Official Journal C 348 Volume 42 of the European Communities 3 December 1999

ISSN 0378-6986 Official Journal C 348 Volume 42 of the European Communities 3 December 1999

English edition Information and Notices

Notice No Contents Page

I Information

European Parliament

Written Questions with answer

(1999/C 348/001) P-3365/98 by Paul Lannoye to the Commission Subject: GMO marketing approval dossier: C/NL/96/10, Directive 90/220 (Supplementary Answer) ...... 1 (1999/C 348/002) E-3555/98 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: St. Teresa di Lerici sailing school (Supplementary Answer) ...... 2 (1999/C 348/003) E-3561/98 by Klaus Lukas to the Commission Subject: UNRWA and missing EU funds (Supplementary Answer) ...... 2 (1999/C 348/004) E-3825/98 by Gérard Caudron to the Commission Subject: Commission charged on payments in euros ...... 3 (1999/C 348/005) P-3869/98 by Petrus Cornelissen to the Commission Subject: Duty-free and tax-free sales ...... 5 (1999/C 348/006) E-3959/98 by Raimo Ilaskivi, Marjo Matikainen-Kallström and Jyrki Otila to the Commission Subject: Equality of treatment with regard to various services (continued) ...... 6 (1999/C 348/007) E-3967/98 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Cost assessment for European legislative acts ...... 7 (1999/C 348/008) E-3970/98 by Juan Colino Salamanca to the Commission Subject: Noise pollution and roads ...... 8 (1999/C 348/009) P-4009/98 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Participation of Greece in programmes for the elderly ...... 9 (1999/C 348/010) E-4058/98 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: EU funds for the South-East of England government region (Supplementary Answer) ...... 9 (1999/C 348/011) E-4072/98 by Ralf Walter to the Commission Subject: PHARE-CBC/Interreg ...... 10 EN Price: EUR 29,50 (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/012) E-4079/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Petrol supplies in Spain ...... 11 (1999/C 348/013) E-4100/98 by John McCartin to the Commission Subject: Duty-free employment ...... 12 (1999/C 348/014) E-0003/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Delay in funding of programme ...... 12 (1999/C 348/015) E-0030/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Suspension of Commission official ...... 13 (1999/C 348/016) E-0042/99 by Kirsi Piha to the Commission Subject: Suspension of Commission official ...... 13 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0030/99 and E-0042/99 ...... 13 (1999/C 348/017) E-0040/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: Trade in cat and dog fur ...... 14 (1999/C 348/018) E-0053/99 by Markus Ferber to the Commission Subject: Assistance for Bavaria from EU funds 1994-1998 (Supplementary Answer) ...... 15 (1999/C 348/019) E-0061/99 by Ursula Stenzel to the Commission Subject: Urban issues ...... 16 (1999/C 348/020) E-0064/99 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: Community approach to nuclear energy ...... 17 (1999/C 348/021) E-0068/99 by Esko Seppänen to the Commission Subject: Double taxation of pensions paid from Sweden to Finland ...... 17 (1999/C 348/022) E-0069/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Exclusion of capital companies from agritourism grants in Sicily ...... 18 (1999/C 348/023) E-0072/99 by Umberto Bossi to the Commission Subject: Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico ...... 19 (1999/C 348/024) E-0087/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato (IPZS) (Italian State Printing Works and Mint) ...... 20 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0072/99 and E-0087/99 ...... 20 (1999/C 348/025) E-0086/99 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Private sector funding for the Madrid-Saragossa-Barcelona stretch of the high-speed railway ...... 21 (1999/C 348/026) E-0104/99 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: Joint Relex Service ...... 21 (1999/C 348/027) E-0109/99 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Unjustified banking charges levied by Italian banks following the introduction of the euro ...... 22 (1999/C 348/028) E-0123/99 by Patricia McKenna to the Commission Subject: Aircraft pollution ...... 24 (1999/C 348/029) E-0137/99 by Carlos Robles Piquer to the Commission Subject: Community policy on promoting energy crops ...... 25 (1999/C 348/030) E-0151/99 by José Barros Moura to the Commission Subject: Implications of the ban on exports of bulls for bullfighting ...... 26 (1999/C 348/031) E-0156/99 by Phillip Whitehead to the Commission Subject: The new EMEA Procedure for Notification of Parallel Distribution of Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products 27 (1999/C 348/032) E-0157/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Incorporation of Community legislation by Greece ...... 27 (1999/C 348/033) E-0164/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Existence of documents interpreting Directive 96/92/EC which have not been forwarded to Parliament ... 28 (1999/C 348/034) E-0165/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Interpretation and further legislative development of Directive 96/92/EC ...... 28 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/035) E-0166/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Established rights of undertakings following the amendment of rules and the introduction of liberalisation measures ...... 28 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0164/99, E-0165/99 and E-0166/99 ...... 29 (1999/C 348/036) E-0167/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Lawfulness of the medium and long-term fixing of charges for electricity for SMEs and domestic consumers 29 (1999/C 348/037) E-0179/99 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer to the Commission Subject: BSE research J overcoming the species barrier ...... 30 (1999/C 348/038) E-0184/99 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Food which does not contain genetically modified ingredients ...... 31 (1999/C 348/039) E-0192/99 by Robert Evans to the Commission Subject: Ariane ...... 32 (1999/C 348/040) E-0193/99 by Robert Evans to the Commission Subject: Grey whales in Mexico ...... 32 (1999/C 348/041) E-0199/99 by Laura González Álvarez to the Commission Subject: Threatened extinction of the wolf in Asturias (Spain) ...... 34 (1999/C 348/042) E-0204/99 by Manuela Frutos Gama to the Commission Subject: Protection for small and medium-sized electricity consumers as a consequence of liberalisation in the energy sector ...... 35 (1999/C 348/043) E-0205/99 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Funding of restoration schemes in Aragón ...... 35 (1999/C 348/044) E-0206/99 by Manuel Escolá Hernando to the Commission Subject: Aid for Objective 1 regions in Spain ...... 36 (1999/C 348/045) E-0207/99 by Heidi Hautala to the Commission Subject: Payments to national organisations ...... 37 (1999/C 348/046) E-0215/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Air accidents ...... 38 (1999/C 348/047) P-0223/99 by Daniela Raschhofer to the Commission Subject: ‘World Vision Austria’ and the misappropriation of funds ...... 39 (1999/C 348/048) E-0313/99 by Klaus Lukas to the Commission Subject: World Vision Austria ...... 39 (1999/C 348/049) P-0559/99 by Karl Habsburg-Lothringen to the Commission Subject: Possible misappropriation of EU funds (World Vision) ...... 40 Joint answer to Written Questions P-0223/99, E-0313/99 and P-0559/99 ...... 40 (1999/C 348/050) E-0237/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Italian secret services report on the euro’s use for money-laundering purposes ...... 41 (1999/C 348/051) E-0241/99 by Ulf Holm to the Commission Subject: Aid to Bangladesh following the floods ...... 42 (1999/C 348/052) E-0244/99 by Ulf Holm to the Commission Subject: The EU’s sustainable development objective ...... 43 (1999/C 348/053) E-0248/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Motorway link west of Wels, Austria ...... 44 (1999/C 348/054) E-0254/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: The Spea Autostade project and MonteBeni (Florence) ...... 44 (1999/C 348/055) P-0258/99 by Joan Colom i Naval to the Commission Subject: Alleged ESF fraud in Catalonia (Supplementary Answer) ...... 45 (1999/C 348/056) E-0288/99 by Joan Colom i Naval to the Commission Subject: Delays to payments for projects financed from the Leader initiative in Catalonia ...... 46 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/057) E-0294/99 by Hiltrud Breyer to the Commission Subject: Energy saving potential in hospitals ...... 47 (1999/C 348/058) E-0295/99 by Dagmar Roth-Behrendt to the Commission Subject: EU funding, information on the volume of monies in 1998 flowing to Berlin (Supplementary Answer) ... 48 (1999/C 348/059) E-0314/99 by Patricia McKenna to the Commission Subject: Gender mainstreaming in the European Commission ...... 48 (1999/C 348/060) P-0325/99 by Luigi Moretti to the Commission Subject: Uneven distribution of air traffic between Milan’s Malpensa and Linate airports ...... 49 (1999/C 348/061) E-0334/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Incineration plant for poultry droppings ...... 50 (1999/C 348/062) E-0335/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: OPM projects: development and promotion of sustainable tourism and preservation of sheep tracks .... 51 (1999/C 348/063) E-0339/99 by Edith Müller to the Commission Subject: Forwarding of Commission reports on internal investigations ...... 52 (1999/C 348/064) E-0358/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: Survey of crime in European cities ...... 53 (1999/C 348/065) E-0359/99 by Elisabeth Schroedter to the Commission Subject: Diversion of European regional funding from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) by the government of the Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to feeder roads to the A20 motorway ...... 53 (1999/C 348/066) E-0361/99 by James Moorhouse to the Commission Subject: Violation of human rights in Burma ...... 54 (1999/C 348/067) E-0368/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: Protection of the Tuscan archipelago park and the island of Elba ...... 55 (1999/C 348/068) P-0372/99 by Yvonne Sandberg-Fries to the Commission Subject: European housing fair ...... 56 (1999/C 348/069) E-0500/99 by Niels Sindal to the Commission Subject: Housing fair ...... 56 Joint answer to Written Questions P-0372/99 and E-0500/99 ...... 56 (1999/C 348/070) P-0375/99 by Karla Peijs to the Commission Subject: Implementation of directive 94/62/EC ...... 57 (1999/C 348/071) E-0387/99 by Karl von Wogau to the Commission Subject: Recognition of a German university diploma in Spain ...... 58 (1999/C 348/072) E-0389/99 by Gerhard Schmid to the Commission Subject: Monitoring the allocation of EU funds ...... 59 (1999/C 348/073) E-0395/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Progress of drug treatment and prevention programmes ...... 59 (1999/C 348/074) E-0397/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Operating licence for quarry in protected area ...... 60 (1999/C 348/075) E-0399/99 by Phillip Whitehead to the Commission Subject: Fire safety ...... 61 (1999/C 348/076) E-0404/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor to the Commission Subject: Measures to prevent counterfeiting of the euro ...... 61 (1999/C 348/077) E-0405/99 by Riitta Myller to the Commission Subject: Project for the renovation of the sewage treatment plant of Sortavala (Russia) ...... 62 (1999/C 348/078) E-0408/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Negotiations on the future trade agreement between the EU and South Africa ...... 63 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/079) E-0409/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Draft trade agreement between the EU and South Africa ...... 63 (1999/C 348/080) E-0410/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Counter-concessions granted under the future trade agreement with South Africa ...... 64 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0408/99, E-0409/99 and E-0410/99 ...... 64 (1999/C 348/081) E-0412/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Use of the designation ‘Port’ on wines produced in the United States ...... 65 (1999/C 348/082) P-0413/99 by Ernesto Caccavale to the Commission Subject: Illegal restrictions on free competition in the pay-TV sector in Italy ...... 66 (1999/C 348/083) E-0419/99 by Markus Ferber to the Commission Subject: Air pollution in the buildings of the European Patent Office ...... 67 (1999/C 348/084) E-0420/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Arrangements envisaged by the Commission for the project shared amongst European cities of culture in 2000 67 (1999/C 348/085) E-0425/99 by Mary Banotti to the Commission Subject: Identity cards ...... 68 (1999/C 348/086) E-0438/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Lack of transparency in the recruitment of staff at the European Central Bank ...... 69 (1999/C 348/087) E-0440/99 by Glyn Ford to the Commission Subject: Lobbying regulations ...... 69 (1999/C 348/088) E-0444/99 by José Valverde López to the Commission Subject: Adjusting the definition of small and medium enterprises ...... 70 (1999/C 348/089) E-0450/99 by Giuseppe Rauti to the Commission Subject: Collapse of the ancient walls of Viterbo ...... 70 (1999/C 348/090) E-0452/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Epidemic of swine vesicular disease ...... 71 (1999/C 348/091) E-0453/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Korean financial crisis and knock-on effects on Community shipbuilding ...... 72 (1999/C 348/092) E-0454/99 by Honório Novo to the Commission Subject: Construction of the solid waste treatment plant at Meia Serra, Madeira ...... 74 (1999/C 348/093) P-0455/99 by Carlo Ripa di Meana to the Commission Subject: Lyon-Turin-Milan-Venice-Trieste high-speed rail link ...... 74 (1999/C 348/094) E-0460/99 by Gianni Tamino to the Commission Subject: Importation into Sicily of cattle, pigs and sheep without health documents ...... 75 (1999/C 348/095) P-0464/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: EU-Argentina fisheries agreement ...... 76 (1999/C 348/096) E-0475/99 by Paul Rübig to the Commission Subject: The effects of the employment initiative ...... 77 (1999/C 348/097) E-0483/99 by Gianfranco Fini and Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission Subject: Enlargement and the Mediterranean ...... 77 (1999/C 348/098) E-0484/99 by Jan Lagendijk to the Commission Subject: Scrapping of European ships in India ...... 79 (1999/C 348/099) E-0485/99 by Wilfried Telkämper to the Commission Subject: Bougainville ...... 80 (1999/C 348/100) E-0486/99 by Wilfried Telkämper to the Commission Subject: Recurrent reports of dangerous incidents at the nuclear power station in Fessenheim in the Alsace (Upper Rhine, France) ...... 81 (1999/C 348/101) E-0488/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: Delays in the provision of ERDF aid to Spanish SMEs ...... 82 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/102) E-0489/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas to the Commission Subject: Rabbit-breeding sector in Aragón (Spain) ...... 83 (1999/C 348/103) E-0495/99 by Mark Watts to the Commission Subject: Welfare of animals at slaughter ...... 84 (1999/C 348/104) E-0496/99 by Bartho Pronk to the Commission Subject: Posting of workers ...... 84 (1999/C 348/105) P-0498/99 by Mark Watts to the Commission Subject: Infringement of Directive 93/119/EC in France during Eid-el-Kabir ...... 85 (1999/C 348/106) E-0503/99 by Susan Waddington to the Commission Subject: Peaceful resolution of dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia ...... 86 (1999/C 348/107) E-0634/99 by Roberto Speciale to the Commission Subject: Border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea ...... 86 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0503/99 and E-0634/99 ...... 87 (1999/C 348/108) E-0504/99 by Ursula Stenzel to the Commission Subject: Leonardo ...... 87 (1999/C 348/109) E-0505/99 by Ursula Stenzel to the Commission Subject: Application ...... 88 (1999/C 348/110) E-0509/99 by Kirsi Piha to the Commission Subject: Telecom markets in Estonia ...... 89 (1999/C 348/111) E-0510/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Consumer protection with a view to the liberalisation of the electricity sector ...... 90 (1999/C 348/112) E-0511/99 by Ludivina García Arias to the Commission Subject: Criteria to assess non-profit-making investment in the future of the European electricity sector ...... 90 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0510/99 and E-0511/99 ...... 90 (1999/C 348/113) E-0516/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Fraud ...... 91 (1999/C 348/114) E-0517/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde to the Commission Subject: Veterinary inspections ...... 92 (1999/C 348/115) E-0518/99 by Herbert Bösch to the Commission Subject: Assistance for hydroelectric power stations from the PHARE and TACIS programmes ...... 92 (1999/C 348/116) E-0522/99 by Françoise Grossetête to the Commission Subject: Scope of Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, division, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States ...... 93 (1999/C 348/117) E-0536/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union ...... 94 (1999/C 348/118) E-0542/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union ...... 95 (1999/C 348/119) P-0545/99 by Christian Rovsing to the Commission Subject: Tendering by the state-owned Danish bus company COMBUS A/S ...... 96 (1999/C 348/120) E-0548/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Transfer to Italy of cultivation of the ‘Katerini’ tobacco variety ...... 96 (1999/C 348/121) E-0549/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Measures to replace the cultivation of ‘Tsempelia’ and ‘Mavra’ tobacco varieties in Greece ...... 97 (1999/C 348/122) E-0551/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Improved library facilities in the European Union ...... 98 (1999/C 348/123) E-0555/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: India and the environment ...... 98 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/124) E-0564/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Telecom’s monopoly over district telephone calls ...... 99 (1999/C 348/125) E-0565/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Paleontological and ichthyological park ...... 100 (1999/C 348/126) E-0566/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Recognition of alternative medicine ...... 101 (1999/C 348/127) E-0567/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Update on the central dairy in Rome ...... 102 (1999/C 348/128) E-0574/99 by Carlos Bru Purón to the Commission Subject: Alteration of the course of the River Jarama ...... 102 (1999/C 348/129) E-0576/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: European recognition for the profession of family adviser ...... 103 (1999/C 348/130) P-0582/99 by Mark Killilea to the Commission Subject: State aid to commercial property ...... 103 (1999/C 348/131) E-0586/99 by Nuala Ahern to the Commission Subject: Fourth report on the present situation and prospects for radioactive waste management in the European Union (COM(98) 799 final) ...... 104 (1999/C 348/132) E-0588/99 by Nuala Ahern to the Commission Subject: Revisions to the Commission proposals in COM(92) 56 final ...... 105 (1999/C 348/133) E-0613/99 by Patricia McKenna to the Commission Subject: The Tibetan Antelope J extinction and fur trade ...... 105 (1999/C 348/134) E-0614/99 by Patricia McKenna to the Commission Subject: European funding of Irish railways ...... 106 (1999/C 348/135) E-0618/99 by Peter Crampton to the Commission Subject: Fishing agreement with Iceland ...... 106 (1999/C 348/136) E-0622/99 by María Izquierdo Rojo to the Commission Subject: Disrespect and ill-treatment suffered by Moroccan musicians applying for visas ...... 107 (1999/C 348/137) E-0624/99 by Gianni Tamino and Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz to the Commission Subject: Introduction of rainbow trout into the river Serpis (Community of Valencia, Spain) ...... 108 (1999/C 348/138) E-0625/99 by Raimo Ilaskivi to the Commission Subject: The Commission’s replies to written questions ...... 109 (1999/C 348/139) E-0629/99 by Anne McIntosh to the Commission Subject: Working-time Directive ...... 109 (1999/C 348/140) E-0631/99 by María Sornosa Martínez to the Commission Subject: Dos Aguas solid waste tip (Valencia, Spain) ...... 110 (1999/C 348/141) E-0635/99 by Luigi Moretti to the Commission Subject: Presence of uranium in building cement ...... 111 (1999/C 348/142) E-0636/99 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten to the Commission Subject: Indication of the country of origin on packaging containing fresh vegetables or fruit ...... 112 (1999/C 348/143) E-0639/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen to the Commission Subject: Detention of Aliakram Gummatov in Azerbaijan ...... 113 (1999/C 348/144) E-0647/99 by Ben Fayot to the Commission Subject: Liaison committee for senior citizens’ organisations ...... 113 (1999/C 348/145) P-0652/99 by Ioannis Theonas to the Commission Subject: Threats to public health and the ecological balance from waste on Santorini ...... 114 (1999/C 348/146) E-0685/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: 1999 tariff quotas for tuna loins ...... 114 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/147) E-0693/99 by Sebastiano Musumeci to the Commission Subject: Ban on importing grape must from third countries ...... 115 (1999/C 348/148) E-0697/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 115 (1999/C 348/149) E-0698/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 116 (1999/C 348/150) E-0699/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 117 (1999/C 348/151) E-0700/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 117 (1999/C 348/152) E-0701/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 117 (1999/C 348/153) E-0702/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 118 (1999/C 348/154) E-0703/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 118 (1999/C 348/155) E-0704/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 119 (1999/C 348/156) E-0705/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 119 (1999/C 348/157) E-0706/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 119 (1999/C 348/158) E-0707/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 120 (1999/C 348/159) E-0708/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 120 (1999/C 348/160) E-0709/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 121 (1999/C 348/161) E-0710/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 121 (1999/C 348/162) E-0711/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 121 (1999/C 348/163) E-0712/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 122 (1999/C 348/164) E-0713/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 122 (1999/C 348/165) E-0714/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 123 (1999/C 348/166) E-0715/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 123 (1999/C 348/167) E-0716/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Structural Funds ...... 123 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/99, E-0699/99, E-0700/99, E-0701/99, E-0702/99, E-0703/99, E-0704/99, E-0705/99, E-0706/99, E-0707/99, E-0708/99, E-0709/99, E-0710/99, E-0711/99, E-0712/99, E-0713/99, E-0714/99, E-0715/99 and E-0716/99 ...... 124 (1999/C 348/168) E-0734/99 by James Moorhouse to the Commission Subject: Funding of the Turkish European Foundation ...... 124 EN Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/169) E-0738/99 by Alessandro Danesin to the Commission Subject: Negotiations on Slovenia’s accession to the European Union ...... 125 (1999/C 348/170) E-0739/99 by Alessandro Danesin to the Commission Subject: Recognition of qualifications in the EU ...... 125 (1999/C 348/171) E-0742/99 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission Subject: Redundancies at the Milani Fabriano paper mills ...... 126 (1999/C 348/172) E-0744/99 by Anita Pollack to the Commission Subject: Maríne resources ...... 127 (1999/C 348/173) E-0756/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Funding by the Commission ...... 128 (1999/C 348/174) E-0757/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis to the Commission Subject: Funding by the Commission ...... 128 (1999/C 348/175) E-0760/99 by Roberto Speciale to the Commission Subject: Civil and political rights in Cuba ...... 129 (1999/C 348/176) P-0763/99 by Petrus Cornelissen to the Commission Subject: Avalanche disasters in the Alps ...... 129 (1999/C 348/177) E-0768/99 by Alexandros Alavanos to the Commission Subject: Archaeological excavations at ancient Nikopolis, Epirus ...... 130 (1999/C 348/178) E-0770/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Traditionally made ice cream ...... 131 (1999/C 348/179) E-0771/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Traditionally made ice cream ...... 131 (1999/C 348/180) E-0772/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Traditionally made ice cream ...... 131 (1999/C 348/181) E-0773/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil to the Commission Subject: Traditionally made ice cream ...... 132 Joint answer to Written Questions E-0770/99, E-0771/99, E-0772/99 and E-0773/99 . . . 132 (1999/C 348/182) E-0776/99 by Thomas Megahy to the Commission Subject: Persecution of a religious minority in Iran ...... 133 (1999/C 348/183) E-0789/99 by Graham Mather to the Commission Subject: The Falkland Islands J EU funding ...... 133 (1999/C 348/184) E-0799/99 by Gerhard Hager to the Commission Subject: Refugee projects ...... 134 (1999/C 348/185) P-0809/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis to the Commission Subject: Progress of work to complete the northern road axis in Crete ...... 135 (1999/C 348/186) E-0821/99 by Antonio Tajani to the Commission Subject: ENEL power line in Valnerina ...... 135 (1999/C 348/187) E-0833/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Slate industry and generalised system of preferences ...... 136 (1999/C 348/188) E-0847/99 by Glyn Ford and Alan Donnelly to the Commission Subject: Ombudsman ...... 137 (1999/C 348/189) E-0848/99 by Tony Cunningham to the Commission Subject: Barbarity of the fur trade in China ...... 138 (1999/C 348/190) E-0849/99 by Anne André-Léonard to the Commission Subject: Reductions in old age pensions for those already receiving a pension in another Member State ...... 138 (1999/C 348/191) E-0855/99 by Bill Miller to the Commission Subject: Excise duty ...... 139 EN (Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents (continued) Page (1999/C 348/192) E-0857/99 by Pedro Marset Campos to the Commission Subject: Discrimination against women in a municipal transport company in Murcia (Spain) ...... 139 (1999/C 348/193) P-0860/99 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens to the Commission Subject: Policy for the deaf ...... 140 (1999/C 348/194) P-0880/99 by Werner Langen to the Commission Subject: Promotion of women, families and senior citizens ...... 141 (1999/C 348/195) P-0904/99 by Vincenzo Viola to the Commission Subject: Alleged state aid for the Banco di Sicilia ...... 142 (1999/C 348/196) E-0918/99 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Workplace Directive ...... 143 (1999/C 348/197) E-0922/99 by Riccardo Nencini to the Commission Subject: ‘Laboratoires Boironm’ J the case of Mr Mariano Parrucci ...... 143 (1999/C 348/198) E-0924/99 by Christa Randzio-Plath to the Commission Subject: European itinerant trade licence ...... 144 (1999/C 348/199) E-0942/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Canadian Fisheries Bill C-27 ...... 145 (1999/C 348/200) E-0954/99 by Eryl McNally to the Commission Subject: EC terminology and the difference between ‘mentally handicapped’ and ‘with a learning disability’ ..... 145 (1999/C 348/201) P-0975/99 by Eluned Morgan to the Commission Subject: Ritual slaughter of animals in religious festival ...... 146 (1999/C 348/202) E-0983/99 by Concepció Ferrer to the Commission Subject: Action to eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade with the United States ...... 146 (1999/C 348/203) P-1024/99 by Christine Oddy to the Commission Subject: Commission Communication of the development of public health policy and women’s health ...... 147 (1999/C 348/204) P-1025/99 by Rinaldo Bontempi to the Commission Subject: Closure of frontiers to block a peaceful demonstration ...... 147 (1999/C 348/205) E-1054/99 by Angela Billingham to the Commission Subject: European travel pass for the elderly ...... 148 (1999/C 348/206) E-1056/99 by Daniela Raschhofer to the Commission Subject: Award of contracts ...... 149 (1999/C 348/207) P-1062/99 by Graham Watson to the Commission Subject: Payments to flax farmers ...... 150 (1999/C 348/208) E-1065/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna to the Commission Subject: Bringing the additional provisions of the French law 97-1051 of 18 November on sea fishing guidelines and marine crops into line with Community law ...... 150 (1999/C 348/209) P-1073/99 by Anne McIntosh to the Commission Subject: Social security requirements ...... 151

