier question E-4217/97 (1),the Commission’s reply of 16 February 1998 and DG XV’s note No 4833,addressed to the leaders of the minority parties on Mantua town council,which announces the Commission’s intention to take no further action on their complaint in view of the information supplied by the Italian Government,could the Commission state whether:

1. it is aware of the successive petitions lodged by the leader of the opposition on the town council with a view to precipitating further inquiries?

2. on the basis of the facts alleged in those successive statements,it agrees that the information provided by the Government is incomplete and inaccurate?

3. it agrees that it would be reprehensible to condone a substantive infringement of Directive 92/50 (2), which might set a regrettable precedent as regards the need for strict compliance with the rules governing the award of public service contracts?

(1) OJ C 354,19.11.1998,p. 2. (2) OJ L 209,24.7.1992,p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

1. The Commission has examined the letter it received from the opposition councillors on Mantua town council in response to the communication announcing its intention to take no further action on this affair.

2. After studying the above-mentioned letter in detail,the Commission did not feel that it contained any convincing new information which might cast doubt on the statements made by the Italian authorities. C 142/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

3. The Commission felt that there were no grounds for establishing the existence of alleged infringements of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (1), and therefore decided on 7 October 1998 that no further action would be taken.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(1999/C 142/079) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2972/98 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Chrysotile Asbestos

Given that 10,000s of workers die each year from asbestos related diseases, there is genuine concern across the EU that not enough action has been taken at a European level to halt the use, production and marketing of white asbestos.

Can the Commission confirm that the Plenary session of the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (CSTEE) on the 14-15 September, adopted a formal opinion in which Chrysotile Asbestos was found to be more dangerous than its substitutes?

In the light of these findings, does the Commission agree that rapid action is required and that the next logical step is a European ban on Chrysotile Asbestos, perhaps taking the form of a technical amendment to existing legislation which already covers the use, production and marketing of other forms of asbestos, which would be speedier and could therefore save lives more urgently?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 1998)

The scientific committee on toxicology, ecotoxicology and the environment (CSTEE) opinion on the comparative risk between chrysotile asbestos and the three main fibrous substitutes for the remaining uses of chrysotile (cellulose fibres, polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fibres and p-aramid fibres) reads as follows:

Both for the induction of lung and pleural cancer and lung fibrosis − i.e. the end point conditions investigated to a greater extent − and for other effects, it is unlikely that either cellulose, PVA or p-aramid fibres pose an equal or greater risk than chrysotile asbestos. With regard to carcinogenesis and induction of lung fibrosis, the CSTEE has reached a consensus that the risk is likely to be lower.

This opinion complements the SCTEE’s conclusion of 9 February 1998 that ‘it may be appropriate in the absence of definitive information to assume that there is no safe dose of chrysotile’. This conclusion was confirmed in the CSTEE’s opinion of 15 September 1998.

However, it is important to note that the potential hazards of other non-fibrous materials, like steel or PVC which can replace pressure pipes, were outside the scope of the CSTEE opinion and that the CSTEE ‘recommends expansion of research in the areas of toxicology and epidemiology of the substitute fibres as well as in the technology of development of new, thicker (less respirable) fibres’.

Nevertheless, on the basis of the current knowledge of the science, the Commission has drawn up a draft directive which would ban chrysotile asbestos, with certain exceptions and transitional arrangements. The draft Commission directive will be discussed with Member States and industry experts in a meeting arranged for 29 October 1998. Depending on the outcome of this discussion, it could be submitted to the voting committee by the end of the year. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/65

(1999/C 142/080) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2979/98 by John McCartin (PPE)to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Clothing sector

Is the Commission aware of the continuing decline in the clothing sector because of the industry relocating to developing countries, (a recent example of which is the ‘Fruit of the Loom’, an American company based in Co. Donegal, Ireland deciding to relocate to Morocco − with the loss of 300 jobs and 1500 employees put on short time) and is the Commission considering any plans to arrest this trend?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

The relocation of industrial activities from Europe to third countries is taking place against the background of strong economic growth and competition at world level. Over the last few years, textile and clothing companies have come up with strategies for the internationalisation of their production so as to better serve their worldwide interests. This has been happening more in the clothing sector than in the textile sector.

The Commission is convinced that this trend cannot be slowed down by administrative action. Furthermore, protectionist measures would be neither a truly feasible nor a profitable way of eliminating the causes. Relocation could be reduced by applying the Community measures aimed at increasing the competitiveness of the textile and clothing industry. The Commission’s ‘Plan of action to increase the competitiveness of the European textile and clothing industry’ (1) in particular provides a framework for coordinating all Community schemes to boost the competitive advantages of European companies in this sector.

With regard to economic cooperation strategy (e.g. Asiainvest, Alinvest, JOP, MEDA projects, ECIP and the Centre for Industrial Development), the Commission encourages projects aimed at strengthening the European sector in third country markets in terms of their potential impact on Community employment.

As regards the company ‘Fruit of the Loom’, the Commission is not aware of any Community assistance having been granted.

(1) COM(97) 454 final.

(1999/C 142/081) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2997/98 by Franz Linser (NI)to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the Brenner base-level tunnel project

In its White Paper ‘A strategy for revitalising the Community’s railways’ the Commission stressed that greater use of the railways as an economic alternative to road transport would be an effective way of combating the problem of heavy traffic volumes. The province of Tirol is the region of the European Union most heavily affected by Alpine transit. It is planned in the framework of the TENs to build a Brenner base-level tunnel, which should enable a large part of the goods and passenger traffic that passes through the Tirol to be moved to the railways.

1. In the view of the Commission, has the time now come to start building the Brenner basis-level tunnel?

2. If so, how are the access routes leading through Italy and Germany to the tunnel to be created?

3. If not, what are the reasons not to begin construction as soon as possible, and when will building begin? C 142/66 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

The Community Guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (Decision No 1692/96/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 23 July 1996 (1)), which constitute a general reference framework intended to encourage the Member States in carrying out projects of common interest, foresee the construction of a new high-speed railway line (in addition to the existing railway line) from the German/Austrian border (Kufstein), via Wörgl, Innsbruck, Austrian/Italian border (Brenner pass) to Fortezza. This forms part of one of the 14 priority projects adopted by the European Council at Essen.

Following joint declarations by the governments of the Member States concerned and comprehensive feasibility studies, Innsbruck and Fortezza are to be linked through the Brenner base tunnel. This tunnel project, as well as the upgrading of the access routes to it, constitutes a long-term project which will be implemented in stages, depending on capacity requirements. While for the first stage (the Kufstein − Innsbruck section) construction work is planned to start in 1999, for the Brenner base tunnel all the technical design studies (Baureifplanung) have still to be carried out before works can begin. This phase, including extensive geological and geotechnical investigations, is essential for the granting of building permission by the relevant Italian and Austrian authorities.

The German, Italian and Austrian governments and the Commission have agreed that these studies should be started as soon as possible. The necessary preparations are currently in hand. The Commission is satisfied that all parties involved are making every effort to carry out the essential design phase as quickly and efficiently as possible so that construction can start as soon as possible.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.

(1999/C 142/082) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3004/98

by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: The discovery of pollutants indicated as flame retardants in sperm whales which normally stay and feed in deep waters

1. Is the Commission familiar with flame retardants, a group of chemical compounds which are used at relatively high concentrations in electronic equipment such as computers and television sets?

2. Is the Commission familiar with a Dutch study (published in Nature of 2 July 1998) showing that two chemical groups of flame retardants, polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PDEs), are present in sperm whales which normally stay and feed in deep water, indicating that these compounds have reached deep ocean waters?

3. Does the Commission acknowledge that these substances are very similar in behaviour and toxicity to well-known environmental contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dichlorodi- phenyltrichloroethane (DDT), substances which are banned in the EU Member States? If not, why?

4. Does the Commission agree that the results of this study indicate that these flame retardants, which enter the atmosphere, rivers and sea waters, probably through insufficient burning in waste incinerators, are accumulating in the environment at such speed that they could become a serious threat to the health of humans and animals if no measures are taken quickly? If not, why? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/67

5. If so, can the Commission indicate what measures it will take to prevent further accumulation of these toxic substances in the environment?

6. Would the Commission be willing to ban these groups of flame retardants?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 1998)

The Commission is familiar with flame retardants. Indeed, the use of certain brominated flame retardants in certain textile articles was prohibited many years ago. Directive 79/663 (1) prohibits use of Tris(2,3 − dibromopropyl) phosphate and Directive 83/264 (2) prohibits the use of Tris-aziridinyl phosphinoxide and all ten polybrominated biphenyls for this purpose. In addition, the Commission proposed already in 1991 (COM(91) 7 final) (3) to ban the marketing of all ten brominated diphenyl ethers. However, the Parliament chose not to give an opinion during the first reading and the Commission decided eventually in 1995 to withdraw its proposal. Nevertheless, the flame retardant industry has since made a voluntary commitment to the Orgaisation for economic cooperation and development to better control the use of the brominated diphenyl ethers.

Council Regulation (EEC) 793/93 (4) on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances provides a general programme to assess the risks of chemicals and to identify the needs for risk reduction. Currently the polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs) are not being produced in Europe in high volumes, whereas under this Regulation three polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are being assessed (Bis(pentabromophenyl) ether (DBDPE) (1163-19 − 5) Rapporteur: France and United Kingdom, Diphenyl ether, octabromo derivate (OBDPE) (32536-52 − 0) Rapporteur: France and United Kingdom, Diphenyl ether, pentabromo derivate (PBDPE) (32534-81 − 9) Rapporteur: United Kingdom). The parts of the risk assessment reports related to the environment of all three substances have been discussed and agreed by the competent technical committee. The conclusions were that for the atmospheric ecosystems, no need was seen for further risk reduction measures. For the aquatic, sediment and soil ecosystems, there was a need for additional eco-toxicity testing in order to establish the extent of the potential risk and thereby address the potential need and extent of further risk reduction measures. For the accumulation of the chemicals through the food chain and their potential effects on higher food chain species, it was concluded that under normal use and disposal practices for DBDPE and OBDPE no further risk reduction measures are needed. A potential concern was indicated for PBDPE. In order to clarify this concern further information on releases of the chemical from specific uses has been requested. Discussions within the competent technical committee on the assessment of risks to human health are currently in progress. The recent information, including the study published in Nature, has been forwarded to the Member State rapporteur for evaluation and possible inclusion.

There are similarities between these compounds and DDT and PCBs. However, there are also differences. The three compounds are all very lipophilic, but only PBDPE is being considered for classification as dangerous to the environment. A testing programme has been recommended to further define the toxicity profiles of all three chemicals in relation to potential human health effects.

The risk assessment reports conclude that emissions of the flame retardants from incineration processes will be near zero. The potential pathways leading to environmental concentrations of the three brominated flame retardants are currently under investigation by the technical committee. When the risk assessment reports have been finalised, and, if necessary, the relevant results submitted to the scientific committee for toxicity, eco-toxicity and environment, risk reduction measures will be recommended in those areas where concern has been indicated. This will take into account the potential concern for both humans and the environment.

(1) OJ L 197, 3.8.1979. (2) OJ L 147, 6.6.1983. (3) OJ C 46, 22.2.1991. (4) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993. C 142/68 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/083) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3006/98

by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Pego-Oliva marsh

The Commission will be aware of the background concerning the Pego-Oliva marsh owing to the previous questions tabled by the author. The repeated and flagrant breach of both Community and national law is causing irreparable damage whilst no authority with the power to stop it is taking any action.

The Pego-Oliva marsh is the second most important wetland in the Community of Valencia. It has been designated a Special Protection Zone (SPZ) pursuant to Directive 79/409/EEC (1) on birds and has been in receipt of funding from the Life Nature programme since 1992.

The repeated and flagrant violation of Community law and the law of the Autonomous Community in this field, in the form of water-extraction works (three water-extraction pumps are currently in operation despite court orders banning them) is causing more damage to this nature reserve each day since, once the land has been drained, it is intensively farmed with the massive use of pesticides, which in turn contaminate the surface and ground water. Other factors, such as the fire which broke out on 13 September 1998 in the area surrounding the marsh, are also contributing to the degradation. All this demonstrates the extraordinary speculative pressures to which the Mediterranean marshes are subject.

In view of the fact that the Commission has taken an interest in this matter, has informed the Pego municipality, which is responsible for authorising drainage work, that the funding from LIFE could be suspended and has sent representatives to visit the zone.

1. What action has the Commission taken in the meantime?

2. Can the Commission take action against the Spanish Government and the Government of the Autonomous Community for failing to enforce the law?

3. What effective measures can the Commission take to stop these infringements going unpunished and can legality be restored?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

The Pego-Oliva marshes are an important natural site which is deteriorating as a result of problems resulting from illegal agricultural practices.

The Pego-Oliva marshes have been classified as a special protection area by the Spanish authorities pursuant to Article 4 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. The obligations on Member States pursuant to Article 6 paragraph 2 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) are as follows:

Member States shall take appropriate steps to avoid, in the special areas of conservation, the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species as well as disturbance of the species for which the areas have been designated, in so far as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives of this Directive.

This obligation also applies to special protection areas pursuant to Article 7 of Directive 92/43/EEC. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/69

The Commission has accordingly decided to open an own initiative case (2) and requested the observations of the Spanish authorities on measures taken to stop the deterioration of the site. The answer of the Spanish authorities explained that all administrative and legal measures to stop deterioration of the site,including legal action before the courts,have been taken. In the light of the above information,the Commission considers that no breach of Community law can be identified in this case since the authorities have fulfilled their obligations pursuant to Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC,taking appropriate action under Spanish law to stop the deterioration of the site.

(1) OJ L 206,22.7.1992. (2) Case B-98/2014.

(1999/C 142/084) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3008/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE)to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Discriminatory rise in insurance rates for Italian moped owners

In Italy,the third party insurance rates for mopeds recently rose by up to 300 % with respect to last year’s rates. The Italian Association of Insurance Companies,ANIA,explained this highly controversial increase by means of vague allusions to the state of the market,including the increase in the number of accidents and the cost of claims. However,in view of the fact that this increase was across the board,there is good reason to suspect that the insurance companies came to an agreement among themselves,which,if true,is likely to undermine the workings of the free market and the principle of free competition. Furthermore, according to some press reports,moped owners are not allowed to take out insurance with other European companies,thus preventing those companies from competing on an equal footing,in clear violation of Community rules on the single market.

Given the above,would the Commission:

1. ascertain whether this across-the-board increase in insurance rates is in fact due to an agreement reached between the various companies,in clear violation of the most basic principles of free competition;

2. ascertain whether non-Italian European insurance companies are being prevented from offering competing insurance products,in violation of Community rules on the single market;

3. on the basis of its findings,establish whether there has been a clear violation of consumer rights and, if necessary,take appropriate action without delay.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1998)

Community insurance law lays down rules on the conduct of business in relation to compulsory third- party liability insurance for motor vehicles within the single market.

A Member State may not prevent an insurance undertaking which is authorised in the undertaking’s home Member State from conducting motor insurance business on its territory,whether by opening branches or under the rules on the freedom to provide services,provided that the undertaking complies with the conditions laid down in Community legislation. The insurance undertaking must conduct its business in compliance with the rules laid down,in the interest of the general good,by the Member State where the business is conducted. Nor may a Member State introduce measures designed to prohibit or prevent its citizens from taking out third-party insurance cover for motor vehicles,including mopeds,with an insurer in another Member State of the European Economic Area if the insurer complies with the requirements of Community law governing the carrying-on of insurance business and wishes to conduct its business in that Member State,either by opening local branches or under the rules on the freedom to provide services. C 142/70 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The Commission has not found that the public authorities have introduced any measures on the Italian market to prevent insurers from other Member States of the European Economic Area from conducting business in Italy in the field of motor vehicle insurance, and in particular moped insurance.

Lastly, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it will be checking whether there is any breach of Community competition rules on the Italian market for compulsory third-party liability insurance for mopeds.

(1999/C 142/085) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3011/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Free competition between private undertakings

Under Tuscan Regional LawNo 67/95, all the chemists in the region, whetherpublic or private, are obliged to close for a minimum period each year, for holidays.

It is inadmissible to place a legal obligation on professional persons or businessmen to close their undertakings for a minimum holiday period, in that such an obligation violates the principle of free enterprise and the right to engage in a professional activity.

The Commission(with particular reference to the Commissioner in charge of competition matters, Mr Van Miert) is therefore asked to state its views on the matter and take appropriate action.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The situation described by the Honourable Member does not appear to be contrary to Community law.

Council Directive 85/432/EEC of 16 September 1985 concerning the coordination of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in respect of certain activities in the field of pharmacy (1) did in fact introduce a minimum level of coordination regarding training conditions and access to the profession of pharmacist, and the conditions for carrying out this profession.

However, this coordination was not total and did not, for example, cover the operating conditions of dispensing pharmacies. In this connection, the Commission would draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the second recital of the above-mentioned Directive. This recital stipulates that ‘this Directive does not ensure coordination of all conditions of access to and pursuit of activities in the field of pharmacy, and, in particular, the geographical distribution of pharmacies and the monopoly of the supply of medicinal products continue to be matters for the Member States’.

In fact, in the absence of Community legislation for harmonisation or coordination in this area, the Member States retain sole responsibility for adopting regulations concerning the operating conditions for dispensing pharmacies, provided that these regulations are compatible with Community law.

In this respect, the Commission considers that national measures such as the one mentioned here (the obligation to close for a minimum period each year) are not contrary to the principle of the freedom of establishment contained in Article 52 of the EC Treaty, provided that they are applied in a non- discriminatory fashion and are proportionate to the stated objective, within the specific context of the right of establishment in the Community.

Finally, the measure mentioned by the Honourable Member does not appear to be contrary to Community competition law. Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty only in fact relate to the conduct of undertakings and do not cover measures adopted by the State. The joint application of Article 3(g), the second paragraph of Article 5 and Article 85 of the EC Treaty should also be ruled out. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/71

In connection with this, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the decisions taken by the Court of Justice, according to which the joint application of these Articles is only possible where a Member State required or favoured the adoption of an agreement contrary to Article 85 or reinforced its effects or deprived its own legislation of its official character by delegating to private traders responsibility for taking decisions affecting the economic sphere (cf. the Meng judgment of 17.11.1993, case C-2/91, ECR I-5751 and the Ohra judgment of 17.11.1993, case C-245/91, ECR I-5851).

(1) OJ L 253, 24.9.1985.

(1999/C 142/086) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3018/98

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

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Tackling child pornography on the Internet

On Sunday, 13 September the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung reported that the child welfare authorities in Germany felt that nothing had come of the initiatives to tackle child pornography on the Internet: considerable numbers of people were still visiting websites offering child pornography. This is disappointing, since it may be assumed that Member State would have stepped up their efforts to combat child pornography following the sensational discovery this Summer of the paedophile network in Zandvoort. Earlier this Summer the Austrian Presidency announced that it was working on proposals directed at this problem.

1. Can the Commission provide any information on the progress made by the Austrian Presidency in drawing up proposals for tackling child pornography on the Internet?

2. Following the events this Summer, has the Commission decided to modify, or to step up, its policy on promoting the safe use of the Internet and, if so, what steps has it taken?

3. One of the keystones of the action plan on promoting the safe use of the Internet is the creation of a European network of hotlines. Is the Commission encouraging the setting up of hotlines in the Member States and, if so, what action is being taken to achieve optimal coordination of the hotlines?

4. Is the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, taking action to ensure that throughout the EU people are aware of the addresses where they can report websites offering child pornography and that people also know that they can complain to those addresses about similar websites active in other EU countries?

5. Is the Commission prepared to meet providers active in more than one EU country to discuss with them how to improve the reporting system and what other measures can be taken in this area?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 1998)

1. The General Affairs Council on 5 October 1998 adopted a set of conclusions on the fight against child pornography. It listed a series of actions to be taken in this field, noting in particular that the Presidency would see that the Council completes as soon as possible its work on the Community action plan (1) on promoting safe use of the Internet and protection against illegal and harmful content on the Internet, the draft joint action submitted by the Presidency concerning the fight against child pornography on the Internet, and the mid-term programme of Community action (2) on measures relating to violence against children, young people and women (Daphne programme). Moreover, the Presidency stated that it C 142/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

will propose to the Council to define common positions in relation to draft conventions and protocols in this and related matters being discussed in the framework of the United Nations.

Furthermore, the group of experts set up following the European conference (March 1998, London) is examining the joint action concerning action to combat trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children (3) with a view to determining which measures foreseen by the joint action could be extended to all states participating in the European conference.

Lastly, the Justice and home affairs Council on 24 September 1998 also discussed the issue of combating child pornography in the Internet. It noted that it envisaged to give priority to the implementation of the joint action concerning action to combat trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children and to extend the present mandate of Europol on trafficking in human beings also to cover child pornography.

2. The action plan supports four areas: a European network of hotlines, self-regulation by industry, filtering and rating and awareness. Member States are also committed under Council Recommendation 98/ 560/EC of 24 September 1998 on the development of the competitiveness of the European audiovisual and information services industry by promoting national frameworks aimed at achieving a comparable and effective level of protection of minors and human dignity (4) to provide the appropriate framework. The Commission considers that these measures, together with co-operation between law enforcement and industry, are the right reaction at Community level.

International action is also required. The group of eight most industrialised nations is including these issues in its discussions on high-tech crime. The Council of Europe is preparing a convention on computer crime, which will allow for a common approach throughout Europe to important issues of law. The Commission is closely involved in both initiatives.

3. The Commission agrees that the European network of hotlines is a keystone of the action plan. Existing and future hotlines are already holding discussions in a scheme funded by the Daphne programme. The preparatory actions which have been launched will also allow this work to continue.

4. Public awareness of the addresses to be contacted is an important element and is part of the measures already being implemented.

5. The Commission maintains active contacts with the service providers in relation to implementation of hotlines and codes of conduct.

(1) COM(98) 582. (2) COM(98) 335. (3) OJ L 63, 4.3.1997. (4) OJ L 270, 7.10.1998.

(1999/C 142/087) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3024/98

by Brian Simpson (PSE)to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Postal services

Can the Commission indicate when it will be in a position to inform Parliament of proposals relating to the postal sector and if those proposals will be in line with Parliament’s often stated position regarding the liberalisation of Postal Services? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/73

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 1998)

Article 7 of Parliament and Council Directive 97/67/EC of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market for Community postal services and on the improvement of quality of service (1) provides that the Commission shall put forward a proposal for a Directive on the further gradual and controlled liberalisation of the postal-services market before the end of 1998.

Since that proposal must take place after a re-examination of this sector, it is necessary for the Commission already to have received the conclusions of studies currently in progress on the impact of the liberalising of certain postal services. Since these must have been completed towards the end of October 1998, the Commission could thus be in a position to send its proposal to Parliament towards the end of this year.

Although at this stage the Commission cannot reveal the content of its future proposal, more particularly since it does not have in its possession the result of the studies currently taking place, it may nevertheless assure the Honourable Member that it will take the fullest account possible of the position previously adopted by Parliament on this matter.

(1) OJ L 15, 21.1.1998.

(1999/C 142/088) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3027/98 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Admission of holders of Spanish postgraduate diplomas to A/LA posts

In his answer of 10 February 1998 to Written Question E-4186/97 (1) by Mrs Bárbara Dührkop, Commissioner Liikanen stated that the Commission admits holders of Spanish postgraduate diplomas which enable them to study for a doctorate to category A/LA posts in the European civil service. Why, then, has the Commission not included this requirement in any of the notices of open competitions for category A/LA posts in the European civil service?

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 1998)

The Commission requires Spanish candidates to A/LA competitions to have a university degree giving access to doctoral studies, as stated in answer to written question E-4186/97 (1) by Mrs Dührkop Dührkop.