EN 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/1

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(1999/C 348/001) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3365/98 by Paul Lannoye (V) to the Commission

(4 November 1998)

Subject: GMO marketing approval dossier: C/NL/96/10, Directive 90/220

The Scientific Committee on Plants has delivered a negative opinion on Avebe’s application for marketing information for a transgenic potato. It concludes that without an adequate risk assessment of the potential consequences of horizontal gene transfer from the GM plants to humans, animals and the environment ... it is not possible to fully assess the safety of the transgenic potato lines.

Can the Commission explain the following:

1. Is this in fact the same issue on which the UK advisory committee ACRE, reached the conclusion that ‘the additional genes did not pose a risk to human health and the environment?

2. Were the same facts available to both committees and the same risk assessment criteria applied?

3. Which antibiotic-resistant genes are involved? ACRE refers to kanamycin, the SCP refers to amikacin?

4. Given the provisions of Article 19(4) of Directive 90/220 (EEC) (1) which lays down ‘that in no case should the description of the GMO or the evaluation of foreseeable effects including pathogenic and/or ecologically disruptive effects be kept confidential’ does the Commission now consider it to be in the public interest to publish the marketing application in full and the complete text of the SCP’s opinion?

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

With regard to the publication of the complete opinion of the scientific committee on plants, the Commission had postponed its reply on this specific point because of claims of confidentiality by the notifier. After examination of the legal aspects connected with the publication of the full opinion (Article 19 of Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and Article 10 of Commission Decision 97/579/EC of 23 July 1997 setting up scientific committees in the field of consumer health and food safety (1)) the Commission considers that the complete opinion can now be published apart from one sentence. This opinion will be put on the Internet as soon as possible.

(1) OJ L 237, 28.8.1997. C 348/2 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/002) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3555/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (1 December 1998)

Subject: St. Teresa di Lerici sailing school

On 30 December 1993, the local authority in Lerici approved the above project, financed by the Liguria regional authority and the Community’s Reneval programme.

On 16 April 1997, work on the project was completed for the local authority in Lerici.

To date, five years after the funds for the project were approved and 18 months after work on the project was completed, the local authority has still not managed to make the sailing school operational. Furthermore, the fact that the school has remained unused for an extended period has led to the deterioration of the buildings, which have also been damaged by vandals.

1. Is the Commission aware of the reasons for this disgraceful delay and does it know where responsibility for the delay lies?

2. Is it in a position to assess whether the expenditure on the implementation of the project tallies with the funds made available?

3. Can it state how much funding was made available for the project under the Reneval programme?

4. Do the rules in force stipulate a deadline for the implementation of a project once aid has been granted?

5. What are the consequences of a deadline not being observed?

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (5 March 1999)

1. The situation described by the Honourable Member remains primarily a matter for the Italian authorities in application of the subsidiarity principle. On the basis of information received from them, the Commission understands that the delay can be ascribed principally to two factors. The municipal administration of Lerici set up a special company to take charge of the building, which had to be handed over formally to it by the administration. This turned out to be a lengthy procedure. It was followed by a call for tenders in July 1998 to choose a company to run the sailing school. The tender procedure was completed in September 1998 when the Caprera sailing centre was selected.

2. and 3. The cost of the project was estimated originally at 1,26 billion Lire (about 651 000 euro) of which 475 million Lire (about 245 000 euro) were structural funds made available under the Renaval programme. Final expenditure amounted to 1,3 billion Lire (about 671 000 euro) but the amount of the structural funds did not change.

4. The normal deadline for the completion of payments on projects is two years from the end of the programme. The sailing school project was completed within the time limit of 31 December 1996. However a clear distinction must be made between physical implementation of a project, which in this instance related to the enhancement of premises in an industrial area, and the project’s end use which, for the reasons explained above, did not become immediately operational.

5. Payments made after the deadline are not eligible for structural fund support.

(1999/C 348/003) 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’. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/3

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?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Community contributions to the United Nations relief and works agency (UNRWA) are based on a triennial convention between the Community and UNRWA governing the Community contribution to the operations of UNRWA in the education, health, and social relief fields. In addition specific UNRWA projects are supported.

The Commission does carry out controls and audits to ensure an appropriate distribution and allocation of its contributions to UNRWA. As regards the Community contribution to the general budget, Article 6 of the 9th convention with UNRWA provides for financial control and on-the-spot visits.

The Commission is not aware of any claim that € 12 million are missing. The Honourable Member probably refers to the amount of some € 12 million that was due to UNRWA pursuant to the 9th convention. This amount was held back pending following allegations raised concerning UNRWA construction in Lebanon. As a preventive measure, the Commission suspended all payments to UNRWA related to this project and contributions to the general fund. Since the allegations have not been confirmed the Commission decided in late October 1998 to release this second payment for 1998. The third payment was released in December. Under the financial regulations of the Commission, a balance of 5 % (1.83 million Euro) is still outstanding and will be released on presentation and acceptance of the final reports and accounts.

The Commission is forwarding direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat of the Parliament a summary of payments, available only from 1992, made to the relevant United Nations bodies (UNRWA, and the United Nations high commissioner for refugees).

(1999/C 348/004) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3825/98 by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Commission charged on payments in euros

The introduction of the euro is a historic step forward for the European Union.

Most citizens seem to have welcomed the single currency because of the part which it is expected to play in the economy and in everyday trade.

Nevertheless, certain financial establishments seem to be determined to charge commission on any purchase made in euros where that purchase is made outside the Member State in which they are established, no matter what method of payment is chosen, whether cheque or banker’s card. C 348/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

If such practices become established, they would be certain to cast doubts as to whether the euro is actually any use, since a strong argument for introducing it was indeed that the single currency would remove all the uncertainties over the exchange rates applied when paying for goods bought outside their country of origin.

Does the Commission therefore intend to take action against such measures, which distort the very purpose of the euro?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 1999)

The Commission fully agrees with the Honourable Member that one of the main arguments for the introduction of the single currency was the elimination of exchange rate. This has been achieved by the irrevocable fixing of the conversion rates between participating currencies, effective from 1 January 1999.

The Honourable Member will no doubt be aware that the Commission issued its Recommendation 98/286/ EC (1) on banking charges for conversion to the euro in April 1998. The Commission also made public an initial evaluation on 8 December 1998 (2), which indicates that banks throughout the euro area intended to implement the Recommendation. This means that banks will not charge for converting accounts from the national currency unit of the individual participating Member State to the euro unit (e.g. from French franc to euro in France) or for converting payments to and from the euro and the national currency unit. Furthermore, the Recommendation provides that banks cannot charge a different fee for services in the euro unit than that for otherwise identical services in the national currency unit. This is an important and significant contribution to public confidence in the changeover to the euro.

Neither the Recommendation, nor indeed the introduction of the euro, require that banks cease to charge for the services they provide. The processing of cross-border payments, whether carried out by cheque, payment card or credit transfer, is a service for which banks are entitled to charge. The Recommendation does, however, require that full transparency be provided for all conversions and exchanges by showing clearly the application of the fixed conversion rates and identifying separately any charges of any kind.

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

With the introduction of the euro, banks are no longer able to calculate their charges within an exchange rate ‘spread’, for transactions involving the currency units of participating Member States. This is because of the fundamental requirement that the fixed conversion rates are applied for all conversions and exchanges between participating national currency units. Banks had therefore to alter their method of charging with effect from 1 January 1999 at the latest.

On 12 February 1999 the Commission wrote to the main European banking federations requesting them to provide information comparing the level of charges before and after the introduction of the euro.

On 5 February 1999, the Commission issued a press statement calling on banks further to increase transparency by making publicly available information showing changes in the total level of charges (before and after the introduction of the euro) for exchanging euro zone banknotes and cross border cheques, transfers and card payments. Banks in the euro zone were requested to report the state of play to the Commission before 31 March 1999 through their European associations. The Commission has also recently launched investigations of possible infringement by banks of competition policy. The Commission will keep the Parliament informed of the results of these reports and investigations. However, the Commission’s expectation is that the overall level of these charges should fall, since the banks will no longer face the costs associated with exchange rate risk, and transparency will intensify competition between financial institutions. The Commission shares the Parliament’s concerns that initial feedback and analysis from some banks in some Member States suggests the contrary. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/5

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

The implementation by Member States by 14 August 1999 of Directive 97/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 on cross-border credit transfers (3) will partially improve the situation by providing for transparency of charges, a ban on double charging and a money back guarantee in case the transfer is not successfully carried out within a certain period. On 8 February 1997, the Commission urged Member States to meet their commitment to timely implementation of the directive as delays would be unacceptable in the Commission’s view.

The Commission’s press release IP/99/90 issued on 5 February 1999 contains further details on these matters.

(1) OJ L 130, 1.5.1998. (2) Available on the Internet at http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg15. (3) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997.

(1999/C 348/005) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3869/98 by Petrus Cornelissen (PPE) to the Commission

(9 December 1998)

Subject: Duty-free and tax-free sales

On 3 April 1998 the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the Commission to carry out an independent study on the social, economic, regional and fiscal consequences of abolishing duty-free and tax- free sales in the EU, and to publish the results of this study no later than 30 September 1998 (1).

1. Can we expect the results of the requested study to be published in the near future?

2. If not, will the Commission explain how this refusal to implement a European Parliament resolution can be reconciled with the Commission President’s repeated commitment to good cooperation with Parliament?

3. Does the Commission also consider that the abolition of tax-free sales, without first carrying out a reliable study of the consequences of such abolition, does not help the positive image of the European institutions?

4. In view of the above, is the Commission prepared to sound out the Council on its willingness to postpone the abolition of duty-free sales for a time, not least because a growing number of Member States including Germany, the UK, France, Greece and Ireland wish to do this? (see ‘The Times’ of 2 December 1998).

(1) OJ C 138, 4.5.1998, p. 217.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Commission has not accepted the request of the resolution, adopted by the Parliament on 3 April 1998, to carry out a study on the social, economic, regional and fiscal consequences of abolishing intra-Community duty-free and tax-free sales. C 348/6 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The Commission had already been asked several times whether it intended to carry out a study on the implications of the abolition of tax-free sales. The first time was back in 1991. As the following discussions in the Council had brought an agreement on the introduction of a derogatory regime of more than seven years, the need for a study had already been largely overcome by the adoption of a specific regime, as reflected in the ‘whereas’ clauses of Council directives 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 and 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992.

The Commission today remains convinced that this specific regime was an appropriate and concrete answer to the concern expressed at the time and again more recently by the Parliament, as it has explained on various occasions; on 29 October 1997 at the public hearing of the Parliament; on 2 April 1998 in the reply with debate to the oral questions from Mr Cornelissen and other Honourable Members (B4-0279/98-0-0073/98); in several meetings with of the committee on economic and monetary affairs and industrial policy in 1998 and of the committee for transport on 20 January 1999.

Furthermore, the end of the transitional period on 30 June 1999 is the legal effect of the adoption by the Council of the above mentioned directives, rather than a question of image. On the contrary, any attempt to reopen this debate could lead operators to further delay the process of adjustment to the abolition of duty-free sales and have detrimental consequences.

The Commission has been invited by the Vienna European Council in December 1998 to examine by March 1999 the problems that could arise with regard to employment following the abolition of intra-Community duty-free sales. The results of this examination are featured in the communication adopted by the Commission on 17 February 1999 (1). The Commission’s analysis shows that the impact on employment is likely to be limited and specific in terms of localities and sectors affected. It should however be noted that, in the medium term, short term negative effects on employment could be turned into a net creation of jobs.

The Commission will be sending the communication not only to the Council but also to the Parliament. The Council discussed this issue at its meeting on 15 March 1999.

(1) COM(99) 65.

(1999/C 348/006) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3959/98

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

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Equality of treatment with regard to various services (continued)

Martin Bangemann, Member of the Commission, signed a reply to Written Question No E-2554/98 (1) by the undersigned Members of the European Parliament. The reply, which one hopes the Commissioner had at least read, was inadequate both in style and in substance. It merely called on those who had tabled the question to read the reply to Question No E-3942/97 (2) by Raimo Ilaskivi, MEP. However, that reply does not even mention the issue of highly unequal treatment of summer residents and permanent residents, for example with regard to waste disposal rates and real estate tax, which was raised in the new question.

Without repeating the unanswered question, we would like to know:

@ whether, before signing the reply, the Member of the Commission genuinely studied the text of the abovementioned new question in its entirety, and if so,

@ whether in his opinion the reply which one of his officials presented to him for signature was conducive to the development of an atmosphere of trust between the Commission and Parliament, and

@ whether the Member of the Commission considers that, if a Member of the European Parliament tables supplementary questions to clarify the reply he has received, there is no longer any need to answer them, it being sufficient to refer the questioner arrogantly to a previous reply? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/7

To be on the safe side, we are sending an unofficial English translation of this question directly and personally to Commissioner Bangemann, in order to avoid any possible breakdown in communications.

(1)OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 149. (2)OJ C 223, 17.7.1998, p. 35.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1999)

The Commission would take this opportunity of reassuring the Honourable Members that it takes very seriously its duty to reply to parliamentary questions under Article 140 EC Treaty, and that it would regret any perceived failure to reply to a question.

Every question that the Commission receives is circulated to all commissioners, their cabinets and services. Every reply is approved by the competent commissioner, before being adopted by the Commission as a whole. The procedures established by the Commission aim to ensure proper replies to all questions.

Unfortunately in the case of some questions the Commission can add nothing to what it said in reply to a previous question. In referring to a previous reply the Commission does not intend to be arrogant, and would regret if it appeared so.

Turning to the matters raised in Written Question E-2554/98 by Mr Ilaskivi, it is only possible to say that, unless discrimination on grounds of nationality can be shown, there is no basis for Commission intervention.

(1999/C 348/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3967/98 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Cost assessment for European legislative acts

The principle that specific legislative acts should be adopted as soon as an urgent need arises has gained acceptance both within the Member States and at a European level. In this connection, subsidiarity, SLIM and Fiche d’impact are key concepts which stand for greater efficiency and transparency.

Streamlined and sensible legislation requires in particular a comprehensive assessment of the financial impact of a given measure both on the administration and on those at whom the legislation is targeted. After all, it is usually the external cost which can be quite substantial.

1. Is the Commission satisfied with the current format of the financial statement annexed to its legislative proposals?

2. Are there any guidelines or common principles for the evaluation of financial impact?

3. In what manner can greater account be taken of the financial impact of legislation in future?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 1999)

1. The financial statement referred to in Article 3 of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as last amended by Regulation No 2779/98 (1), must be annexed to any Commission proposal or communication with potential impact on the Community budget. This enables the Council and Parliament to assess whether Community action is needed, whether it is in proportion to the objectives sought and whether the implementing arrangements have an acceptable level of cost-effectiveness. Several of the measures taken by the Commission as part of the SEM 2000 project are designed to improve the content and quality of the information supplied to the legislative and budgetary authorities for this purpose. C 348/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

2. and 3. The Commission has for several years been involved in evaluating the impact of its legislative proposals, particularly the impact on the public and on businesses. The Commission has recommended that its departments should carry out evaluations not just when adopting proposals, but also throughout the legislative process (2).

There have also been exchanges of information on best practice as regards evaluation techniques with the Member States and businesses, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

In this connection, the Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to two important Commission initiatives:

(a) the SME impact assessment sheet which is attached to proposals likely to have a significant effect on businesses and SMEs in particular; it covers a detailed evaluation of the regulations, including a cost analysis where possible.

(b) the preliminary pilot project, launched in July 1998, concerning the business panel; the purpose of this project, which supplements the SME impact assessment sheet, is to evaluate, in conjunction with the Member States and by consulting businesses directly, the cost and consequences for them of new legislative proposals concerning the single market; Parliament was duly notified of this project, which is operating satisfactorily (Commission communication to the Council and Parliament; the business panel; a pilot project) (3).

(1) OJ L 347, 23.12.1998. (2) See General guidelines on legislative policy, Bull. EU 1/2-1996, point 1.10.11. (3) COM(98) 197 final.

(1999/C 348/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3970/98 by Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE)to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Noise pollution and roads

The Commission Green Paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final) tackled the problem of road traffic noise at Community level. It can be concluded from the said document that the European Union funds the building of roads which comply with the highest possible environmental and safety standards from the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and the budget heading for trans-European networks.

Will the Commission say whether this Green Paper has since taken the form of a legal text of any kind to protect citizens exposed to noise pollution from road traffic on a given thoroughfare?

If not, do any standards exist at European level requiring Member States to use porous asphalt or to erect noise protection walls on their domestic road networks?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

Since the adoption of the green paper on future noise policy, the Commission has adopted a proposal for a directive on noise from outdoor equipment (1). The Parliament approved the proposal without amendments in May 1998, and the German Presidency is aiming to reach a common position in the Council in June.

Furthermore, in the light of the response to the green paper, the Commission has started work on a framework directive on environmental noise, in close collaboration with experts from Member States, industry, non- governmental organisations and local authorities.

There are no existing Community standards requiring Member States to use porous asphalt nor to erect noise protection barriers on their domestic road networks. Nor is it envisaged that future Community legislation will prescribe specific solutions of this kind, as this in the view of the Commission would not be compatible with the principle of subsidiarity.

(1) COM(98) 46 final. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/9

(1999/C 348/009) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4009/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Participation of Greece in programmes for the elderly

According to Eurolink Age, the elderly and the organizations working with them may take advantage of various European programmes such as:

' health promotion: budget heading B3-4300,

' health surveillance: budget heading B3-4306,

' Alzheimer’s disease: budget heading B3-4304,

' free movement of workers and measures to benefit migrants: budget heading B3-4110,

' action to integrate refugees: budget heading B3-4113.

Will the Commission say:

1. whether Greece has submitted applications to take part in any of the above programmes, and

2. if so, in which programmes, what measures are involved and what is the budget for them?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission is happy to provide the Honourable Member with information on the budget headings mentioned in his question:

' health promotion programme (B3-4300): Eight projects from Greece have been supported, with a total budget of € 2 195 421. The Commission has co-financed € 1 045 508;

' Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders (ADRD) (B3-4300, B3-4307 and B3-4304): Three projects from Greece have been selected, with a total budget of € 237 592. The Commission has co-financed € 159 231;

' the Commission has so far not supported projects received from Greek organisations or citizens in health monitoring (B-4306);

' no applications from Greek organisations or citizens for actions in favour of older migrants were submitted to take part in any of the programmes related to free movement of workers and measures to benefit migrants (B3-4110) or action to integrate refugees (B3-4113).

The Commission would point out that any Member State, organisation or individual may take advantage of the European public health programmes adopted in accordance with Article 129 of the EC Treaty. However, it only co-finances projects encompassing several and preferably all Member States. Some applications have had Greek citizens and organisations acting as project leaders, but there has also been Greek participation in many more projects where project leaders have not been of Greek nationality.

(1999/C 348/010) 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? C 348/10 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 1999)

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

(1999/C 348/011) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4072/98 by Ralf Walter (PSE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: PHARE-CBC/Interreg

The draft version of a new PHARE-CBC regulation has been in existence for some time. It raises the following questions:

What regional cooperation will qualify? Only that between border areas in EU Member States and EU applicant countries and between border areas in the applicant countries, or also at the European Union’s future external borders?

What proportion of the aid has been earmarked for cooperation between border areas of EU Member States and applicant countries and between border areas in the applicant countries? The remarks in the EU budget, unlike the draft regulation, mention a 2/3-1/3 split.

The procedures and financing of Interreg/PHARE-CBC have taken separate paths. There is no sign of any improvement over past years. So far there is only an expression of intent to set up joint cooperation committees and joint cross-border programming.

What specific action is the Commission taking or intending to take here?

How will it be ensured that the Joint Cooperation Committee receives a joint mandate?

Who is drawing up the joint cross-border programme documents?

What is being done to ensure that the Joint Cooperation Committee’s project recommendation is implemented by both the PHARE and Interreg decision-making bodies, which will continue in operation?

What will happen if these bodies reach conflicting decisions?

Interreg is a multiannual and PHARE an annual programme. How is this problem to be resolved?

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

(12 February 1999)

The Commission adopted a new Regulation concerning cross-border co-operation in the framework of Phare on 18 December 1998 (Commission Regulation (EC) 2760/98) (1), which replaces Regulation (EC) 1628/94 of 4 July 1994 (2).

According to Article 2.1 of this new Regulation the eligible borders are those between the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Community, and those between the following applicant countries: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. However, according to its 11th recital, an extension, in a later stage, to borders with some other neighbouring countries benefiting from Community support programmes may be envisaged. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C348/11

Of the amount of 180 million euro available under Article B7 502 for 1999, 2/3 will be allocated for borders with the Community, and 1/3 for the other eligible borders, in line with the budgetary comment.

With a view to contributing to genuine cross-border co-operation, Article 7 provides that for each border region, a joint cooperation committee (JCC) will be set up consisting of representatives of the countries concerned and of the Commission. The JCC will prepare a joint programming document, and will define, taking into account this document, a common set of projects once a year.

The final decision-making concerning project selection will be governed by Phare and Interreg rules respectively. In the case of Phare, Article 8 provides that the Commission will formulate a programme proposal per border taking into account the joint programming document and project recommendations of the JCC, and that the grant will be approved following standard Phare procedures.

Although the general annuality principle of the budget prevails, Article 7.2 provides that the joint programming document will be prepared in a multi-annual perspective, which also will contribute to a better alignment between the Phare cross-border co-operation programme and Interreg.

(1) OJ L 345, 19.12.1998. (2) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994.

(1999/C348/012) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4079/98 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Petrol supplies in Spain

In Spain, the CLH company supplies the main oil companies with the fuel which the latter then sell to petrol stations and other public selling points.

Despite the fact that the CLH sells its product to the oil companies at a standard temperature of 15°, i.e. with a specific density and volume, the oil companies do not make the conversion to this temperature when supplying their clients, which increases the price paid by the latter for a product which ‘does not exist’, since the volume increases with increased temperature, thus also increasing the number of litres which have to be paid for.

In view of this whole situation, and of the fact that Spanish oil companies pay their taxes on the basis of the 15°, can the Commission confirm that these are indeed the facts of the matter?

If so, are such practices in accordance with Community directives? And if not, what measures does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

Petrol for motor vehicles is a liquid which, like all liquids, increases in volume with increasing temperature for the same mass of liquid. If a liquid is traded by volume and the increase in volume is substantial, significant profits can be made by selling the product at a higher temperature than the temperature at which it was purchased.

Ideally, liquids that are prone to significant change in volume due to temperature changes should be sold by mass. Traditionally, however, for practical reasons determining the quantity of liquid is done by metering the liquid, or measuring the volume by other means, due to the non-solid form in which the product presents itself. Liquids are therefore usually sold by volume. To compensate for the temperature dependence of the volume, the measured volume is often converted to a value at base conditions. However, it is not impossible that in the future, technical progress in measurement technology might make the mass measurement of liquids economically feasible by automatic conversion to mass, or even direct mass metering. C 348/12 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The taxation of mineral oils is governed by Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils (1). Article 3(1) requires that Member States subject mineral oils to taxation on the basis of volume at 15°C. It is therefore in line with the requirements of this Directive that the payment of duty by the enterprise releasing the mineral oil for consumption is made on the basis of the volume at 15°C.

The Commission is not aware whether or not in Spain systematic abuse is made of the temperature dependence of the volume of petrol downstream of the point of the taxation. The Commission considers that fighting unfair trading practices is primarily a responsibility of the Member States. Nevertheless, there are two possible situations that could lead to action being taken at Community level. One situation would arise should the national legislation hinder trade in industrial goods in the internal market, such as the measuring instruments used to determine the amount of petrol. The second possibility is to take account of intra- Community trade where it has been established that the measures taken by the Member States are insufficient to achieve such an objective.

Since it has not been established that either of the above situations exist, the Commission does not intend for the present to take any action in respect of the trading practices in Spain highlighted by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992.

(1999/C 348/013) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4100/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: Duty-free employment

Can the Commission indicate the number of jobs involved in the actual selling of duty-free goods in outlets in the various EU Member States?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

The number of people employed in selling duty-free goods in the Community is one of the questions addressed in the study currently being conducted by the Commission in response to the request made by the EuropeanCouncil at its meeting in Vienna.

This work on employment in the duty-free trade was the subject of a communication to the Council and Parliament which the Commission adopted on 17 February 1999. The topic will be discussed at the Council meeting (economic and financial affairs) to be held on 15 March 1999.

(1999/C 348/014) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Delay in funding of programme

The Commission has adopted a programme (code: 96/T/18) entitled ‘Management of insect pests and viruses of tobacco using ecologically compatible technologies’. This programme was drawn up by Directorate-General VI (Agriculture) and was launched in March 1997. Although two out of a total of five phases have already been completed, and substantive spending has been made, EU funding for the programme has so far been non- existent. As a result neither those employed on the project nor the suppliers of laboratory equipment which has been purchased and installed and has been operating since last March have been paid. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/13

Will the Commission say:

1. Why has funding for the programme been delayed?

2. What measures will be taken to ensure that the sums due are paid forthwith?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

Project 96/T/18 ‘Management of insect pests and viruses of tobacco using ecologically compatible technologies’ is one of a number of tobacco research projects. The delay in payments for these projects is due to a lack of staff in the departments concerned. The Commission is trying to find a solution to this problem so that payments can be made as quickly as possible and will keep the Honourable Member informed of progress made.

(1999/C 348/015) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0030/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Suspension of Commission official

Mr Paul van Buitenen, an official in the Commission’s Financial Control section, has been suspended on the grounds that he passed on to the European Parliament a report revealing financial irregularities by some Commission services in the management of European taxpayers’ money; this led incidentally to Parliament’s refusal to grant discharge to the Commission for the 1996financial year.

This Dutch official has been refused access to his office, and the Commission spokesman has confirmed the imposition of this disciplinary measure.

Will the Commission say how it was decided to impose this draconian punishment on Mr van Buitenen, whether this decision is in keeping with the objective of transparency which is supposed to govern the actions of all Community institutions and what measures will be taken to ensure that European taxpayers’ money is properly managed?

(1999/C 348/016) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0042/99 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Suspension of Commission official

According to news reports, the Commission has suspended the official who passed on to the European Parliament information about irregularities in the Commission’s accounts, including the misuse of funds granted via ECHO.

How does the Commission justify its decision to punish an official for sending to the European Parliament, the Union’s highest budgetary authority, crucial information concerning the monitoring of the budget? Does the Commission consider that the decision to suspend the official is compatible with the principles of cooperation between the EU institutions, and in particular with the task of monitoring so as to prevent the abuse of the EU budget?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0030/99 and E-0042/99 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

The disciplinary measures applicable to officials or temporary staff are laid down in Articles 86et seq. of the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and in Annex IX thereto, applicable by analogy to C 348/14 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

other servants. They can be applied only after a very precisely defined procedure has been followed. Proceedings can be initiated only in cases where officials or members of the temporary staff have failed to comply with their obligations under the Staff Regulations.

In the case to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission would point out that no disciplinary measure has been taken against Mr VanBuitenen at this stage. The decision to suspend him is a precautionary administrative measure covered by Article88 in the event of an allegation of serious misconduct, which the Commission considered applicable in this case.

The Commission would also point out that the disciplinary proceeding in this case was not opened on the grounds that the official concerned disclosed cases of fraud but rather on the ground that without authorisation, and contrary to the Staff Regulations, he transmitted the following to third parties: documents subjudice in a case initiated by the Commission, thereby jeopardising the investigations, provisional audit documents, not yet subject to the adversary procedure with the body audited, and documents containing unfounded allegations against his colleagues.

Disciplinary proceedings are covered by the confidentiality of investigations to protect the rights of the defendant and the confidentiality of proceedings.

The Commission considers that application of these measures is not incompatible with respect for the principle of openness, cooperation between the institutions and efforts to combat fraud.

Regarding the measures the Commission has taken, and will take, to ensure that European taxpayers’ money is properly managed, the SEM (sound and efficient management) initiative was launched in 1995 with the aim of tightening up financial management in the Commission; it has already had a marked effect.

Regarding the use of the technical assistance offices (BATs), on 22 July 1998 the Commission adopted a memorandum, covering in particular the following measures in respect of new/renewed programmes: the use of BATs must be covered by the specific legislation governing the programme or operation in question, the need to use BATs must be assessed exante, a Guide governing the use of BATs spelling out the rules and procedures will be issued; compliance with the rules will be supervised by a BAT Monitoring Centre, and a Central Contracts Team will be responsible for harmonisation of the contracts.

In addition, a survey of Commission departments was launched in autumn 1998 to assess the various forms of technical and administrative assistance, including the BATs charged to Parts A and B of the budget. This exercise was part of the procedure for drawing up the 1999 budget. A standard budgetary remarkand ceilings for each of the budget items concerned will ensure that the use of this type of assistance is transparent.

In July 1998 the Commission adopted a working paper on recasting the Financial Regulation, which will be followed up by a legislative proposal in June 1999.

(1999/C 348/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Trade in cat and dog fur

On 13 December 1998, from 10.55 p.m. to 11.45 p.m., German RTL Television broadcast a documentary entitled Cats and dogs: the fur scandal = consumer advertising and cruelty to animals, reporting the existence of a growing trade in cat and dog fur.

The fur is reported to be used in producing such items as decorative collars, cuddly toys, leather jackets, shoes, golfing gloves, etc.

Hundreds of thousands of cat and dog pelts are reported to be traded in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Switzerland in particular. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/15

Can the Commission state whether the trade in and processing of cat and dog fur is lawful in the European Member States?

Can the Commission confirm that both the trade and the processing business are growing strongly?

Does the Commission not consider that this is a reprehensible development, not least because nearly all cats and dogs are domestic animals and an expanding trade in these animals’ fur increases the risk of stray family pets being stolen?

Is the Commission prepared simply to prohibit this trade and the associated processing in the European Union so that members of the public need have no fear of their pets being caught and killed to satisfy the needs of this trade?

Supplementary answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(9 April 1999)

The documentary to which the Honourable Member refers was televised on the German television channel RTL and concerns cruelty in the methods of killing cats and dogs for the purposes of skin production in certain Asian countries. The Commission shares the opinion of the Honourable Member that animals should not be treated in a cruel manner.

The Commission is not collecting any specific information concerning trade and processing of such furs. It is therefore not possible to confirm whether this business is growing. Similarly there is no information available on whether the demand for dog and cat furs actually leads to an increased risk of stray family pets being stolen.

There is no binding international agreement in force which lays down minimum standards for the killing of fogs and cats. Under World trade organisation (WTO) rules as currently interpreted, animal welfare provisions cannot be made a condition for imports from third countries. However, in the context of the determination of the Community negotiating objectives for the next stage of the WTO negotiations, the Commission will examine the possibility of addressing animal welfare concerns more generally.

(1999/C 348/018) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0053/99 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Subject: Assistance for Bavaria from EU funds 1994-1998

Can the Commission provide information about the amounts paid to Bavaria from 1994 to 1998 from EU support funds in the following areas:

1. During the period 1994-1998 what amount was paid to Bavaria from the European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF)?

2 In the same period, how much went to Bavaria in support funds for Objective 2 and Objective 5b regions?

3. From 1994 to 1998, how much was paid to Bavaria as assistance for research and development (R&D)?

4 In the same period, how much was paid from the following programmes: (a) Socrates (b) Leonardo (c) Kaleidoscope (d) Town twinning (e) Raphael? C 348/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 1999)

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

(1999/C 348/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0061/99 by Ursula Stenzel (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Urban issues

In May 1997, the European Commission published its communication entitled ‘Towards an urban agenda in the European Union’ (COM(97) 197 final). That communication serves as a good basis for an overall analysis of the way in which urban issues are tackled under the various Community policies at local authority level.

In the resolution of the European Parliament of 2 July 1998, A4-0172/98 (1), the European Parliament closely connects urban issues with the maintenance and strengthening of economic and social cohesion and emphasises the importance of the reform of the Structural Fund Regulations, as the first phase of the European urban agenda. The proposals set out by the European Commission treat the discussion of urban issues under the eligibility criteria for Objective 2. On several occasions, the Commission has confirmed that urban issues can be approached in a horizontal manner within the corresponding policies and programmes of the Community Support Frameworks and the Single Programming Document under Objectives 1 and 2. How does the Commission intend to implement this approach?

The horizontal dimension of urban issues means, at the same time, close coordination and synergy between the different Community policies, in particular regional policies, if they are to have an impact at urban level. Has the Commission identified which implementing measures and financial mechanisms are needed to secure such coordination and synergy?

(1) OJ C 226, 20.7.1998, p. 36.

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

(10 March 1999)

On 3 February 1999, the Commission adopted a working paper entitled ‘The Structural funds and their coordination with the Cohesion fund : draft guidance for programmes in the period 2000-2006’ (1).

This made it clear that in both objective 1 regions end objective 2 areas the various programming documents under the structural funds should include integrated measures for urban development. The regeneration of disadvantaged urban areas which could receive special support, within objective 2, through an integrated territorial approach similar to that developed by the urban initiative, will therefore represent one, but certainly not the only way to address urban problems within the new programming period.

All these measures will make a vital contribution to an integrated approach to regional development and conversion.

As far as the horizontal dimension and a closer co-ordination of urban matters are concerned, the Commission recently adopted the communication ‘Sustainable urban development in the European Union: a framework for action’ (2). This indicated that an interservice group in the Commission will continue to examine the urban implications of Community policies and instruments with a view to further strengthening their urban sensitivity and integration. It will in particular monitor progress in the implementation of the framework for action.

(1) SEC(99) 103. (2) COM(98) 605 final. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/17

(1999/C 348/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0064/99 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Community approach to nuclear energy

Whilst the attempts by some countries to dismantle their nuclear installations indicate the shift away from this energy source in the West, its supporters predict its inevitable resurgence within twenty years.

The debate, based on emotional rather than rational arguments, has practical repercussions and raises expectations that a cleaner energy source will be developed than the use of coal, oil or natural gas to generate electricity.

Given the responsibility placed on it in the field of nuclear energy by virtue of the corresponding legal texts, will the Commission say what approach it has adopted and will adopt with a view to pinpointing accurately for Community public opinion the genuine assets of nuclear energy and the problems it can resolve, at a time when worldwide energy demand is on the increase?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 1999)

The current and future part played by civil nuclear energy in the Community’s and the world’s energy supplies was examined by the Commission in its communication on the nuclear industries in the European Union: an illustrative nuclear programme within the meaning of Article40 of the Euratom Treaty (1).

This document examines, in particular, the main characteristics of the nuclear industry and identifies the challenges that it must meet.

(1) COM(97) 401 final.

(1999/C 348/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0068/99 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Double taxation of pensions paid from Sweden to Finland

Together with Esko-Juhani Tennilä, Member of the Finnish Parliament, I have written to the Commission asking it to ascertain whether the Finnish authorities’ practice of taxing pensions paid from Sweden violated citizens’ freedom of movement within the EU. In addition, I have tabled two written questions on the subject, in reply to which the Commission said that it was looking into the matter and would inform me of its position in autumn 1998. No answer has yet been given. What is the Commission’s position on the subject?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1999)

The Commission cannot see any incompatibility with Community law of the manner in which Swedish pensions have been taxed in Finland in the past and are taxed today. In general, the fact that taxes differ from one Member State to another is a consequence of the absence of harmonisation of income taxes at Community level. The Commission does not consider these differences to be in conflict with the free movement of people, even if tax burdens can conceivably influence a citizen when deciding in which Member State to live.

As regards the concrete situation of Finnish residents who receive Swedish pensions, these pensions are paid after deduction of 25 % Swedish withholding tax applied to the pension beyond the allowance of SKR 40 000 (± € 4 500). Under Article 18(1) of the Nordic income and capital tax convention (identical in the 1989 and 1996 versions) such pensions are only taxable in Sweden, thus exempted from tax in Finland. However, by C 348/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

virtue of Article 25(3) (d) of that convention, Finland may include such pension in the Finnish tax base, but shall allow as a deduction from the Finnish tax on income that part of the income tax which is attributable to that pension. In effect, the Finnish rules amount to what is known as ‘exemption with progression’. This corresponds to generally accepted principles of international tax law and in particular to the Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD) model tax convention.

Under the previous legislation in force until 1997, Finland applied exactly what is allowed in the tax convention. This led to a result considered unsatisfactory by the pensioners concerned, as the Swedish surplus tax remained at the charge of the pensioner, if the Swedish tax on the pension was higher than the Finnish tax on that part of the income. In order to remedy this situation, section 136(3) of the Finnish income tax act has been modified in favour of the taxpayer in 1997. Now Swedish tax is fully imputed on the overall Finnish tax liability in those cases where so far Swedish surplus tax remained. Thus the combined Swedish and Finnish tax burden can no longer be higher than if the whole income were taxable in Finland only.

Under these circumstances, the Commission does not see any reason to intervene with the Finnish authorities in order to challenge under legal or political grounds their practice or the underlying principles.

However, Finland does not reimburse Swedish tax in the case of pensioners whose Finnish tax liability is lower than the Swedish tax. In such cases Finnish pensioners should benefit in Sweden from the interpretation of the EC Treaty given by the Court of justice in its judgement of 18 February 1995 (C-279/93 5 Schumacker) and might need to be treated for tax purposes as if they were residents. In this respect, the Commission has written to the Swedish authorities asking them to explain in which way the principles set out in the Schumacker judgment are respected by the Swedish tax legislation.

Conflicts as to the competence of which Member State is entitled to levy social security contributions are governed by Community law. In the case of health care contributions levied on pensioners benefiting from invalidity or old-age pensions falling under Council Regulation (EC) 118/97 of 2 December 1996 amending and updating Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community and Regulation (EEC) 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 (1), it is the view of the Commission that such a levy would be contrary to Community law if levied on a pensioner resident in Finland without being the beneficiary of an invalidity or old-age pension under Finnish legislation but the beneficiary of an invalidity or old-age pension under the legislation of another Member State. According to the provisions of the Regulation the Finnish institution would, in such a case, be obliged to provide the health care to the pensioner but on behalf of the institution in the other Member State. However, for pensioners benefiting also from an invalidity or old-age pension under Finnish legislation the provisions of the Regulation do not oppose the levy of social security contributions by Finland, as in such a case benefits would be provided by the Finnish institution at its own expense.

(1) OJ L 28, 30.1.1997.