Hitherto notices for A/LA competitions required candidates to have completed a course of university education and obtained a degree or diploma. It was also stated that the ‘selection board will allow for differences between education systems’. Competition notices also contain a guide for candidates, which, in the section on education and diplomas, states that the level of education of the candidate will be checked and assessed by the selection board and, if necessary, by specialists of the education system concerned.

In view of the range of education, diplomas and qualifications in the fifteen Member States, the Commission uses a single formula applicable throughout the Community.

In any case, to avoid any confusion in future, in the latest notices of open competition COM/A/8/98 to COM/A/12/98 the Commission included the sentence: only candidates with a university degree that could give access to doctoral studies will be considered.

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998. C 142/74 OfficialJournalof the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/089) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3032/98 by Odile Leperre-Verrier (ARE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Protection of Kosovo’s heritage

The current fighting in Kosovo is not without its consequences for the country’s cultural heritage, whether civil, religious, Muslim or orthodox.

Can the Commission say whether it envisages taking measures to protect Kosovo’s heritage and working with UNESCO to raise the awareness of the internationalcommunity and promote the developmentof a consensus between two communities which each have a rich cultural heritage?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the destructive consequences that the conflict in Kosovo had on its civil and religious cultural heritage.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Community is very much involved in the international efforts to reconcile the two communities. However, the Commission does not have the competence to take any measures for the protection of Kosovo’s cultural heritage.

The Commission would be willing to consider co-operation with the United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organisation (Unesco), should this organisation undertake an initiative concerning the matter raised by the Honourable Member.

(1999/C 142/090) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3033/98 by Gianfranco Dell’Alba (ARE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Accusations by Alitalia of an abuse of office to further private interests in the Malpensa affair

On 20 September 1998 Alitalia ran an advertisement in a number of Italian daily newspapers which bore the headline ‘To stop Malpensa from opening some people are playing dirty tricks’, and which went on to allege that ‘they want to cancel everything because of pressure from a number of international airlines seeking to protect their own economic interests’.

Alitalia’s criticisms are clearly directed at the Commission’s decision which ruled that the Burlando decree contravened Community law. Alitalia claims the Commission has acted unlawfully (hence the ‘dirty tricks’) in order to protect ‘the economic interests of a number of internationalairlines’.

What action, including legal action, does the Commission intend to take in response to these allegations, which imply that the Commission’s decision in the Malpensa affair arose from an abuse of office to further private interests, and that this involved other crimes such as acts of corruption etc.?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

In its decision of 16 September 1998, the Commission addressed the substantive issues of discrimination and lack of proportionality posed by the air traffic distribution rules then intended for use by the Italian government. This decision was based on Article 8 of Council Regulation (EEC) 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes (1). The intervention of the 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/75

Commission in the Malpensa case was exclusively motivated by the need to ensure that Community law is respected. That is the principle applied by the Commission at all times and in all cases. Unfounded allegations will not distract the Commission from fulfilling that duty.

(1) OJL 240, 24.8.1992.

(1999/C 142/091) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3041/98

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

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Storage of nuclear waste from the reactor in Petten (Netherlands)

The safe storage of highly radioactive nuclear waste from the High Flux Reactor in Petten, the Netherlands, could be jeopardised by a shortage of storage capacity. The Netherlands Energy Research Centre (ECN), which is operating the Petten reactor with the authorisation of the Commission, expects storage capacity to be exhausted at the end of this year. Arrangements will therefore have to be made in good time for storing the waste elsewhere. However, Covra’s storage facility, the central storage point in Zeeland, is not yet ready, nor has a licence for temporary storage yet been issued.

The ECN considers that the safe storage of nuclear waste at Petten must not be endangered, and says that it will close the reactor down when storage capacity is nearly exhausted.

1. Is the Commission aware of this problem?

2. What role does the Commission intend to play in solving the problem?

3. Might the Commission be considering helping another EU Member State to solve the problem?

4. Who would then be responsible for transport and financing?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

1. The Commission is aware of the problem. As owner and licence holder its Joint research centre (JRC) is responsible for the operation of the high flux reactor. A large part of the reactor operation is executed under contract by the ECN (now NRG) Petten.

2. To solve the problem the Commission has considered several solutions. Arrangements were made in 1996 for the storage of spent fuel and waste in the form of a contract with Covra signed in July 1996. This covers the temporary storage of the waste. It is correct that the storage capacity at Covra is not yet available since the licence is not yet issued. The second level solution is the storage of the waste (spent fuel) in the pound of the reactor building, where more storage capacity is possible.

3. Waste management is effected at national level. No example exists of cooperation at Community level of nuclear waste storage. Safety rules have to comply with national regulations and practices. Moreover, any possible reprocessing action that could be contracted with another Member State such as France would imply the return of the resulting waste to the Netherlands for final storage.

4. Transport of the spent fuel from Petten to Covra is taken over by the JRC. C 142/76 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/092) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3045/98 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Framework directive on noise

With regard to the preparation of a framework directive on noise, can the Commission tell me what its guidelines are with regard to this (urgently required) possible initiative, and the timetable envisaged for its taking concrete form?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 1998)

The Commission was able to announce at the conference on the Community future noise policy held in Copenhagen on 7 September 1998 that it would prepare a draft directive on environmental noise as soon as possible. The Commission is already working with groups of experts on environmental noise to provide position papers that could form the basis of the technical content of the framework directive in question. Results are expected in 1999.

(1999/C 142/093) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3047/98 by Dietrich Elchlepp (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Criticism of the German power supply law

1. Is it true that, in a letter to German Economic Affairs Minister Günter Rexrodt, EU Commissioner Karel Van Miert has criticised the German rules on power supply remuneration for disrupting competition in the EU?

2. Does the Commission realise that in making such a statement, it comes into conflict both with the EU Directive for the internal market in electricity and with its own strategy, set out in the White Paper on renewable energy sources, of doubling the proportion of non-polluting sources − solar energy, wind, hydroelectric power and biomass − by 2010?

3. How does the Commission assess the statement that German supply remuneration arrangements could disrupt competition among power producers and end the practise of passing on any additional costs in a liberalised power market to customers, when the separation of supply and transport networks, on the one hand, and power production, on the other, is the very hallmark of a liberalised power market?

4. Does the Commission not know that the German power supply law amended in spring 1998 clearly places the sale and remuneration obligation on network operators and that the latter can reflect the costs in usage charges, so that competition between power producers is not disrupted in any way?

5. What objective grounds can the Commission give to support the claim that the statutory minimum price for wind power in Germany − currently 16,79 Pfennig per kilowatt-hour − represents ‘over- compensation’?

Does the Commission not know that a scientific measurement and evaluation programme carried out by German Government departments calculated average costs to be 16,60 Pfennig/kWh and that over the next few years, because of the link with average prices, supply remuneration in Germany will fall by 30 % to 14-15 Pfennig per kWh anyway? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/77

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

1. The Stromeinspeisungsgesetz has been approved by the Commission as state aid in 1990, after having been notified by the Federal government. The EC Treaty not only obliges the Commission to control newstate aid, but also to continue to assess state aid previously approved for its further compatibility with state aid rules. In this context a letter was sent in autumn 1996 asking the German government whether the developments in the sector were still in line with the autorization decision of 1990, in light of several complaints received by the Commission.

2. The position of the Commission is not in contradiction with the objective laid down in the white paper on renewable energies (1) to increase the market share of renewable sources of energy. The white paper in principle does not affect state aid rules, as far as state aid for the promotion of renewable energies still falls under the general state aid rules of the EC Treaty. At the same time, the positive attitude of the Commission towards the promotion of renewable energies is also shown in its state aid policy. The guidelines of the Commission for environmental protection foresee that aid for renewable energies is treated like environmental aid. When assessing whether an aid is exceptionally justified for environmental reasons, the Commission in principle takes a positive approach. In the examination of each case also environmental concerns and competition aspects have to be balanced.

3. The position of the Commission is not in contradiction with the directive on common rules for the internal market for electricity. This directive in principle does not affect state aid rules. When assessing the Stromeinspeisungsgesetz under state aid rules, one has to take into account that this directive will have to be implemented by the Member States by February 1999 and that the Commission presently envisages presenting a proposal for a directive for the harmonization of the treatment of renewable sources of energy. For these reasons, it seems appropriate to first await the further development.

4. The Commission knows that the Stromeinspeisungsgesetz as amended in spring 1998 imposes the purchase obligation and the payment obligation on the electricity companies which operate a net for general supply.

5. The Commission does not question that support is still necessary in order to compensate for competitive disadvantages of wind energy. However, considering the progressive development of wind energy since 1990, it has to be assessed − especially in the light of several complaints − whether the level of support is still in line with state aid law requirements.

(1) COM(97) 599 final.

(1999/C 142/094) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3055/98

by John Cushnahan (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Manchester United

What action will the Commission take to ensure that the proposed acquisition of Manchester United by BSkyB does not conflict with EU sport broadcasting policy? C 142/78 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

The proposed acquisition of Manchester United by BSkyB is not an isolated event. Such operations, involving television companies owning sport clubs, have become a frequent practice in Europe (as was already the case in the United States). The Commission keeps a close watch on all instances of interpenetration between the world of sport and the audiovisual industry and will ensure that such acquisitions comply with Community rules, where appropriate.

(1999/C 142/095) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3058/98 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Possible failure of various Member States to comply with the Kyoto Protocol on climate change

It was recently reported in the press that France, Germany and the Netherlands will be unable to reach the targets set by the Kyoto Protocol. Both the Member States and the European Community are responsible for reaching those targets.

What is the Commission’s standpoint?

Will the Commission take any action on this matter?

In view of this situation, will the Commission amend its proposal to the IVth conference of the parties in Buenos Aires?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

The Kyoto Protocol is not yet in force. For it to enter into force, it needs to be ratified by 55 parties, incorporating parties included in annex I which accounted for at least 55 % of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the parties included in annex I. In addition, the Community and its Member States have not yet ratified, so the provisions of the Protocol, including its emission reduction targets, are not yet binding upon Member States.

Furthermore, the Commission would underline that the targets laid down in the Kyoto Protocol have to be achieved by parties by the year 2012. Therefore, it considers it premature to take position regarding press articles about possible non-compliance with the targets of the Protocol by certain Member States.

The burden-sharing between Member States agreed by the Council in June 1998 remains unaffected.

(1999/C 142/096) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3061/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: State aid for RAI − the Italian broadcasting corporation

In its reply to written question E-0577/98 (1) on State aid for RAI, the Commission is basically reticent and does not say whether or not it intends to adopt a formal position with regard to the complaint in respect of public subsidies for RAI in the foreseeable future. It merely refers in general terms to Community competition rules, the new Treaty of Amsterdam and one of its protocols, which have yet to be ratified by more than half the Member States, and says it will adopt a ‘coherent approach’, without going into greater detail, on all cases that have been pending for almost a decade. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/79

This reticence, not to say ambiguity, on the part of the Commission is disconcerting in view of the following:

− the Court of First Instance has found the Commission guilty of failure to take timely action in a similar case;

− the market concerned is very important for economic operators and consumers and is growing significantly because of technological developments and the associated process of convergence between conventional television and audiovisual services and it would therefore seem to be both urgent and important to give investors and consumers legal certainty by providing them with a clear framework of regulations and guarantees;

− the growing direct competition between traditional subsidised public service television and private television raises the urgent question of distortion of conditions of competition and the need to establish transparent accounting rules for the funding of public services that are defined by objective criteria;

The Commission:

1. Will it adopt a clear stance as soon as possible, in line with its institutional obligations, that will avoid further court rulings against it for as failure to act on complaints still pending on State aid to public television and help to provide legal certainty and protection for economic operators and consumers?

2. More specifically, can it say whether, in the absence of transparent accounting rules and a clear definition of public service broadcasting, the use of public funds to finance programmes for what are clearly commercial purposes may constitute a breach of Community competition rules?

(1) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 3.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1998)

In answer to the Honourable Member’s written question E-577/98 (1), the Commission confirmed the existence of a complaint, lodged on 19 June 1996, against RAI (Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A.), concerning breaches of Community law on state aid.

Since the liberalisation of the broadcasting sector is a phenomenon which started only in the 1980s and given the complexity of the analysis required, the Commission has taken a prudent approach in regard to state aid complaints in this sector. However, as the Honourable Member mentions, the Commission has been condemned by the Court of first instance recently for failing to act within a reasonable time and with the necessary diligence. This is the first time that this has occurred in the state aid domain. The ruling of the Court of first instance confirms the responsibility of the Commission in the area.

When several complaints occur in an area where no specific guidelines exist it has always been considered as good policy to draw up guidelines first so as to enable the Commission to scrutinise the individual cases in a coherent and transparent way. The Commission services thus prepared a discussion paper, presenting the problems at stake and asking Member States to provide their opinions and possible solutions.

However, as most of the Member States consulted seem to dislike the idea of guidelines, the Commission will now proceed with the individual cases, all the more so since the Court of first instance could again condemn the Commission for inactivity.

In the meantime, the Commission will continue to seek the views of all parties involved, i.e. public and private broadcasters as well as other interested parties. In taking this responsibility as required by the Treaty and the Court of first instance, the Commission will act in full conformity with the requirements of fair competition between private and public broadcasters and in respect of the crucial task which public broadcasters have been given by the national authorities.

(1) OJ C 310, 15.12.1998. C 142/80 OfficialJournalof the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/097) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3064/98 by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Portuguese energy projects

The Commission has decided to fund 116 energy technology demonstration projects and 120 related measures, involving a total cost of ECU 110,5 million.

Could the Commission say whether the activities to be financed include any Portuguese projects or related measures? If so, what amounts have been allocated to the individual projects and measures concerned?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

In 1998 12 proposals for (type A) demonstration projects, including 16 Portuguese participants, were assessed by the Commission under the non-nuclear energy programme, demonstration part (Thermie). The total estimated amount of support for those 12 proposals is ECU 8,1 million.

In addition the Commission assessed 19 proposals for back-up type-B activities with a forecast involvement of 20 Portuguese organisations and a total amount of ECU 2,7 million.

The Commission will send a full list of those 31 proposals (12 type-A projects and 19 type-B projects) direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat-General of Parliament. This will state the reference, title, cost, estimated support and the Portuguese proposer concerned.

(1999/C 142/098) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3068/98 by Werner Langen (PPE) to the Council

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Plans to make lotteries subject to European competition law

The opening of infringement proceedings against Ireland pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty, the request by a Finnish court for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice and proposals to make lotteries subject to European competition law rather than national legislation have given rise to some debate in the FederalRepublicof Germany.

As far as I am aware, the German Länder do not intend to open up the German lottery market to foreign organisers. A range of different issues play a crucial role here, in particular tax considerations.

Can the Councilsay:

1. What led the Council to abandon its original declaration at the EU summit in Edinburgh of 12 December 1992 that it would not seek to regulate lotteries?

2. What opinion has the Council expressed in relation to the request by a Finnish court for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice in the Läärä case C-124/97?

3. Has the subject been discussed in the Ecofin Counciland, if not, when are such discussions scheduled to take place? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/81

(18/19 January 1999)

In reply to the questions put by the Honourable Member concerning possible regulation of lotteries at Community level, the Council would like to make the following points.

The Council has received no proposal for any legal act for the purpose of regulating games of chance. Consequently, there are no plans for a Council act in this area.

The Council would also point out that the infringement proceedings referred to in Article 169 of the EC Treaty do not provide for intervention by the Council.

Furthermore, since no act of the Council is in question in the case before the Court to which the Honourable Member refers, no intervention by the Council in this case can be contemplated.

(1999/C 142/099) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3073/98 by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE) to the Council

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Proposal for a regulation in the field of employment creation and support to small and micro- enterprises in the Maghreb countries

In July 1994 the Commission submitted a proposal for a regulation in the field of employment creation and support to small and micro-enterprises in the Maghreb countries, requiring the cooperation procedure.

Conscious of the importance of its report, Parliament completed the procedure as speedily as possible and delivered its opinion at first reading on 28 October 1994. The Commission subsequently submitted a modified version of the original proposal on 22 December 1994, in which it incorporated most of Parliament’s amendments.

Since then Parliament has been awaiting the common position of the Council, but no such text has been forthcoming and no explanation has been given for the failure to submit it.

The situation has now become even more serious in view of recent events surrounding the growing illegal emigration from the Maghreb countries (chiefly Morocco) to Spain, with more than 200 people losing their lives in the Strait of Gibraltar in the current year alone.

Can the Council give any reason for the delay in submitting its common position?

Can the Council say when it expects to forward the common position?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the Council’s reply to Written Question No 0364/98 by Mr Fernández Martín.

(1999/C 142/100) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3076/98 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(9 October 1998)

Subject: Compliance with the criteria for the growing of transgenic maize and soya at Maccarese (Rome)

Directive 90/220 (1) lays down criteria designed to limit the environmental and health risks posed by the growing of transgenic organisms. According to information in the author’s possession, the agricultural C 142/82 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

undertaking Sogea SpA of Maccarese (Rome), which is owned by Monsanto SpA and which is authorized to grow transgenic maize and soya, appears to have made no provision for measures to identify the experimental test.There also seems to be an area of what are presumably traditional crops much closer than the 200 metres required by directive 90/220.

Bearing in mind the danger of the characteristics induced by genetic manipulation being passed to genetically related plants or similar traditional crops, will the Commission take steps to check whether the cultivation of transgenic maize and soya at Maccarese complies with the safety criteria laid down by Directive 90/220?

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) (1) sets out, in Articles 5 to 9 (Part B of the Directive), the provisions for undertaking a deliberate release of GMOs for research and development purposes. Implementation of these provisions is the responsibility of the national authorities.

According to information supplied by the Italian authorities, the notifications for the above-mentioned deliberate releases had been examined by the Italian committee on biotechnology and were found to be in compliance with the provisions of the Directive.It was deemed that sufficient measures had been proposed for the management of risks.In particular, for the transgenic maize, special measures were foreseen to reduce the possibility of a potential cross-hybridisation with other maize plants.This included an isolation distance of 200 metres from other cultivated maize or a detasseling of the GMOs.As an additional safety measure, six rows of traditional maize, which will be destroyed after harvest, have been planted as a pollen sink around the trial.

For the trial with the transgenic soybean, comparable provisions have been applied.Buffer rows with non- transgenic soya have been planted, but because of the low rate of outcrossing the isolation distance has been reduced to 10 metres.

The Italian authorities have informed the Commission that they organise regular inspections of Part B releases to ensure that the conditions of the consents have been complied with.

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.

(1999/C 142/101) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3087/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Classification of ramson and its production

What is the Commission’s view of the classification of ramson as a foodstuff or medicine?

Is the Commission aware that dried ramson leaves (granulate, powder in capsules) are lawfully in circulation as a foodstuff in Greece, the Netherlands and Austria, while they are to be classified as a medicine in other countries, such as Germany?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

The classification of ransom (alium ursinum) as a foodstuff or medicinal product depends on the presentation of the product to the consumer.According to Article 1 of Directive 65/65/EEC of 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/83

26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to proprietary medicinal products (1) ‘any substance or combination of substances presented for treating or preventing disease in human beings or animals’ has to be considered as a medicinal product. If, therefore, a medical claim is indicated on the labelling of a product containing ransom, this product must be considered as a medicinal product, whilst the same product may be legally marketed as foodstuff if no medicinal claim is made.

The Commission does not possess specific information concerning the commercialisation of products containing dried ransom leaves in the Community. The fact that these products are marketed sometimes as foodstuffs and sometimes as medicinal products may, however, be the consequence of the legal situation illustrated above.

(1) OJ L 22, 9.2.1965.

(1999/C 142/102) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3097/98 by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: The monopoly enjoyed in Italy by CONI − football clubs and free competition

The monopoly enjoyed in Italy by CONI [Italian National Olympic Committee] in professional and amateur competitive sporting activities, organised under law No 426 of 16 February 1942, is no longer tenable, not least in view of the substantial hand-outs the Italian state gives to CONI each year. The regulatory authority responsible for competition and markets, which has frequently been the subject of questions in the Italian Parliament calling for it to act, has never taken any action to assert the principle that the legislator should foster competition and break up monopolies. In particular, the action taken by the regulatory authority in respect of clubs in divisions A and B of the Italian Football League to tackle the perennial contractual issue of pay-per-view television rights has been ineffective, since it is directed at a body that belongs to the Italian Football Federation (Article 6(II) of the Statute) which effectively enjoys a monopoly in the game of soccer (Articles 1 and 2 of the Statute). The action taken by the regulatory authority fails to assert the principle of free competition, thereby benefitting a small number of groups operating in the sports industry.

Can the Commission say whether or not everyone is free to organise professional and amateur sporting activities, on a one-off or series basis, in a free market system, unlike the CONI-dominated monopolistic system that exists in Italy, in particular in view of the multi-billion lira subsidies CONI receives?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 1998)

As Community law stands at present, Member States may, for reasons of public interest of a non- economic nature, exclude certain services from the field of competition by conferring exclusive rights on one or more undertakings (see Case C-155/73 Sacchi [1974] ECR 409). However, although the granting of a monopoly is not as such incompatible with Community law, the monopoly may be organised in such a way as to infringe the rules on the free movement of services, freedom of establishment and the free movement of goods within the common market.

Furthermore, Article 5 of the EC Treaty requires Member States to fulfil their Community obligations in good faith. Under the competition rules laid down in the EC Treaty and according to settled case-law, Member States may not enact legislative measures or adopt regulations that allow private undertakings to be excluded from the constraints imposed by Articles 85 to 94 of the EC Treaty. This would be the case if a Member State adopted legislative or regulatory measures that required or encouraged the conclusion of agreements that were in breach of Article 85 of the Treaty or reinforced the effects of such agreements (Joined Cases 209 to 213/84 Ministère public v Asjes [1986] ECR 1425 and Case 311/85 Vlaamse Reisbureaus [1987] ECR 3801). C 142/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Such would also be the case if regulatory measures in the Member State encouraged the abuse of a dominant position held by one (or more) undertakings on the relevant market (Case 66/86 Ahmed Saeed [1989] ECR 803).

In the case in point, the fact that the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) holds a monopoly in the organisation of sporting activities does not as such constitute an infringement of the Community competition rules. Nor indeed are CONI’s agreements and practices called into question by the Honourable Member. The specific points made concern the agreements of the Italian Football League or Italian Football Federation regarding television rights. It would appear that these actions are not directly linked to CONI’s monopolistic position. In the absence of any precise evidence of abuses or restrictions, the Commission is not able to say whether or not the rules laid down in the EC Treaty have been infringed.

(1999/C 142/103) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3100/98 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) and Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Problems with the storage of highly radioactive waste from the High Flux Reactor in Petten

The Zeeland Provincial Authority in the Netherlands has appealed to the Council of State against the permit allowing Covra in Borssele to build a storage facility for highly radioactive waste. The authority’s objection concerns the element of the permit allowing highly radioactive waste, inter alia from the High Flux Reactor (HFR) in Petten, to be stored temporarily in containers in the existing sheds until the new storage facility is ready. The Zeeland Provincial Authority is not convinced that the containers are safe.

1. Is the Commission aware of the Zeeland Provincial Authority’s appeal to the Council of State against the granting of the permit for temporary storage of highly radioactive waste in the existing sheds?

2. Is the Commission aware that the storage capacity of the HFR in Petten is likely to be exhausted by the end of this year?

3. Has the Commission considered the possibility that the Council of State may grant the appeal and suspend the permit? If so, where will waste from Petten be stored?

4. What would be the financial consequences of closing down the Petten reactor, should it come to that, and what impact would it have on research work there, particularly at the Boron Neutron Capture Therapy Facility (BNCT)?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(21. December 1998)

The Commission is aware of the appeal against the granting of a permit for temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel in the existing Centrale organisatie voor radioactief afval, Nederland (COVRA) installations. This temporary storage is included in the contract signed between COVRA and the Commission in 1996, meant to cope with the limited storage capacity still available in Petten.