(1999/C 348/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0069/99

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Exclusion of capital companies from agritourism grants in Sicily

Torresalsa turistica SpA has lodged a complaint with the Commission on the grounds that it has been excluded from the grants to farmers for agritourism measures in the region of Sicily because it constituted in the form of a capital company. The grants concerned are made to all other individual farmers or associations of farmers as part of the incentives policy promoted by Community directives. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C348/19

This inevitably involves differential treatment based solely on the legal form of the firm concerned. The discrimination is also regional in that capital companies in other regions of Italy are eligible for the grants in question.

In its judgment of 18 December 1986 in a similar case the European Court of Justice (First Chamber) ruled that Member States are not permitted to withhold from legal persons the benefit of provisions of a Community directive solely because they have assumed a certain legal form as this would conflict with the principle of non- discrimination enshrined in Article 40(3) of the Treaty. It should also be pointed out that discrimination of this kind is not sanctioned by any law but arises from an administrative interpretation that appears to be completely arbitrary.

This view was subsequently confirmed by the Court of Justice, with reference to the second paragraph of Article 40(3) of the EEC Treaty, in its judgments of 15 October 1992 in Case C-162/91 and 6 November 1997 in Case C-164/96.

The Commission:

1. What action does it intend to take in this case?

2. What impact has the complaint by Toresalsa turistica SpA had or what effect is it having?

3. What are it’s views on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

After asking the complainant for clarification the Commission sent the Italian authorities a letter setting out the reasons why, on the basis of Community law, it considers that the administrative authorities of the Region of Sicily are wrong in excluding companies from the benefits accorded to agricultural businesses involved in farm tourism.

The Commission will decide what further action to take in the light of Italy’s reply. The complainant company has been informed of the steps taken by the Commission to date.

(1999/C348/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0072/99 by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico

Italy’s Istituto Poligrafico is under scrutiny on the grounds that it may have fallen foul of European anti-trust law.

The Commission is investigating injections of capital, in particular the one received at the beginning of 1996 by Cartiere Miliani (which is 97,34 % controlled by the Istituto Poligrafico), and the commercial advantages which the Istituto Poligrafico is reportedly able to secure as a result of its exclusive contracts with the Italian Government. Such practices may contravene the rules relating to state aid.

In a letter to the Italian Government the Commission takes the view that the 54 billion lire increase in capital granted in 1996 to the Istituto Poligrafico and to the company it controls may constitute state aid.

The investigations being carried out by the Commissioner responsible for competition also cover the 250 billion lire increase in capital which was approved in 1998: Cartiere Miliani appears to have recorded losses of 187 billion lire in 1997 and to have used up all its capital. This act therefore appears to constitute state aid insofar as it does not seem like the type of investment which would have been made by a private investor in a market economy.

At the end of its letter the Commission points out that, without such aid, the Istituto Poligrafico and the companies it controls (Cartiere Miliani and Verres) would have recorded substantial losses. C 348/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Can the Commission state the reasons put forward by the Italian Government to justify the financial dealings involving the Istituto Poligrafico?

What action would the Commission take if the Istituto Poligrafico were to be found guilty of contravening European anti-trust laws?

(1999/C 348/024) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0087/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato (IPZS) (Italian State Printing Works and Mint)

Commissioner Van Miert has started proceedings against the Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato (IPZS . Italian State Printing Works and Mint) for the breach of European competition law. In Italy too the Italian Parliament, the media and the Rome Public Prosecutor’s Office are concerning themselves increasingly with the disastrous situation in the IPZS which in 1997 made a loss of LIT 614 thousand million out of a turnover of around LIT 1 000 thousand million.

This loss is largely the result of the management of the former chairman, Ruggeri, and a former director, Maggi, who, with other directors, created an empire of 35 subsidiary companies which they could use at will without being accountable for them even to the Board of Governors. For 5 years, a former governor, Mr Tribuni, has been informing the Italian Treasury of this state of affairs, which has only led to his being irregularly removed from office.

The reason for these possible cover-ups by the ministry in charge might be that thousands of millions of lire in counterfeit government bonds are in circulation (in other States as well), looking identical to the genuine bonds produced by the IPZS.

In view of the above, can the Commission:

1. indicate whether it believes it is essential to investigate the activities of the IPZS;

2. give a general opinion on the matter.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0072/99 and E-0087/99 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The Commission began its investigation of the state aid allegedly granted to Poligrafico in April 1997. The information provided by the Italian authorities on several occasions, at the Commission’s request, was not such as to convince it that no state aid was involved.

By decision taken on 28 October 1998, the Commission initiated proceedings under Article93(2) of the EC Treaty. This decision was notified to the Italian Government by letter dated 26 November 1998. The Italian Government asked for an extended period within which to submit its comments and the information requested.

The proceedings initiated will enable the Commission to determine whether the capital increases granted to Cartiere Miliani di Fabriano, a company controlled by Poligrafico, and the exclusive contracts awarded to Poligrafico to supply goods and services to the State constitute state aid, and, if so, whether that aid is compatible with the common market. The Commission will also examine the additional aid granted for the group’s restructuring. The aid measures will be assessed in the light of the Treaty provisions on state aid and the guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty.

Should the Commission find that the measures are incompatible with the common market, it will order the recovery of the sums paid out to the recipients.

It is not for the Commission to judge whether the case involves criminal law matters in relation to the former managers of Poligrafico and the possible existence of forged government bonds. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/21

(1999/C 348/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0086/99 by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Private sector funding for the Madrid-Saragossa-Barcelona stretch of the high-speed railway

In its communication on public-private partnerships in trans-European transport network projects, the Commission identifies the stretch of the high-speed railway linking Madrid, Saragossa and Barcelona as a candidate for funding through a PPP (public-private partnership), whereby funding for the project would be opened up to the private sector. In practical terms, such an arrangement could mean completing construction work ahead of schedule and opening the stretch earlier than originally planned, insofar as the implementation of the project would not be dependent solely on the availability of funding from state budgets.

Has the Commission taken any action in this regard? Has the Spanish Government signalled to the Commission any interest in implementing such an arrangement, involving cooperation on the project between the public and private sectors?

Has the Commission examined the possibility of extending arrangements of this kind to projects linking the transport networks in the various Member States other than the fourteen which have been given priority, such as road or rail projects to ease travel through the Pyrenees?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

In the Commission’s communication to the Council and Parliament on public-private partnerships (PPP) in trans-European transport network (TETN) projects (1) a number of projects were identified as potential PPPs. They included projects which were not on the list of fourteen that were given priority for development under the TETNs framework. The Commission continues to discuss these projects with Member States, as it undertook to do, and to encourage government to consider the application of a PPP approach to infrastructure projects wherever possible and suitable.

There has, so far, been no request submitted by the Spanish authorities for co-financing from the TEN’s budget or other city funds of a project involving a public-private partnership.

(1) COM(97) 453 final.

(1999/C 348/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0104/99 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Joint Relex Service

In reply to my earlier Written Question (E-3236/98) (1) about late payments by the Commission, particularly for work carried out under PHARE and TACIS contracts, the Commission stated that, ‘the new Joint Relex Service ... has undertaken to review the financial structure of and payment plans for technical assistance contracts and to align procedures and methods for drawing up technical assistance programmes.’

1. What progress has been made in this area since 1 September 1998 and what timetable is envisaged for the implementation of the improvements identified by the review?

2. Will the review examine blockages which delay payments throughout the payment process? C 348/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

3. Would the Commission comment on the fact that British companies awarded interest on payments made after more than 60 days will be penalised by the fact that the UK base rate is currently twice the level of that set by the ECB?

(1) OJ C 182, 28.6.1999, p. 53.

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

(9 April 1999)

1. A document drawn up late last year on the simplification, consolidation and rationalisation of contracting procedures is currently being discussed by experts from the Member States. It will be adopted in accordance with the division of powers between the Council and the Commission and the usual procedures. It will permit uniform contracting procedures to be phased in for all external aid programmes.

2. The new standard contracts and simplified methods to speed up payments are now being finalised. Given the legal complexity of the work to be carried out and the great number of contracts to be rationalised, work will be spread across this year and the beginning of next year.

The new contracts for use by the external relations directorates-general and the terms of reference for invitations to tender (general conditions) will be completely overhauled and modernised by the summer of next year. Next year should see a significant improvement in payment procedures for all new contracts, but progress should begin to become apparent this year as work advances in the sectors already rationalised.

The Commission would point out that last year, pending this future harmonisation effort, it made a special effort to improve the processing of Phare and Tacis invoices, improving matters considerably. The situation should increasingly return to normal over the months ahead. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to his written question E-3236/98 and Mr Cassidy’s written question E-3500/98 (1).

3. The rate of interest applicable in case of late payments by the Commission is calculated by reference to the rate applied to recovery of debts (Article 94 of the Commission Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EC) No 3418/ 93 of 9 December 1993 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of certain provisions of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1997 (2)). This harmonised treatment of all the Community contracts ensures an equal treatment of debts within the Community. The differences of rates applicable to commercial debts should be abolished by the forthcoming ‘late payments directive’ (3).

(1) OJ C 320, 6.11.1999, p. 51. (2) OJ L 315, 16.12.1993. (3) COM(98) 126 final.

(1999/C 348/027) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0109/99 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Unjustified banking charges levied by Italian banks following the introduction of the euro

On 23 April 1998 the Commission adopted three recommendations concerning the euro. One of the recommendations dealt with bank charges for conversions and stipulated that exchange transactions between European currencies should be completely free of charge, that banks should make no charge for the conversion of incoming and outgoing payments or for the conversion of current accounts from the national currency unit to the euro at the end of the transitional period.

Only a few days after the launch of the euro, which was universally hailed as a fundamental step towards the realisation of the single European market and backed by intensive information and awareness-raising campaigns, it has emerged that the Italian banks and a number of European banks are still charging their 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/23

clients foreign exchange commission, which in Italy varies between ITL 5 000 and 10 000, in addition to a percentage of the amount changed. This is a clear infringement of a previous common undertaking by credit institutions to ensure that no charge would be made on foreign exchange transactions involving national currencies in the euro zone.

There have also been irregularities in cross-border payment and transfer transactions, which are still not dealt with in the same way as national payments since they are subject to additional costs.

It is vital, in order not to undermine the widespread optimism generated during the period immediately after the launch, that consumers are not made to bear the burden of the costs of the transition to the euro.

In view of the above, will the Commission:

D investigate the continued application of these banking charges and, if necessary, say whether or not this constitutes a clear infringement of the Community law on the single market;

D establish whether or not the banks’ conduct contravenes the Treaty of Rome as a result of agreements, secret understandings or concerted practices and abuse of dominant position the direct consequence of which is a failure to comply with the rules on competition;

D lastly, say whether it considers that an unjustifiable infringement of consumer rights has taken place, and that appropriate steps should therefore be taken as a matter of urgency?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

The Commission Recommendation 98/286/EC of 23 April 1998 on banking charges for conversion to the euro (1) lays down a standard of good practice which concerns mainly the conversion of money from national currencies to the euro and vice-versa. In this regard, Article 2 of this Recommendation provides that the conversion of incoming and outgoing payments and of accounts from the national currency to the euro should be free of charge.

However, this standard of good practice does not cover the exchange transactions between currencies (banknotes and coin) of the euro zone. In this respect, the Recommendation provides only for a general obligation of full transparency. During the transitional period, banks should apply the official conversion rates and indicate separately all charges applied to such operations. Banks shall perform exchange operations free of charge only from 1 January 2002 and subject to certain conditions (i.e. only for their customers, for household amounts and for conversions from the national currency to the euro).

Therefore, from the beginning of the transitional period, Community banks are providing specific information on charges for exchange operations. This new practice has revealed a surprisingly high level of charges, which has understandably provoked strong reactions among the European public and suspicion that banks are trying to make up for revenue lost from exchange transactions by increasing the level of these charges. Moreover, the exchange risk, which no longer exists between currencies of the euro zone, was never a main element of the charges related to exchange transactions. According to the information available, the exchange risk accounted for approximately 20 % of these charges, which are mainly due to handling and overhead costs (transport costs of large quantities of foreign currencies and the labour intensive nature of these operations, which are not suitable for cash machines).

Nevertheless, the Commission expects that, during the course of the transitional period, the charges for exchange operations related to currencies of the euro zone will diminish, since the exchange risk between these currencies no longer exists. C 348/24 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The practice applied by Italian banks concerning exchange operations, while it may be justified, could undermine the consumers’ trust in the single currency and jeopardise public support for this project. As underlined in a letter to the main European banking federations in January 1999, the Commission attaches paramount importance that public confidence in the introduction of the euro and the credibility of the banking system as a whole should not be undermined by financial institutions drawing unfair benefit from increases in charges for transactions between former national currencies within the euro zone.

On 5 February 1999, the Commission issued a press statement calling on all banks to make publicly available information, showing changes (before and after the introduction of the euro) in the total level of charges for exchanging euro zone banknotes and cross border cheques, transfers and card payments. The Commission further requested banks in the euro zone to report the state of play to the Commission by 31March through their European associations.

Also in the press statement, users of financial services were invited to report to the Commission any cases of banks’ failure to respect the legal framework for the euro or the Commission Recommendation on transparency of bank charges, using a specially created e-mail and fax service. The Commission will analyse the information received and will take the appropriate actions in order to prevent possible infringements of consumers’ rights.

Moreover, the Commission is considering making a study on Community banks’ charging practices before and after the introduction of the euro for the exchange of euro zone banknotes, as well as for other cross-border operations (cheques, transfers and payment cards).

Regarding credit transfers, the fact that cross-border operations continue to be more expensive than domestic operations is neither irregular nor directly related to the introduction of the euro. Indeed, the execution of cross-border credit transfers is more complex than that of domestic payments and therefore the related costs are higher. This situation is due to the lack of efficient structures for such payments and to the reliance on correspondent banking. On the other hand, in the majority of the Member States domestic credit transfers are automated and are executed by clearing systems, which link domestic credit institutions. Nevertheless, after the introduction of the euro, citizens will no longer understand why the current charges for cross-border transfers continue to be much higher than for domestic payments. For this reason, a joint effort of all interested parties (banks, Member States and the Commission) is needed to bring them down.

As far as the Commission is concerned, it will issue in spring 1999 a communication on the future of payment systems in the single market, which will be the basis for a comprehensive policy in order to achieve the goal of a single payments area. It will examine existing barriers in cross-border payments and propose concrete measures in order to reduce them. In particular, the Commission will increase the pressure on Community banks to establish more efficient links between national retail payment systems as soon as possible.

Finally, on secret understandings and concerted practices, the Commission has recently launched investigations of possible infringement by banks of competition policy. The Commission will not hesitate to intervene should any infringements be established.

(1) OJ L 130, 1.5.1998.

(1999/C 348/028) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0123/99

by Patricia McKenna (V)to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Aircraft pollution

Does the Commission intend to present proposals for a directive on the reduction of environmentally polluting substances from aircraft, an issue which is becoming increasingly important, but on which the Commission remains silent? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/25

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The Commission has stated its serious concern about the environmental impact of aircraft engine emissions on several occasions. Since these emissions contribute to global environmental problems such as climate change and atmospheric ozone depletion, regulatory action on aircraft engine emissions has a much more significant reduction potential if introduced at international level. This was clearly highlighted in the explanatory memorandum to the Commission proposal of 3 December 1997 for a Council directive on the limitation of the emission of oxides of nitrogen from civil subsonic jet aeroplanes (1).

At international level there are currently mandatory certification standards in force for emissions of smoke, unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen from aircraft engines, laid down in Volume II of Annex 16 to the Convention on international civil aviation. All Community Member States are signatories to that Convention and the international standard is applied in all Member States.

As indicated in its Report on the main results of the 32nd session of the assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and its implications for the Community (2), the Commission envisages taking an active part in the work of the committee on aviation environmental protection of ICAO with a view to contributing to continued progress in reducing the environmental impact of aircraft engine emissions.

The Commission intends provide further reflections on the reduction of aircraft engine emissions in a proposed communication to the Council and the Parliament on air transport and the environment.

The Commission, consequently, has not been and will not be ‘silent’ on the issue of environmental pollution resulting from aircraft emissions.

(1) OJ C 108, 7.4.1998. (2) COM(98) 677 final.

(1999/C 348/029) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0137/99

by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Community policy on promoting energy crops

The set-aside of land formerly devoted to growing food crops means that such land can either lie fallow or it can be used for alternative non-food crops such as energy crops without losing its right to the appropriate EU subsidy.

So-called energy-crops, mainly for the production of bio-fuels, therefore constitute an alternative of the greatest importance for those who own land which has been withdrawn from food production.

Can the Commission tell me what Community initiatives have been taken to create an EU policy on promoting energy crops, what information campaigns have been undertaken in connection with these initiatives, and how it intends to promote energy crops amongst owners of set-aside land?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

In its White Paper on energy establishing a strategy and an action plan for renewable energies (1), the Commission predicts a substantial increase in the proportion of energy produced from biomass in the C 348/26 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Community’s overall energy consumption, from the current 45 million tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) to 135 million by 2010.Such a development will require additional agricultural and forestry land to be made available for non-food crops, and especially energy crops.

In addition, following a request by the ‘Agriculture’ Council of 22-26 June 1998, the Commission drafted a working document on non-food crops in the context of Agenda 2000 (2).Presenting the paper to the ‘Agriculture’ Council of 15 December 1998, the Commission emphasised that this was an initial approach to the problem of support measures for non-food crops.

While not proposing practical solutions at this stage, the document opens the debate and invites Member States to give their points of view.

The Commission will give these its fullest attention in the negotiations on Agenda 2000.

(1) COM(97) 599 final. (2) SEC(98) 2169.

(1999/C 348/030) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0151/99

by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Implications of the ban on exports of bulls for bullfighting

With reference to my question E-3620/98, the Commission should bear in mind what was written by Ana Fernandez Graciani in issue No 23 of the magazine ‘Toros’, of 15 December 1998:

‘Just like last year, when the heavens gave valuable assistance to livestock farmers who were in a desperate situation by sending them a splendid year of rainfall, Spanish breeders of bulls for bullfighting will this season face less competition when they come to sell their products since the closing of the border with Portugal because of ‘mad cow’ disease will result in a significant reduction in the total supply of bulls.’

However, will Community law allow this ‘miracle’, which goes against the rules on competition in a single market and which will change a measure intended to protect human health into one which protects the economic interests of Spanish livestock farmers, against all the provisions of, for example, Article 30 (ex Article 36) of the EC Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

As already stated in the answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-3620/98 (1), the purpose of Commission Decision 98/653/EC, of 18 November 1998, concerning emergency measures made necessary by the occurrence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Portugal (2) is to protect human and animal health. Any request to exempt fighting bulls from the general ban to move live bovine animals out of Portugal must be examined in the light of the likelihood that the animals will enter the food or feed chain and of the possibilities to prevent fraud.

The Commission does not share the view of the Honourable Member that there is a commercial objective to the decision to restrict the trade from the Member State concerned.

(1) OJ C 320, 6.11.1999, p. 60. (2) OJ L 311, 20.11.1998. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/27

(1999/C 348/031) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0156/99 by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: The new EMEA Procedure for Notification of Parallel Distribution of Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products

In the light of the recently published Procedure for Notification of Parallel Distribution of Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products (EMEA-H-HB-37678-1998), can the Commission please explain the basis upon which the sum of ECU 3 000 has been calculated as the administrative fee which is to be paid with each notification per product type? Is the Commission aware that such a level of fee is not only excessive when compared to the scale of fees payable to national regulatory authorities for the issue of a national PL(PI) Licence but is also likely to act as an impediment to the free movement of pharmaceutical products, as some products do not yield a sufficient profit margin to enable the proposed annual administrative charge to be met.

(NB: In the United Kingdom, for example, an importer will currently pay the sum of £1 000 per product for which he applies for a Licence to import and parallel distribute. The period of validity is five years, not one year, as proposed by the EMEA. The renewal fee is £250 for a further five years).

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

In accordance with section D of the Commission communication on the Community marketing authorisation proceduresfor medicinal products( 1) the European agency for the evaluation of medicinal products(EMEA) checks compliance with the terms of the Community marketing authorisation in case of parallel distribution of centrally authorised products.

The € 3 000 fee levied by the EMEA for checking notifications of parallel distribution of centrally authorised products covers all changes made during a one-year period. The level of this fee has been set on a cost recovery basis and is fully supported by the extent and frequency of the checks required (multilingual product information amended on average three to four timesa year). The administrativecharge levied by the EMEA in case of notification of parallel distribution is substantially lower than the possible maximum level of € 5 000, fixed by Article 8 paragraph 2 of Council Regulation (EC) 2743/98 of 14 December 1887 amending Regulation (EC) 297/95 on feespayable to the EMEA ( 2). The feeslevied by national authoritiesin caseof parallel import cover only checksin one language and generally for a singleoperation only.

The level of the fee levied by the EMEA for checking notifications of parallel distribution of centrally authorised productswill be reviewed at the end of 1999 taking into account the practical experience acquired in the operation of the procedure. The Commission is not convinced that a renewal fee of € 3 000 is justified and has therefore requested the EMEA management board not to maintain this fee.

(1) OJ C 229, 22.7.1998. (2) OJ L 345, 19.12.1998.

(1999/C 348/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0157/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Incorporation of Community legislation by Greece

Will the Commission say how many and which Regulations and Directives have not been incorporated into national law in Greece? C 348/28 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

Regulations are directly applicable in the Member States and therefore do not require measures for their transposition into national law.

In the case of Directives, at the beginning of March 1999 there were 64 infringement proceedings open against Greece for failure to notify measures. For further details the Honourable Member is referred to the Sixteenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law ' 1998, which will be presented to Parliament in the next few weeks.

In the meantime, the Honourable Member is referred to the Fifteenth report ' 1997 (1).

(1) OJ C 250, 10.8.1998.

(1999/C 348/033) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0164/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Existence of documents interpreting Directive 96/92/EC which have not been forwarded to Parliament

Can the Commission confirm that its services have already drawn up documents clarifying and interpreting Article 24 of Directive 96/92/EC (1)? Can the Commission specify which of its services have drawn up these documents and what legal status those documents have? When will the Commission forward them to Parliament or inform Parliament of their substance, given that the above directive was adopted under the codecision procedure?

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997, p. 20.

(1999/C 348/034) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0165/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Interpretation and further legislative development of Directive 96/92/EC

Is it true that the Commission has drawn up documents after Directive 96/92/EC (1) was adopted making an interpretation possible whereby some transitional regimes concerning competition (Article 24) may be intended to recover the costs arising from operating commitments or guarantees existing before the entry into force of the Community text, and which would be impossible to recover under that directive? Can the Commission supply those documents?

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997, p. 20.

(1999/C 348/035) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0166/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Established rights of undertakings following the amendment of rules and the introduction of liberalisation measures

Does the Commission not believe that the legal principle put forward by some European electricity undertakings according to which the costs of the transition to competition in the electricity sector are established rights which must be recognised from the point of view of compensation, to be borne by consumers, represents a serious legal precedent for all the liberalised sectors given that the principle of equal treatment, inter alia, is enshrined in the Treaties? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/29

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0164/99, E-0165/99 and E-0166/99 given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

It is correct that the Commission has prepared a discussion document titled ‘Indicative guidelines for transitional regimes Article 24 of Directive 96/92/EC’ which was discussed with the Member States at the meeting of the follow-up group on the implementation of the electricity Directive 96/92/EC on 13 May 1998. It was prepared by the Directorate general for energy (DGXVII) in close cooperation with the Directorate general for competition (DGIV) and the Legal service and did not commit the Commission with regard to any decisions according to Article 24 of the Directive or Article 92 of the EC Treaty. With this understanding, the document can be made available to the Members of the Parliament.

The approach of Article 24 of the Directive is to address ‘stranded costs’ or ‘costs for the transition to competition’, in the perspective of commitments or guarantees of operation given before the entry into force of the Directive, which may not be honoured on account of the provisions of this Directive, by providing for derogations from Chapters IV, VI and VII of the Directive. However, Member States may choose not to apply derogations, that is, delaying market opening but to fully apply the Directive and to compensate electricity companies with transfer payments. The Commission considers that such measures, not representing derogations from the Directive but payments to electricity companies, these should also be examined according to the state aids rules.

(1999/C 348/036) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0167/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Lawfulness of the medium- and long-term fixing of charges for electricity for SMEs and domestic consumers

Does the Commission agree with the interpretation according to which an electricity undertaking may assess the reduction in income in the medium and long term resulting from the arrival of free competition and, consequently, that it may fix its prices or charges for consumers without taking account of the potential effects on costs in the coming years of fluctuations such as trends in the prices of energy products, developments in water management systems, exchange rates and interest rates and the expansion or contraction of supply and demand? Is that interpretation consistent with the free market principles laid down in the Treaties?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The question put by the Honourable Member concerns the mechanism whereby an electricity utility determines its selling prices.

Generally speaking, in a free and competitive market an enterprise sets its selling prices in the light of its production costs, which normally constitute the lower limit, and the prices charged by its competitors, which normally constitute the upper limit. In many cases, production costs are made up in part of provisions to cater for future events that have already been identified but have not yet been quantified exactly or are not certain.

The admissibility tests for such provisions are not standard in all Member States, although hypothetical events or events that are simply probable but cannot be quantified may not, as a rule, be taken into account.

Establishment of such provisions in accordance with the general concept of prudence is required by Community legislation, viz. Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 based on Article 54(3)(g) of the EC Treaty on the annual accounts of certain types of companies (1), by national laws on annual accounts and by international accounting principles, while the corresponding financial estimates are a matter for the directors and/or managers of the enterprise. C 348/30 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

This is why, in the case at issue, the Commission is unable to take a position on the Honourable Member’s proposed interpretation without knowing more about the points mentioned.

(1) OJL 222, 14.8.1978.

(1999/C 348/037) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0179/99 by Irene Soltwedel-Schäfer (V) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: BSE research - overcoming the species barrier

1. It is a known scientific fact that BSE can be transmitted from cattle to humans. Since SE occurs in a number of animals (overcoming the species barrier), there is a risk of BSE being transmitted to pigs and chickens, and hence entering the human food chain.

(a) What research programmes have there been in the European Union since 1991 for examining the transmissibility of BSE to other agriculturally useful animals?

(b) Which universities in which Member States are focusing on this work?

2. What research results are available in this area?

3. What appropriations are available in the budget for the research scientists?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 1999)

1. (a) In the field of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE) the Community has since 1991 supported 54 research projects with an overall Community contribution of approximately 46,2 million euro. These activities were or are being implemented within the Community specific research programmes Biomedicine and health (Biomed), Biotechnology (Biotech) and Agriculture and fisheries (FAIR) of the fourth framework programme for research and technological development.

11 out of the 54 projects are supported as part of the different calls for proposals within the Biomed, Biotech and FAIR programmes. The remaining 43 projects are a result of the action plan on TSE research launched by the Commission in June 1996.

Moreover, the Joint research centre (JRC), on behalf of the Commission and in co-operation with independent experts, is engaged in three projects in relation with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), namely ‘Detection of bovine animal meals in feedingstuff of plant origin’, ‘Detection of an appropriate heat treatment of animal meals’ and ‘Evaluation of BSE post mortem tests’, with a budget allocation of approximately 1 million euro.

The specific issue of BSE transferability is addressed, from different perspectives, in seven projects. Two projects are aimed at the study of the mechanisms of BSE transmission and the species barrier. One project intends to assess potential transferability of BSE from cattle to pigs and one project aims to develop a pre- clinical test to differentiate between scrapie and BSE infection in sheep. In addition, three projects aimed to reduce risks of transferability by developing measures to avoid meat contamination; improve sterilisation processes for the production of feed animal proteins; and to develop procedures for inactivation of TSE agents. A summary of the projects is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

1. (b) A list of institutions involved in the above projects is also sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/31

2. The projects on transferability of BSE all started during 1998 and it is premature at this stage to anticipate their results.

3. The overall budget allocated to these activities is approximately 7,6 million euro.

(1999/C 348/038) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0184/99

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Food which does not contain genetically modified ingredients

Commissioner Bonino has stated on several occasions recently that the Commission favours the establishment of a food sector, other than organic food, which is free from genetic engineering.

Will the Commission please explain:

1. What practical steps it is taking to encourage the development of such a market sector?

2. What financial support will be made available to assist in promoting this development?

3. What criteria it recommends to ensure that uses of genetic engineering in the cultivation or production processes are excluded?

4. Whether, in accordance with recital 10 of the Novel Food Regulation 258/97 (1), the Commission will bring forward a standardised form of wording for a label for products that contain no genetically engineered substances?

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

To date there are no specific rules governing cultivation and production ‘free of genetically modified organisms (GMO)’ or the indication of such status on the labelling of foodstuffs for which it could be claimed.

However, the 10th recital of Regulation (EC) 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients states that ‘nothing shall prevent a supplier from informing the consumer on the labelling of a food or food ingredient that the product in question is not a novel food within the meaning of this Regulation or that the techniques used to obtain novel foods indicated in Article 1(2) were not used in the production of that food or food ingredient.’ Consequently, the option of voluntary labelling, specifying > in this case > to the ultimate consumer that the foodstuff is not genetically modified or that it is free of GMO, is governed by the principles established in Council Directive 79/ 112/EEC of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate consumer (1), and in particular the principle that labelling must not be such as to mislead the consumer. Application of this principle falls within the jurisdiction and responsibility of Member State authorities.

In fact, the Commission is currently examining the possibility of regulating at Community level the use of such information, though it is unable at this stage to provide any further details on this matter.

(1) OJ L 33, 8.2.1979. C 348/32 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/039) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0192/99 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Ariane

Would the Commission indicate whether it will accept project applications which aim to make books and reading more acceptable to blind and partially-sighted people under the recently agreed ARIANE Programme?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

The Ariane programme, adopted by the Parliament and the Council on 24 October 1997 (Decision No 2085/ 97/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997 establishinga programmeof support including translation, in the field of books and reading(Ariane) ( 1)) aims to encourage cooperation between the Member States in the field of books and reading; to support and complement their activities in this area, by contributing to the development of their cultures while respectingnational and regionaldiversity; to increase the knowledge and dissemination for the literature and history of the European peoples, as well as access thereto by European citizens, notably through support for the translation of literary works, plays and reference works, support for cooperation projects carried out in partnership and improvement of the skills of professionals in this field.

In the context of action 1, which concerns support for the translation of literary works, plays and reference works, all of the projects submitted must involve the translation of the work at least into one other Community language. Consequently, a project which does not foresee translation to another Community language, but rather concentrates on the changes required in order to make books and reading more accessible to blind and partially sighted people, cannot be eligible under this action.

However, any application submitted under action 2 ; support for cooperation projects carried out in partnership which aim to improve the promotion of books and reading, and access by the citizen to them ; can involve projects which aim to make books and readingmore accessible to blind and partially sighted people, as with any other people. Such projects must of course respect the eligibility criteria, particularly as regards the need for a European dimension.

Finally, the projects submitted under action 3 ; which concerns support for improvement of the skills of professionals ; may involve both blind people and partially sighted people, on condition that the other criteria for participation are respected.

(1) OJ L 291, 24.10.1997.

(1999/C 348/040) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0193/99 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Grey whales in Mexico

The European Union is currently conducting negotiations with the Government of Mexico for a wide-ranging and ambitious economic association and political cooperation agreement. The preamble to the draft Proposal for a Council Decision (COM(97) 527 final) (1) refers to the importance both parties attach to the application of sustainable development principles, as set out in Agenda 21 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Furthermore, in Article 34 of the proposal under negotiation, the parties commit themselves to preserve the environment and ecological balance of their respective jurisdictions. Since the proposed Mexico-EU Free-Trade Agreement contains as yet no environmental ‘side agreement’ ; a level of protection found in the North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA) ; there is a concern that Mexican environmental laws and regulations will not be fully enforced and implemented and that this will lead to an unfair trade advantage between the EU and Mexico. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/33

Is the Commission aware of the fact that a project proposed by the Mexican Government and the Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan to construct an industrial salt-producingcomplex in Baja California, within a pristine lagoon, the Laguna San Ignacio, where grey whales reproduce and which was designated as a whale sanctuary by Mexico in 1976 and further protected by Mexican Presidential Decree in 1988 (as part of the Vizcaino Biosphere Reserve) and given international protection when the site was declared a UN World Heritage Site in 1993 by the 159-member Convention, is therefore in direct contradiction with the letter and spirit of the draft agreement, and, more specifically, with Articles 29 and 34 thereof?

In accordance with the regular dialogue and information exchange referred to in Article 13 of the draft agreement, is the Commission prepared to discuss the Laguna San Ignacio saltworks development by the ESSA company, the threat to the grey whales and other fauna and flora, including the highly endangered prong- horned antelope, as well as the unacceptability of the establishment of a huge industrial development within a World Heritage Site and to ask the Mexican Government to abandon this salt-evaporation plant?

For the time being, in the event that the Mexican Government allows ESSA to continue with these saltworks, is the Commission prepared to consider, in accordance with Article 5(k) of the draft agreement, to make an exception for the import of salt from Mexico into the EU so as to help prevent the establishment of this salt- evaporation plant?

For the time being, in the event that the Mexican Government allows ESSA to continue with these saltworks, is the Commission prepared to consider raisingthe question with the Member States of the EU which are members of the World Heritage Convention and ask them to propose to the General Assembly of the WHC to put the El Vizcaino MAB/UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (which includes the Laguna San Ignacio) on the World Heritage in Danger list?

(1) OJ C 350, 19.11.1997, p. 6.

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his question and the interest he takes in the plight of the San Ignacio Lagoon. The Commission is aware of the proposed project to construct a solar evaporation salt plant in this area.

The Honourable Member cites a number of important environmental provisions in the Economic partnership, political co-ordination and co-operation agreement signed by the Community and its Member States and Mexico in December 1997. Although the agreement has already been ratified by a number of Member States, in order for it and its legal provisions to enter into force, the remaining Member States, the Parliament (where work has begun on this process) and Mexico must complete the requisite procedures. Notwithstanding this situation, the Commission will certainly communicate the concerns raised by the Parliament to Mexico in the appropriate context in order that it be aware of the strength of feeling aroused by this issue.

Regarding the suggestion raised by the Honourable Member to make an exception for imports of Mexican salt from a future free trade agreement, given that the Community already provides duty-free access for such salt (CN code 25010000) from Mexico under its multilateral commitment at the World trade organisation (WTO) to grant duty-free access on a most favoured nation (MFN) basis, the question of an exception in a bilateral context would not apply to the extent that there would be no tariff to further dismantle.

Moreover, to date the Community has coherently argued against the recourse to unilateral trade action in pursuance of environmental and conservation objectives for two reasons. Firstly, such action has been shown to be highly ineffective to address such concerns. Secondly, given that WTO rules do not allow members to restrict imports on the basis of the processes and production methods (PPMs) of products, the Community would risk falling foul of its obligations as a WTO member by undertaking such a measure on such grounds.

The Honourable Member’s suggestion regarding raising the issue in the World heritage convention context could be considered in the context of the Community’s broader stance in favour of multilaterally agreed action. C 348/34 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/041) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0199/99 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Threatened extinction of the wolf in Asturias (Spain)

The regional media have recently published the decision of the Wolf Commission to eliminate the species from the Asturian part of the Europa Peaks National Park. The Wolf Commission maintains that the distinctive traditional habitat of the wolf lies in the part of the conservation area situated in the province of Léon and is therefore insisting that all individual wolves that settle permanently in Asturias must be shot.

Is the European Commission aware of this situation, bearing in mind that Spain is one of the last wolf bastions in Western Europe?

The wolf is an animal species of Community interest that has to be strictly protected. Furthermore, Directive 92/43/EEC (1) stipulates that Member States must prohibit all forms of deliberate killing of wolves other than in specific exceptional cases where there is no satisfactory alternative and the killing will not undermine the continued favourable conservation status of the wolf population. That being the case, does not the Commission believe that the indiscriminate use of poison and traps and the reluctance of the authorities concerned to tackle this highly sensitive issue are running counter to proper implementation of the Directive?

What steps has Spain taken to incorporate the wolf into Annex II to Directive 92/43/EEC?

How far have the Spanish authorities progressed with the transposition of Directive 92/43/EEC?

Can the Commission report on the action taken in this matter?

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

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission had not been aware of the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member.

Under Council Directive92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and on wild fauna and flora, the wolves located in Asturias (northern Duero) is a species listed in Annex V(a) as an animal species of Community interest whose taking in the wild and exploitation may be subject to management measures. In no case has the Commission been aware that poisons or traps were used, this being prohibited in principle by Article 15 of the abovementioned Directive. However, it should be pointed out that exemptions from Articles 12, 13, 14 and 15 are provided for by Article 16 of said Directive.

The wolf populations located in southern Duero are listed in Annex II to Council Directive 92/43/EEC as animal species of Community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special conservation areas. However, the wolf population described by the Honourable Member is covered by Annex V, since it is a population located in northern Duero, as mentioned above.

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats has been transposed by Spain via the ‘Real Decreto 1997/1995 of 7 December 1995 which specifies action intended to contribute towards and guarantee biodiversity by conserving natural habitats and woodland fauna and flora’ as amended by ‘Real Decreto 1193/1998 of 12 June 1998’.

Since the information provided does not seem to identify any fact that is likely to constitute an infringement of Community law, the Commission does not intend to take any particular action involving the Spanish authorities. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/35

(1999/C 348/042) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0204/99

by Manuela Frutos Gama (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Protection for small and medium-sized electricity consumers as a consequence of liberalisation in the energy sector

Does the Commission consider it consistent with the objectives of the Treaty that the outcome of the Electricity Directive in Spain in the coming decade for SMEs and domestic consumers should be a limit on any fall in charges to 1 or 2 % agreed between undertakings and the authorities and a fixed 4,5 % increase in charges to offset costs linked to the transition to competition, regardless of developments in other energy market parameters?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The liberalisation of the electricity market according to Directive 96/92/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (1) is introduced witha gradual approach. The share of ‘eligible customer’, i.e. customers which may choose their electricity supplier, has to represent in the first step at least a Community average of large industrial customers with more than 40 GWhyearly consumption and is successively extended to a larger shareof also smaller customers. It is true that during this gradual opening period the benefit of liberalisation tends to be larger for those consumers which are already ‘eligible’. However, the Commission expects that through the further extension of the eligible customer segment also to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) as well as through eligible distributors and newly entering electricity traders and suppliers, the liberalisation will become more and more beneficial also for small consumers.

In this context, the Spanish electricity law fully complies with the market opening schedule of the Directive, and goes even further, with reductions for smaller customers. As liberalisation progresses, the Commission hopes that its benefits will also be shared to a greater extent by residential consumers.

On the question of the cost of transition to competition in Spain, the Commission is still examining the case pursuant to both Article 24 of the Directive (stranded costs) and to the state aids rules under the EC Treaty. Therefore, for the time being, the Commission can only refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to oral questions H-161/99 by Mr Izquierdo Collado and H-162/99 by Mrs Garcia Arias during question time at Parliament’s March1999 post-session.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.11.1992.

(1999/C 348/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0205/99

by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Funding of restoration schemes in Aragón

The 1997 Commission report on the Cohesion Fund indicates that the Autonomous Community of Aragón received funding for nine restoration schemes amounting to ECU 29 million.

Can the Commission say what projects benefited, how much funding was allocated to each and what the current situation is in eachcase? C 348/36 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

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

(16 March 1999)

The nine drainage systems to which the Honourable Member refers concern the construction of collectors and waste-water treatment stations in the towns of Alcañiz, Barbastro, Calatayud, Ejea de los Caballeros, Binéfar, Calamocha, Cariñena, Fraga and Tarragona.

These projects are in progress and are expected to be completed in November or December 1999. The Cohesion Fund has contributed EUR 23,43 million to the total cost of the investment of EUR 29,29 million.

Details of these projects will be sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1999/C 348/044) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0206/99

by Manuel Escolá Hernando (ARE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Aid for Objective 1 regions in Spain

In accordance with the decision taken at the Edinburgh Summit, the cumulation of commitment appropriations for Objective 1 regions under the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund should permit a doubling of Community financial assistance for Objective 1 regions in real terms.

ECU 7 950 million was awarded to Spain under the Cohesion Fund between 1993 and 1999.

Can the Commission give a breakdown of this amount by project?

Does the Commission take the view that the Spanish Government has fulfilled the commitment to double the aid allocated to Objective 1 regions in real terms by channelling Cohesion Fund assistance to the autonomous communities concerned?

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

(10 March 1999)

Article 12(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) 2081/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) 2052/88 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (1) stipulates that ‘for the four Member States eligible for the cohesion financial instrument, the increase in commitment appropriations for the Structural Funds must permit a doubling of commitments in real terms under Objective 1 and the cohesion financial instrument between 1992 and 1999’. This Article implements the conclusions of the Edinburgh European Council, which also stated that ‘ for the four Cohesion Fund Member States this means about ECU 85 billion over the period 1993-99’.

The Commission has taken full account of these regulatory and political provisions with regard both to the Cohesion Fund and to the Structural Fund commitment appropriations allocated under Objective 1 for the four Member States concerned. Accordingly, there will be a doubling between 1992 and 1999 for these four Member States, taken as a whole. On the other hand, there is no obligation for the Member States to double the resources of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund for the regions eligible under Objective 1.

The Commission is sending directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat the list of projects part-financed by the Cohesion Fund in Spain since 1993, containing the information requested. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/37

With regard more specifically to the Cohesion Fund resources actually channelled towards the Objective 1 regions, the Commission considers that this question should be addressed to the Spanish Government.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(1999/C 348/045) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0207/99

by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Payments to national organisations

There are problems with the payment of subsidies allocated to national organisations in the European Union. In the reply of 10 September 1998 (E-2156/98) made on behalf of Commissioner Erkki Liikanen, it was stated said that decisions on subsidies were made on the basis of legislative texts and ultimately in accordance with Commission instructions and guidelines.The questioner was urged to consult the unit which had taken the decision on the subsidy.

It is hard for national organisations to obtain information on why payment is delayed even though the organisation’s closing accounts and report have been approved by the Commission.Numerous contacts by post, fax and telephone fail to produce a result.The delay may be as much as a year and the organisation is not able to find out why the promised funding does not arrive.This causes the organisations not only operational problems with the completion of their projects but also accounting problems.

Can the Commission department which has dealt with and monitored the project follow up and hasten the activities of the funding department? How does the Commission monitor payments from its funding unit? Can the Commissioner provide instructions and guidelines on project funding?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1999)

The Commission’s implementation of the budget is based on the principle that the functions of authorising officer, accountant and financial controller are separate.In organisational terms this principle is reflected in the separation of these functions in the different directorate-generals, under the authority of the various Commissioners.The authorising departments, or operational directorates-general, administer the projects and are empowered to commit expenditure and issue payment orders.The authorising officers must obtain the approval of the Financial Controller for implementation.