To solve the problem of the storage of irradiated fuel, several solutions are under consideration, in particular:

− the COVRA contract providing for the temporary storage of the spent fuel;

− a possible reorganisation of the storage of the spent fuel in the pond of the reactor building is still under discussion. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/85

Technical solutions, such as those mentioned above, exist for the storage of spent fuel. The closure of the high flux reactor (HFR) would have dramatic consequences on the supply of radiopharmaceuticals to hospitals and medical centres, because the HFR production covers more than 50 % of Community needs. Of course, the closure of the HFR would also mean the termination of the boron neutron capture therapy project.

(1999/C 142/104) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3105/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Environmental characteristics of PVC in the light of proposed Council Directive COM(97) 358

In the light of the proposed Council Directive COM(97) 358 on end-of-life vehicles, will the Commission explain how specifically it has ensured that the directive is based on the most recent data and studies?

This applies in particular to the statement in the proposal that 1 kg of PVC waste generates between 2 and 5kgs of flue gas residues. It has come to light in Denmark that the Danish Environment Agency made a mistake in its calculations concerning the volume of flue gas residues. This is the study referred to by the Commission in its answer to Written Question P-1524/98 (1).

This being so, can it therefore state specifically what figures have been taken as the basis for its statement about flue gas residues in relation to the proposed Council Directive COM(97) 358?

Will it also explain whether it is absolutely definite that overall environmental pollution will be reduced by replacing PVC with any other material? For example, a car’s energy consumption is increased by replacing PVC with a heavier material.

(1) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 51.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Will the Honourable Member please refer to the answer given by the Commission to her written question E-1524/98 (1) as regards the general approach and the work in progress concerning the management of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) waste.

More particularly as regards PVC incineration a study of the quantity and harmfulness of PVC incineration residues is under way, since PVC is the only plastic whose incineration generates hydro- chloric acid. That study will constitute one aspect of the analysis in the Danish study mentioned by the Honourable Member.

The study covers all types of incinerator in use within the Community. The neutralisation taking place during the dry treatment of incinerator flue gases causes highly soluble residues to be formed. These are classified as hazardous − particularly because of calcium chloride contaminated by heavy metals. Given the requirements regarding incinerator emissions the incineration of PVC involving dry treatment generates the same quantity of residues. The study in progress should yield precise data as regards the quantity and level of harmfulness of the residues produced by all types of incinerator used in dry, wet, semi-wet or semi-dry flue-gas treatment methods.

The replacement of PVC in vehicles mentioned by the Honourable Member would not necessarily cause a considerable increase in vehicle weights since PVC may be replaced by other plastics.

(1) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 51. C 142/86 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/105) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3114/98 by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Roof renovation products

Is the Commission aware that certain products for the renovation of flat roofs that are permitted and used in other Member states, such as the United Kingdom, are banned in Germany by virtue of the outdated DIN (German industrial standard) 16726? This is detrimental to the internal market.

What steps does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concern about obstacles to the free circulation of building products on the Community territory.

The primary aim of Directive 89/106/EEC (1) on construction products is, precisely, to eliminate technical obstacles to intra-Community trade in such products. This Directive stipulates that such products may only be put on the market if they are ‘fit for the intended use’, a notion defined in relation to certain essential requirements regarding the works contained in the Directive. It also stipulates that ‘fitness for intended use’ is to be assessed with special reference to harmonised technical specifications adopted on mandates given by the Commission.

The roof renovation products referred to by the Honourable Member are the subject of a standardisation mandate annexed to Commission Decision 98/436/EC of 22 June 1998 (2) (on the procedure for attesting the conformity of construction products pursuant to Article 20(2) of Council Directive 89/106/EEC as regards roof coverings, rooflights, roof windows and ancillary products). Specifically, the mandate is for a harmonised standard on roof coverings, rooflights, roof windows and ancillary products to be drawn up by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN).

Under the Directive, only compliance with this standard will entitle products to circulate freely with the EC mark without any further test. In the interim, national standards (DIN 16726, for example) will apply, but Member States must accept other national standards which are equivalent in health, safety, energy saving and environmental terms on the basis of Article 30 of the EC Treaty. Furthermore the Commission is currently contemplating an amendment to Directive 89/106 so as to accelerate the standardisation programme and to open up an alternative route for issue of the EC mark, on the basis of decisions already taken regarding proof of compliance and of the mandates drawn up in concertation with the Standing Committee on Construction.

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989. (2) OJ L 194, 10.7.1998.

(1999/C 142/106) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3115/98 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Regulations governing charter flights

Can the Commission inform me if there are any regulations or proposed regulations governing service provision of charter flights in Europe?

In particular are there any regulations concerning delays and compensation? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/87

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

The establishment of a liberalised civil aviation market in the Community on 1 January 1993 ended differences between scheduled and non-scheduled air services in respect of access to intra-Community links. Consequently, no particular provisions govern the service provisions of charter flights in Europe.

Nevertheless, Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours (1) provides certain provisions for passengers travelling on a package tour. According to Article 4 of this Directive, the tour organiser has a liability for compensating the consumer for any difference between the services offered and those supplied. Delays are not, however, expressly covered.

Passengers buying transport on non-scheduled flights are not currently covered by this Directive. A Council regulation (2) which amends Regulation (EEC) 295/91 of 4 February 1991 should remedy that omission by extendingthe rules for a denied boardingcompensation system to non-scheduled flights.

(1) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990. (2) COM(98) 580 final.

(1999/C 142/107) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3120/98

by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: The Leonia Bank’s monopoly

The Leonia Bank, which is owned by the Finnish State, has enjoyed a total monopoly on payment transactions on behalf of the State. These transactions have not been subjected to competitive tendering, although the competition authority and other financial institutions have called for this to be done. Accordingto the most recently published statement on the subject (published on 29 September 1998), the Finance Ministry did not consider it necessary to invite competitive tenders because the bank so far remains wholly owned by the State.

Is it right to exclude healthy competition from the State’s financial affairs, particularly the execution of payment transactions, and if not, what will the Commission do to enforce competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that monopolies as such are not prohibited. However, in the case of a state monopoly such as the one referred to, Article 90 of the EC Treaty is applicable in so far as it stipulates that, as regards public undertakings and undertakings to which they grant special or exclusive rights, Member States must not enact or maintain in force any measures contrary to the EC Treaty.

In the case of Leonia Bank, the Commission does not possess sufficient information for it to determine whether or not the Community competition rules have been complied with. C 142/88 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/108) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3125/98 by Astrid Thors (ELDR)to the Council

(19 October 1998)

Subject: EU’s conduct during the latest crisis in Albania

The latest crisis in Albania began when a member of the parliamentary opposition was murdered on 12 September. This event sparked off serious disturbances in Tirana, during which the Albanian government building came under heavy fire and the Ministry of Justice was looted.

The first international organizations to issue public statements on the crisis were the Council of Europe and the OSCE. The EU took part only in a brief joint statement of 14 September. Subsequently, the EU was offered an opportunity to take part in a joint delegation to Tirana on 19 September together with the OSCE and the Council of Europe. The EU participated at a low level only, without any visible results whatever before the joint declaration of 23 September drawn up by the Council of Europe and the OSCE. At the same time, the EU is represented on a substantial scale in Tirana in terms of human resources and property. Despite this, the EU’s efforts to resolve the crisis were modest.

What does the Council intend to do to play a more active part in the ongoing crisis in Albania and not let slip another opportunity to act as a purposeful player in international politics in line with its ambitions under the CFSP?

(18/19 January 1999)

The Council regrets that the Honourable Member assesses the EU’s efforts to resolve the crisis following the assassination of a member of the parliamentary opposition on 12 September 1998 as having been ‘modest’ and would like to inform the Honourable Member on the full extent of the EU’s recent activities with regard to the situation in Albania.

On 13 September, the Presidency, in light of the urgency of the situation, issued a statement on Albania in Tirana, i.a. condemning the murders of Mr Hajdari and his bodyguard, calling on the Albanian authorities to urgently investigate the murders, calling on all Albanian parties − especially the Democratic Party − to show restraint in their declarations and actions and reiterating the EU’s readiness to continue helping Albania.

Furthermore, the acting President of the Council of Ministers phoned Sali Berisha on 13 September to inform him of the contents of the above-mentionned declaration and to urge him to exercise maximum restraint.

On 15 September, the President of the Council issued a press statement supporting the endeavours of President Rexhep Meidani who tried to call on all parties to practice restraint.

Furthermore, on 15 September the Presidency sent Ambassador Grubmayr, who had been Resident Representative to the Personal Representative of the OSCE’s Chairman in office for Albania in 1997, as the Presidency’s Special Emissary to Albania. His mandate was to promote a cessation of violence and to encourage all political forces in Albania to take up constructive discussions with a view to leading Albania out of the crisis.

The European Community Monitoring Mission (ECMM) presence in Albania has, on a daily basis, kept the Council informed on the latest developments on the ground with a view to informed decision-making by the Council and its working bodies.

Furthermore, the EU was instrumental in setting-up the ‘Friends of Albania’ Group in Brussels on 30 September, to be co-chaired by the European Union and the OSCE Presidencies.

As regards the International Conference on Albania which took place in Tirana on 30 October, the Council adopted an EU position which has been substantially reflected in the operational conclusions of the conference. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/89

At the Conference, the Council reaffirmed its commitment to assist Albania to make progress in the process of stabilisation, recovery and democratisation, recalling however that the main responsibility in this regard lay with Albanians themselves. The relations between the EU and Albania will be taken forward on the basis of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement of 1992and the declaration on the establishment of a political dialogue, and the possibilities of this framework will be fully exploited. Assistance will continue to be provided namely through the PHARE programme focusing on priorities established together with the Albanian government after the 1997 crisis which remain fully valid (public administration reform, including customs, the judiciary and the police; large infrastructure/roads; agriculture; local community development).

Moreover, the EU will continue to provide humanitarian assistance for the Kosovo refugees in Albania. For full implementation of ongoing assistance programmes, rapid progress is required in terms of security and public order. The EU will continue to support the Albanian police in cooperation with WEU/MAPE (Multinational Advisory Police Element), as well as the Albanian customs services via the EC Customs Assistance Mission. A strengthening of these activities is currently under consideration.

(1999/C 142/109) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3126/98

by John Cushnahan (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: e-commerce

Is the Commission aware of a recent report by Anderson Consulting which indicated that Europe needs to take action now or run the risk of missing out on the benefits of e-commerce for its business and citizens?

As e-commerce has the potential to help overcome the disadvantage of peripherality by bringing jobs and access to information to where people are, rather than people having to gravitate towards where jobs are created, it could act as a powerful force in holding local communities together. The EU has a tremendous opportunity to foster this by sponsoring e-commerce-based initiatives in European regions, perhaps using the Information Age Town initiative in Ennis, Co. Clare as a model to follow.

Would the Commission be prepared to take such initiatives?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1998)

In 1997, the Commission communication on ‘A European initiative in electronic commerce’ (1) under- lined the potentially beneficial impact of electronic commerce on the European economy, including peripheral regions, and set out policy priorities for Community action. These included access to infrastructures, technologies and services which are interoperable and affordable, creating a favourable regulatory framework, and promoting a favourable business environment through small and medium- sized enterprise programmes, support actions and research and development, and reinforcing awareness and encouraging best practice.

Since then the Commission has prepared legislative proposals aimed at removing barriers to trans-border electronic commerce within the internal market and creating an environment which can promote trust and confidence in the field of copyright and related rights, and electronic signatures. Further legislation is expected to cover issues such as the liability of intermediaries and the place of establishment.

The November 1997 Luxembourg European Council on employment asked the Commission to assess the implications of the information society for employment and training. The Commission is preparing its report to the Vienna European Council in December 1998 which will show that the information society industries have become one of the biggest and fastest growing sectors of the Community economy but C142/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

which will also draw attention to the fact that Europe is not making the most of the employment potential of the information society. Innovative start-ups are hindered by lack of capital and administrative red tape. Businesses are failing to exploit the full potential of new technology to develop new products and services and unleash the creativity and innovation of their workforce. Job vacancies are unfilled and new jobs are being lost because of skill shortages and low levels of information and communication technologies literacy. The report will therefore call for urgent and concerted action.

The Commission supports the Regional information society initiative (RISI) which has two strands, the development of regional information society strategies and action plans (22 regions supported) and the development of inter-regional information society applications (9 inter-regional applications supported). Attention has been given to electronic commerce as a tool for local enterprises to improve their performance and enhance local quality of life. RISI supports different projects and exchanges of experience between them in order to develop good practice. The regions supported have established an association named ERIS@. The world wide web address for this organisation is: HYPERLINK‘http:// www.eris.epri.org/’.

As far as regional initiatives are concerned, the new Community support framework (CSF) for 2000-2004 includes a specific sub-programme on the information society. Should past levels of funding be maintained, it is likely to represent as much as 2 % of the total CSF budget.

In the field of research and development, the 2nd key action of the specific programme of the 5th framework programme on information society technologies focuses on electronic commerce and includes activities ranging from research and market studies to demonstrations and pilot projects.

In the field of standardisation, a new initiative ECOM-IS has been launched in order to assess the specificities of various industrial sectors and to facilitate the take-up of electronic commerce by industry.

The Commission’s work programme for 1999 envisages a specific action in the field of electronic commerce and SMEs.

(1) COM(97) 157 final.

(1999/C142/110) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3133/98

by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to theCommission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Global harmonisation of the legal provisions governing motor vehicles

The legal provisions governing motor vehicles were originally designed to enhance the technical characteristics of motor vehicles and improve road safety. The legal provisions and standards governing motor vehicles have been developed to the furthest extent in those countries which have an automobile industry. Traditionally, manufacturers have jealously guarded their market shares and national interests have often been invoked in cases where competitors were to be denied market access with the aid of legal provisions and standards.

The wide range of provisions introduced by the automobile industry in various parts of the world not only constitute barriers to trade, but also generate substantial costs, since the specific models authorised for that area must be built for each market, making automobile production highly cost-intensive, even before the expense involved in securing type-approval is taken into account.

What steps does the European Commission intend to take in order to bring about the global harmonisation of the legal provisions governing motor vehicles? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/91

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

Concluded under the aegis of the United Nations economic commission for Europe (UN/ECE), a 1958 agreement is intended to lay down international uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts together with the reciprocal recognition of approvals granted on that basis by the contracting parties. The aim is to facilitate and liberalise the trade in motor vehicles among the contracting parties, benefitting manufacturers and consumers alike.

After revision of the 1958 agreement, opening the possibility for the Community to become involved as a legal entity in its own right, the Community acceded to the agreement in March 1998 on the basis of Council Decision 97/836/EC (1). The 1958 agreement so far has 30 contracting parties, among them 14 Member States and the Community, Japan (from 24 November 1998) and the Russian Federation. More than 100 technical regulations governing the automotive sector have been adopted under the agreement so far.

In order to allow participation in international harmonisation of countries, such as the United States, that for one reason or other will not adhere to the 1958 agreement, a parallel agreement was concluded under the auspices of the UN/ECE on 25 June 1998. This agreement also concerns the establishment of global technical regulations in the automotive sector which should be consistent with those of the 1958 agreement, but it does not concern the mutual recognition of approvals. Until now, the agreement has only been signed by the United States. The Community will sign the parallel agreement once its internal procedures have been completed, including the assent of the Parliament, which should be given before June 1999 in order to allow the Community to participate in its work from the beginning. The parallel agreement will enter into force in October 1999 at the earliest.

Both agreements will operate in parallel in the framework of the UN/ECE, and make use of UN/ECE working parties. This organisation based in Geneva has over the years become the world forum for international harmonisation in the motor vehicle sector. With a view to enabling the Community to participate efficiently in the work and rulemaking undertaken by this important body, all the Community institutions should ensure that the Community procedures laid down in Council Decision 97/836/EC and in the future decision on the approval of the parallel agreement are carried out without delay.

(1) OJ L 346, 17.12.1997.

(1999/C 142/111) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3139/98 by Ana Miranda de Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Harmonisation of legislation on precious metals

The current lack of a Community directive on the manufacture and marketing of objects containing precious metals constitutes a practical obstacle to the free movement of goods in this sector.

What measures are available to the Commission to harmonise national legislation in the Member States in this field and thus avoid the abovementioned effects? Does the Commission intend to adopt any legislative measures in this regard?

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

It should first of all be pointed out that there is a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive (1) intended in particular to harmonise national legislation concerning articles of precious metal with the aim of ensuring their free movement. The proposal sets out to harmonise standards of fineness and sponsors’ and fineness marks, as well as certification systems (three alternative systems are planned: product quality, Community declaration of conformity and third-party verification). C 142/92 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The proposal has not yet been adopted because of differences among the Member States concerning the planned certification procedures. The version that is currently being considered by the Council offers a compromise solution. There would accordingly be correspondance between only two of the three certification systems, i.e. third-party verification and product quality, with the system providing for a Community declaration of conformity being retained as optional.

Pending harmonisation at Community level, and following a horizontal lookat legislation in all the Member States in 1992, the Commission started infringement procedures against most of the Member States, the main aim being to request: recognition of fineness standards struckin other Member States or at least of those standards listed in the proposal for a directive (in the current version, i.e. the version proposed by the Italian Presidency in April 1996, this set of standards matches the list contained in the ISO standard, plus fineness standard 999); the insertion of a clause aimed at recognition of fineness marks legally struckin other Member States, when the information included is equivalent to that laid down in national legislation; insertion of a clause aimed at recognition of sponsors’ marks registered in another Member State; abolition of any marking difference between national and imported products, in cases where the latter are submitted for marking in the importing Member State.

The infringement procedures have resulted in changes to the relevant legislation in most of the Member States. In the case of some Member States, the procedure is still under way or being resolved. It is therefore fair to say that, following the action by the Commission, the national authorities now accept the principle of mutual recognition with regard to trade in articles of precious metal. It seems that certain concrete problems still exist, however. Actual recognition is often hampered, in practice, by the fact that Member States with a third-party verification system refuse to recognise as equivalent any marks affixed by manufacturers or as part of a product quality system.

In these circumstances, the Commission has noted a new series of complaints and cases that have arisen, and it has resumed discussions with all the Member States involved with a view to finding a solution to the problem. In particular, it has asked the relevant authorities if they are ready to recognise as equivalent to marks affixed by a third party those marks that are affixed as part of a product quality system offering suitable and adequate guarantees of professionalism and impartiality.

(1) OJ C 209, 29.7.1994.

(1999/C 142/112) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3140/98

by Ana Miranda de Lage (PSE) and Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Hurricane George

Hurricane George already holds the unenviable record of being among the most destructive in the past decade.

The scale of the catastrophe has attained particularly apocalyptic proportions in the Dominican Republic and Haiti.

Can the Commission say what emergency measures, aid, etc. have been deployed to alleviate the catastrophic effects of the hurricane?

Can the Commission say whether following the assessment of damage, the EU will cooperate in the reconstruction of both republics and if so in what kind of projects? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/93

Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 1998)

Two regions of the Dominican Republic were very badly hit by Hurricane George. Heavy rain and the sudden release of water from a dam where the floodgates had been opened as a precautionary measure caused serious damage in the South-West (San Juan, Baoruco and Barahona). Many houses were washed away and the vast majority of public buildings (schools, hospitals and health centres) were severely damaged in the resultant mud slides. It is in this area that the greatest number of people were made homeless and there is a serious risk of disease from contaminated water. The South-East (east of the Distrito Nacional, San Pedro de Marcoris and la Romana) was battered by violent winds with many hundreds of houses being destroyed and the hotel sector being seriously affected.

Victims in these two areas, who are largely housed in temporary shelters such as schools or churches, need considerable assistance ranging from food aid (distribution of water and food) to basic health care and the building of houses. The Commission has allocated financial aid totalling ECU 1,7 million to victims in the Dominican Republic to be implemented by the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRL), the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) and NGOs.

In Haïti there was heavy rainfall in many areas. The capital’s shanty town, and in particular the Drouillard quarter, were flooded as always happens when there is heavy rain. In the South-Eastern département the village of Fonds Verretes which is built on a river bed was virtually washed away and 85 people lost their lives in this village alone. Serious damage to houses and buildings, crops and livestock is being reported in the villages of Marigot and Belle Anse.

A number of villages in the département of Artibonite were flooded as a result of the heavy rainfall and the opening of floodgates at the Peligre dam where water pressure had risen to dangerous levels. This rice- growing area has been particularly affected by the loss of crops and land. Many of the inhabitants have had to be evacuated and are housed in temporary shelters. There has been damage to other départements, particularly in the North. The emergency aid deployed in these areas has largely been in the form of emergency food aid and essentials. Further aid is needed for people who are still housed in temporary accommodation.

The Commission has allocated financial aid of ECU 300 000 to be implemented by Médecins sans frontières and the IFRC.

(1999/C 142/113) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3151/98

by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Comprehensive strategy for combating forest fires in the Mediterranean as part of Community civil defence policy

Given the views recently expressed in Parliament’s resolution on the implementation of a Community forest policy which takes account of the specific nature of Mediterranean forests and establishes permanent cooperation between the Member States airborne fire-fighting forces, will the Commission say whether it is contemplating drawing up a comprehensive strategy for combating forest fires, particularly in southern Europe, as part of civil defence policy?

Such a strategy would bring about considerable savings on the purchase of the necessary fire-fighting equipment and would promote coordinated action, exchange of experience, technical know-how and information between the Member States, resulting in more effective fire-fighting and a reduction in the scale of the damage caused. C 142/94 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Will the Commission take the initiative to develop such a comprehensive strategy, bearing in mind that climate change is likely to increase the risk of fires in the Mediterranean?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

For several years the Commission has been supporting the Member States in the fight against forest fires. In the southerly Member States, in particular, self-training workshops have been held which enable experience to the exchanged and, since 1996, there has been a system enabling experts to be exchanged; Moreover, a system enabling information on risk levels to be exchanged between Member States every summer has been set up with Commission support.

The Commission was able to further the expansion of mutual aid between Member States in the event of forest fires when, in 1994, it was possible, thanks to its support, to finalise an administrative agreement on the common use of airborne fire-fighting equipment between Italy and France.

As part of the Community’s current action programme on civil defence the Commission is prepared to provide additional support and to back-up any action enabling that mutual cooperation among the Member States to be improved in order to boost its effectiveness and reduce the impact of those disasters.

(1999/C 142/114) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3152/98

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Eradication of polio

In 1998 the World Health Organization launched an initiative to eradicate polio by the year 2000. Although there has been a 90 % reduction in the number of cases of polio the ultimate target is still to be reached.

Will the Commission therefore set out its approach to tackling polio in the developing world, and indicate what financial commitments it has so far made towards solving this problem?

(1999/C 142/115) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3282/98

by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: EU funding for immunisation programmes

Howmuch money does the EU currently spend on programmes of immunisation against diseases such as polio in Europe and the rest of the world?

Does the EU have any plans to increase its funding of polio immunisation to help achieve the aim of the 1990 World Summit on Children to eradicate polio by the year 2000? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/95

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3152/98 and P-3282/98 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalfofthe Commission

(1 December 1998)

The Commission’s communication on the Community and the Member States’ policy on cooperation with the developing countries in the field of health (1) defines priorities for aid and centres on the reform of health systems and the reinforcement of each country’s own capabilities.

If there is no direct financial support to different specific initiatives,the Commission tends to support the integration of these specific activities as far as possible. This integration is obtained firstly by taking into account particular problems during the preparation of national health development plans,sectoral reviews and evaluations; secondly through dialogue on the health budget and finally in many cases,directly within the scope of projects supporting basic health services and pharmaceutical policies.

The Commission does not directly finance projects that exclusively concentrate on polio such as the global polio eradication programme but focuses its efforts on the reinforcement of national capabilities in the field of vaccination. It supports efforts to secure the supply of priority vaccines (polio vaccine is included in the expanded programme of immunisation) in order to bring about a reduction in developing countries’ dependence on external funding,notably by the inclusion in the budget of,and the release of expenditure for,the supply of vaccines.

The numerous interventions undertaken by the Commission at the level of basic health services contribute to the development and improvement of routine vaccination activities (this includes vaccination against polio). In this field,projects are underway in 32 sub-Saharan countries (for more than ECU 250 million in the 7th European development fund (EDF)) and,through the structural adjustment programmes,the priority budget lines of national health budgets have been secured for more than ECU 450 million in the course of the same period. As an example,under the West African regional programme (7th EDF) a project is underway (ECU 9,5 million) which aims to make the supply of vaccines secure (this includes polio vaccine) in the Sahel zone,and to provide technical support in order to facilitate the regional coordination of expanded programmes of immunisation.

If necessary and at the request of an individual government,this commitment can be increased in countries where there is both a dialogue on health policies and a structural adjustment programme. In this case, supplementary support can be agreed as a way to secure additional funding linked to the polio eradication programme (including the organisation of immunisation days) if this expenditure is included as a line in the national health budget.

(1) COM(94) 77 final.

(1999/C 142/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3154/98

by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: European Caemis project

The Innovation programme of DGXIII of the European Commission financed the European project Caemis E1 (Computer Aided Environmental Management Information Systems) codes IN 10359D and IN 20603A,which concerns the development of a computer programme for the environmental management of undertakings. Can the Commission say:

At whom is this programme directed?

In what countries is it marketed? C 142/96 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

What is the overall cost?

What financing has it received from the Commission?

What companies have benefited from this financial aid?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1998)

The project ‘computer aided environmental management information systems’ (Caemis) (Contract Code IN10359I) aims to promote information technology support systems for environmental management in business and to reduce environmental risks in technical processes and plant operations in relation to human health and safety. The target markets are the food and pharmaceutical industry and the transport sector. The Member States involved are Denmark, Spain, Ireland and Austria. The total cost of the project is ECU 3,74 million with a Community contribution of ECU 880,000. The consortium of the project consists of Randa Group (Spain); Rendan A/S Danish Environmental Management Center (Denmark); LMS Umweltsysteme Gesellschaft mbH (Austria); Banestyrelsen − Danish Railway Maintenance (Den- mark); University College, Cork (Ireland); Dairygold Co-Operative Society Ltd. (Ireland); Grupo Uriach (Spain).

The project Caemis-NETS (Contract Code IN20603A) is an accompanying measure also funded by the Innovation programme. Caemis-NETS aims to prove in selected test markets the capacity for an extension of the Caemis project to all industrial domains and across the various regulatory environments of the member states. The target markets are the food and pharmaceutical industry and the transport sector. The Member States involved are Denmark, Spain, Ireland and Austria. The total cost of the project is ECU 287 723 with a Community contribution of 199,839 ECU. The consortium of the project consists of University College, Cork (Ireland); Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine (Great Britain); LMS Umweltsysteme Gesellschaft mbH (Austria); Randa Group (Spain); Rendan A/S Danish Environmental Management Center (Denmark).

(1999/C 142/117) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3156/98 by Felipe Camisón Asensio (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Coordination of aid to SMEs from the Commission and the EIB

Recently, the European Investment Bank granted a loan to four Spanish and one Portuguese savings institutions with the aim of setting up a risk capital fund of Ptas 10 000 million to finance innovative investment projects by small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Does the Commission consider that this type of action results in the strengthening of similar actions by the Commission? If so, how and to what extent?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

At its meeting in Amsterdam in June 1997, the European Council resolution on growth and employment urged the European investment bank (EIB) to step up its activities promoting investment projects creating employment in the Community. In response the EIB established its Amsterdam special action programme (ASAP) on 20 August 1997. Under this programme the EIB set up an ‘SME window’ to strengthen the capital base of innovative small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) offering strong growth, particularly in relation to high technology. SMEs are crucial for job creation. Their development can be helped by the injection of equity, which in turn can also facilitate access to loan finance. The SME window involves a number of risk sharing global loans and a new European technology facility. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C142/97

Under the risk sharing global loans the EIB makes funds available to partners from the European banking community to support SME activities under their own responsibility. The risk involved in these financing operations is shared by the EIB with the respective partner institution. The loan cited in the question is part of ten operations totalling ECU 277,8 million already concluded with institutions of nine Member States.

At the same time, the EIB has allocated ECU 125 million to the European technology facility (ETF) managed on its behalf by the European investment fund (EIF), to provide venture and equity capital to funds or venture capital companies which specialise in equity for SMEs in their early start-up phase or in expansion. Some ten participations are expected to leverage about ECU 500 million for SMEs.

The risks associated with these instruments are offset by drawing on up to ECU 1 000 million from EIB operating surpluses over the period 1997-2000.

In addition, the Luxembourg growth and employment initiative sponsored by the Parliament covered the setting up of financial instruments financed by the Community budget (ECU 420 million for the period 1998-2001) for innovative and job-creating SMEs. These instruments include a risk-capital facility (ETF start-up) managed by the EIF and targeted at the establishment and early stage of SMEs, a scheme on financial contributions for the establishment of transnational joint ventures (Joint European venture) and a SME guarantee facility managed by the EIF to increase the availability of loans to newly established enterprises.

Both initiatives aim to facilitate access to finance for job-creating SMEs, but differences exist, mainly in the risk approach (generally speaking, the Luxembourg initiative has a higher risk profile) and in the choice of intermediary institutions. The finance instruments of the Luxembourg initiative and the ASAP measures are distinct but complementary.

(1999/C142/118) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3157/98

by Felipe Camisón Asensio (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Situation of Castelo Branco vis-à-vis priority project No 8 of the Transeuropean Transport Network

The 14 priority projects of the Transeuropean Transport Network designated at Essen include the multimodal link between Portugal/Spain and the rest of Europe (No 8). With regard to the motorway section Lisboa to Valladolid, can the Commission say whether the route will pass near the Portuguese city of Castelo-Branco? What is the current state of affairs as regards the corresponding construction works?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

The Commission understands that the Portuguese authorities no longer plan to build a motorway on the Portuguese section of the main Lisbon-Valladolid road, which is part of the second Lisbon-Irun corridor of project No 8, (multimodal link from Portugal and Spain to the rest of Europe) (1) designed to balance investments between road and rail. However, the Portuguese authorities are currently carrying out improvement work on the existing road, in particular the Guarda-Covilhã and Covilhã-Castelo-Branco sections.

(1) OJ C120, 18.4.1998. C 142/98 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/119) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3159/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Work programme for the period 1998-2000 with regard to the development of local and regional transport networks

The Commission recently presented its work programme for the period 1998-2000 for the development of local and regional transport networks aimed at promoting the exchange of information in the field of transport between different regions in the European Union.

Under this programme, the Commission hopes to draw up a manual for carrying out comparative analyses in the area of local passenger transport.

Can the Commission say what criteria were followed in the selection of the 15 cities which will participate in the drafting of said manual?

Did the Commission receive proposals from cities in all the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 1998)

The pilot benchmarking project cited by the Honourable Member aims to establish methods for cities to compare the performance of their transport systems with those of others and to learn from best practice. It covers all modes of passenger transport, not just public transport.

The Commission asked several European associations of local authorities and of public transport operators to bring the project to the attention of cities that might be interested. 45 cities (from 8 Member States plus the Czech republic) expressed an interest. Budget limits meant that only 15 could be accepted. As stated in the Commission’s letter inviting expressions of interest, the criteria for selecting these were evidence of: commitment, at a senior level, to implementing change in order to improve the performance of their local transport system; staff with the time needed to take part in the project; the availability of basic data on their local transport system (covering aspects like the amounts of travel by different forms of transport, travel by different social groups, and public expenditure on transport); and a willingness to make some of this data publicly available. In addition, the Commission aimed to find participants from cities of different sizes and from different regions of the Community.

Bodies from two Spanish cities expressed an interest in taking part in the project. Unfortunately, neither met the project’s criteria. One application related only to one specific form of public transport, rather than to the whole transport system. The other did not provide sufficient information to allow its application to be evaluated against the criteria that had been defined. Their interest, and that of all applicants was, however, greatly appreciated.

The results of the first stage of the project (a guide to performance assessment) should be available in the first part of 1999. The Commission will ensure that copies are sent to the cities which were not selected and that they are kept informed of the further development of the project. 21.5.1999 EN OfficialJournalof the European Communities C 142/99

(1999/C 142/120) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3162/98

by Mathieu Grosch (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Sickness and care insurance for frontier workers

In cases C-120/95 and C-1548/96 the Court of Justice has ruled that the principles of freedom of movement for goods and services also apply to medical treatment and services. Consider the case of a frontier worker who lives in Belgium but works in Germany where he is also insured in accordance with German law.

1. Regardless of the EU country in which the medical services are used, do the reimbursement rates always depend on the tariffs in the country where the person is insured?

2. If so, does it not run counter to the judgments cited above if the socialsecurity scheme of the party insured applies the reimbursement rates only in accordance with the rules of the country of origin?

3. Is it true that, while freedom of the market applies in accordance with the judgments of the Court of Justice cited, above frontier workers are excluded from this and will continue to be subject to EEC Regulation 1408/71?

4. If so, what action is the Commission planning to take to remedy this as soon as possible?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

Under Articles 19 and 20 of Council Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community (1), frontier workers may choose to receive medicaltreatment in the Member State in which they reside, in accordance with the legislation of that Member State, or in the Member State in which they work, as provided for by the legislation of the latter Member State, without needing to obtain prior authorisation or being limited to services in emergencies.

(1) consolidated by Council Regulation (EC) 118/97 − OJ L 28, 30.1.1997.

(1999/C 142/121) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3163/98

by Mathieu Grosch (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Arrangements for part-time employment following pregnancy for workers in Luxembourg

A Luxembourgish woman resident in Luxembourg can receive from the state of Luxembourg child allowance after the birth of her child even if she is employed on a part-time basis or if she stops working altogether. This allowance is covered by the child allowance scheme and is payable over two years. A Belgian frontier worker who is resident in Belgium and works in Luxembourg and whose wife is a Luxembourger has also applied for child allowance in Luxembourg on the grounds that his wife is still working part time. Luxembourg has referred to its rules whereby the child allowance is payable only to Luxembourgers or foreigners resident in Luxembourg.

1. Does this contravene Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community? C 142/100 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

2. Is the decision of the Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber) of 10 October 1996 in the case of Hoever and Zachov versus the Land of North Rhine-Westfalia applicable to this case, too, or does a new complaint have to be submitted to the Court?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

In the absence of details enabling the Commission to carry out the necessary research, the Commission regrets that it is currently unable to answer the Honourable Member’s question. It would therefore ask the Honourable Member to provide more details of this matter.

(1999/C 142/122) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3164/98

by Mathieu Grosch (PPE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Care insurance

In the ‘Molenaar’ judgment of 5 March 1998 (A3 − C160/96) the Court of Justice ruled that Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 (1) which covers statutory sickness was applicable to German care insurance. The Court denied that care benefits were benefits in kind and said they were sickness benefits which had to be granted in other Member States. A judgment by the Court creates law which is immediately applicable. It has an immediate effect on existing legal arrangements, with the result that if parties insured under German care visit or reside in countries of the EU or the EEA they can receive care benefits for a period of six weeks. Transposition does not require an implementing act by the national parliaments.

1. Is it true that persons in receipt of two different pensions from two different EU Member States are excluded from claiming care payments in other countries?

2. If so, what is the legal basis for this?

(1) OJ L149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 1998)

In the Molenaar case (C-160/96), the Court of Justice regarded the care benefits in question as sickness benefits in kind.

This interpretation means that all persons who receive only a German pension and reside in another Member State may benefit from the right to export care benefits (Article 28 of Council Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self- employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (1)). In the case of a person in receipt of two or more pensions, the first issue is to decide which Member State is responsible for sickness benefits in kind. If a person resides in a Member State which pays him or her a pension, it is that Member State which is responsible (Article 27).

If a person resides in a Member State without being entitled to a pension there, the Member State in which he or she has been insured the longest must provide sickness benefits in kind (Article 28). 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/101

Under these circumstances, it cannot be ruled out that a person who receives a German pension but, for example, resides in and receives a pension from his or her Member State of origin may not be entitled to export German care benefits.

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971.

(1999/C 142/123) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3166/98

by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) andJyrki Otila (PPE) to the Council

(22 October 1998)

Subject: Council official’s attitude towards the European Parliament

On 3 October 1998, a report by Mikko Numminen appeared on pages 22-23 of the weekend supplement to the Ilta-Sanomat, a Finnish newspaper, under the headline ‘Lost in the house of Europe’. Among other things, the article quotes the views of Council officials concerning the position of the European Parliament. According to the article, Director-General Sixten Korkman is scathing about the European Parliament, which he describes as being primarily a nuisance.

This statement displays lack of judgment, as well as deep contempt for the EU’s only democratically elected institution. What is worse, it does nothing to dispel the prejudices against the EU in the minds of many citizens in various Member States.

Are Mr Korkman’s views widely shared within the Council? Should he have failed to reflect the Council’s position accurately, what action will the Council take in response to this statement and with regard to Mr Korkman?

(18/19 January 1999)

It is not the practice of the Council to comment on newspaper reports such as that referred to by the Honourable Members. The Council wishes however to emphasise that the remarks of officials of the General Secretariat of the Council, whatever their nature, are in no way attributable to the Council.

The Council, as well as its General Secretariat, attaches the utmost importance to the role of the European Parliament and to good relations between the European Parliament and the Council.

(1999/C 142/124) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3180/98 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Financial contributions to the European Union

How much (in ecus) did each EU Member State contribute to the European Union in the year to 31 March 1997 and how much (in ecus) did each Member State receive from the European Union?

The answer should clearly specify the method of attributing the cost of collaborative or joint activities, the benefits of which are enjoyed by all Member States, such as the cost of running the European Parliament. C 142/102 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1998)

The Commission’s report on the Community’s own resources system (1) includes data on both Commun- ity expenditure in each Member State and own resources contributed by each Member State to the Community budget. The data are available on a calendar year basis and the latest available figures relate to 1997.

The various methodologies which can be used for calculating budgetary balances are discussed in annex 3 to the report. None is ideal and the Commission has repeatedly warned against simplistic interpretation of budgetary balance figuresas a measure ofthe real balance ofadvantage and disadvantage in membership ofthe Community.

The method used for allocating expenditure to individual Member States in calculating the British rebate is set out in the method ofcalculation document ( 2).

(1) COM(98) 560 final available on web.site http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg19/index”_en.htm, choose ‘quoi de neuf?’. (2) COM(85) 36 final.

(1999/C 142/125) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3186/98

by Jan Lagendijk (V) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Parliamentary scrutiny ofdecisions under Title IIIA ofthe Treaty ofAmsterdam

Is the Commission aware that the Netherlands Second Chamber is considering declaring in the law approving the Treaty ofAmsterdam that the present requirement ofthe assent ofthe States-General, applying to all decisions under Title VI ofthe EU Treaty that are legally binding on the Kingdom, will also apply to decisions taken under the provisions ofTitle IIIA ofthe EC Treaty on which (and provided that) the European Parliament has not obtained the right ofcodecision, in order to prevent any increase in the democratic deficit in such fields as immigration and asylum policy? (1)

As guardian ofthe Treaties, does the Commission agree with the Netherlands Government that ‘any expansion of assent to include (titles of) the EC Treaty would run into [...] difficulties in European law’ (2), or does it welcome any move by national parliaments to take responsibility for parliamentary scrutiny of European policy where the European Parliament’s powers are not sufficient?

If the former, what difficulties does the Commission foresee?

(1) Second Chamber, 1996-1997 parliamentary term, motion 21 501-058, No 20 by De Hoop Scheffer and Rosenmöller (adjourned), and Second Chamber, 1997-1998 parliamentary term, 25 922 (R1613), No 4. (2) Second Chamber, 1997 parliamentary term, 25 922 (R1613), No 5, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Under Article 146 ofthe EC Treaty, the Council consists ofa representative ofeach Member State at ministerial level, authorised to commit the government ofthat Member State. Each Member State is entitled to lay down its own rules and procedures which determine the position to be adopted by that representative in the Council. It is not for the Commission to judge these rules and procedures. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/103

(1999/C 142/126) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3191/98 by Arthur Newens (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: EU aid to the countries of the former USSR

Would the Commission list the total amount of aid which has been supplied to each of the states which were formerly members of the USSR on an annual basis since the break-upof the Soviet Union and provide a breakdown of the headings under which that aid has been supplied?

(1999/C 142/127) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3192/98 by Arthur Newens (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Trade with the countries of the former USSR

Would the Commission provide information to show how the pattern of trade between each of the states which were formerly members of the USSR and the various EU Member States has developed on an annual basis since the dissolution of the USSR?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3191/98 and E-3192/98 given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

Since 1991, the Community through the Tacis programme has been providing primarily technical assistance to the countries of the former Soviet Union. Mongolia also became eligible for Tacis support in 1996. The programme has been implemented on the basis of national programmes agreed with each of the partner countries as well as an inter-state programme which has addressed trans-national issues such as the environment. Projects have been drawn upin a number of key sectors. In 1996, the Council Regulation governing the implementation of the Tacis programme was amended (Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) 1279/96 of 25 June 1996 concerning the provision of assistance to economic reform and recovery in the New Independent States and Mongolia (1)) to permit inter alia, a small component of investment financing. This is currently restricted to investment in small-scale infrastructure in the context of border-crossings and equity investment in small and medium-sized enterprises.

In addition, the Community has responded to emergency needs in the New Independent States (NIS) and Mongolia through the provision of humanitarian aid. Between 1993 and 1997, this aid totalled ECU 313 million. This assistance has focused primarily on three major humanitarian crises: the South Caucasus, involving Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia: Chechnya in Russia; and Central Asia, involving Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

Reliable data on trade with the NIS is limited. In the early years following the break upof the Soviet Union data for a number of countries was lacking. The most reliable and comprehensive data relate to trade with Russia which represents by far the Community’s most significant trading partner in the region. For example, in 1996, Russia accounted for 81 % of total NIS exports. Most NIS countries did a large part of their foreign trade with other NIS countries.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat of the Parliament a breakdown of the total amount of Tacis technical assistance supplied to each of the former Soviet republics in the period 1991-1997, a breakdown of the total Tacis assistance supplied by sector, a breakdown of humanitarian aid allocations per country 1991-1997, a breakdown of humanitarian aid allocations per sector 1991-1997, data on trade flows between the Community and the NIS, and data on Russia and the Community’s trade balance.

(1) OJ L 165, 4.7.1996. C 142/104 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/128) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3195/98

by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Rules in the EU governing substitute medicinal products and forms of treatment used to help patients overcome drug addiction

In the European Union there are two almost completely different approaches to helping people overcome drug addiction.

The first is the officially approved model, which focuses on hospitals and includes monitoring by the authorities and the controlled prescription of medicinal products.

The second model is based on interaction: it focuses on the patient and places emphasis on the freer provision of medicinal products and open discussions. In addition, the patient has the right to choose the doctor and place of treatment.

There are also substantial differences with regard to the availability of the medicinal products used for the treatment. For example, Buprenorphin (Subutex), the medicinal product used in withdrawal treatment for out-patients in France, cannot be obtained on prescription in Finland because the authorities regard it as a drug almost equivalent to heroin and stipulate that it may be prescribed to drug addicts only in certain places and subject to strict monitoring of the patients and medicinal products. At least 80 drug addicts therefore travel each month from Finland to France in order to obtain prescriptions for this medicinal product.

1. Is the Commission preparing legal provisions to cover the medicinal products used in withdrawal treatment and in the treatment of drug addicts?

2. Is the Commission planning to launch investigations into the effectiveness of the various withdrawal treatments and medicinal products used to help drug addicts in the various stages of their illness?

3. Will the Commission take steps to bring an end to the situation whereby drug addicts receiving private treatment in many Member States are forced to travel to another Member State in order to obtain Buprenorphin/Subutex for their withdrawal treatment?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

1. and 3. Buprenorphin is, together with methadone, one of the medicines used in the treatment of serious opiate dependence. The placing on the market, indications, rules and procedures for the prescription of these ‘substitution’ drugs falls within the competence of the national authorities, and the Commission does not intend to introduce legislation in this connection.

2. The evaluation of treatments for drug dependence is a priority of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction which, in collaboration with the organisers of the World Health Organisation (WHO) programme to combat drug abuse and the COST A-6 programme, organised a workshop on this subject in March 1997 at which the terms of reference were laid down for the medium term. In the same connection, the Community action programme on the prevention of drug dependence (1) sets out the minimum assessment criteria for medical treatment of a psychological or socio-educative nature.

(1) Decision No 102/97/EC, OJ L 19, 22.1.1997. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/105

(1999/C 142/129) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3196/98 by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Order of priority of the reasons justifying derogations from the Natura provisions

1. Does the following order of priority apply to the reasons justifying derogations granted by the Commission in connection with the implementation of the Natura provisions:

(a) alternative proposals for the project have been investigated,

(b) the project is of vital public interest,

2. Does this order of priority mean that the government must first investigate whether there are alternative solutions for a project and that the government must reject the first project if there is an alternative more suited to the implementation of the Natura provisions?

3. Does the order of priority also imply that the issue of the vital public interest of the project is only considered if there is no alternative solution?

4. At what planning stage does the Commission require the alternatives to be investigated? Does the Commission take the view, in connection with the Vuosaari port project in Finland, for example, that the alternatives should already have been investigated when the regional development plan was drawn up?

5. Does the Commission plan to take measures on the grounds that the draft regional development plan completely disregarded possible alternatives for the project, e.g. other locations or the expansion of the capacity of existing ports?

6. At what stage can a derogation procedure be initiated? Can the derogation be requested before the national Natura proposal has been completed, in order to ascertain from which body or agency the derogation can be requested?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 1998)

The Habitats Directive (1) provides for a setting up of a network of special areas of conservation, Natura 2000. This network consists of sites hosting the natural habitat types listed in Annex I, and habitats of the species listed in Annex II (sites of Community interest, SCI). Further, it shall include the special protection areas (SPAs) classified by the Member State pursuant to the Birds Directive (2).

The list of sites selected as of Community importance for Natura 2000 is set up in a step-by-step procedure, which ends with the adoption of the list by the Commission. As soon as a site is placed on the list, it is the subject of the provisions of Article 6(2), (3) and (4). However, these provisions are already applicable to special protection areas under the Birds Directive.

The Habitats Directive provides that the Member States shall take appropriate steps to avoid the deterioration of sites in Natura 2000. However under the strict conditions of Article 6(3) and (4), the Member State may carry out a project even if it has negative impact for the site. The conditions include assessment of the project’s implications for the site, absence of alternative solutions, the project being of overriding public interest and compensatory measures. The Commission confirms that all these safeguards must be ensured before a negative project can be allowed to proceed, but it is up to the Member State to choose the appropriate procedures for this purpose. While it is ultimately for the Court of justice to interpret whether a particular sequential order should govern the safeguards, the Commission considers that it would not be unreasonable to envisage different safeguards being addressed at the same time, e.g. a consideration of alternative solutions as part of an environmental impact assessment which also deals with the ecological implications of a project. C 142/106 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The alternative solutions must be seen in relation to the project under consideration. The Habitats Directive does not regulate any specific evaluation of alternatives, but leaves it to the Member State to assess in an appropriate manner if there are alternative solutions. A negative project can be carried out only in the absence of alternative solutions. The Commission can require the Member State to demonstrate that it has respected the condition.

The Honourable Member refers to a specific project concerning the newport of Helsinki in Vuosaari. The project affects the site Mustavuori-Östersundom, which Finland has recognised should be an SPA and which also is proposed as SCI in its national list under the Habitats Directive. On this basis, the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) would appear to be relevant from the date of accession, 1 January 1995. The Commission is in correspondence with the Finnish authorities on the matter.