Over the past few years the Commission has taken a number of steps, under the SEM 2000 programme (Sound and Efficient Management), to eliminate delays in the payment of Community grants wherever possible.

The Commission closely monitors the performance of its departments in the area of payment times.In 1998 the average time taken for payments was 55,1 days.The period is measured from the day on which a valid invoice or request for payment is received to the day when the Commission’s bank carries out the instruction to pay the beneficiary.The figures show that most of the delays are attributable to the authorising departments. They also show that 74 % of all Commission payments are made within 60 days and 15 % take more than 90 days.The Commission has set its departments the target that 95 % of payments should be made within 60 days and intends to continue its efforts to ensure that this target is met.

Internal statistics also show that, except where delays are due to factors attributable to the beneficiaries themselves (incorrect bank details, insufficient grounds, missing or inadequate supporting documents, failure to comply with the terms of the contract), payments are made within reasonable deadlines in terms of standard business practice. C 348/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Furthermore, on 10 June 1997 the Commission adopted a communication on payment times and penalty interest (1), requiring the Commission to pay penalty interest, at the request of the beneficiary, if payment is not made within a period regarded as appropriate in the light of standard business practice (60 days), provided that the beneficiary has complied with all the relevant contractual provisions. This obligation must be stipulated on all contracts concluded by the Commission, with effect from the date of the communication. In addition, the Commission proposed an amendment to the Financial Regulation (2) and its implementing provisions so that creditors who receive late payment have the right to claim penalty interest.

The Commission recently commissioned an external study of payment times, which has just been completed. The results and recommendations of this will form the subject of a Commission communication in the near future.

On the operational front, the Commission has continued its efforts to improve financial management by introducing its new computerised accounting system (Sincom2). Once fully operational, this system should ensure complete security and greater efficiency in the execution of payments.

The rules on budget implementation may be found in the Financial Regulation and its implementing provisions.

(1) SEC(97) 205. (2) SEC(98) 1228 final.

(1999/C 348/046) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0215/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Air accidents

In reply to my question (H-0036/98) (1) on a Permanent Monitoring Body for air accidents, the Commission stated that the Greek government ‘had submitted a draft Presidential Decree which, once implemented, will resolve the problems’, whereas in reply to my Written Question of 15 January 1998 (P-0001/98) (2)on inspection of third countries’ aircraft, the Commission did not know ‘if such inspections are performed in Greece.’

Will the Commission say:

1. whether it considers that progress is being made on the subject of an organisation to monitor air accidents, and

2. whether inspections of third countries’ aircraft are performed in Greece?

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (February 1998). (2) OJ C 196, 22.6.1998, p. 106.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

1. As the information given in reply to the Honourable Member’s oral question H-36/98 at the February 1998 part-session (1) indicated, the Commission, after careful assessment, considered that progress in the relevant area was not satisfactory and, in accordance with Article 169 of the EC Treaty, delivered a reasoned opinion to the Greek government in September 1998.

2. In its reply to the Honourable Member’s written question P-1/98 (2), the Commission provided a list of the Member States that were already participating in the exchange of information on ramp inspections. Greece has also sent a number of reports on inspections of such aircraft that have been carried out at its airports.

(1) Debates of the Parliament (February 1998). (2) OJ C 19, 22.6.1998. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/39

(1999/C 348/047) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0223/99 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(3 February 1999)

Subject: ‘World Vision Austria’ and the misappropriation of funds

In its reply to my Question P-3879/98 (1), the Commission failed to answer the issues Iraised in a comprehensive and detailed manner. Iam therefore taking this opportunity to be more specific in, and expand the scope of, my questions concerning ‘World Vision Austria’ and the misappropriation of funds.

1. In her answer, Mrs Bonino said that the Commission had looked into the matter but that it possessed no information on the basis of which it could confirm the truth of the statements made. Has it now secured new information concerning the affair to which Irefer, and has its level of knowledge changed since Itabled my previous question? If so, in what way? If not, why not?

2. In the light of the accusations concerning ‘World Vision Austria’, has the Commission carried out a specific investigation, or is it planning to do so?

3. Was pressure applied, were preliminary discussions held or were other requests submitted so as to ensure that an EU aid project for Bosnia would be entrusted to the aid organisation ‘World Vision Austria’?

4. Who was responsible, in Austria and in the European Commission, for ensuring that the projects were properly implemented in Bosnia?

5. On another occasion, the wife of Karl Habsburg-Lothringen, MEP, said on Austrian TV that her husband could provide people seeking project aid with the right names to contact in the EU. Were such contacts used, or preliminary discussions held, with a view to securing EU aid for Bosnia, including in the case of ‘World Vision Austria’?

6. Are there any plans for the Court of Auditors or for the Commission’s internal audit bodies to verify that the projects were properly implemented and conducted? If so, by what date will their reports be available? If not, why not?

(1) OJ C 207, 21.7.1999, p. 140.

(1999/C 348/048) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0313/99 by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: World Vision Austria

We have received information that World Vision Austria has concluded contracts with the Commission to the value of ECU 3,8 million for Phare and Tacis projects in Bosnia, Romania and Mongolia.

Have any irregularities ? i.e. suspicions of embezzlement and corruption ? arisen in connection with these projects?

Has the Commission performed audits?

Have there been systematic on-the-spot inspections of the work allegedly carried out?

If appropriate, were the projects cancelled promptly and repayment of funds demanded? If so, what amount was involved?

Was any offence reported to the police? If so, who was the suspect, and why? If not, why not?

Did the Austrian Public Prosecutor’s Office keep the Commission informed about its investigations into World Vision Austria? When did it do so? What information does the Austrian Public Prosecutor’s Office have about EU-funded projects? C 348/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/049) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0559/99 by Karl Habsburg-Lothringen (PPE) to the Commission

(3 March 1999)

Subject: Possible misappropriation of EU funds (World Vision)

There have been recurrent reports, particularly in the Austrian media, in connection with a scandal concerning donations to World Vision, of the misappropriation of EU funds and intervention by Members of the European Parliament. Has the Austrian World Vision organisation misappropriated EU funds, or were the funds used properly? Was there really intervention by Members of the European Parliament, and if so, who were they?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-0223/99, E-0313/99 and P-0559/99 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Upon learning of the legal proceedings against World Vision Austria (WVA) at the end of November 1998, the Commission contacted the Austrian judicial authorities offering to cooperate on the aspects involving Community funds. It also asked to be kept informed of the findings on these aspects, in line with the provisions of national law.

With the permission of the Austrian judicial authorities, a financial control visit took place in January 1999 to the field headquarters of WVA’s implementing partner in Sarajevo (World Vision International BiH) where financial documentation for the Community funded aid projects is kept. The audit was limited to the control and testing of Commission (ECHO) financed operations. No irregularity was found in respect of the use of ECHO funds by this non-governmental organisation.

As far as humanitarian projects are concerned, contacts between the Commission and WVA, before, during and after the implementation, were mainly managed between World Vision’s offices in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Commission’s (ECHO) office in Sarajevo, and were of a purely operational nature. No contacts of the sort mentioned were used to secure humanitarian funding of WVA backed projects in Bosnia. Its proposals were judged on their own merits and assessed in conformity with the relevant criteria. Control of the implementation of these projects was carried out by the Commission’s (ECHO) office in Sarajevo with technical assistance from the International management group (IMG) there.

In respect of two of the three contracts with WVA, the Commission made final payments to WVA in September and October 1998 of euro 38 900 and euro 30 383 respectively. This was shortly before news of the legal proceedings reached the Commission. The Austrian authorities subsequently blocked the bank accounts of WVA. As an additional control, the Commission wrote to the legal adviser of WVA to ask about the status of these payments and whether he was aware of any irregularities that might affect Community funds. As a precaution a final payment under the third contract with WVA for approximately euro 100 000 has been suspended. This payment will remain suspended until the legal adviser replies with clarification.

In addition to projects in the area of humanitarian aid, WVA has received contracts under the Obnova, Phare and Tacis programmes in Bosnia, Romania and Mongolia as follows:

(Euros)

Programme Action Contract Amount Obnova Integrated return programme for the return of refugees and displaced persons in the Maglaj and Zavidovici municipalities, Bosnia 3 539 370 Phare: Partnership Village renewal in Romania 57 480 Phare: Partnership Micro-enterprise in the community (Romania) 118 480 Phare: Partnership Training and Consulting for micro-enterprise (Romania) 153 000 Tacis: Partnership and Community forestry development, Mongolia Cooperation 118 160 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/41

The project under the Obnova programme aims to promote the return of refugees and displaced people (418 Bosniaks, 266 ethnic Serbs and 91 ethnic Croats) to their municipalities by the rehabilitation of housing infrastructure and the revitalisation of the socio-economic environment. This contract is managed by the Commission representation in Sarajevo. Regular monitoring of the project showed that, at a technical level, project implementation was progressing smoothly and that the financial aspects of the project seemed to be in order. An advance payment of euro 1 695 890 to World Vision Austria was made by the Commission on 6 May 1998. No further payments have been made. The current project was due to expire on 1 April 1999 but, even though the Commission has not received evidence of fraud related to this project, it decided to suspend it and to carry out a full appraisal of its implementation.

As to the Phare projects, the first was completed in June 1998 and a monitoring visit in May 1998 by independent consultants indicated that the results were positive. A final payment of euro 8 622 is outstanding. WVA was not the lead partner in this contract. The second Phare project has been completed and the assessment of its impact, again by independent consultants in a monitoring visit in December 1998, is broadly positive. However the final payment of euro 17 772 has been withheld pending an audit of the project costs. The last of the Phare projects was cancelled as soon as the Commission became aware of the arrest of the (former) WVA staff and the first (and only) payment of euro 61 000 has been recovered.

The Tacis contract was stopped in November 1998 following the notification by World Vision, office of the international president, that WVA would be dissociated from the international network. No payment was made under the contract.

(1999/C 348/050) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Italian secret services report on the euro’s use for money-laundering purposes

Is the Commission aware that, in a report which was subsequently published by the daily newspaper ‘Il Messagero’ on 25 January 1999, the Italian military secret services (SISMI) maintained that the euro could be used to launder proceeds from criminal activities which had not yet entered financial and banking channels?

Does it intend to ask the Italian Government to forward the SISMI report?

What action does the it intend to take to prevent computer systems and the Internet from being used for criminal activities?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 1999)

The Commission has noted the article in ‘Il Messaggero’ and other press articles but is not in possession of any report from the Italian secret services. The Commission is interested in obtaining any relevant material on this important subject that the Member States are prepared to communicate to it and will inform the Italian authorities accordingly.

The Commission has for some time been studying the implications of the introduction of the euro for the fight against money laundering. Within the contact committee set up under Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering (1), the Commission held a discussion with the Member States on 1 March 1999 concerning all the anti-money laundering issues raised by the introduction of the euro and the changeover to euro notes and coins as from 1 January 2002. There was a consensus that the Member States’ existing anti-money laundering legislation should be sufficient to deal with any dangers posed by the changeover period. It was agreed, however, that this important question should be kept under regular review.

As regards electronic money systems and the Internet the Commission continues to monitor closely technical developments and their potential vulnerability to being misused for money laundering purposes. The experts C 348/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

of the financial action task force (the foremost world body dedicated to the fight against money laundering) have not yet encountered cases of money laundering using electronic-money technologies but are aware of the possible dangers and remain vigilant.

(1) OJ L 166,28.6.1991.

(1999/C 348/051) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0241/99

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Aid to Bangladesh following the floods

The very widespread flooding which hit Bangladesh in late July 1998 claimed nearly 1 400 lives and left more than 30 million people homeless,as two thirds of the country was under water.

How much aid has the EU given to Bangladesh following the floods?

In what areas and to whom has such aid been given?

Has an evaluation of the EU aid been carried out? If so,what were the results?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 1999)

The total response of the Commission to the floods that affected Bangladesh during 1998 amounted to € 40,2 million, the details of which are set out below.

As an immediate response to the crisis,the Commission cleared a package of humanitarian aid worth € 1 million in September 1998 and a further € 2 million in October 1998,focusing on food,medical support, purification of water supplies and the provision of sanitation services. In December 1998,the Commission provided an additional € 5,45 million, which provided further immediate relief for 50 000 families in the most affected districts and mainly concentrated upon reducing dependence on emergency aid through crop recovery; low cost housing for those whose property had been completely destroyed; occupational rehabilitation promoting income generation; and the supply of clean water and latrines. The Commission’s total contribution for the assistance of victims of the flood in 1998 was € 8,45 million.

The provision of this humanitarian aid was country wide with the identification of beneficiaries and the allocation per district identified by the implementing partners of the Commission based upon need in coordination with the local authorities. These partners report regularly upon the progress and effect of each action and are monitored by a Commission correspondent. However no formal evaluation has been undertaken.

Further financing of over € 31,75 million of food security and food aid was provided by the Commission for some 175 000 metric tons of cereals and associated financial inputs. This food aid has been targeted at vulnerable groups as well as for food for work in rehabilitation programmes. It was in addition to the € 21 million provided in October 1998 for development food security programmes. A joint evaluation by the Department of international development and the Community of the ‘Vulnerable group feeding’ relief programme,to which the Community contributes is expected in April 1999.

Finally,Member States humanitarian contributions declared to the Commission for the period August- December 1998 amounted to some € 10,4 million. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/43

(1999/C 348/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0244/99

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: The EU’s sustainable development objective

One of the objectives which the Treaty of Amsterdam sets for the EU is sustainable development. This objective will in itself inevitably mean dramatic changes in many EU policy areas.

Will the Commission carry out a systematic study of EU policies in order to ascertain whether they are compatible with sustainable development?

What action will it take so that sustainable development can be achieved?

How will it ensure that EU-funded investment and assistance, e.g. for improving infrastructure, do not increas pressure on the environment but result instead in sustainable development?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 1999)

The Amsterdam Treaty has recognised the importance of ensuring that all Community policies make their contribution to the protection of the environment and the achievement of sustainable development.

In order to give substance to this commitment, in June 1998 the Commission submitted to the Cardiff European Council a document called Partnership for integration (1), identifying the importance and potential of this commitment and calling on the heads of state to signal their support. This they did by putting in place a process whereby each Council formation is being asked to prepare strategies for the integration of environment into the policy area under their authority. In the first instance, the Energy, Transport and Agriculture Councils were asked to commence this exercise and subsequently the Vienna European Council has asked the Development, Single Market and Industry Councils to commence such an examination. The Commission is working actively with the various Councils to support these reflections, in some cases by way of the provision of communication and working papers.

In line with the Vienna European Council conclusions there will be an overall review of progress at the Helsinki European Council. Alongside consideration of the global assessment the Commission is currently preparing the operation of the fifth environmental action plan. This combined reflection will play an important part in giving orientation to the next Commission on both the approach and position that should be followed in establishing the programme for sustainable development and environment in the next decade.

At the level of Community funded plans and programmes, increasing emphasis is laid on prior environmental assessment. For the new structural funds 2000-2006, the Commission proposes assessments that cover both the environmental potential of a region as well as direct and indirect impacts on the environment of the planned strategies and measures. The proposed partnership between the Commission and the Member State which associates partners at different levels in the preparation, financing, monitoring and evaluation of assistance, constitutes an additional feature for enhancing environmental integration and for promoting sustainable development in this context.

When specific projects are submitted for Community funding, environmental impact assessments in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC (2) and its amendment 97/11/EC (3) are required, where applicable, accompanied by appropriate preventive or compensatory measures.

(1) COM(98) 333 final. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997. C 348/44 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/053) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0248/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to theCommission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: Motorway link west of Wels, Austria

With the North-South artery we are endeavouring to create an integrated road network from the North Sea to Greece. The 1 600 km of road between Hamburg and Belgrade is complete apart from two stretches in Austria. The link west of the town of Wels will join the A8 Innkreis motorway and the A9 Phyrn motorway. At present long-distance traffic has to make a considerable detour or take the ring-road east of Wels, a federal road that passes through a built-up area.

The link west of Wels will greatly increase road safety: the total distance covered by vehicles will be reduced by 100 m km p.a., total driving time by about 900 000 hours. The economic gain is estimated at almost half a billion Schillings. Pollution will be sustainably reduced. Fuel consumption per 5 000 vehicles will then fall by 10 000 tonnes p.a.

The motorway link west of Wels is still at the project stage. How does the Commission intend to support and accelerate the implementation of this project?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 1999)

The road project ‘Westspange Wels’ has been identified as a project of common interest in Decision No 1692/ 96/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (1). These guidelines constitute a general reference framework intended to encourage the Member States concerned in carrying out the projects of common interest that they identify.

The decision on implementing the road project in question and its financing is the responsability of the Austrian government.

According to Council Regulation (EC) 2236/95 of 18 September 1995 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (2), the Community can support this project, provided that a series of conditions and criteria are fulfilled. Any application for financial aid under this Regulation has to be submitted by the Member State concerned. The criteria on which the selection of measures in view of the granting of Community financial aid are based include, for example, project maturity, the solidity of the financial package or the environmental consequences. Up to now the Austrian government has not requested Community financial aid for the ‘Westspange Wels’ project.

The project has not been considered under the structural funds programmes in Austria as the area concerned is not eligible.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996. (2) OJ L 228, 23.9.1995.

(1999/C 348/054) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0254/99 by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: The Spea Autostade project and MonteBeni (Florence)

Spea Autostrade recently submitted the final plans for a major project involving the construction of a road link over MonteBeni in the Firenzuola municipality (Florence). 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/45

The project appears to be totally contrary to the plans for the environmental rehabilitation and improvement of the area which have been announced, given that earthmoving work will be going on at a height of 1 260 metres (while the summit stands at 1 263), approach roads capable of carrying large numbers of heavy goods vehicles will be required and the excavation area is to extend beyond that already existing, thus leading to the destruction of wildlife habitats.

MonteBeni is subject to a large number of hydrogeological, landscape and forestry restrictions and has also been classified as a type B), C), D) and ( partially ( A) ‘protected area’ by decision of the Regional Council.

It has also been included in the provincial land-use master plan as a possible site for the establishment of parks, reserves and protected natural areas of local interest, has been put forward as a site of Community importance and has been classified as a protected wildlife sanctuary by the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry.

The project submitted by Spea Autostrade appears to be extremely destructive and to be contrary to the purposes for which the areas is intended.

Does the Commission intend to take action without delay, in compliance with Community rules, to prevent the destruction of a site which is extremely valuable both in environmental terms and from the point of view of its wildlife population?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Directive 85/337/EEC (1)of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and Directive 92/43/EEC (2)of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora may be relevant to the project mentioned by the Honourable Member.

However, on the basis of the information available, the Commission is not able to identify the exact nature of the project and is not in a position to assess the situation described by the Honourable Member. At the moment, the Commission is only able to confirm that the area of Monte Beni is a site of Community importance proposed by the Italian authorities under the terms of Article 4 of Directive 92/43/EEC: code IT5140002 ‘Sasso di Castro e Monte Beni’.

In the light of the above, the Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to gather detailed information about the project and to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1)OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (2)OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 348/055) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0258/99 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Alleged ESF fraud in Catalonia

The High Court in Catalonia has agreed to hear a lawsuit concerning claims of ongoing corruption stemming from alleged irregularities in the processing of assistance from the European Social Fund in Catalonia.

To what extent is the Commission aware of this situation? Have its services, in particular UCLAF, taken any measures to deal with the alleged fraud?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

Further to its answer of 3 March 1999 (1), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information. C 348/46 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The Commission learned from the press about two lawsuits involving the Autonomous Government of Catalonia and one of the sponsors of the European Social Fund (ESF) programmes.

Subsequentlythe Commission contacted the administrative unit of the ESF (UAFSE) at Madrid, which performed an audit at Barcelona from 30 November to 3 December 1998. This audit did not detect any irregularities on the part of the Generalitat in managing and justifying the funds part-funded by the ESF. However the report indicates the need to clarifyand formallypublish certain economic criteria and economic modules concerning the award of subsidies.

The fraud prevention coordination task force (UCLAF) has contacted the Spanish legal authorities to offer its assistance. At this stage the investigations are covered byjudicial secrecy.UCLAF will provide these authorities with all the information needed for the effective conduct of the enquiry.

Besides, the Honourable Member was directlyinformed byCommission letter that UCLAF would request the Spanish administrative authorities to keep the Commission abreast of developments in compliance with the provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) 1681/94 of 11 July1994 concerning irregularities and the recoveryof sums wronglypaid in connection with the financing of the structural policies and the organisation of an information system in this field (2). This request has now been addressed to these authorities.

The Commission has also requested the UAFSE at Madrid to inform the Commission of the ESF amount in question concerning the sponsor.

The Commission has also stressed the need for further clarification as regards the criteria governing the conditions that must be met bythe training centres and the economic modules applied in calculating the subsidies, their strict application and their formal publication.

(1) OJ C 207, 21.7.1999, p. 175. (2) OJ L 178, 12.7.1994.

(1999/C 348/056) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0288/99 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Delays to payments for projects financed from the Leader initiative in Catalonia

A number of mayors in Catalonia have complained about the considerable delays to payments for projects financed from the Leader Communityinitiative. According to them, it can take more than two months for a payment made in Brussels to reach its recipients.

Is the Commission aware of these delays? Has it observed any irregularities or negligence on the part of the Spanish Government or the Autonomous Communityof Catalonia?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

Payments from the Structural Funds in connection with the Leader II Community initiative are paid into a Spanish national treasuryaccount. The Ministryof Agriculture authorises transfers from the treasuryto the local action groups, which are the beneficiaries under this initiative. The Commission has not been informed of a specific problem in this area, but it remains vigilant regarding the implementation of the programme on the ground, and regarding the take-up of the Communityappropriations available.