(1) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21.5.1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. (2) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2.4.1979 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(1999/C 142/130) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3201/98

by Astrid Lulling (PPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Transportation by Germany of the directive on the posting of workers

As draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy I refer to transposition of this directive in the Federal Republic of Germany. It has finally been possible to ensure, after a number of years, that Luxembourgish firms which have carried out orders in Belgium with their workers who are resident in Luxembourg do not have to pay bad-weather compensation or a loyalty payment.

Employers and workers in the construction industry in Germany have now agreed on arrangements for a holiday and pay compensation fund. Luxembourgish firms performing work in the frontier region will have to pay into this fund, for the duration of the period of posting, 14.25 % of gross wages paid, even though the workers in question have a guaranteed right to holiday and holiday pay in Luxembourg.

Does the Commission agree that such schemes, which have already been agreed for similar situations in Belgium, are incompatible with the directive on the posting of workers and that they distort competition?

Is the Commission prepared to take action against these and other annoying practices which impede access to the market?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question E-3110/98 by Mrs Reding (1).

(1) OJ C 135, 14.5.1999, p. 168. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/107

(1999/C 142/131) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3216/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Proceedings against Greece for failure to implement Directive 96/42/EC

The Fifteenth Annual Report monitoring the application of Community law in 1997 indicates that proceedings have been initiated against Greece in relation to Directive 96/42/EC concerning taxation of floricultural products. Will the Commission say:

1. what exactly the infringement by Greece consists of, and

2. what the substance of the Commission’s arguments is?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

According to Article 2 of Council Directive 96/42/EC of 25 June 1996 amending Directive 77/388/EEC on the common system of value added tax, (1) Member States are obliged to communicate to the Commission the provisions of domestic law that they adopt in connection with reduced VATrates on floricultural products and wood used as firewood.

Greece was already applying the reduced rate to cut flowers and other floricultural products, as well as to wood used as firewood, prior to the adoption of the Directive. Nevertheless, under its provisions, Greece is obliged to comply with the requirement to communicate the measure to the Commission, even if there is no need for it to adopt any new measures.

In spite of this, Greece has failed to communicate to the Commission the measures which transpose Directive 96/42/EC.

(1) OJ L 170, 9.7.1996.

(1999/C 142/132) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3227/98 by David Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Use of baboons in xenotransplantation research in the UK

Is the Commission aware that wild baboons have been used in xenotransplantation (animal-to-human transplantation) research in the United Kingdom? Does the Commission consider that this is compatible with the provisions of Article 7(3), second indent, of Directive 86/609/EEC (1)?

(1) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1998)

The Commission is aware that wild caught baboons have been used for xenotransplantation research in the United Kingdom. The use of animals for experimentation in the United Kingdom is regulated by the Animal Act of 1986 in accordance with Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes (1), and it is the responsibility of the national authorities − and not that of the Commission − that the provisions of the Animal Act are respected. C 142/108 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

An exemption to use non-purpose bred animals can be obtained ‘under arrangements determined by the authority’ (Article 19(4) of the Directive) and it is at the discretion of the authorities of the Member States that the applicant sufficiently justifies that ‘Experiments on animals taken from the wild may not be carried out unless experiments on other animals would not suffice for the aims of the experiments’ (Article 7(3), 2nd indent).

(1) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986.

(1999/C 142/133) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3237/98 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Availability of Commission documents and of publications of the various services and agencies on the internet

The practice of EU institutions making more and more documents available through the internet has met with wide-spread public approval.

What plans does the Commission have to expand these services in the coming months?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

Statistics on the use of the Europa Internet server confirm the widespread public approval of this initiative. In September 1998, for example, almost 7 million Commission documents were consulted, which is more than double the figure for September 1997. Approximately four hits on the the site are from within the Community.

In the coming months the Commission’s plans include:

− continuing to develop the server in the eleven official Union languages;

− putting the Europe Direct service into full operation; this should make it easier for private individuals and small and medium-sized businesses to locate information about the Community via the Internet and by means of freephone services;

− incorporating the Eur-Lex service in the Europa structure as a whole (making the Official Journals and current legislation available on-line);

− developing the EURO site;

− opening new sites, together with the Council, dealing with the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and cooperation in justice and home affairs.

(1999/C 142/134) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3239/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Assistance to victims of crime in the European Union

According to reports in the Finnish media, the crime victims service which was set up in Finland in 1994 is to be placed on a permanent footing. At present it is operated by volunteers, coordinated by the Finnish Red Cross.

The service has proved extremely necessary. In the course of the public debate, the possibility has been raised that it could be broadened through European coordination. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/109

How will the Commission ascertain the scope for assisting victims of crime through Community policies? What view does the Commission take of the idea that crime victim services operating in the European Union could receive Community funding?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

In order to address the issue of victims of crime in Europe, the Commission has included the issue in its work programme for 1999, when it will initiate appropriate consultations with a view to taking subsequent initiatives for strengthening the situation of victims in Europe.

The Commission does not consider that Community funding for victim services should be the norm. The main responsibility for funding victim services is with the Member States, which have voluntarily subscribed to international obligations to provide adequate services of this nature.

The Commission has, however, on occasion supported financially individual projects in the field of victims of crimes in the context of its Grotius, STOP and Daphne programmes.

(1999/C 142/135) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3241/98 by Patrick Cox (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Recommendation 1030/96 from the Committee on Petitions − safety standards for riding helmets

Following the recommendation from the Committee on Petitions (1030/96) concerning the EN1384 standard for riding helmets and the Commission’s obligation to comply with Directive 89/686/EEC (1), can the Commission indicate what progress has been made to date, if any, on the ‘urgent review’ requested by the Committee on Petitions?

(1) OJ L 399, 30.12.1989, p. 18.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1998)

In September 1998 the Commission sent, as requested, information relating to EN 1384 standard ‘Helmets for equestrian activities’ to the petitions committee of the Parliament.

Three enquiries are presently launched within the European committee for standardisation (CEN) (technical committee CEN/TC 158 ‘Head protection’ and its working group WG5 ‘Helmets for horse riders’) on EN 1384. The first pertains to the normal procedure of revising standards every five years. WG 5 has started work on the next revision of EN 1384 which is due in 2001. The second concerns a draft amendment to EN 1384 which was issued by CEN for enquiry in July and will finish in December 1998. The third will answer the specific issues raised by the petitioner.

The questions put by the petitioner were addressed specifically and in the general context of the work programme for EN 1384 and last discussed at the meeting of TC158/WG5 on 14 October 1998. The petitioner was present at that meeting and has been invited to take part in future work. It was decided to launch a third enquiry in parallel to the two previous enquiries, on the revision and the draft amendment. Its aim will be to determine the main causes of injury in riding accidents and review the relevant statistics. To that effect a questionnaire has been prepared and circulated by the convenor. An answer is awaited from each delegation in January 1999. These questionnaires will also be sent to the equestrian federations.

The next meeting of the working group is planned at the beginning of March 1999. C 142/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/136) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3245/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 October 1998)

Subject: Aromatherapy

With regard to the ongoing discussions being held on herbal medicines with a view to establishing stricter regulation of this industry, what consideration has the Commission given to the possible impact on the aromatherapy industry? Is the Commission aware that the aromatherapy industry could suffer adversely from measures such as the restriction of sales of essential oils solely to pharmacies and/or practitioners? Will the Commission also ensure that the aromatherapy industry is represented on the relevant committees so that it is not sidelined in the debate on stricter regulation?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

The Commission is not aware of any draft legislative measure or proposal which might directly affect the aromatherapy industry. The regulation of the distribution of essential oils to the consumer falls within the competence of Member States and it is therefore national law that regulates the sale of these products.

Some products used in aromatherapy may fall under the definition of ‘medicinal product’ as laid down in Article 1 of Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to proprietary medicinal products (1). If these products are industrially produced, they may only be placed on the market if a marketing authorisation has been granted in accordance with Community pharmaceutical legislation. The ‘ongoing discussion on herbal medicine’, to which the Honourable Member refers, essentially deals with the problem of whether the requirements to prove quality, safety and efficacy of a medicinal product should apply to herbal medicines in the same manner as to any other medicinal product.

Were the Commission − in the future − to decide to proceed with a specific proposal to address the above issue, it would ensure broad consultation with all interested parties.

(1) OJ L 22, 9.2.1965.

(1999/C 142/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3246/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(28 October 1998)

Subject: 1998 Urban Renewal Act, Ireland

Can the Commission indicate which cities and towns are included in the 1998 Urban Renewal Act submitted to the Commission in late September by the Irish Government and indicate whether any regional airport zones (and, if so, which ones) have also been included? When does it expect a decision to be taken on the scheme so that it can come into effect in Ireland?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

A preliminary study of the notified file indicates that the Irish government has not yet finalised the selection process of the areas concerned by the scheme. These areas, to which one or more of the incentives provided in the scheme may apply, will be small zones located in various cities and towns. The final list will be sent to the Commission when the selection process is completed. It is also deduced from the study of the file that no regional airport zones are covered by the scheme. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/111

The Commission considers that the notification of the file was not complete and is currently working on a request for additional information. A decision must be taken within two months from the date the Commission receives complete information on the notified scheme.

(1999/C 142/138) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3248/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(28 October 1998)

Subject: Telecom Italia’s monopoly in the urban telephone services sector

Telecom Italia, the dominant player in Italy’s telecommunications sector, has officially announced increases of 22 % in charges for local telephone calls and 11 % in fixed charges for domestic users, although these are somewhat attenuated by various discounts for individual customers. These increases have raised once again the question of Telecom’s continued monopoly position in the market in urban telephone services, as shown by the marked disparity between Telecom and the new operators that have recently entered the Italian market, which offer their services for trunk and international calls only. This clearly operates to the disadvantage of users and consumers, particularly those from the least affluent sectors of society, who are least likely to benefit from the reduced rates promised for interurban and international calls, which in any event will take some time to come into effect following the liberalisation of the communications market.

Could the Commission state, therefore:

− whether it considers that, in a liberalised telecommunications services system, Telecom Italia, which simply by virtue of its position already benefits from fixed charges yielding more than Lit 5 000 billion a year, is de facto infringing European competition rules?

− whether, given that Telecom obviously has a dominant position in the market in fixed telephone networks, these increases in local call charges constitute an abuse of dominant market position within the meaning of Article 86 of the Treaty?

− finally, whether it is not possible to prevent this increase, the most recent of Telecom’s many attempts to fleece its customers, who do not have the opportunity to opt for alternative services?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

The Commission is keeping a particularly close watch on the pricing practices of telecommunications operators during the initial opening-up to competition. For example, Commission Directive 96/19/EC of 13 March 1996 amending Directive 90/388/EEC with regard to the implementation of full competition in telecommunications markets (1) calls on Member States to allow incumbent operators to rebalance their tariffs in order to remove any instances of certain services being subsidised by other services, i.e. provided at artificially low rates. Such pricing practices restrict competition since it is not in the interests of potential market entrants to target this segment of the market.

Price changes designed simply to implement the principle of cost orientation (which is, in any event, compulsory under Article 17(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 98/10/EC of 26 February 1998 on the application of open network provision (ONP) to voice telephony and on universal service for telecommunications in a competitive environment, (2) which concerns application of the arrangements for open network provision to voice telephony) could not, therefore, constitute an abuse. According to this Directive, the national regulatory authorities are responsible for ensuring that the principle of orienting charges to costs is put into practice. This principle has been incorporated into Italian law and the Italian communications authority is currently examining the orientation of charges to costs and the phased rebalancing of Telecom Italia’s charges.

The examination by the Italian communications authority, which has consulted the Commission on this issue, will take into account the provisions of European competition law, including Article 86 of the EC Treaty. C 142/112 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

The responsibility for rebalancing the charges rests fully with the Italian communications authority, and the Commission does not intend to take a position on any increases that might be authorised on condition that they facilitate the orientation of charges to costs.

(1) OJ L74, 22.3.1996. (2) OJ L101, 1.4.1998.

(1999/C 142/139) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3249/98

by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(20 October 1998)

Subject: Taxation of securities in Italy

Article 8(5) of Decree Law No 461, issued in the Italian Republic on 21 November 1997 and amending Article 10(b) of Law No 77 of 23 March 1983, establishes, in the new paragraphs 4 and 5, a regime for the taxation and redemption of securities deposited in other EU Member States which is different from and harsher than the regime governing securities deposited in Italy.

Can these rules be said to comply with EU legislation, particularly from the point of view of the fundamental freedom of movement of capital and the principle of free competition?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

Under the legislation referred to by the Honourable Member, the special tax of 12.5 % would appear to apply to income from securities of investment funds in other Member States which are held by Italian residents, irrespective of whether they are deposited inside or outside Italy.

The legislation does not seem to allow an Italian resident to receive a tax credit corresponding to the foreign tax paid by a fund based in another Member State in cases where the special tax regime applies. However, where securities are deposited abroad, it would appear to allow the granting of such a tax credit in so far as the taxable person decides not to apply the special tax regime and subjects the income paid by the fund to the general progressive income tax schedule.

The Commission is collecting further information on the legislation referred to by the Honourable Member and will examine it in detail, particularly with a view to determining whether it is compatible with Community law as regards the above-mentioned matter.

(1999/C 142/140) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3256/98

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(28 October 1998)

Subject: Disturbances on board aircraft and ferries

In the light of the rise of disturbances due to drunken passengers on board aircraft and ferries, does the Commission believe that the decision to exempt goods from excise duty when consumed immediately aboard aircraft or ferries is a sensible one? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/113

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

There has been no decision at Community level to exempt goods from excise duty when consumed immediately aboard aircraft or ferries. Under Article 23, paragraph 5, of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (1), the excise treatment of goods consumed on board ferries and aircraft has been and remains entirely a matter for individual Member States.

(1) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.

(1999/C 142/141) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3268/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Subject: Pilot projects to protect areas from flash floods

Official Journal OJ C 185 of 18 June 1997 published a call by the Commission for proposals for pilot projects in the field of environmental protection of areas prone to flash floods.

Will the Commission say:

1. Has it received any proposals from the Member States on the above projects and, if so, what are they?

2. Is Greece participating in the above programme?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 1998)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that, following the call for proposals for pilot projects in the field of environmental protection of areas prone to flash floods (1), 19 pilot projects have been proposed, three of which have been adopted. Greece has not submitted any projects under this call for proposals.

However, it should be pointed out that, as part of the implementation of the Community action programme in the field of civil protection adopted by the Council on 19 December 1997 (2), the Commission is going to grant financial assistance to the Greek Ministry of the Interior for a workshop to set up an early warning system for torrential floods.

Furthermore, the Greek civil protection authorities are closely associated with the monitoring of the above pilot projects.

(1) OJ C 185, 18.6.1997. (2) OJ L 8, 14.1.1998.

(1999/C 142/142) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3271/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Subject: EU aid − improvement of nuclear safety in the CEECs

In its answers to Written Questions E-2488/98, E-2489/98 and E-2490/98 (1), the Commission endeavours to outline the extent of the success of EU aid for the nuclear sector in the CEECs. Unfortunately, however, its explanations are inadequate as answers to the various questions which ask in detail for information on various fields. C 142/114 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Accordingly, I am obliged to ask those questions again:

1. Does the Commission feel that the staffing levels required for the implementation of the nuclear sections of the PHARE and TACIS Programmes are adequate? How many Commission officials are involved, and in what exact capacity?

2. What studies and/or investigations (please give titles and document reference numbers) has the Commission put in hand itself, or asked third parties to carry out, in order to evaluate the success or failure of EU aid for the nuclear sector in the CEECs?

3. When will it make these studies and/or investigations available to the European Parliament? Alternatively, how can these studies and/or investigations be accessed?

4. What is the amount of the financial aid granted by the EU to the CEECs to date for improvements in their nuclear sector, and what is the breakdown of that aid among specific local aid projects, studies, etc., carried out by western European consultants?

(1) OJ C 135, 14.5.1999, p. 63.

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

(18 December 1998)

The Commission considers that the resources which could be allocated to the management of the nuclear safety programmes have been insufficient. The continuous increase in the budgets committed since 1990 was not followed by an increase in suitable resources. These circumstances have resulted in chronic understaffing. Presently there are 14 A and B level agents (officials and other statutes) working in the nuclear safety units of DG1A (External relations: Europe and the New Independent States, common foreign and security policy and external missions) and of the common service ‘RELEX’. Other directorates general Environment, nuclear safety (XI); Research (XII) and Energy (XVII) have assisted and taken part in the programmes. The Commission’s Joint research centre (JRC) is more and more closely associated with the implementation of the programme. In the Moscow and Kiev delegations, some support is also provided.

In 1996, the Commission requested three independent nuclear safety experts to perform an ‘assessment of the current status of Eastern nuclear power plants and some proposals for the future policy directions of the Community action in support of safety improvement’. The TACIS interim evaluation, published by the Commission in 1997 and sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat includes an assessment of the nuclear safety programme. More recently, an independent panel of high level experts, headed by a former director general of the Joint research centre, prepared a report entitled ‘Nuclear safety in Central and Eastern Europe and in the New Independent States, a strategic view for the future of the European Union’s PHARE and TACIS programmes’ (1). This gives a comprehensive view of the programme and proposals for the future. It does not necessarily reflect in all cases the Commission’s point of view. The report has been forwarded to the Parliament.

The communication on nuclear activities in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and in the New Independent States (2) forwarded by the Commission to the Parliament contains the information requested concerning financial commitments.

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg1a/nss/index.htm. (2) COM(98) 134.

(1999/C 142/143) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3284/98 by Reinhard Rack (PPE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: The Commission’s selection procedures

In connection with the Commission’s latest selection procedure, during which irregularities occurred, the question of other forms of recruitment procedure at the Commission arises. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/115

Of particular interest in this context are the simplified procedures for temporary staff that open the way for a career as an official at the Commission.

How many staff are/were employed by the Commission on temporary contracts:

(a) from 1990 to 1994

(b) from 1995 to 1998?

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of temporary staff in all categories (A, B, LA, etc.) by nationality?

How many temporary staff have been taken on as officials under the simplified recruitment procedure?

Are there other ways of becoming an official at the Commission? If so, is the information requested the same as in the simplified selection procedures for temporary staff?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

The number of temporary staff paid from the administrative budget rose from 557 in 1990 to 748 by the end of the period 1990-1994. During the period 1995-1998, the number fell from 971 at the end of 1995 to the current figure of 824. The breakdown of temporary staff by nationality and by category, e.g. for the end of each of these two periods, has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat-General.

Temporary staff are recruited and selected according to the new, simplified system, which came into force on 1 December 1996 (Commission Decision of 13 November 1996 (1)). Recruitments to posts at grades A4/5 and B3 are based on the criterion of specialisation. The three stages are: definition of the profiles for the vacant posts; the call for applications, which as a rule is restricted (list prepared by the Directorate- General concerned, contact with the Permanent Representations) though it may be general if required (direct contacts with the public sector in the Member States, advertisements in the specialised press); and selection interviews with a selection board, following which lists of successful candidates are produced. Candidates who have passed external open competitions are recruited to posts at the starting grades A7 and B5, unless specific skills are required, in which case the above procedure applies. This simplification is designed to speed up procedures for selecting temporary staff and to cut costs by avoiding the systemic publication of advertisements in the press, while at the same time ensuring rigour and transparency.

One way of becoming a permanent official at the Commission (since 1988) is to pass an internal competition for appointing temporary staff as officials. In its Decision of 13 November 1996, the Commission acknowledged that this was an alternative way of entering the institution as an official. Like external open competitions, the competition for appointing temporary staff as officials consists of a written and an oral test supervised by a selection board. In the above Decision, the Commission decided to end this competition system. The last internal reserve competition for the appointment of temporary staff to posts as officials will be held in 1999.

In all, from 1990 to 1994, 942 temporary staff paid from the administrative budget were appointed to posts as officials (an average of 188 per year), and from 1995-98 the figure was 614 (an average of 154 per year). The breakdown by nationality and by category for each of these two periods has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat-General.

(1) SEC(96) 1940 final. C 142/116 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/144) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3288/98 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Regulation on credit reference agencies

Would the Commission consider legislating to introduce common regulatory controls over the work of credit reference agencies across the European single market, compelling them to make their files available to the subject of those files, to correct any misrepresentations in the information they hold and to provide adequate compensation for those disadvantaged by inaccurate information disclosed to other bodies?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

The issue of individuals’ rights with respect to information held about them in credit reference files is addressed by existing Community law in the form of Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data on the free movement of such data (1) (the data protection Directive), which Member States were required to implement by 25 October 1998.

This Directive guarantees to individuals rights of access to and rectification of data held about them, as well as a right to be given information about the ‘logic’ used in the data processing in particular where significant decisions are taken on a purely automated basis − an important feature given the complexity of credit-scoring techniques. Where the result of an automated decision is negative for the individual, he must be given the possibility to air his point of view. People suffering damage as a result of inaccurate data or breaches of any of the Directive’s other provisions are entitled to compensation.

The Commission will continue to monitor the need for further regulation of this area in the light of the requirements of the internal market.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(1999/C 142/145) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3290/98 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Recognition of veterinary qualifications

Would the Commission specify the precise position with regard to the recognition of veterinary qualifications throughout the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

The freedom of movement of veterinary surgeons within the Community is based on national qualifications awarded upon completion of a full cycle of training satisfying certain common criteria. The provisions of Community law which are applicable in this case are those of Council Directive 78/1026/ EEC of 18 December 1978 concerning the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in veterinary medicine, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services (1), and of Council Directive 78/1027/EEC of 18 December 1978 concerning the coordination of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in respect of the activities of veterinary surgeons (1).

(1) OJ L 362, 23.12.1978. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/117

(1999/C 142/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3298/98 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Directive on the construction of shooting ranges

It is understood that the Commission is planning a directive setting out uniform rules on the construction of shooting ranges throughout Europe. Besides safety requirements, new financial provisions concerning high security deposits are also under discussion. A deposit of this kind might threaten the construction of a new shooting range.

In view of the subsidiarity principle laid down in Article 3b of the EC Treaty it has to be asked how such a directive can be adopted at EU level?

Is it in fact true that a Commission initiative aimed at harmonising the construction of shooting ranges is planned?

If so, what are the details?

How does the Commission justify the inclusion of this sphere in its terms of reference?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 1999)

The Commission has no plans for a directive setting out uniform rules on the construction of shooting ranges.

(1999/C 142/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3308/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Problems in the alabaster industry in Aragon

95 % of the world’s alabaster production (48 000 tonnes) today takes place in the Autonomous Community of Aragon (Spain), in the area formed by Bajo Martín, Caspe and the lower banks of the Ebro.

However, all of the alabaster mined is exported before the manufacturing stage. This is because the mining rights are in the hands of a small number of companies which are not based in the mining area, and which monopolise the entire market, sending the raw material to their own factories and practising quite unjustified prices.

In some cases, companies located in the mining area have even had to close down, following severe exploitation problems arising from the power of the owners of the mining rights.

This gross concentration of mining rights in the hands of a few is preventing the development of manufacturing enterprises in the places where the alabaster is mined, thus creating obstacles to job creation and population stability.

Is the Commission aware of this monopoly on the market in alabaster?

Does the Commission intend to take measures to stop this state of affairs, in which this raw material is generating no value added in the area where it is mined? If so, what is the nature of these measures?

Can the Commission guarantee supplies of this raw material, in proper free-market conditions and at fair prices, to the enterprises which could be created in the mining area? C 142/118 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1998)

The Commission has no data such as would enable it to confirm that 95 % of the world’s alabaster-mining activity is concentrated in the Autonomous Community of Aragon. The Commission has not, to date, observed the existence of a monopoly on the alabaster market.