The progress reports on implementation of the initiative in Catalonia do not suggest that the management of the funds bythe national authorities or the autonomous communitycould be considered irregular or negligent. The two-month period mentioned bythe Honourable Member is comparable with the deadline laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) 2082/93 of 20 July1993 amending Regulation (EEC) 4253/88 layingdown provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/47

the other existing financial instruments (1) (Article 21(1)) for payments from the Commission to the Member State, which specifies that payment must be made ‘as a general rule within two months from receipt of an acceptable application’.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(1999/C 348/057) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0294/99 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Energy saving potential in hospitals

1. How great does the Commission think is the energy saving potential in European hospitals?

2. Can the Commission say how many hospitals there are in the individual Member States?

3. Does the Commission have information on how energy consumption by hospitals is recorded and assessed?

4. Can the Commission quantify the reduced burden on the environment that can be expected from energy savings in individual homes and/or for the Member States in terms of CO2,NOx and SO2?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1999)

The energy-saving potential in hospitals is significant, given the number and size of the buildings involved. However, it is extremely difficult to quantify that potential. The prime purpose of hospitals is to provide quality care and comfort for patients. Energy is merely a means to attain that end. Besides, there is no question of allowing the slightest risk that the energy supply might be interrupted, given the consequences that could have.

From the economic point of view, it should be emphasised that energy represents, on average, only 2,5 % of a hospital’s operating budget (ranging from 1,5-5 %). Energy consumption in hospitals covers a wide variety of functions: heating and air conditioning (50-65 %), hot water (15-28 %), cooking (5-8 %), laundry (4-8 %), lighting and specific uses of electricity (6-12 %).

The wide range of supervisory authorities makes it difficult to implement specific actions for hospitals.

The Commission has no information regarding the number of hospitals, but is sending a table indicating the number of hospital beds in the Member States directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

The Commission has no specific information on arrangements for recording and assessing energy consumption in hospitals. Consumption of electricity and natural gas is easy to determine; it is much more difficult to record consumption of liquid or solid fuels, and most institutions simply work on the basis of delivery invoices. Consumption in 1993 may be put at 6 475 000 tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) per annum (EUR 12).

Figures cannot be given for the reduction in environmental pollution to be expected from the introduction of energy-saving measures in each establishment. All in all, one might expect energy saving of between 1 and 1,5 million toe and a cut in CO2 emissions of around 4 million tonnes.

Reductions in SO2 emissions will depend on the quality of liquid and solid fuels consumed, while reductions in NOx emissions cannot be approached at a macro-economic level as specific combustion conditions have a major impact on the amount of NOx produced. C 348/48 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/058) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0295/99 by Dagmar Roth-Behrendt (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: EU funding, information on the volume of monies in 1998 flowing to Berlin

Through which projects and Funds, and in what volume, did Community monies in 1998 flow to Berlin:

1. from the European Fund for Regional Development (EFRD)

2. from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) . Guidance and Guarantee Section

3. from the European Social Fund (ESF)

4. from the Community’s research programmes

5. from the Community’s energy programmes

6. from the Community’s environmental programmes

7. from the Community’s transport programmes

8. from the Community’s education and youth programmes

9. from the Community’s health programmes

10. from the Community’s social programmes

11. from the programmes for NGOs

12. from the cultural programmes

13. from the programmes for cooperation with third countries (CEEC, CIS)

14. from the town-twinning programmes

15. from other Community programmes?

16. How successful in the view of the EU, have the measures been?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 1999)

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

(1999/C 348/059) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0314/99 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: Gender mainstreaming in the European Commission

Is the Commission aware of the gender imbalance in certain of its directorates-general (for instance Agriculture and Customs and Indirect Taxation) despite its equal opportunities policy?

Given this alarming situation, does the Commission have any specific plans for combating it? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/49

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1999)

Being aware of the problem of gender imbalance within its staff, the Commission has since 1995 established annual objectives for the recruitment of women in the framework of its Third action programme for equal opportunities for women and men in the European Commission 1997-2000 (1). The aim of annual objectives is to increase the number of women in the A category and in management positions.

The Commission monitors the implementation of the objectives in the various services. This monitoring is regularly transmitted to the group of Commissioners for equal opportunities as well as to directors general and heads of service.

Furthermore, special efforts have been made in order to ensure that competitions are ‘gender neutral’.

DG VI (Agriculture) and DG XXI (Customs and indirect taxation) do not stand apart from the other services as far as the gender balance is concerned. However the Honourable Member may be interested to know that DG VI has recently nominated a female director and a female assistant. The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat a table containing the exact figures.

For further details the Honourable Member is invited to refer to the Commission’s answer given to written question E-3951/98 by Mrs Breyer (2).

(1) COM(98) 770 final. (2) OJ C 289, 11.10.1999, p. 107.

(1999/C 348/060) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0325/99 by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(10 February 1999)

Subject: Uneven distribution of air traffic between Milan’s Malpensa and Linate airports

With effect from 1 February 1999, Alitalia has dropped the 20.55 flight which it used to operate in conjunction with Meridiana from Rome’s Fiumicino airport to Malpensa airport, Milan. This means that, after 17.55, all flights from Rome to Milan have Linate airport as their destination.

Does the Commission consider this state of affairs to be consistent with the commitment to ensure that air traffic is evenly distributed between Malpensa and Milan?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

As provided in Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access of Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes (1) Member States may adopt rules in order to distribute traffic between the different airports of an airport system. These rules are subject to the control of the Commission which ensures that Member States comply with the law by ensuring that rules are fully compatible with the principle of non- discrimination in relation to the nationality and identity of the carriers and that they respect the principles of Community law concerning the freedom to provide services.

Concerning Malpensa and Linate airports, traffic distribution rules are enshrined in the Italian Decree of 9 October 1998 which provides that, as of 25 October 1998 and until access conditions to Malpensa airport are significantly improved, Community air carriers may continue to operate at Linate airport within a limit of 34 % of the frequencies operated at that airport during the preceding International air transport association (IATA) season. Such distribution of traffic between Linate and Malpensa airports can be considered as balanced. It reflects the condition of the existing road and rail access infrastructures to Malpensa airport and at the same time it permits the creation of a fully operational hub at that airport. On this basis, and in accordance with Community law C in particular, the principle of non-discriminatory provision of services C Community air carriers are entirely free to decide to operate a particular service either at Linate or Malpensa, as long as they C 348/50 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

respect the above mentioned threshold of 34 %. Therefore, the Commission does not consider that the fact that Alitalia no longer operates a particular service at Malpensa to be incompatible with the objective of a balanced distribution of traffic between Malpensa and Linate airports.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.

(1999/C 348/061) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0334/99

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Incineration plant for poultry droppings

The province of Forlì is the main poultry breeding centre in Italy, with so many poultry farms that the ratio of farmland, the number of heads of poultry and the resident population is completely altered, which has far- reaching effects on the environment and public health.

The four main poultry farmers in the province have agreed to dispose of their poultry droppings by building an incinerator with a capacity of 220 000 tonnes per annum.

At present the poultry droppings are disposed of by spreading them in limited quantities directly on the land, which constitutes a system of organic manuring. The only problem is the stench which could be eliminated by prior composting in small installations with little impact on the environment which could be built near the poultry farms. Incineration of the poultry droppings would deprive agriculture of an important source of fertiliser which would have to be replaced by the massive use of artificial chemical fertilisers, thereby increasing the environmental impact on an area already heavily overworked owing to intensive agriculture and at risk of desertification due to constant decline in organic substances in the soil. The plan was rejected by the Commune of Cisena but has been resubmitted to the Commune of Sogliano, the Region of Emilia-Romagna and the Ministries of Industry, Public Health and the Environment.

Does the Commission believe that such a plan can be deemed compatible with the Community objectives of protecting the soil from the risk of desertification and with Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of effects on the environment?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

It appears, based on the information given by the Honourable Member, that the work to which he refers (an incinerator with a capacity of 200 000 tonnes per annum) is within the scope of Council Directive 85/337/ EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1) and, in particular, is a project of the classes listed in Annex II. Such projects should be made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where Member States consider that their characteristics so require. However, as concerns these projects, Member States are obliged to make a pre-assessment in order to establish whether they need to be made subject to an EIA procedure.

The incineration project mentioned should be considered compatible with Directive 85/337/EEC where it complies with its provisions. Should an EIA procedure be carried out, or should a pre-assessment be made in order to establish whether the project needs to be made subject to an EIA procedure, no breach of Community law will arise. The other elements raised by the Honourable Member do not appear pertinent to the issue.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/51

(1999/C 348/062) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0335/99

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: OPM projects: development and promotion ofsustainable tourism and preservation ofsheep tracks

Sheep tracks are grass covered paths between 60 and 110 metres wide used for thousands of years to move flocks and herds from the mountain pastures of Abruzzo and Molise to the valleys of the Tavoliere di Puglia. This is an invaluable historical and archaeological heritage because ofits considerable influenceon the development and use ofthe area (they are bound by Law 1089/39 on the protection ofhistorical, artistic and environmental assets) and also fromthe environmental and ecological point ofview because these belts ofland are ofgreat biological and botanic importance (conservation ofbiodiversity).

The Regional Government ofMolise laid down, by Decision No 304 of16.3.1998, a number ofpriorities for the protection ofthese sheep tracks. The Region ofMolise is starting to carry out an OMP pilot project ‘forthe development and promotion ofsustainable tourism in the regions covered by Objective 1 4 Measure No 3 4 Interregional Cultural Routes 4 ‘Transhumance paths’.’

This project was however drawn up solely by an electrical engineer and an architect, in other words, not by professional experts conversant with the technical and ecological problems of these sheep tracks, be they agronomic, botanical, biological, forestry or archaeological. Local ecological groups have also informed the Public Prosecutor’s Office at the Campobasso Audit Office of various possible irregularities in the procedures for awarding contracts.

Does the Commission believe that for the purpose of funding projects in such sensitive environments it is necessary to require preliminary compatibility studies and to appoint experts with scientific and technical authority in order to avoid the risk offailingto achieve the objectives ofconservation, as alleged in this case by the environmental organisations?

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

(27 April 1999)

The implementation ofthe projects under the multi-regional operational programme ‘Development and promotion ofsustainable tourism in the regions covered by Objective 1’ is the responsibility ofthe Italian Department ofTourism which comes under the Presidency ofthe Council ofMinisters.

The latter has informed the Commission that the drawing up of the ‘Transhumance paths’ route in Molise was the subject ofa protocol between the Italian Department ofTourism and the Region ofMolise. The Region thereafter delegated to Isernia and Campobasso provinces the coordination of the activities on their territory.

The consultants mentioned by the Honourable Member provided technical assistance to the two provinces concerned, limited to programming and coordination with the municipal authorities and to the preparation of a specific ‘logo and signs’ project.

The other municipal projects, on the other hand, were, according to information available to the Commission, prepared by external consultants selected by the municipalities themselves, according to the rules on public service contracts in force. C 348/52 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/063) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0339/99 by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Forwarding of Commission reports on internal investigations

By letter of 9 October 1998, the President of the Commission informed the President of the European Parliament that the Committee on Budgetary Control would in future receive final Commission internal reports on its investigations before these were forwarded to the relevant judicial authority. The Commission nevertheless, on 23 November 1998, forwarded its report concerning its internal investigations into irregularities affecting selection procedure COM/A/8-12/98 to the Belgian judicial authorities without informing Parliament in advance.

1. Can the Commission state why Parliament was not informed in accordance with the information received from the Commission President?

2. When will the report be made available to the Committee on Budgetary Control?

3. What department was interviewed by the officials conducting the investigations?

4. Was the UCLAF anti-fraud unit involved? If not why not?

5. Does the report contain recommendations that disciplinary proceedings should be brought against certain officials?

6. Have disciplinary proceedings been opened or officials suspended from their duties? If so, in how many cases and with what results? If not why not?

7. Can the Commission confirm that it has evidence that staff from the Office or Offices of one or more Commission Members could be involved in these irregularities?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 1999)

In response to the Honourable Member’s question, the Commission would point out that as soon as it became known that irregularities had occurred during the competition held on 14 September 1998 the appointing authority ordered an administrative inquiry into the circumstances.

In the light of the administrative inquiry and given the seriousness of the matter, by letter dated 28 October 1998 the appointing authority lodged a complaint against ‘X’ with the Brussels public prosecutor in respect of fraud and irregularities in the context of open competition COM/A/12. The inquiry, however, did not provide enough data for disciplinary proceedings to be initiated against any particular official.

The facts in question did not justify opening an investigation by the Task Force for Coordination of Fraud Prevention (UCLAF) as such, but at the request of the appointing authority an UCLAF official was appointed to head the administrative inquiry.

At the request of the Brussels judicial authorities, and in order not to jeopardise the judicial inquiry currently under way, the utmost discretion must be maintained with respect to this case. The judicial authorities have also asked that any inquiry within the Commission be discontinued pending action by the said authorities themselves.

The Member of the Commission responsible for personnel informed Parliament of this situation at the meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Control on 25 November 1998.

The Commission is not aware of any element in the inquiry that would imply the involvement of staff from the Offices of Members of the Commission.

The Commission will inform Parliament in full as soon as the procedures under way have been completed. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/53

(1999/C 348/064) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0358/99

by Paul Rübig (PPE) to theCommission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Survey of crime in European cities

A current survey of serious crime in Austria, Germany andSwitzerlandshows that crime rates in the Austrian capital, Vienna, are clearly lower than in German or Swiss cities. For example, a figure of 3,9 murders per 100 000 inhabitants is given for Vienna in 1997. A similar trendis also revealedby the number of robberies where Vienna’s figure of 82 per 100 000 inhabitants is clearly lower than other major cities.

Does there exist a representative survey for all major cities in the European Union showing which urban centres require particular action to be taken to make them safe areas for citizens of the Union? If not, when does the Commission plan to arrange for such a survey?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

To date the Commission has not initiated a study of the type described by the Honourable Member. The political priority establishedby the Member States at European Union level was to combat the various forms of organisedcrime. Efforts are mainly directedtogathering information on this more specific area. One of the results is the annual Council report on organisedcrime in Europe, which is transmittedto Parliament.

One of the difficulties of comparing statistics drawn up in the Member States is that they are not equivalent, given that there are no common criteria for measuring certain types of crime. Work certainly needs to be done in this area. It couldbe supplementedby studieson vulnerability to certain forms of crime originating in differences in the social or cultural environment. This type of study might obtain financial support from the Commission.

The Commission is well aware of the needfor comparable statistical tools on aspects of crime, andbefore the summer intends to put forward a multiannual programme to promote cooperation between experts in crime statistics with a view in particular to developing Europe-wide crime statistics.

(1999/C 348/065) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0359/99

by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Diversion of European regional funding from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) by the government of the Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to feeder roads to the A20 motorway

In its answer to my question of 16 April 1998 on the same subject (E-0518/98) (1), the Commission statedthat it had no information about the diversion of ERDF funding to basic infrastructure measures at federal or Land level in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. It also statedthat general infrastructure measures couldnot be funded from ERDF resources.

At the same time, however, it is clear from public statements by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania’s Minister for Economic Affairs, Mr Rolf Eggert, that planning work is currently beginning on linking the islandof Rügen to the A20 motorway, a project which is to be financedwith ERDF fundingtotalling DM 272 million (of a plannedtotal estimatedamount of DM 724 million, i.e. over one third). C 348/54 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

1. Does the Commission take the view that, in the case of such subsidies, EU funds are being used economically and efficiently as intended, particularly in terms of their employment impact and the promotion of small and medium- sized undertakings?If so, what impact on employment does it anticipate and how many jobs could actually be created directly and indirectly?

2. Was it consulted before the diversion of economic development funding to basic infrastructure measures in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania?If so, did it approve this diversion?If not, what action will it be taking to halt the misuse of ERDF funding?

(1) OJ C 402, 22.12.1998, p. 13.

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

(31 March 1999)

The Commission has not been officially notified of the project for European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) part-financing of an access road from the island of Rügen to the A 20 motorway. In its answer to Written Question E-518/98, the Commission explained that a scheme of this kind could not be part-financed within the provisions of the Community support framework (CSF) for Objective 1 regions in Germany for the period 1994 to 1999: in view of the stage the programmes in question are at as regards commitments and expenditure, the possibility of Community assistance for this project during the current programming period must be ruled out.

As far as the next programming period is concerned (2000 to 2006), the draft ERDF Regulation (1) provides for the possibility of part-financing for investment in infrastructure contributing to increasing the economic potential, development, structural adjustment and sustainable employment in Objective 1 regions. In less- favoured areas, and in particular the remote regions and islands of the Community, the development of transport infrastructures can indeed play a key role in improving the competitive position of businesses and regional prosperity (cf. the Commission communication of 14 January 1999) (2). In this context the Commission will pay particular attention to connections and interconnections with the trans-European networks (TENs), which include the A 20 motorway under construction.

Once the new Structural Fund regulations have been adopted, it will be up to the national authorities to decide whether they wish to submit the Rügen-A 20 link project to the Commission under the Structural Fund assistance programming for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. The Commission will not be in a position to consider the effectiveness of this scheme in terms of cost, environmental impact, economic benefits and effects on employment in the region until the authorities have submitted this project to it. Major projects accounting for a total eligible cost of over EUR 50 million will have to be approved by special procedure on the basis of very precise details to be supplied by the Member State concerned (see Articles 24 and 25 of the draft Regulation laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1).

In order to maximise the impact of budget resources, the Commission will as far as possible give preference to schemes involving a public-private partnership, combining Community subsidies and loans (with the participation of the European Investment Bank) with private funding.

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998. (2) COM(98) 806 final.

(1999/C 348/066) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0361/99 by James Moorhouse (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Violation of human rights in Burma

Given the Burmese regime’s continuing reprehensible policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide against ethnic minorities, what action is the European Union taking against Burma? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/55

Anwer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Commission continues to follow closely the repressive measures imposed upon the Burmese people by the military regime.

The Commission fully supports the continued and consistent application of the Union Common Position with regard to Burma. Recent events in Burma give no reason for any change in the Union position and its measures against Burma are therefore maintained.

(1999/C 348/067) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0368/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Protection of the Tuscan archipelago park and the island of Elba

The Tuscan archipelago park and the commune of Marciano have delivered a negative opinion on exploitation of the EURIT-Eurelba mine because of the scenic and natural beauty of the area concerned.

Florence district (a State body) has however asked that the mine be exploited for another five years. Does the Commission not think that this initiative, which will cause serious damage to the area, conflicts with European environmental regulations which protect the island of Elba?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

It appears, based on the information given by the Honourable Member, that the situation to which he refers is outside the scope of Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1). The request by the Florence district for the prolongation of the exploitation of the already existing mine does not appear to be a project covered by the Directive.

In contrast, Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2) could be concerned in so far as the situation described can be considered covered by the provision set out in Article 6, paragraph 2, which states ‘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 provision of Directive 92/43/EEC is currently applicable to special protection areas (SPA) identified under Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds (3). The area mentioned by the Honourable Member is not an SPA under Directive 79/409/EEC. However it is mentioned as an important bird area (IBA) in the list of the important bird areas in Europe compiled by the International council for bird preservation. In principle, it should have been classified as an SPA under Directive 79/409/EEC.

In the light of the above, a letter requesting information has been sent to the Italian authorities. The Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. (3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. C 348/56 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/068) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0372/99 by Yvonne Sandberg-Fries (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: European housing fair

There are plans to hold a European housing fair in Malmö,Sweden,in 2001. It will be jointly organised by Sweden and Denmark and receive support from the two governments. At their meeting in Graz in October 1998 the European Ministers of Housing called on the Commission to support the Fair,thus emphasising the Fair’s importance to the establishment of a common market in the house building sector which would support employment in Europe. The most important part of the Fair will in that respect be the ‘European City’ in which each European country will erect a house reflecting its own ideal and which complies with EU directives. Denmark and Sweden have put in a great effort,as have experts in the Member States and in the Commission, so that this important project may reach fruition. Despite repeated enquiries the Commission has still given no clear indication of how it intends to support the European Housing Fair. This delay is likely to become a serious problem as invitations have to be sent out to the countries of Europe at the latest by the end of February/beginning of March this year.

Will the Commission immediately give a clear indication of the support it intends to give to the European housing fair to be held in Malmö in 2001?

(1999/C 348/069) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/99 by Niels Sindal (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Housing fair

Sweden,Denmark and their two governments are planning to hold a housing fair in Malmö,Sweden,in 2001. The project has the backing of Europe’s housing ministers,who have called on the Commission to support the fair so as to help create a European construction market and boost employment in Europe. The fair also has a cultural dimension,as one of its centrepieces is the ‘European City’ stand,where every country in Europe is to erect a house reflecting its own ideal. Many people throughout the EU have put a great deal of effort into ensuring that the project goes ahead. However,despite repeated inquiries,the Commission has still not stated clearly whether it will support the project.

Will the Commission therefore say whether it is prepared to support the European housing fair which is to be held in Malmö in 2001?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-0372/99 and E-0500/99 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 1999)

The Commission shares the view that the European housing exhibition could be useful in the process of establishing a common market for the construction sector that will also contribute to employment in Europe. The holding of the exhibition is therefore welcomed and could be regarded as an important project with a European dimension. The Commission supports the exhibition,as already stated in a letter to the Swedish minister of the Interior in September 1997 and in several meetings with the organisers,and has offered its patronage. The use of the European emblem in association with the project has previously been clarified with the Commission.