The Commission does not have the authority to determine where raw materials should be processed. It is up to the companies concerned to decide where to locate their production plants.

The Commission can adopt a decision requiring companies which are abusing a dominant position within the common market as referred to in Article 86 of the EC Treaty to put an end to this infringement. On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission is unable to establish whether there is any evidence of a dominant position being abused such as would prompt it to initiate proceedings under Article 86 of the Treaty. Up to now the Commission has received no complaints concerning possible abuses of dominant positions in the alabaster-mining industry.

(1999/C 142/148) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3315/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: Operational programme on telecommunications in Greece

The operational programme on telecommunications included under the second CSF for Greece, which is receiving Community funding of ECU 203,743 million for the period 1994 to 1999, seems to be experiencing certain problems which have led the Commission to raise the matter with the Greek Government. It would seem that the problems mainly concern the fact that: (a) the Greek Government has not harmonized domestic legislation with Community directives; (b) the OTE (Greek telecommunications organization) has failed to carry out internal restructuring or draw upa pricingsystem; (c) the OTE is failing to make available to other mobile telephone companies the frequencies under the DCS-1800 system held by Cosmote, a subsidiary of the OTE.

1. Is the operational programme on telecommunications being implemented in the manner agreed between the Commission and the Greek Government and, if it is true that the normal implementation of the programme has been interrupted, why has this happended and what are the implications for Greece as regards use of the funds concerned?

2. What undertakings has the Greek Government given as regards the proper implementation of the programme and has it complied with them?

3. Is this whole question linked with the programme agreements concluded between the OTE and private companies in December 1997 and, if so, in what way?

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

(30 November 1998)

1. and 2. Article 4 of the Commission Decision of 18 December 1995 granting financial assistance from the Structural Funds to the Telecommunications Operational Programme (OP) stipulates that the timetable proposed by the Greek authorities in subprogramme 1 for harmonising the relevant Greek rules and regulations must be complied with, failing which Community funds will be suspended.

Following various extensions running to two years beyond the time limit laid down in the timetable, and because the relevant Community directives had not been correctly transposed in Greece, the Commission informed the Greek authorities, by letter dated 12 August 1998, that it had decided to suspend the payments for the programme in question. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/119

Current progress on transposing the Community telecommunications directives is as follows: eleven infringements have been recorded (among which the case of the DCS-1800 service and the failure of the Greektelecommunications service, OTE, to introduce a system governing the cost of leased lines). The result has been several warnings, a reasoned opinion and a conviction before the Court of Justice.

Since its adoption, the OP has used up ECU 141 million (70 % of the funding earmarked for it). The suspension of payments relates only to the balance. The suspension will be lifted when the Greek authorities actually apply the Community legislation.

However, it is worth noting that the OP is continuing to run on the ground. Meetings are being prepared to consider the other areas that are behind schedule, in particular the implementation of measure 3.7 on financial assistance for the private sector for advanced telecommunications applications.

3. There is no linkbetween the frameworkagreements concluded by OTE and the suspension of the payments.

(1999/C 142/149) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3316/98 by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: The Flemish Fertiliser Action Plan (MAP) and Flanders’ compliance with Directive 91/676/EEC on nitrates

On 28 May 1995 and 28 October 1997 the Commission wrote to the Kingdom of Belgium concerning the application of Directive 91/676/EEC on nitrates (1) in the Brussels Capital Region and the Flemish Region. Pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty, the competent authorities were asked to respond to the Commission’s remarks on the failure to comply with this directive. In particular, these remarks referred to the failure to identify vulnerable areas, the absence of a code of good agricultural practice, the incorrect and incomplete transposition of the directive into provisions of internal law, the specification of larger quantities of nitrogen applied per hectare and year than permitted (in Flanders 450 kg rather than a maximum of 210 kg as of December 1998!) and the absence of an action programme.

1. How did the competent Belgian, Flemish and/or Brussels authorities react to the letters forwarded by the Commission on 28 May 1995 and 28 October 1997?

2. How far did the competent authorities comply with the Commission’s remarks?

3. Is the Commission considering legal steps to force the Flemish Region and Brussels Capital Region to ensure the correct implementation of the directive referred to above? If so, what legal steps? Can the Commission also provide a timetable?

4. What sanctions can the Commission impose in this case?

(1) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

Under Article 155 of the EC Treaty, the Commission must ensure that measures taken by the institutions under the Treaty are applied. To this end, the Commission was required to verify the implementation by the Member States of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources.

In this context, the Commission has started infringement proceedings, as provided for in Article 169 of the EC Treaty, against Belgium and decided to issue a reasoned opinion. As the Commission points out in the press release which it issued on that occasion (1), the reasoned opinion raises several problems, in particular the insufficient number of vulnerable areas in Flanders, the lackof surveillance in Brussels and the absence of an action programme for the Walloon region and for Brussels. C 142/120 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

If Belgium failed to conform to this reasoned opinion, the Commission might have to bring the matter before the Court of Justice for a ruling on whether Belgium has failed to meet its obligations.

Lastly, it should be pointed out that, under the rules regarding publicity about infringement proceedings, the details of these proceedings are confidential. With regard to any comments made by a Member State in the frameworkof such proceedings, it is for the authorities of that State to decide whether or not the public should be allowed access to the comments.

(1) IP/98-367, 7.7.1998.

(1999/C 142/150) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3320/98 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Conversion of the monastery of Aghios Makarios in Cyprus into a casino

It has recently been reported in the European press (’L’Alsace’ newspaper of 17.10.1998) that the Armenian monastery of Aghios Makarios in the Turkish-occupied part of Cyprus is in danger of being completely destroyed and converted into a casino. The same publication refers to a confidential draft report on this subject examined by the Council of Europe and states that this extremely important Christian monument dating from the 11th century has been subject to constant vandalism since the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

In its reply of 23.4.1998 to Question E-0968/97 (1) by Katerina Daskalaki, the Commission stated that ‘it is aware of the facts’ and that it ‘will also endeavour to address the issue in its discussions with the Turkish authorities’. Will the Commission say once more whether it has made representations to Turkey on this matter and, if not, what measures it intends to take before it is too late, given that it is presently endeavouring to find means of circumventing objections to European funding for the invader of Cyprus, thus encouraging further arbitrary actions by Turkey?

(1) OJ C 323, 21.10.1998, p. 100.

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

(15 December 1998)

Since the Turkish government decided to suspend all political dialogue with the Union after the Luxembourg European Council, relations between the Community and Turkey have not been such that the Commission could raise the issue of the monastery of Aghios Makarios with the Turkish authorities. The Commission very much regrets the lackof contact with civil society in northern Cyprus in recent months. The current situation precludes Commission representations in defence of the cultural heritage.

(1999/C 142/151) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3323/98 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Effects of the Russian crisis on Estonia

The deepening economic and political crisis in Russia has brought about greater economic problems than predicted in Estonia, which may have long-term effects, inter alia, on the country’s EU membership negotiations. One of Estonia’s largest banks has been placed under supervision by the central bank owing to a riskof bankruptcy,and the sectors in Russia which are most dependent on exports, such as agriculture and the foodstuffs industry, are in particularly serious difficulties. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/121

In the light of the most recent information, how serious does the Commission consider the economic effects of the Russian crisis will be on the Estonian economy? What effect does the Commission consider the deepening crisis will have on Estonia’s negotiations for EU membership?

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

(9 December 1998)

The Commission believes that the impact of the Russian crisis on the Estonian economy will be limited and rather short-lived. The lower expected gross domestic product (GDP) growth for Estonia in 1998 may help diminish the external imbalances which had resulted from high growth rates in the past. The Commission is confident that the long-term economic prospects remain good, provided that prudent macro-economic policies are maintained.

The Commission does not consider that the current economic crisis in Russia will have an effect on the process of Estonia’s negotiations for Community membership.

(1999/C 142/152) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3325/98

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Subject: Effects of the crisis in Russia on its nuclear safety

The deepening political and economic crisis in Russia has already created problems with the country’s energy supplies. According to recent news reports the nuclear power station at Sosnoviy Bor near St. Petersburg has filed for bankruptcy on the grounds of debt, and the salaries of workers at nuclear power stations in the Kola peninsula have been in arrears for several months.

How much of a threat does the Commission consider the Russian crisis poses to the country’s nuclear safety? What does the Commission propose to do to identify the nuclear safety problems caused by the crisis in its cooperation with the Russian authorities?

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

(1 December 1998)

The Commission is certainly concerned by the impact that the current crisis in Russia will have on nuclear safety. The present situation confirms the importance that the Commission has placed on activities in this sector. In particular through a twinning between Community utilities and most nuclear power plants in Russia, the Commission supports a permanent monitoring of the situation at these installations, the transfer of Community working methods and important supplies of safety-related equipment.

The Russian crisis has also highlighted the fact that nuclear safety is not only a technical issue, but an economic and structural issue, and must be addressed as such. For this reason, the Commission has included assistance for the restructuring of the nuclear sector in Russia in its programme.

Concerning the non-payment of wages, it should be noted that this is a chronic problem, and one may question whether the current crisis will exacerbate it further. However, the payment of salaries is a centre- piece of the new government’s programme, and it is to be hoped that the government will address the root causes of this problem. C 142/122 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/153) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3341/98 by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Commission Communication on Entrepreneurship

This Communication (COM(98) 222 final) sets out many laudable proposals to assist entrepreneurship in the European Union, but a large number of new businesses will be facedwith another problem which is not referredto in the priorities − counterfeiting. Does the Commission intendto includethis unfortunate aspect of entrepreneurship in any promotional strategy to assist businesses in tackling this problem? Will assistance, either in the form of funding or advice, be made available with a view to helping those smaller businesses which do not have the same financial means as larger firms to tackle counterfeiting?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 1999)

While counterfeiting is not specifically mentionedin the communication ‘Fostering entrepreneurship in Europe: priorities for the future’, the Commission is aware of the negative impact of counterfeiting on entrepreneurship, innovation andcompetitiveness. Therefore, it has recently publisheda green paper on combating counterfeiting andpiracy in the single market ( 1). This will mark the start of a wide-ranging consultation of all the parties concerned, including businesses, the Member States and the institutions of the Community.

This consultation aims to determine the economic impact of counterfeiting and piracy in the single market, to assess the effectiveness of the relevant legislation andto propose a number of initiatives to improve the situation. These initiatives couldincludesupport for private-sector monitoring, legal protection of security andauthentication devices,assessment of the penalties andother means of enforcing intellectual property rights andthe setting-up of suitable administrativeco-operation arrangements between the relevant national authorities.

As counterfeiting and piracy affect a wide variety of sectors (including computing, toys, textiles, perfumes, compact disks, medicines, and watches), a horizontal initiative could prove a useful approach to deal with it in a comprehensive way. For the single market this would also complement the existing mechanism for controlling counterfeit and pirate products at the external border of the Community, and wouldthereby reinforce the coherence of Community action.

Without prejudging what the outcome of the consultation process might be, actions to be undertaken by the Commission couldbe of a legislative nature or consist in financial support to anti-counterfeiting activities, in organisational or administrative measures or in facilitating measures. This could also include assistance, either in the form of advice or funding, under certain circumstances, to small businesses.

(1) COM(98) 569 final.

(1999/C 142/154) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3345/98 by Ulla Sandbæk (I-EDN) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: ICPD + 5

In the light of the forthcoming ICPD + 5 International Forum (The Hague, 8-12 February 1999), which will review andappraise the implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action five years on, couldthe Commission provide information on the following issues:

1. How is the Commission preparing for the International Forum on ICPD + 5? Are any documents being drawn up? If so, when will they be made available to Members of Parliament? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/123

2. Will the Commission use the occasion of the Hague Forum to provide an update on the progress made on the forthcoming Communication to the European Parliament and the Council on reproductive health?

3. How does the Commission plan to coordinate information and share it with Parliament and the Council in the run up to ICPD +5?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1998)

1. The Commission considers the Cairo +5 process to be very useful and plans to participate in the international forum in The Hague. The Commission is also in the process of providing financial support to the non governmental organisation (NGO) forum that will take place in The Hague immediately prior to the international forum in February 1999.

A comprehensive report on Community support (1994-1998) in line with the objectives agreed at the International conference on population and development (ICPD) is in preparation and is due for release in January 1999. This report will outline the Commission’s policies and strategies and provide an overview of the portfolio of projects and programmes ranging from research to service delivery.

2. The new Commission communication on population and reproductive health in developing countries is currently in preparation. Upon adoption by the Commission, which is expected in the first half of 1999, the communication will be transmitted to the Council and Parliament for discussion.

The Commission is also assisting the future German Presidency of the Council to organise an NGO round table on population, reproductive health and development to be held in Brussels on 21 and 22 January 1999. This will provide another opportunity for an exchange of views on progress with reproductive health issues and the role of NGOs in taking this forward.

3. As well as the report above a detailed report to the Parliament and the Council on actions in the field of population policies and programmes in developing countries will be provided before the end of the year. Further information sharing between the Parliament, Council and Commission is ensured through existing channels, such as the development group meetings and plenary, committee and working group sessions.

(1999/C 142/155) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3347/98

by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Wrongful maintaining of the monopoly of the Italian State Printing Works

On the basis of judgment C/44/96 the European Court of Justice recently obliged Austria to dismantle the legal monopoly in the supply of goods and services to the civil service, which was operated by Strohal Rotation Druck. According to Community legislation, therefore, government departments cannot grant exclusive rights to supply stationery and printing services to the civil service, with very few exceptions ( such as stamps and codes of law). Whilst in other Member States, such as France and Great Britain, the State bodies which used to have a monopoly in supplies to the civil service have already been privatized, the situation in Italy has remained unchanged. According to press reports it would seem that the Chairman of the Italian State Printing Works, which last year suffered a loss of more than Lit 600 billion, intends to reschedule the group’s debts with an Italian government decree providing for the transfer of approximately 1 000 billion of public funds and confirming the Printing Works’ exclusive right to supply stamps and stationery to the civil service. C 142/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Can the Commission therefore say:

− whether the decree in question does not constitute State aid;

− whether there are not sufficient reasons to justify infringement proceedings against the Italian State, which continues to maintain a protected market in this sector in blatant contravention of Community rules on free competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 1998)

The Commission asked the Italian authorities about alleged state aid to Poligrafico in April 1997. The information submitted by the Italian authorities on several occasions has not reassured the Commission on the absence of state aid.

Therefore, the Commission, by decision of 28 October 1998, decided to open proceedings under Article 93(2) EC Treaty. This will allow the Commission to assess the presence of state aid, and, if so, its compatibility with the common market, in the capital increases in favour of Cartiere Miliani di Fabriano, controlled by Poligrafico, and in the exclusive contracts granted to Poligrafico itself for the provision of products and services to the state.

On the basis of the observations submitted by the Italian government, the Commission will assess the measures in accordance with the state aid rules of the EC Treaty, and in particular with Articles 92 and 93.

(1999/C 142/156) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3359/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Council

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Eco-audit

1. The eco-audit which has existed in the EU since 29 June 1993 has so far been carried out by about 1960 undertakings. To what extent was Council Regulation (EEC) 1836/93 (1) taken into account in the European Parliament’s new buildings in Brussels (Rue Wiertz) and Strasbourg?

2. What potential water and energy savings were taken into account in the two new buildings, and what technical means were used to achieve them?

3. What potential energy savings did the installation of solar cell units make possible?

4. What waste avoidance strategies has the European Parliament’s administration adopted or implemented for Parliament’s buildings?

(1) OJ L 168, 10.7.1993, p. 1.

(25 January 1999)

The Council considers it is for the European Parliament to reply to the questions raised by the Honourable Member. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/125

(1999/C 142/157) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3360/98 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Eco-audit

2. What potential water and energy savings were taken into account in the two new buildings, and what technical means were used to achieve them?

3. What potential energy savings did the installation of solar cell units make possible?

4. What waste avoidance strategies has the European Parliament’s administration adopted or implemented forParliament’sbuildings?

(1) OJ L 168, 10.7.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

As the Honorable Member rightly mentions Council Regulation (EEC) 1836/93 allowing voluntary participation by companies in the industrial sector in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) entered into force on 13 July 1993 and was applicable from 13 April 1995. Since then 1962 companies in the industrial sectors mentioned in Article 2 (i) of the Regulation have been registered in the scheme. However the building industry is not amongst the sectors for which the scheme is open. The reason for this was the intention to concentrate on the industrial and manufacturing sector in the first instance.

On 30 October 1998 the Commission adopted a proposal for the revision of the EMAS regulation (1), in which it is proposed to extend the scope of the scheme to all sectors including the building industry. After the entering into force of the proposed revision it will be possible for building companies together with theirbuilding locations to registerinthe EMAS scheme.

As far as the administration of the Parliament buildings are concerned the Commission is not competent.

(1) COM(98) 622 final.

(1999/C 142/158) 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 Septem- ber 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 6000 per hectare per year.

1. Can the Commission 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 Commun- ity aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture, and can the Commission provide a full list of the beneficiaries? C 142/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

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 L215, 30.7.1992, p. 96.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/159) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3383/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Aid programmes

The aid programmes for ‘Eurathlon’ and ‘Sport for the Disabled’ are to be dropped from next year’s budget.

The disabled have been disgruntled for some time now that they have not been allowed to see the accounts and budgets for the sport for the disabled programme. It has been revealed by a British MEP that very little of the money for the programme was allocated in accordance with the committee’s recommendations. An external report by the auditors Europool this year has confirmed that the disabled had good reason to be disgruntled. Only 37 % of the funds for the programme were allocated via the committee in accordance with the official guidelines. The rest of the money was spent on projects selected by the external experts from FIPA themselves, for which they charged outrageous amounts.

1. Is it reasonable to discontinue these two aid programmes when aid has been granted to sport for the disabled for eight years with no basis in the Treaty?

2. Does the Commission not agree that the wrong party has been penalised in this case since the disabled themselves have been trying for some time to draw attention to the problems?

3. Does the Commission not agree that it was unsatisfactory that only a very small part of the funds for the programme was allocated in accordance with the committee’s recommendations, when FIPA spent money on producing glossy brochures in nine languages describing the EU’s efforts to promote sport for the disabled?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1998)

The question asked by the Honourable Member raises two different issues: the management of the programme for sport for disabled people and its continuation.

On the first issue, the Commission would like to point out that it ordered a financial audit to examine the effectiveness of the actions supported and management methods. The Commission then prepared a new version of the programmes with major changes incorporating the audit recommendations. Among other things, the Commission took over the running of the programme, which until then had been managed by a foundation, in an attempt to improve transparency and effectiveness. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/127

Turning to the second part of the question, the current position is that in Case C-106/96 the Court of Justice ruled that it was necessary to have a legal basis accompanied by secondary legislation for items to be entered in the Community budget. (1) As a consequence of this ruling, the Commission verified what budget headings existed without a legal basis; these included itemB-3 2020, Sport in Europe. An exception was made and the payment of commitments planned for 1998 to organisations that had taken part in an expression of interest procedure was authorised, as the organisations had legitimate expectations. This included Sport for the Disabled.

In line with the agreement reached with the budgetary authority (at the tripartite budget meeting on 17 July 1998), it will no longer be possible to enter headings considered to be lacking a legal basis in the Community budget. This includes sport, which means that the Commission will be unable to organise the Sport for the Disabled programme.

Nevertheless, since sport is viewed as a means of obtaining broader goals, sport can also be taken into consideration in Community programmes dealing with education, young people, social integration or health which may benefit the disabled.

(1) United Kingdom, supported by Denmark, Germany and the Council v the Commission, supported by Parliament. Judgment given on 12 May 1998.

(1999/C 142/160) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3384/98 by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Shutdown of waste incineration plants in the Canary Islands

Community provisions on solid waste incineration plants establish a series of requirements and conditions including maximum emission levels for polluting gases.

The European Commission has notified the Kingdom of Spain that it should close three waste incineration plants on the island of La Palma (Canary Islands), two in the municipality of Mazo and one in the municipality of Barlovento.

Despite the amount of time that has passed since the Commission notification, a simple visual inspection of the affected areas shows that there has been no change in the situation and that the competent authorities, i.e. the autonomous government of the Canaries and the La Palma Island Council have not adopted any measures to remedy the situation.

What measures does the Commission intend to take and when will it initiate infringement proceedings?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1998)

The Commission has initiated infringement proceedings against Spain under Article 169 of the EC Treaty in the matter raised by the Honourable Member. As part of this procedure it has addressed a reasoned opinion to that Member State.

The reply to the reasoned opinion by Spain has just been received by the Commission and is now being examined.

Should the Commission feel that the response from the Spanish authorities to the reasoned opinion is insufficient it may decide to bring the matter before the Court of Justice in order to establish whether Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations. C 142/128 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/161) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3388/98 by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Security of NGO staff in India

How safe are citizens of EUMember States in India at present, particularly workers with NGOs in general and Christian organisations in particular, in view of increasing attacks by various Hindu organisations on members of other faiths, and of the growth of anti-Western propaganda?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(10 December 1998)

The international press and the Commission’s delegation in New Delhi have extensively reported on the increased incidence of attacks on Christian families, attributed mainly to alleged Christian missionary activities. These events occur mainly in the north of the country where the Hindu nationalist party, BJP, has its strongholds. According to the South Asia human rights documentation centre, a non governmental organisation (NGO) located in New Delhi, this is a serious and growing problem, the extent of which is still being assessed. The attacks are not necessarily related to activities of Christian NGOs.

Member States’ ambassadors have recently expressed their concern in this regard to the joint secretary at the ministry of Foreign Affairs at New Delhi, who confirmed that the government will take all the necessary actions to suppress these activities and protect Community citizens and foreign workers from such criminal acts.

The government of India has this year set up a national commission for minorities, which is charged in particular with the protection of religious minorities in India, and it follows up complaints received. Although the national commission for minorities has no judicial powers, it is hoped that it will exert the necessary added moral and public support and pressure, and thus exert a restraining influence on extremist groups.

Potential risks to the security of Community citizens working in India, especially for Christian and other NGOs need to be carefully assessed in their local context in India.

(1999/C 142/162) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3397/98 by Guido Podestà (PPE) to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: The new role of the Third Age

There are now many studies, both Community-wide and within individual Member States, showing the exponential increase in the number of elderly people and the consequent ageing of the Union’s population; the statistics indicate that in the first decade of the next century there will be the same number of elderly people and young people and, if the trend is not reversed, ten years later one person in three will be over the age of 60.

In the light of this demographic trend, and bearing in mind Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, which explicitly states the intention of the Community institutions to combat discrimination based on age, and also Article 137 of the same treaty, which provides for the adoption of measures intended to encourage cooperation among the Member States with the aim of combating social exclusion, and also recalling the call made by the President of the European Parliament, Mr José María Gil-Robles, at the Senior Citizens’ Conference on 1 and 2 October this year, for Europe to take note of these circumstances: 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/129

1. Does the Commission not consider that the Community institutions have a duty to draw up a more wide-ranging programme than the policies which have been implemented to date, one that will give the Member States the opportunity to set up a system for cooperation in implementing optimum social policies, thereby also making it possible to improve the services provided?

2. Does it not consider that active steps should be taken towards promoting and spreading a new social perception of the elderly which includes their integration as active, rather than passive, members of society and which, by combating the ‘cultural ghettoisation’ of weaker social groups, will restore their freedom of choice and right of autonomy, thus transforming what is currently regarded as a problem into a resource for European society of the next century?

3. Does it not consider that, in connection with the management of the Structural Funds and of other Community resources, more attention should be given at both the planning and implementation stages to the requirements of those belonging to the Third and Fourth Ages?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member’s view that the demographic trend resulting in increasing numbers of older people and the ageing of the population is a matter of great importance to the Community.

In recent years the Commission has produced a number of reports examining various aspects of the demographic situation and also organised, jointly with the Austrian Presidency, a symposium in Vienna on 12-13 October 1998 entitled ‘A society for all ages’. Furthermore, the Commission has ensured that full account has been taken of these issues in key economic, social and employment policy areas, notably through the communication on modernising and improving social protection (1) and the employment guidelines (2).

The Commission also shares the Honourable Member’s view that older people represent a considerable untapped resource and that measures to combat the negative stereotyping of older people should be encouraged. In this context, the Commission is currently preparing a communication for adoption early in 1999. This will contain a short analysis of the character of the demographic challenge facing the Community and outline a strategy of active ageing that is a coherent framework for how to age well in ageing societies by, for example adoption of healthy life styles, by maintaining the employability of older workers and boosting this participation in work and by ensuring that they can remain active after retirement. This communication is intended as the official contribution from the Commission to the United Nations international year for older people and will serve as an important tool to raise and focus attention on ageing and older peoples’ issues in 1999.

In its social action programme 1998-2000 (3), the Commission stated its intention of exploring the new scope for action opened up by Articles 13 and 137 of the Amsterdam Treaty. The Commission is currently examining options in this regard and will ensure that whatever proposals are put forward take proper account of relevant issues related to older people.

As regards the structural funds, the Commission’s proposal for the revision of the European social fund (ESF) Regulation (4) makes no discrimination as to age, but encourages (amongst other elements) a ‘life- long learning’ approach to human resources development. This enables full account to be taken not only of the needs of older workers, but of the ways in which their potential can be enhanced and realised.

(1) COM(97) 102 final. (2) COM(98) 574 final. (3) COM(98) 259 final. (4) COM(98) 131 final. C 142/130 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/163) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3403/98 by Luis Campoy Zueco (PPE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: New anti-drugs strategy

Can the Commission supply details of the new anti-drugs strategy introduced following the adoption at the Cardiff summit of the report on activities on drugs and drugs-related issues, including a post-1999 strategy?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 1999)

The Commission is in the process of preparing a communication to the Council and the Parliament on a Union action plan to combat drugs for the years 2000-2004, as a follow-up to the Cardiff European Council conclusions.

Building on the key elements for a post 1999 drugs strategy which were endorsed at Cardiff, the new plan will provide a general framework reference for the development of a balanced, integrated and multi- disciplinary approach, taking in particular into account the opportunities afforded by the coming into force of the Amsterdam Treaty and the conclusions of the United Nations General Assembly special session on drugs which took place in New York in June 1998.

(1999/C 142/164) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3405/98 by John Cushnahan (PPE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Competition

Irish farmers have been paid low prices for their produce for a considerable period of time, yet Irish consumers have not experienced a similar drop in prices in their weekly shopping baskets.

Will the Commission investigate a possible abuse of their dominant position by either processors or supermarket grocery chains?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

The Commission has not received any complaints from Irish farmers or other interested parties, alleging that Irish processors or retailers have abused a possible dominant position.

The Commission has been informed, however, that the Irish government has announced its intention to launch an investigation into the pricing practices of processors and retailers.

(1999/C 142/165) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3423/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Cancellation of a competition

On 23 September 1998 the Commissioner responsible for personnel and the budget, Erkki Liikanen, announced the cancellation of the first round of the mega-competition held on 14 September, in which 30 700 candidates had taken part. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/131

The cost of this abortive exercise was roughly ECU 1,2 million (2,4 billion lires). The competition was cancelled because ‘examination papers had been leaked, at least in one language’.

Does the Commission intend to identify those responsible to ensure that they, rather than the citizens of Europe, meet the cost of organising another examination?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1998)

Yes. On 28 October 1998 the Commission lodged a complaint with the public prosecutor in Brussels so that everyone involved in the affair, both the perpetrators and the beneficiaries, could be identified and brought to justice.

(1999/C 142/166) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3434/98

by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Fires in the far east of Russia

The far eastern taiga of Russia (Sakhalin island and the Khabarovsk region) has been suffering the effects of a large number of fires since the spring. More than 1 800 000 hectares of forest has already been destroyed by fire as a result of a dry and warm summer, strong winds and the lack of any means of fighting the fires. In addition to this incalculable loss, unique animal species are under threat; they include the Ussuri tiger, 80 % of whose habitat has been devastated. At the present time, these fires are still burning out of control, with the consequent loss of biological diversity and adverse influence on the global climate.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

Will it be contributing any kind of financial and/or material aid to alleviate the effects of this ecological disaster?

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

(8 December 1998)

The Commission is aware of the problem of forestry fires in the Russian Federation, not only in the region of Sakhalin and Khabarosk, but also in other parts of the territory. One to three million hectares are damaged or lost annually through fire.

The Commission, in the framework of the 1997 Tacis action programme, designed a project specifically addressing this question which will start in the coming weeks. It is called ‘Improvement in forest fire response systems’ and its main objective is to improve the fire-fighting response of the Russian Federal forestry fire service, both in terms of time and quality. Three regional centers will benefit directly or indirectly from the project (Pushkino, Krasnoyarsk and Khabarosk).

A detailed description of this project is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament. C 142/132 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/167) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3438/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Community policemen and petty crime in large cities

The proposals put forward in Italy in order to improve safety in areas which are particularly difficult to police, such as certain parts of Rome, include one concerning the appointment of community-based police officers.

One of the most serious problems in the major cities of Europe is that of protecting the general public in the face of ever-increasing levels of petty crime, the widespread nature of which has a significant social impact on the community.

In view of the above, could the Commission say:

1. whether there are any Commission documents or studies concerning safety in the major cities of Europe?

2. whether there are any documents or directives concerning strategies to combat petty crime?

3. whether there are any documents concerning community-based police officers?

4. whether, in other Member States, there are similar strategies which take the form of community-based institutions?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 1999)

The Commission is aware of the problems posed by petty crime and their impact on ordinary people in their everyday lives. It agrees that the measures taken by the Union to combat organised crime must take account of urban crime − an approach followed by the action plan to combat organised crime adopted by the Council in 1997 (1).

The action plan supports the use of Union instruments to help prevent European cities becoming a breeding ground for organised crime. Projects can be financed from the Community Structural Funds, but to date only Italy has availed itself of this possibility.

The problems of urban crime are also raised in a communication recently adopted by the Commission on urban policy, which includes a chapter on developing initiatives to prevent urban crime. (2)

Finally, at its meeting on 3 and 4 December 1998 the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) reached agreement on a draft resolution on the implementation of a strategy for preventing organised crime, which also includes measures to prevent urban crime. The resolution, which sets out a timetable and describes the tasks to be carried out by the Member States, Europol and the Commission, will be formally adopted shortly.

As regards the documents mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission has not commissioned any studies on petty crime. Moreover, it feels that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, it is primarily up to the Member States to decide on the implementation of structures such as community policing and to lay down the appropriate powers.

The Commission could co-finance projects for the prevention of organised crime − including links to urban crime − through its own programmes, in particular the Falcone programme. It could also provide support for a mechanism designed to pool experience and good practice in the prevention field.

(1) OJ C 251, 15.8.1997. (2) COM(98) 605 final. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/133

(1999/C 142/168) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3451/98 by Mark Watts (PSE) to theCouncil

(23 November 1998)

Subject: Compensation for French lorry drivers’ dispute

Could the Council inform me what progress has been made in providing financial compensation to haulage companies and truck drivers who were victims of the French lorry drivers’ disputes in November 1996 and November 1997? There was yet another blockade in France last week, on the N141 outside Cognac, involving the unnecessary detention of up to 40 vehicles and their cargoes. Can the Council say what compensation arrangements will be made for the companies affected and what welfare arrangements made for foreign drivers detained?

(25 January 1999)

The question raised by the Honourable Member falls within the competence of the French authorities.

(1999/C 142/169) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3455/98 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Human rights abuses in Bahrain

Is the Commission aware of the Bahrain Government’s ratification of three human rights treaties, the Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (1990), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1992), and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment (1998)?

Is the Commission also aware that one of the Bahrain Government’s obligations under these treaties is to submit periodic reports to the Committees monitoringtheir implementation?

As regards the first two treaties referred to, the Bahrain Government has, to date, failed to submit reports due in 1991 and 1994 respectively.

Can the Commission assure me that it will make every effort to urge the Bahrain Government not only to improve its human rights record but to fulfil its obligations under the treaties it has signed?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

The Commission follows developments in human rights, including the conventions in question, as an observer in the relevant fora of the United Nations. In this respect, the Commission associates itself with positions taken by the Union in relation to Bahrain or other countries parties to the conventions.

The Commission does not have any bilateral contractual arrangement with Bahrain. Questions concerning human rights and democracy are raised in ministerial meetings under the cooperation agreement under the cooperation agreement between the Community and the Gulf cooperation council (GCC) concluded in 1989 (1). Duringthe recent joint council meetingin Luxembourgon 27 October 1998, Community ministers reiterated their commitment to the promotion of human rights and to the principle that all human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. C 142/134 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

In the context of the political dialogue between the GCC and the Community, the Commission encourages Bahrain and the other GCC countries to promote democracy and to become signatory parties to and fully apply international instruments in relation to human rights.

(1) Council Decision of 20 February 1989; 89/147/EE.

(1999/C 142/170) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3459/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Burgenland (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Burgenland, can the Commission provide information as to:

1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided, with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative and the amount of EU funds disbursed for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Burgenland, charged to other budgetary headings since 1995;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/171) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3460/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Kärnten (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Kärnten, can the Commission provide information as to:

1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided, with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative and the amount of EU funds disbursed for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Kärnten, charged to other budgetary headings since 1995;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/172) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3461/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Lower Austria

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Lower Austria, can the Commission provide information as to:

1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided, with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative and the amount of EU funds disbursed for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Lower Austria, charged to other budgetary headings since 1995;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/135

(1999/C 142/173) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3462/98 by Daniela Raschhofer(NI) to the Commission (24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Upper Austria

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Upper Austria,can the Commission provide information as to: 1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided,with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative and the amount of EU funds charged to other budgetary headings since 1995 disbursed for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes,universities,undertakings and other bodies in the State of Upper Austria; 2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3463/98 by Daniela Raschhofer(NI) to the Commission (24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Salzburg (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Salzburg,can the Commission provide information as to: 1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided,with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative,and the amount of EU funds charged to other budgetary headings and disbursed since 1995 for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes,universities,undertakings and other bodies in the State of Salzburg; 2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3464/98 by Daniela Raschhofer(NI) to the Commission (24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Styria (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Styria,can the Commission provide information as to: 1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided,with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative,and the amount of EU funds charged to other budgetary headings and disbursed since 1995 for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes,universities,undertakings and other bodies in the State of Styria; 2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/176) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3465/98 by Daniela Raschhofer(NI) to the Commission (24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Tirol (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Tirol,can the Commission provide information as to: 1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided,with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative,and the amount of EU funds charged to other C 142/136 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

budgetary headings and disbursed since 1995 for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Tirol;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/177) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3466/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Vorarlberg (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Vorarlberg, can the Commission provide information as to:

1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided, with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative, and the amount of EU funds charged to other budgetary headings and disbursed since 1995 for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Vorarlberg;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

(1999/C 142/178) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3467/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Vienna (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Vienna, can the Commission provide information as to:

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3459/98, E-3460/98, E-3461/98, E-3462/98, E-3463/98, E-3464/98, E-3465/98, E-3466/98 and E-3467/98 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/179) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3478/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(12 November 1998)

Subject: Investigation into the state aid for the Lenzing Lyocell plant in the Austrian province of Burgenland

In mid-October, the Commission announced that it would be carrying out an investigation into the aid granted by Austria to the Lenzing Lyocell plant in the province of Burgenland. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/137

I should like to ask the Commission the following questions concerning the investigation procedure and the background to its actions:

1. What information or tips resulted in the aid granted being investigated at this particular moment in time? Where did the information come from that Lenzing GmbH & Co KG Austria had bought the land on which to build its plant at a price other than the normal market price?

2. Was the aid agreement between the Federal Province of Burgenland, representing WIBAG, and Lenzing GmbH & Co KG Austria authorised?

3. What substantive objections exist which make an investigation necessary? What amounts were granted as state aid for the Lenzing plant in Burgenland, and for what purpose?

4. Which parts of the agreement, or which particular types of aid (such as direct payments, guarantees provided, provision and assignment of infrastructure, etc.), are being investigated to ensure conformity with EU legislation?

5. What method of calculation and what legal basis underpin the maximum authorised national ceiling of 40 %? When will the investigation be completed, and when may we expect to know the Commission’s final decision?

6. What would be the consequences for the Lenzing GmbH & Co KG Austria if it were to be proved that the aid granted was not in conformity with EU competition legislation?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

1. Austria forwarded to the Commission application forms for European regional development fund (ERDF) co-financing on two large-scale investment projects at the Heiligenkreuz business park in Burgenland. In these documents, Austria referred to the investment of Lenzing Lyocell GmbH & Co KG (LLG) at the business park, which raised questions related to the application of state aid rules. In the light of this information and the additional information submitted upon request, the Commission decided on 14 October 1998 to initiate formal investigations. The Commission will inform interested parties by publishing this decision in the Official journal.

The Commission has so far not drawn a final conclusion whether LLG paid a market price for the land at the Heiligenkreuz business park. At present, and on the basis of the information available, the Commission only doubts whether the price of land could be considered as a market price.

2. The Commission has not approved a specific aid contract between Land Burgenland and LLG. The Commission therefore asked Austria to prove that Land Burgenland provided state aid to LLG under approved or existing aid schemes.

3. The reasons for the investigation are the following. The Commission has doubts whether Austria provided all the committed and proposed aid in accordance with approved or existing schemes. Moreover the Commission cannot exclude that the investment aid may exceed the regional aid ceiling of 40 % net. Furthermore the Commission cannot exclude that possible guarantees, the price of land at the Heiligenkreuz business park, possible free of charge company-specific infrastructure development, and prices for basic process utilities contain state aid elements, and if so, whether these state aids would be covered by approved or existing schemes.

The Commission understands that, as to the first investment phase, Austria committed to investment aid measures of ATS ECU 801 million (ECU 57,8 million), environmental aid of ATS ECU 76,3 million (ECU 5,5 million), and training aid of ATS ECU 10,4 million (ECU 0,8 million). To the second investment phase, Austria proposed state aid of similar extent. Furthermore, Austria proposed aid if LLG would transfer a pilot plant and the research and development (R&D) department from another site to the site in Land Burgenland. C 142/138 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

4. The measures which the Commission is investigating are a grant on purchased land, a grant under the regional business promotion act of Land Burgenland, the commitment of Land Burgenland for further investment aid, grants under article 51 a of the labour market promotion act, grants under article 12 (5) of the environmental state aid act, a dormant partnership capital provided by WiBAG, training aid of Land Burgenland and AMS investment aids proposed by Land Burgenland for an expansion of capacity and for a transfer of facilities from another site to the site at the business park guarantees to secure grants and loans, the price of land at the business park, possible company specific infrastructure development, and prices for basic process utilities.

5. In order to calculate the aid intensity the Commission compares the present value of granted investment aid to the present value of eligible investment costs. The legal basis for the regional aid threshold of 40 % net is the European economic area (EEA) decision on 11 May 1994 (1).

6. State aid granted unlawfully and not compatible with the common market must be recovered from the recipient. The amounts recovered will include interest calculated on the basis of the reference rates used to calculate the grant-equivalent for the purposes of regional aids, running from the date on which the aid was payable to the recipient until the date of actual recovery.

(1) OJ C 199, 21.7.1994.

(1999/C 142/180) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3494/98 by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Council

(13 November 1998)

Subject: Recognition of qualifications by Member States

What efforts is the Council making to harmonise recognition of workers’ qualifications, between Member States, especially in terms of the amount of proof required by the Member States to validate the migrant workers’ qualifications?

(25 January 1999)

At the present time there is no harmonisation of the proofs required by the Member States to validate migrant workers’ qualifications. Nevertheless, the Council would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that, within the European Commission, the Coordinators’ Group on the Recognition of Diplomas, made up of representatives of the Member States, recently adopted a Code of Conduct intended to ensure a harmonised assessment of proofs by the coordinators responsible for facilitating the implementation of the Directives on the recognition of professional qualifications. The aim is to avoid administrative formalities being used as an indirect obstacle to the free movement of persons.

(1999/C 142/181) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3495/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Amendment of the Staff Regulations

Homosexual EU staff do not have the same rights as their heterosexual colleagues. This is particularly the case for the rights and perks that the spouses of EU staff normally enjoy, and applies even though homosexual staff have entered into a registered partnership that corresponds to marriage in their own country. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C142/139

More and more Member States − besides those that already have registered partnerships − plan to introduce such a system. The existing Staff Regulations are thus becoming more and more outdated.

1. What are the provisional conclusions of the reflection group set up for this purpose?

2. When does the reflection group expect to conclude its investigation?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 1999)

Chapter 4.2 (‘The impact of social change’) of the final report dated 6 November 1998 by the Reflection Group on Personnel Policy, a copy of which is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat, comes to the following conclusion:

As registered partnership satisfies all the de facto and de jure criteria underlying the inclusion in the Staff Regulations of special provisions for spouses (right to live together, financial interdependence, legal requirement to provide maintenance, and protection of the family in the case of the invalidity or death of officials), the Group recommends that the institution keep a close eye on developments in national legislation and be ready to amend the Staff Regulations when the time comes.

(1999/C142/182) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3496/98 by Bernd Posselt (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: ’Youth for Europe’ application forms

The application forms for the ‘Youth for Europe’ programme are at least 15 pages long, with very many questions only some of which are necessary. Accordingly, for voluntary youth leaders who have to struggle with these applications and have little experience of form-filling, they are a major obstacle and they are biased towards large organisations will full-time officials. That is not what I regard as the point of European youth work. Even with equivalent programmes in Germany the forms are much shorter and more manageable.

Does the Commission see any scope here for getting rid of bureaucracy and simplifying things in the interests of young people?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

The Youth for Europe III programme will come to an end in 1999. A fundamental change of the forms for this popular programme is not planned for its last year.

The current application forms for the different actions of the programme facilitate first of all a thorough evaluation of projects in the framework of the selection process. It is also necessary to be able to ascertain to what extent the young people themselves are involved in the project. In addition, the data given in the project application serve as a basis for the evaluation of the final report on both the project content and financial issues.

The Commission, however, is aware of the fact that some applicants do consider the forms burdensome. It will therefore simplify and shorten − as far as possible − the application forms for the future Youth programme from the year 2000. C 142/140 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/183) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3501/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Unilateral investment sanctions

If an EU Member State were to impose unilateral financial sanctions on Burma (on serious political grounds and as a matter of urgency under Article 73g (2) of the EC Treaty), would the Commission propose that the Council overturn the Member State’s decision or bring proceedings against that Member State on the grounds of a perceived breach of Community law?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-2119/98 (1).

It is not Commission policy to answer hypothetical questions.

(1) OJ C 96, 8.4.1999.

(1999/C 142/184) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3502/98 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 November 1998)

Subject: The Wassenaar Committee

Within the framework of the EU there is a body known as the Wassenaar committee, whose work is alleged to include studying the encryption of data communications and coding systems. Its secretariat is in Vienna. What duties does this Committee have, what is its status within the EU and in what form are the encryption plans it has presumably put forward dealt with by the EU?

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

(3 December 1998)

The Wassenaar arrangement is the successor to the Coordination committee for export to communist area (COCOM) regime. Definitively implemented with the adoption of ‘initial elements’ in July 1996 by 33 founding members including the United States, Russia and all Union Member States, it deals with export controls and information-exchange related to dual-use items and conventional arms. The Community as such is not party to the arrangement.

The items covered by the Wassenaar arrangement include encryption products. As the entire Wassenaar dual-use list is integrated into the Union list of controlled dual-use products (Council Decision 942/ 94CFSP of 19 December 1994 on the joint action adopted by the Council of the basis of Article J.3 of the Treaty on European Union concerning the control of exports of dual-use goods (1) as subsequently amended), encrypted products covered by the Wassenaar list are subject to control when exported from the Community. Any changes to control scope in Wassenaar (for instance decontrol of certain items) lead to corresponding changes in the Union list.

The arrangement has a permanent secretariat based in Vienna. Information about the work of the arrangement can be found on the Website www. wassenaar.org.

(1) OJ L 367, 31.12.1994. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/141

(1999/C 142/185) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3503/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 November 1998)

Subject: Taxi services in Denmark

Under Danish legislation on taxi services, taxi companies can only operate with a special permit issued by a local authority. Independent taxi operators must in addition be connected to a reservation office, which handles bookings and arranges for a taxi to be sent to the customer. The taxi company does not thus have direct contact with customers.

The requirement to be connected to a reservation office applies only in communes where the number of taxi licences is 10 or more. Taxi operators cannot decide to set up a reservation office themselves because that requires the approval of the Minister of Transport In many Danish provincial towns there is often only one approved reservation office, and the local authorities determine the maximum prices. Individual reservation offices have coordinated practices so that there is no price difference whichever reservation office or taxi operator is chosen.

In practice the legislative requirement to be connected to a reservation office means that the Danish taxi market is completely closed to competition between independent taxi operators.

Does the Commission consider it to be in keeping with the internal market’s rules on free and equal competition for independent taxi operators to have to be connected to an approved reservation office under Danish legislation?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/186) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3517/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Monitoring of State aid

With reference to the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (COM(98) 0073 final − 98(0060 CNS) (1), whilst supporting the Commission’s effort to make the recovery of unlawful aid more efficient, in particular by means of suspension injunctions and provisional recovery of aid (Article 11) and the provision laid down in Article 14 (3) that ‘remedies under national law shall not have suspensive effect’, I would point out that the regulation does not say what will happen if the national legal procedures do not allow immediate and effective execution of the Commission’s decision.

To comply with the fundamental principle of equality of conditions, the Member States must undertake to ensure that unlawful aid can be recovered immediately.

Can the Commission therefore ensure that time-wasting procedures are not established or implemented, given that aid granted unlawfully must be recovered as soon as it becomes incompatible with the Community rules and therefore intrinsically illegal?

(1) OJ C 116, 16.4.1998, p. 13. C 142/142 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/187) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3518/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Monitoring of State aid

The proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty(COM(98) 0073 final − 98(0060 CNS) ( 1) rationalises a number of procedures and principles laid down in the case-law of the Court of Justice bygiving them an organised structure.

The task of coordinating Communityaction in the field of competition in a legal framework must be continued so that in the next few years greater legal certainty in this field will be achieved.

The scope of that regulation must be extended to cover in addition fiscal measures causing distortions of competition between the Member States.

Can the Commission therefore assess whether it would be appropriate to make public the notifications by the Member States of new aid, if onlyin summaryform?

(1) OJ C 116, 16.4.1998, p. 13.

(1999/C 142/188) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3519/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Monitoring of State aid

With reference to the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty(COM(98) 0073 final − 98(0060 CNS) ( 1), it should be pointed out with regard to the rights of third parties in general there is no provision in this proposal authorising the Commission to publish the notification of a specific aid or to provide basic information on the aid granted.

Given that the lack of such a provision adverselyaffects transparencyand infringes the rights of third parties, can the Commission take urgent action in this respect?

(1) OJ C 116, 16.4.1998, p. 13.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3517/98, E-3518/98 and E-3519/98 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 1998)

The Commission welcomes the support given bythe Honourable Member for its proposal for a Regulation on aid procedures, which is aimed at increasing transparencyand legal certaintyand making control more efficient.

Articles 11 and 14 are indeed important tools for making control more efficient, especiallyas regards unlawful aid. Where unlawful aid is also incompatible with the common market, the Regulation lays down the principle that the Commission must require its recovery. The Member State must then effect recovery without delay, in accordance with the procedures of national law, provided, however, that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the Commission’s decision. In addition, the Member State is required to take all necessarymeasures, even provisional ones, to achieve that end. The Commission will ensure that recoveryis not delayedbytime-wasting procedures and will use the means at its disposal, including actions before the Court of Justice, to enforce compliance with its decisions. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/143

As regards the scope of the Regulation, it covers all aid coming under Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty. Insofar as certain tax measures satisfy the conditions of Article 92(1), they are therefore also covered by the Regulation.

There is no provision in the Commission proposal for the publishing of notifications, for legal and practical reasons. The purpose of such an exercise would be to invite third parties to submit comments. The EC Treaty reserves this third-party role for the formal investigation procedure: the decision to initiate the procedure is published in the Official Journal. Such a procedure is mandatory in all aid cases which give rise to doubts as to their compatibility with the common market. It does, however, appear unnecessary for a large number of routine cases which quite clearly satisfy the criteria published by the Commission, and for which it would only delay the Commission’s decisions. All Commission decisions are, however, published in the Official Journal.

(1999/C 142/189) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3525/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work

With regard to the Council Directive amending for the second time Directive 90/394/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work (COM(98) 170 final − 98/ 0093/SYN) (1), up to now there has only been evidence of the carcinogenic nature of beech and oak dust, which can cause adenocarcinomas of the nose and/or mucous membranes of the nose.

In addition, the Scientific Committee has stated that there is clear evidence implicating other types of wood. Differences still exist between the Member States with regard to the limit values for beech and oak wood dust and to some extent also with regard to wood dust in general. The various limit values range from 2 to 10 mg/m3.

Can the Commission therefore incorporate in the directive an initial value of 5 mg/m3 as the threshold for exposure at work with the proviso that that value must be reviewed within five years on the basis of scientific data?

(1) OJ C 123, 22.4.1998, p. 21.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 1998)

The Commission has already taken account of the Honourable Member’s suggestions in its amended proposal for a Council Directive amending for the second time Directive 90/394/EEC (1). This proposal was adopted on 12 November 1998 following the opinion expressed by Parliament.

(1) COM(98) 665 final.

(1999/C 142/190) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3530/98 by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Special EU representative for Tibet

The report of 8 July 1998 by the EU troika’s human rights mission to Tibet from 1 to 10 May 1998 showed clearly that the situation in Tibet is not satisfactory. The lack of transparency concerning respect for human rights in Tibet makes it imperative, from the point of view of the European Parliament, to appoint a special representative of the European Union for Tibet. Parliament’s resolution of 15 January 1998 C 142/144 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(B4-0076/98) and the joint motion for a resolution of 13 May 1998 (B4-0511/98,B4-0537/98,B4-0538/98) both called on the Commission to appoint a special EU representative for Tibet.

Is the Commission now prepared to appoint a special EU representative for Tibet?

If so,when and with what specific remit?

If not,is the Commission prepared to enter into talks with the Council and Parliament with a view to appointing a special EU representative for Tibet?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

Promotion of human rights is one of the priorities of the EU’s China policy,so the situation in Tibet features prominently on the agenda of the human rights dialogue conducted by the Union with China via the troika. The Commission for its part regularly raises human rights issues in the course of its official dealings with the Chinese authorities,most recently when Mr Santer,Sir Leon Brittan and Mr de Silguy visited from 29 October to 3 November.

The EU takes a positive approach to these matters,and has drafted guidelines for its policy on Tibet including support for a direct dialogue between the Chinese government and the Dalai Lama,expert missions to Tibet,development projects and education and training measures for the people of Tibet.

The Commission believes these guidelines offer the best prospect of improving the overall situation in Tibet and ensuring transparency. It does not therefore intend at this stage to propose any additions to the list of planned measures.

(1999/C 142/191) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3561/98 by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission

(1 December 1998)

Subject: UNRWA and missing EU funds

The Member undersigned has been given information according to which EU funds totalling approximately ECU 2 million which had been provided for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees are said to be ‘missing’.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

− can the Commission confirm that EU funds totalling approximately ECU 12 million which were provided for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) are indeed missing?

− What steps have been taken by the Commission in this regard?

− Does the Commission carry out any controls to ensure an appropriate distribution of funds by the UN?

− If so,why did these controls fail in the abovementioned case?

− If not,why not and does the Commission intend to change its practice of providing sums totalling millions to other international organisations without them being subject to any controls?

− Can the Commission provide a summary of payments made by the EU to UN bodies in the past ten years? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/145

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.

(1999/C 142/192) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3574/98

by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(18 November 1998)

Subject: Commission Communication concerning AIDS

I understand that the ‘Commission Communication to the European Parliament and the European Council for increased solidarity to confront AIDS in developing countries’ was available already before the summer recess. Why has this communication not been sent to the Members of Parliament?

Can the Commission explain why they have chosen to send this Communication to the European Parliament solely ‘for information’ and why Parliament has not been asked for its opinion?

Will the Commission ask the European Parliament for its opinion on this very important issue so that we can discuss it in the relevant committee(s)?

Can the Commission explain what has happened with this Communication since then?

Can the Commission provide information on what has been discussed in the meetings of the Council on this issue?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament for increased solidarity to confront Aids in the developing countries (1) was adopted by the Commission on 3 July 1998, whereupon all language versions were formally sent to Parliament’s secretariat. It is up to the secretariat to ensure that the document is circulated internally and that members and the relevant parliamentary committees are duly informed.

As the communication is not a legislative text the Commission, in line with its normal practice, forwarded it to Parliament, as one of the intended recipients, purely ‘for information’. It is then naturally a matter for Parliament itself to decide whether to prepare an opinion on the document, e.g. by drafting an own- initiative report and adopting a resolution.

On the substantive issue, the fact that the Commission drafted and adopted a communication for transmission to Parliament and the Council on so important a topic as Aids in the developing countries surely indicates that it is seeking the reactions of those institutions and would welcome their comments on the analysis and proposals it has put forward.

We would point out that the communication was presented in outline at the meeting of the Council working party on development cooperation on 17 July. C 142/146 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

It was also discussed in depth at a round table meeting of Member State and Commission health and Aids experts in Brussels on 25 September. We are sending copies of the minutes of this meeting direct to you and to Parliament’s secretariat.

(1) COM(98) 407 final.

(1999/C 142/193) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3575/98 by Ingo Friedrich (PPE)to the Commission

(18 November 1998)

Subject: Tax-free and duty-free purchases by EU officials

1. What category of EU officials are entitled to make tax-free and duty-free purchases?

2. How does the Commission justify these exceptional provisions?

3. What level of price reduction is involved?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 1998)

All officials, temporary staff or auxiliary staff holding a contract of at least one year have the right, when they first take up their duties with one of the Community institutions in Belgium, to purchase certain goods free of VAT for personal use. They enjoy this right for not more than twelve consecutive months within the two years which follow their arrival in Belgium.

The goods which may be thus purchased free of VAT and the rules governing such purchases are defined by the Belgian Ministry of Finance. Copies of the list of goods and the said rules have been sent to the Honourable Member in person as well as to Parliament’s Secretariat.

Such purchases are a privilege granted unilaterally by Belgium. Neither the Commission nor any of the other Community institutions which has its seat in Belgium can exert any influence over the goods which may be purchased free of VAT or the rules which govern this arrangement.

It should be noted that both Luxembourg and Ireland grant similar privileges to Community staff when they first take up their duties in those Member States.

For your further information, I would point out that the fiscal advantages granted to officials and other servants of the Communities were recently reduced with the abolition of the tax-free petrol quotas enjoyed by senior officials and the annual allowance of duty-free alcoholic beverages and tobacco, in principle amounting to BEF 1800 and available to officials in general. Both these privileges were withdrawn by Belgium in 1997.

(1999/C 142/194) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3675/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI)to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: The 1999 budget

The draft budget, entitled ‘Budget for the taxpayer’, was adopted by the European Parliament at first reading. Efforts were made to cut back, particularly on the expenditure side. However, the budget for Parliament was increased by 1,7 % over the previous year. One of the reasons given was increased costs for the forthcoming elections. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/147

1. What specific measures are involved, and what exactly are these increases?

2. Who will have access to these funds?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 1999)

The Commission takes the view that it has no jurisdiction in this matter.

(1999/C 142/195) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3718/98 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Sub-standard housing in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Canary Islands, Spain)

Urban redevelopment work is currently under way in the town of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Canary Islands) to make way for the Las Canteras − El Confital Maritime Park, financed from Community funds through the Operative Local Environment Programme (Programa Operativo de Medio Ambiente Local − POMAL).

To enable this work to go ahead, the sites on which many of those living on the margins of society have made their homes are being expropriated. However, no provision has been made for rehousing this group of people, whilst the financial compensation they receive as a result of the expropriation is scarcely adequate to make up for the loss of their current homes.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

Does it believe that urban development programmes affecting groups like this with serious social difficulties should make the latter’s needs a priority, so as to avoid generating further social exclusion of the kind created by sub-standard housing?

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/196) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3722/98 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Nuclear safety and pre-accession strategy adopted by Bulgaria

The Commission report concerning progress towards the accession of Bulgaria indicates that short term priorities in the energy sector are inadequate and that the strategic development of the energy sector is failing to target actual needs. Despite undertakings by Bulgaria as part of the European agreement with the EU and the agreement on the Nuclear Safety Account to which the Community is a contributor, the Bulgarian Government appears reluctant to decommission the four nuclear reactors in Kozloduy (Units 1-4) which not only are the most dangerous but also cannot be made safer for reasons of cost. C 142/148 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

1. Given that nuclear safety is a priority of Agenda 2000 is it acceptable for the nuclear reactors to be allowed to continue operating under the EU-Bulgaria Accession Partnership and following the adoption of the Community acquis with regard to energy and nuclear safety? What action does the Commission intend to take in order to use the undertakings received and Community financial assistance given as a lever to secure the immediate decommissioning of the reactor units?

2. How can the use of these reactors to cover domestic needs be justified while, at the same time, the restructuring of outdated energy-devouring industrial plants is leading to a reduction in energy needs and Bulgaria is now in a position to export 4m kilowatts of power to Turkey (1) annually?

3. Will the Commission take steps to decommission unsafe nuclear power stations in the countries of central and eastern Europe in accordance with recent recommendations by the European Parliament (2), commencing with the hazardous reactors in Kozloduy?

4. Why does the Commission not use PHARE appropriations to provide funding for alternative energy sources in Bulgaria and the management of radioactive waste from the Kozloduy power station and from the extraction of nuclear fuels?

(1) Bulgaria-Turkey cooperation protocol of 6 November 1998. (2) Resolution A4-0354/98, minutes 22 October 1998. .

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

(16 December 1998)

The Commission has always insisted that Bulgaria must proceed to the early closure of its high risk and non-upgradeable units 1 to 4 of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant, on the basis of a realistic timetable consistent with its commitments under the nuclear safety account (NSA) agreement. This position, which is shared by the NSA contributors, is clearly stated in Agenda 2000 (1), in the accession partnership, and in the regular report on Bulgaria’s progress toward accession. It was also included in the Community position at the 4th Community-Bulgaria association council which took place on 27 October 1998. In the course of this year, the Commission has expressed its concern on several occasions to the Bulgarian government over the latter’s intentions on closure dates.

Bulgarian concerns about meeting domestic electricity demand in case of early closures of the older nuclear reactors rely on demand forecasts that appear to be very high. Moreover, as the Honourable Member points out, these concerns are hardly reconciliable with projected substantial and increased electricity exports.

The Commission is willing to assist Bulgaria in meeting its obligations under the NSA agreement and in dealing with the consequences of the early closure of these reactors.

A Euratom loan is under consideration for the modernisation of Kosloduy units 5 and 6, which is a prerequisite for the closures of Kozloduy 1 to 4 in accordance with the conditions of the NSA agreement. The loan will be strictly tied to the respect by Bulgaria of an agreed closure timetable. On the other hand, the Commission will not finance further works on the older reactors, apart from short-term safety improvements which prove necessary for their remaining operation.

The Phare programme is already funding the construction of a nuclear waste treatment plant in Bulgaria. Within the framework of a comprehensive energy strategy as required by the accession partnership, the Commission could consider support for the development of alternative energy sources. The recent inclusion of Bulgaria in the Inogate programme contributes to this goal. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/149

The Commission places high priority in ensuring the earliest possible closure, in Bulgaria and in other applicant countries, of nuclear reactors that cannot be upgraded to internationally acceptable levels of safety at a reasonable cost. In close coordination with the NSA contributors, it will take further appropriate action to reach a satisfactory solution with its partners in the pre-accession process, to the benefit of nuclear safety in Europe.

(1) COM(97) 2000 final.

(1999/C 142/197) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3727/98

by Jan Andersson (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Social dumping as a possible motive for Ericsson’s transfer of operations from Norrköping to Scotland

In the debate that has followed Ericsson’s decision to move certain manufacturing activities from Norrköping to Scotland, it has emerged that one cost-related reason for the move could have been that employees’ social rights are of a lower standard at the Scottish plant, notably as regards compliance with the rules on working time. As a general rule, it should be in the Commission’s interest to take action against social dumping so as to prevent unfair competition in the internal market.

In view of this, will the Commission state whether it has carried out, or intends to carry out, investigations to establish whether Ericsson’s transfer of operations from Norrköping to Scotland was a case of social dumping and explain what steps it is preparing to take to prevent differences in the way the working time directive is applied from contributing to unfair competition between Member States?

(1999/C 142/198) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3728/98

by Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: The need for an overhaul of the working time directive

Ericsson’s decision to transfer printed circuit production to Scotland and close down operations in Norrköping has provoked a debate on how UK application of Directive 93/104/EC (1) on working time could encourage social dumping. In the case of Ericsson’s transfer of production to Scotland, it appears that the derogations which the UK Government secured from this Directive in the past directly influenced the company’s decision to close down its operations in Norrköping in order instead to use a subcontractor in Scotland, where the Directive is applied as per the UK derogation. All in all, this matter cannot be viewed as anything other than a case of social dumping.

Will the Commission therefore state whether it sees a need for urgent revision of the UK derogation from the working time directive so as to prevent instances of social dumping such as has occurred in the case of Ericsson’s transfer of manufacturing activities to Scotland. If so, does it intend to bring forward its revision of the UK derogation so that it takes place before 2003?

(1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 18. C 142/150 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Joint answer to Written Questions P-3727/98 and P-3728/98 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-1128/98 by Mr Sjöstedt during question time at Parliament’s December 1998 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (December 1998).

(1999/C 142/199) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3790/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(4 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects aimed at SMEs and the tourist sector in Catalonia

In view of the Commission’s policy of openness about its own expenditure, can it indicate which of the projects carried out in Catalonia during the period 1994-1999 received all of the different types of aid available for SMEs and the tourist sector?

Furthermore, can it state exactly how much money was finally allocated to each of those projects?

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/200) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3800/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Candidacy of the President of the Court of Auditors for election as a Member of the European Parliament

In view of the fact that within the European Parliament it is increasingly rumoured that Bernhard Friedmann, the President of the Court of Auditors, intends to stand for election as a German MEP representing the CSU; according to the same rumour, his intention emerged in particular during meetings held over the last few weeks; although it is specifically stated in the Treaties that the office of MEP and that of President or judge at the Court of Auditors are incompatible, nothing is said regarding the possibility of a President-in-Office standing for election,

1. Does the Commission not think that, if this rumour were to be confirmed, it would undermine the independence and the impartiality of the Court as enshrined in Article 118b of the Treaty?

2. Does the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, not consider that, in view of the text of the Treaty and, in particular, Article 188b(5) thereof, and also the particular and sensitive tasks performed by the Court of Auditors, it should be impossible for members of that Court (especially the President himself) to stand for election to the European Parliament?

3. What interpretation of the letter and the spirit of the Treaties would the Commission make if the above rumour were to be officially confirmed? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/151

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 1999)

It is not Commission policy to answer hypothetical questions.

(1999/C 142/201) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3801/98 by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Breaking ofthe contract between Texas-Samsung and the Portuguese Government

Last week the semi-conductor manufacturer Texas Instruments-Samsung Electronic (TISE) informed its 748 employees that its factory at Maia (Portugal) would cease operations by 31 March 1999.

Quite apart from the devastating effect which this decision will have on the local community, the decision was stated by the company to be irreversible and it represents the breaking ofcontractual relations with the Portuguese Government which are based on a framework contract signed in July 1995 for the period up to 2004, under which substantial financial incentives were made available to joint ventures. Although the Portuguese Government had already known a week earlier that the company intended to break the contract unilaterally, it was the company itselfwhich made a public announcement regarding the decision, whilst details ofthe contract itselfhave not been divulged on the grounds that to do so could jeopardise the negotiating process, in which the most important thing appears to be the repayment ofthe financial incentives offered to the company under the framework contract.

Given this situation, which is particularly serious from various perspectives and particularly from the point ofview ofthe local community, would the Commission state, as a matter ofurgency, whether or not it is aware of the framework contract, whether Community funds are involved and what precautions were taken to protect public money provided by either the Community or the Portuguese State?

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

(22 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/202) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3804/98 by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission

(4 December 1998)

Subject: Multiannual programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations

What plans does the Commission have to bring forward programmes to replace the multiannual programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations? They are eagerly awaited by social economy organizations.

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

The Commission is considering a proposal for a multi-annual programme in favour of cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations. This proposal is still subject to further discussion within the Commission. The outcome ofthe Commission’s numerous studies ofthe sector and its dialogue with representatives ofthe cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundationswill be taken into consideration in the final elaboration of the proposal. C 142/152 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/203) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3812/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of telecommunications, information technologies and the audiovisual media 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 telecommunications, information technology and the audiovisual media for the period 1994-1999?

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

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/204) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3813/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

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

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

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/205) 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

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/153

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/206) 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 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 agriculture and fisheries for the period 1994-1999?

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

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/207) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3816/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of culture, education and youth 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 culture, education and youth for the period 1994-1999?

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

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

(18 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible. C 142/154 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/208) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3817/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of industry and energy in Catalonia

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

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/209) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3818/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

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

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

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/210) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3820/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE)to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of regional policy in Catalonia

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects? 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/155

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/211) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3822/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Subsidies for the Indian leather sector

Can the Commission list the projects funded by the Commission to the benefit of the Indian leather sector (leather, footwear, leather goods), specifying the date on which each of the projects in question was approved and its objectives?

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

(18 January 1999)

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

(1999/C 142/212) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3829/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Costly consultancy and employment repercussions

1. Is it true that in May 1996 DG V concluded an annual contract with the woman director of the ASSI company for a study of the situation of elderly women in Europe, and that the Commission contributed a total of ECU 243 100 to the cost of the inquiry, estimated at ECU 374 000?

2. If so, does the Commission not consider such expenditure to be excessive for a study that is admittedly important but certainly not crucial to the measures to combat unemployment being implemented by national governments and Commission alike?

3. Is it true that the project leader is the wife of a Commissioner in office and that ASSI is located in the same building in which they live? If so, has the Commission considered the advisability, even while formally complying with the rules in force, of handing over such a sum to the wife of one of its Members when it itself is facing serious charges of fraud and embezzlement?

4. What moral principles and principles of sound management underline the Commission’s decision to grant such an exorbitant subsidy to a project that has no influence on job creation prospects?

5. Is the Commissioner in question the same person who, according to the press of the time, authorised massive expenditure in less than transparent circumstances for supervision of the construction of the Hochtief building in Luxembourg? C 142/156 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 1999)

1. to 4. The allegations of financial impropriety made in the question are false.

Under budget heading B3-4104 ‘actions for older people’,the Commission selected 52 projects for co- funding in 1996. Selection was on the basis of criteria discussed with Member State and non-governmental organisation (NGO) representatives. The criteria emphasised the situation of older women,solidarity between generations and participation by older people themselves in the activities concerned.

One of the projects selected was called ‘Situation of elderly women’ (SEW) and,in a contract dated 2 May 1996,the Commission undertook to provide financial support up to a maximum level of ECU 243 100 for the work involved. The project was developed by a partnership of organisations concerned with the welfare of older people in the four participating Member States Greece,Ireland,Portugal and Finland, with the Finnish partner,National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES), as co-ordinator. STAKES is a government agency under the responsibility of the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. The project aimed at highlighting the situation of older women in four peripheral areas of the Community. The grant to this project was decided in strict accordance with the budget authority’s intentions for heading B3-4104. The budget heading concerned was not intended to be used to fund projects aimed at combating unemployment,and could not be so used.

The total financial assistance actually granted by the Commission to the SEW project was ECU 207 779. The project was successfully finished,its results published,and final payment has been made.

Mrs Hanna-Liisa (Assi) Liikanen is a civil servant employed by STAKES. In her capacity as an employee of STAKES,she was project leader of the team co-ordinating the SEW project and co-signed the contract with the Commission on behalf of STAKES,together with Mrs Vappu Taipale,Director-General of STAKES. There was no involvement in this contract of a company called ASSI,nor is the Commission aware of any company of this name.

5. The Commission would point out that the financial support contract in question was concluded in 1994 following an invitation to tender,at which time the present Commission had not yet entered office. For further information on this matter,the Honourable Member should refer to the Commission’s answer to written questions P-656/96 by Mr Tatarella (1) and E-2442/95 by Mr Crampton (2).

(1) OJ C 173,17.6.1996. (2) OJ C 9,15.1.1996.

(1999/C 142/213) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3895/98

by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Directive 81/851/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products

Does the Commission share the view that Directive 81/851/EEC (1) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products needs amending in order to ensure that medicinal products may be administered to animals which are of minor importance in the food chain (in this instance,horses),should such treatment be the only treatment possible,although those products are not authorised for those animals?

(1) OJ L 317,6.11.1981,p. 1. 21.5.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/157

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question 1495/98 by Mr Kindermann (1).

(1) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 42.

(1999/C 142/214) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3993/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(21 December 1998)

Subject: Contribution payable by holders of telecommunications licences in Italy

The Community market in telecommunications networks and services has been fully competitive since 1 January 1998.

Directive 97/13/EC (1) states, inter alia, that ‘any fees imposed on undertakings as part of authorization procedures seek only to cover the administrative costs incurred in the issue, management, control and enforcement of the applicable individual licences’.

As a result of the recent adoption of the 1999 budget, Italy has obliged holders of licences for the installation and supply of telecommunication networks and services to pay an annual contribution calculated on the basis of a percentage, varying according to the operator concerned, of the turnover of all telecommunication services and facilities.This fee will decrease but will continue to be payable even after 2002.

Since the size of the contribution payable by Italian firms is larger than in any other Member State and is out of all proportion to the administrative costs of issuing licences, can the Commission say:

− why Italy has not come into line with European legislation;

− whether the charging of this fee does not conflict with the principles of free competition, non- discrimination, proportionality and objectivity;

− whether the Italian market and telecommunication firms operating in Italy are not being penalized, compared with other European markets, in particular with reference to the development of innovative services and the Information Society;

− what steps it intends to take to ensure compliance with Community rules;

− why it has not seen fit to follow up its stated position of 11 November 1998 vis-à-vis the Italian Government?

(1) OJ L 117, 7.5.1997, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 1999)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible. C 142/158 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21.5.1999

(1999/C 142/215) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4032/98 by Stanislaw Tillich (PPE)to the Commission (22 December 1998)

Subject: PHARE/CBC

Can the Commission list the indicators according to which appropriations under budget line B7-502 are utilised in the beneficiary countries?

Can it further say which countries have received how much funding for which borders (1995-1998) and what shape financial planning for 1999 will take?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (8 January 1999)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat a table containing the information requested.

(1999/C 142/216) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4058/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE)to the Commission (13 January 1999)

Subject: EU funds for the South-East of England government region

Will the Commission please itemise all EU funding received in the UK new South-East region since July 1994, including structural, social, LIFE, research and other assorted Community initiative funds, their destination, amounts, partners and a brief description of the projects?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (19 January 1999)

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