The preparations for the exhibition,and especially the European village,are well under way and the Commission is working in close collaboration with the organisers,particularly in relation to Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws,regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products (1).

(1) OJ L 40,11.2.1989. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/57

(1999/C 348/070) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0375/99

by Karla Peijs (PPE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Implementation of directive 94/62/EC

1. Can the Commission say which Member States have transposed directive 94/62/EC (1) in national legislation, and to what extent they have done so?

2. Can the Commission say to what extent the Member States have set up (collection) systems in order to achieve the target, no later than 30 June 2001, of recovering and reusing as a raw material at least 15 % of wooden packaging placed on the market? Can the Commission confirm that a number of countries (Denmark, the United Kingdom. France, Spain. Portugal and Italy) have not yet set up systems for reusing wooden packaging (such as wooden pallets)?

3. Does the Commission agree that failure to transpose directive 94/62/EC can distort competition to the detriment of those firms which do comply with the directive? If not, why not?

4. Will the Commission, as the guardian of European laws, act against Member State which have not yet taken adequate measures to achieve the objective of the directive? If so, what form will this action take?

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 1999)

1. The Commission follows very closely the implementation in the Member States of Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste (1). Currently, ten Member Stateshave completed the full implementation of the Directive and there are five Member Statesagainstwhich infringement procedures have been opened and are pending for failure to notify national implementing measures (Belgium, Germany, Greece, France and the United Kingdom).

2. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Directive, Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that systems are set up for the return, collection and recovery of packaging and packaging waste in order to meet the objectives of the Directive, in particular the recycling and recovery targets. These systems cover all packaging and packaging waste, including wooden packaging. In general, the obligations fall on each individual operator unless responsibility is transferred to an agreed organisation. This means that it is up to the industrial operators to organise themselves in case the existing systems do not cover wooden packaging, which may be the case in the Member States the Honourable Member mentions. Otherwise each operator has to organise individually the system for collection.

Commission Decision 97/138/EC of 3 February 1997 (2) establishes that Member States shall present to the Commission the completed formats relating to the database system on packaging and packaging waste. The provision of data is obligatory for glass, plastics, paper and fibreboard and metals. Data on wood are to be completed on a voluntary basis. The formats shall be completed starting with the data for the year 1997, and shall be provided within 18 months of the end of the relevant year. At this moment no data has been received and the information isthusnot available yet.

3. The Directive covers all packaging and packaging waste and the systems shall be designed in order to avoid barriersto trade and distortionsof competition. C 348/58 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

4. If Member States do not take adequate measures to comply with the Directive, infringement proceedings may be opened in accordance with Article 169 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994. (2) OJ L 52, 22.2.1997.

(1999/C 348/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0387/99

by Karl von Wogau (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Recognition of a German university diploma in Spain

Is the Commission aware that, in order to obtain recognition in Spain of a degree in business studies awarded by the Berlin Free University, graduates are required to produce not only a certified translation of the diploma (and any accompanying certification) but assessments of their performance in all the various subjects taken throughout the course? If a graduate does not provide assessments relating to each individual subject, she or he is required to undergo further training. Even without this problem, the approval procedure takes ten to twelve months.

Does the Commission agree that this situation infringes European Union rules on the mutual recognition of educational qualifications, and what does the Commission intend to do to ensure that that principle is upheld in practice?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

The Commission is aware that the recognition of university diplomas often takes some time. Whether this is compatible with Community rules on the mutual recognition of diplomas depends ultimately on the intended purpose of the recognition.

The area of academic recognition is the responsibility of the Member States, with the Community merely playing an encouraging and supporting role (Article 149 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 126)). To this extent the Council can adopt recommendations and decisions, though excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States. As the present case is about the recognition of a diploma in order to obtain further qualifications, the answer would have to be that Community law makes no special ruling on this (1).

The verdict might be different if the purpose of recognising a diploma were to exercise a regulated profession (and, possibly, carry the corresponding professional title). In this case, Council Directive 89/48/EEC (2) might be applicable. Under the terms of this Directive, the host Member State may merely check whether there are substantial differences between the education received in the applicant’s Member State of origin and the requirements in the host Member State. The procedure for checking an application to exercise a regulated profession must be carried out as quickly as possible, and be completed < together with a reasoned decision from the competent authority < within four months of the full supporting documents’ being submitted at the latest. According to a working paper drafted by the committee of coordinators, the host Member State may require that documentation be submitted in the form of a certified translation.

The first precondition for invoking this Directive is that the profession that the applicant wishes to exercise be regulated in the host Member State (i.e. the taking-up or exercise of the corresponding professional activity in that Member State is subject to legal or administrative provisions regarding the holding of a diploma). The second precondition is that the applicant be fully qualified to exercise the profession in his or her home Member State or, if the profession is not regulated in that Member State, have at least two years’ relevant experience. Only if these two conditions are met may the deadline likewise be cited. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/59

The profession that a migrant exercised, or was allowed to exercise, in his or her Member State of origin, is thus of crucial importance, as is the profession he or she wishes to exercise in the host Member State (3). If the Commission is provided with further information and it is shown that Directive 89/48/EEC is applicable, it will approach the competent Spanish authorities.

(1) However, as regards the holding of an academic diploma in another Member State, the Court of justice ruled in its judgment of 31 March 1993 that, on the basis of Articles 48 and 52 of the EC Treaty (Articles 39 and 43 EC Treaty since Treaty of Amsterdam), the sole purpose of the administrative procedure to recognise academic titles awarded on the basis of a period of postgraduate study is to verify whether the postgraduate diploma (including a doctorate) was properly awarded (Case C-19/92 (Kraus), European Court Reports 1993 page I-1663). (2) Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration, OJ L 19, 24.1.1989. (3) If, for example, a German graduate of business studies wishes to exercise the profession of ‘economista’, which is regulated in Spain but for which there is no directly comparable profession in Germany, the type and extent of previous professional activity in Germany will have to be checked. .

(1999/C 348/072) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0389/99 by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Monitoring the allocation of EU funds

What action does the Commission take to ensure that there is no possibility of corruption in connection with the allocation of EU funds in Bavaria?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 1999)

The Commission considers the proper use of Community funds as well as the fight against corruption throughout the Community to be of the utmost importance.

In this respect, the Commission would like to stress that a protocol (1) has been drawn up in September 1996, on the basis of the Treaty on European Union, to the convention on the protection of the Communities’ financial interests. This instrument is intended to define passive and active corruption and to criminalize acts of corruption involving national officials and officials of the Community damaging or likely to damage the financial interests of the Communities. Germany has ratified this protocol (2).

In so far as specific instances of corruption in relation to Bavaria have come to the knowledge of the Honourable Member, the Commission would be willing to examine this information through its Task force for the coordination of the fight against fraud. The Commission is, where necessary, entitled to launch its own enquiries for the protection of the financial interests of the Community, including corruption aspects.

(1) OJ C 313, 23.10.1996. (2) BGBI II 1998.

(1999/C 348/073) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0395/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Progress of drug treatment and prevention programmes

Caring for drug-users and former users, providing them with psychological support, bolstering their basic skills and improving their vocational qualifications helps them to reintegrate into family and society and avoid C 348/60 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

becoming marginalised. Measure 5 of sub-programme 3, ‘Social exclusion’, and measure 4 of sub-programme 2, ‘Welfare’, of the Health and Welfare Programme are designed to tackle the problems of users and former users of narcotic substances in Greece.

Given that there is a specific timetable for these sub-programmes, will the Commission say:

1. what stage has been reached in the above sub-programmes and what measures have been launched, and

2. whether there are any delays in the take-up of appropriations and, if so, what the main reasons are for those delays?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

Under measure 5 of sub-programme 3 of the operational programme on ‘Combating exclusion from the labour market’ (Community support framework for Greece 1994-1999), integrated actions comprising pre- training, training and accompanying or support measures have been implemented to bolster the basic personal abilities and to promote the re-integration into society and the labour market of former drug addicts.

Approximately 27 % of the 1994-1999 total budget allocated for this specific target group (approx. € 9 million) was taken up during the years 1994 to 1997. The rather low take-up is to a large extent due to the difficulties encountered in the implementation of the overall operational programme in the 1994-1997 period as a result of the innovative approach, inadequate administrative and management structures, lack of appropriate implementing agencies, and accreditation shortcomings.

In view of the limited number of actions that have been implemented in favour of this specific target group, the Commission requested the Greek authorities to improve their efforts to reach the greatest possible number of people so that they could benefit to the full from the possibilities offered under the specific operational programme.

Under the sub-programme ‘Welfare’ of the Health and Welfare operational programme (Community support framework for Greece 6 1994-1999), it is planned to set up a detoxification centre for drug-dependent prisoners.

Accordingly, the Greek authorities (Ministry of Justice) have purchased a suitable building complex near to the Voiotis prefecture. The conversions needed to make the centre sufficiently secure are now in progress and are running to schedule. When the work is finished, the centre will have 360 places, but further extension will be possible, if necessary.

(1999/C 348/074) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0397/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Operating licence for quarry in protected area

Environmental organisations claim that authorisation has been granted to operate a marble quarry in the Pieria mountains at ‘Marmaro Sentoukia’ in the prefecture of Pieria close to public woodland at Vria. The area is noted for its remarkable ecosystem, it is a priority area in the Natura 2000 network and has been proposed for inclusion in the Leader 2 programme to mark its importance as an archaeological site.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. Have the requisite environmental impact studies been carried out to assess all the implications of the operation of the quarry?

2. Will the Commission ask the Greek authorities to revoke this decision in order to maintain the ecological balance and the exceptional beauty of the area? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C348/61

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

1. The site the Honourable Member refers to (‘Pieria Ori’) has been proposed by the Greek authorities as a Site of Community Importance (SIC) in accordance with Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora (1). The site hosts a number of priority habitats and species and should therefore be automatically included in the Natura 2000 network under the terms of the Directive. Consequently, appropriate measures must be taken by the Member State concerned to ensure that the site does not deteriorate. The Commission will therefore contact the Greek authorities to check whether the impact studies which should be carried out for the project in question, in accordance with Council Directive 85/337/EECof 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2), took sufficient account of the natural value of the site concerned.

2 The decision to authorise the activity in question, and its revocation, is the sole responsibility of the Member State. The Commission can only intervene if Community law has clearly been infringed.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C348/075) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0399/99 by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Fire safety

Will the Commission list the countries which have responded to the study drawn up by the French company CETEN-APAVE relating to the implementation of the 1986 EU recommendations on fire safety?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

For the part of the 1996 study on fire safety in hotels, which was based on a survey, CETEN ? APAVE had received replies to the questionnaires from eight Member States (Belgium, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom).

(1999/C348/076) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0404/99 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Measures to prevent counterfeiting of the euro

In the run-up to the issuing of euro notes and coins, experts on combating counterfeit money believe that an agency should be set up to coordinate the policies of each country and the surveillance systems operated by issuing banks. Mention has even been made of the possibility of creating a European Central Office which would centralise the data provided by each country on this subject.

Likewise, the authorities in certain countries of the euro zone take the view that it would be desirable to standardise legislation and penalties applying to euro counterfeiters, thus preventing a situation where committing such crimes would be punished less severely in some countries than in others. Otherwise, criminals are likely to set up clandestine printshops in countries with less stringent laws, even though everyone might be equally affected by the forged currency. C 348/62 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Can the Commission say what its forecasts are and whether it will propose standard legislation for all the countries concerned with a view to combating euro counterfeiting in an effective manner?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

In preparation of a communication on protection of the euro and combating counterfeiting of 22 July 1998 (1) the Commission established in 1997an expert group on counterfeiting of the euro. This group brings together police from all the Member States, as well as representatives from the European Central Bank (ECB), the European police office (Europol) and the International criminal police organisation (Interpol).

The Commission set out in this communication a strategy to combat counterfeiting which covers a prevention and training policy at Community level, a regulatory framework for co-operation between the relevant national authorities and the Union institutions and between the Union and third countries, the approximation of national laws in relation to the definition of offences, penalties and mutual assistance in judicial matters, and the creation of a standardised system for the exchange of information between authorities responsible for protection against counterfeiting. This would imply a database on strategic and operational data (as opposed to a separate data base on technical characteristics of counterfeits), rules governing the exchange of information, and the obligation of Member States to continuously update the system.

Work is progressing on both the technical and the strategic or operational side. On the technical side, the ECB has already decided to establish a centre for the analysis of counterfeit notes and to maintain a technical database for counterfeits, with an associated communication network. As for coins, Member States have decided and the ECB has accepted to store data of technical nature on counterfeit coins in the data base maintained by the ECB. In addition, it is envisaged to establish a technical and scientific centre for the examination of counterfeit coins.

On the strategic or operational side, the Commission has organised since 1998 expert meetings within its advisory committee for the coordination of fraud prevention and has put forward a detailed evaluation of the need for action in the form of two working documents. Taking into account the work already undertaken by the experts, the Council is likely to extend shortly the mandate of Europol to the fight against counterfeiting of banknotes and coins.

The Commission’s immediate priority is to examine in close co-operation with the ECB whether there is a need to establish by legislation an obligation on national central banks and Member States to contribute to the exchange of information and to co-operate in the field of counterfeiting. The Commission agrees that international co-operation is essential in order to combat counterfeiting efficiently.

(1) COM(98) 474 final.

(1999/C 348/077) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0405/99 by Riitta Myller (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Project for the renovation of the sewage treatment plant of Sortavala (Russia)

The renovation of the sewage treatment plant at Sortavala (Russia) is of vital importance to the town of Sortavala in the interest of improving the water quality in Lake Ladoga. The sum of ECU 2 million from Tacis funds was promised for the project as long ago as 1996. However, there have been delays in the timetable for the project. In September last year a group of experts went to acquaint themselves with the project and map out its requirements. Then again the documents were redrafted and it was promised that the project would be put out to international tender. Since then, nothing has been heard of the matter.

Why has the project been delayed? Has the invitation to tender been published, what further measures are planned and what is the timetable for their completion? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C348/63

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

(12 April 1999)

The renovation of the sewage treatment plant of Sortavala is of great importance both to the town of Sortavala and for the improvement in the quality of the water of Lake Ladoga. The project aims to improve sewage treatment and renovate and where necessary rebuild, if funds are available, the Sortavala sewage works to serve the whole population of that town.

The delay in the implementation of the project has been caused because it has been difficult to determine the exact role of the three parties involved: the Commission, the government of Finland and the municipality of Sortavala.

The tender was published in 1997 following the adoption of the relevant programme after a positive opinion of the TACIS Committee. The possibility to apply remained open until October 1998. A short-list for a restricted tender will be drawn up soon. The terms of reference have however yet to be completed in detail, and the formal approval (statement of endorsement) of the beneficiary (municipality of Sortavala) has still to be obtained. It is hoped to complete all the necessary procedures during the next two or three months. Much depends on how swiftly the necessary consents from third parties can be obtained.

(1999/C348/078) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0408/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Negotiations on the future trade agreement between the EU and South Africa

Information from various sources, including the Port Wine Business Association, indicates that a draft agreement has been drawn up between the South African Trade Minister and Commissioner Deus Pinheiro regulating future trade relations between the EU and South Africa.

Under the draft agreement, it appears that South Africa will be able to continue producing wine designated ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ for the internal market (including not only South Africa but also Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland) for a period of 12 years, after which the matter will be analysed again, that is without any binding provision being made from the outset for a ban on the production of wine with those designations of origin at the end of the 12 years.

1. Can the Commission confirm whether the draft agreement between the EU and South Africa permits the marketing of South African wine with the designation ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ throughout South Africa’s internal market for a period of 12 years without any provision being made for a ban on such marketing at the end of that period?

2. Can the Commission confirm whether the above marketing possibilities cover any of the following three designations of origin: ‘Port’, ‘Porto’, ‘Port Wine’, = all of which identify products labelled thus as ‘Vinho do Porto’ produced in Portugal?

(1999/C348/079) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0409/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Draft trade agreement between the EU and South Africa

Under the draft agreement, it appears that South Africa will be banned from using the designations ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ for wines destined for export to third countries after a five-year transitional period. C 348/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

1. Can the Commission confirm whether the draft agreement between the EU and South Africa provides for a ban on the export of South African wines designated as ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ only at the end of a five-year period?

2. Can the Commission confirm whether this ban will include any of the above three designations of origin?

(1999/C 348/080) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0410/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to theCommission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Counter-concessions granted under the future trade agreement with South Africa

Information from various sources indicates that a draft agreement has been drawn up between the South African Trade Minister and Commissioner DeusPinheiro regulating future trade relations between the EU and South Africa.

Under the draft agreement, it appears that South Africa will be able to continue producing wine designated ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ for the internal market for a period of 12 years, after which the matter will be analysed again, that is without any binding provision being made from the outset for a ban on the production of wine with those designations of origin at the end of the 12 years.

It also appears that South Africa will be banned from using the designations of origin ‘Port’ and/or ‘Porto’ and/or ‘Port Wine’ for wines destined for export to third countries after a five-year transitional period.

On the other hand, Agence Europe of 4 February reports that, as a counter-concession, South Africa will benefit from preferential tariffs for other types of wine which it exports to the European market, including access to zero duty for some of them.

1. In this context, can the Commission confirm that the terms of the draft agreement provide for this type of counter-concession for South Africa? If so, does the Commission not believe that excessive counter- concessions are being granted in exchange for respecting products with a European designation of origin, respect which should be guaranteed immediately in any case?

2. Can the Commission forward a list of the South African wines for which zero customs duty for access to the Community market has already been offered?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0408/99, E-0409/99 and E-0410/99 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1999)

On 24 March 1999 the European Council in Berlin approved the trade, development and co-operation agreement between the Community and South Africa.

As regards the issue of port and sherry the finally accepted compromise formula reads as follows:

1. South Africa reconfirms that the names ‘port’ and ‘sherry’ are not and will not be used for its exports to the EU.

2. South Africa will phase out the use of the ‘port’ and ‘sherry’ names on all export markets within 5 years, except in the case of non-SACU SADC countries, where an 8 years phase out period would apply.

3. For the purpose of the Wines and Spirits Agreement, the South African domestic market is defined to cover SACU (South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland).

4. South African products may be marketed as ‘port’ and ‘sherry’ on the South African domestic market during a 12 year transitional period. Beyond that period the new denominations of these products which shall be used on the South African domestic market will be jointly agreed between South Africa and the EU. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/65

5. From entry into force of the agreement, the EU will provide a duty free quota for wines covering the current level of trade of 32 million litres of South African exports to the EU, with allowance for the future growth of this quota.

6. As an additional effort to the main objectives agreed for the Development program for South Africa to be funded by the EU, the EU will provide assistance of 15 million euro for the restructuring of the SA wines and spirits sector and for the marketing and distribution of SA wines and spirits products. Such assistance will commence at entry into force of the Wines and Spirits Agreement.

7. A Wines and Spirits Agreement between South Africa and the EU will be concluded as soon as possible and no later than in September 1999, in order to ensure that the entry into force of the Wines and Spirits Agreement will take place before or in January 2000.

As for the specific questions asked:

Paragraph 4 of this text talks about a transition period, and the need to jointly agree on the new denominations of the products involved. This language clearly suggests that the use of these names on the South African domestic market will be discontinued.

South Africa does not and will not market products under the name ‘port’ and ‘sherry’ on the Community market (see paragraph 1). As for other third country markets the provision of paragraph 2 is self- explanatory.

The Community would not be able to agree the continued use of the names ‘port’ and ‘sherry’ by South African producers on the South African domestic market beyond the agreed transition periods.

The quota indicated in paragraph 5 refers to product codes 22042179 / 80 / 83 / 84 and 94. The quota offered is well below current South African exports to the Community and only covers bottled wine.

(1999/C 348/081) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0412/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Use of the designation ‘Port’ on wines produced in the United States

I believe that there is a bilateral agreement between Portugal and the United States which dates from 1910 and which bans the use of the designation ‘Porto’ on wines produced in the US. I also believe the information to be correct that the United States, by refraining from using the term ‘Porto’ but using the term ‘Port’, considers that the agreement signed with Portugal is being complied with even though it is in fact using a ‘semi-generic’ designation (a geographical designation used for a product which does not originate in the place in question).

Moreover, Article 24(4) of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) permits the continued use of geographical indications for wines which do not originate in the geographical area in question provided that those indications have been used ‘in good faith’ and/or were used for at least 10 years before 15 April 1994.

1. Is the Commission aware of the above bilateral agreement between Portugal and the United States? Does it consider that use of the term ‘Port’ instead of the designation ‘Porto’ tallies with the concept of ‘good faith’ in accordance with Article 24(4) of the TRIPS agreement?

2. Does the TRIPS agreement make provision for a transitional period as regards ending the possibility offered by Article 24(4)? If so, what transitional period applies in the case of wines produced in the United States and designated ‘Port’?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

1. The Commission is aware of the bilateral agreement of 1910 between Portugal and the United States to which the Honourable Member refers. It confirms that, in the United States, the designation ‘Porto’ is reserved for wines originating from that region of Portugal. However, under US law the term ‘Port’ (without the letter ‘o’) is viewed as a semi-generic name which may be used for products not originating in Portugal. The United C 348/66 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

States has said that this semi-generic name is used there in accordance with the provisions of Article 24 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and with the conditions referred to by the Honourable Member in particular.

2. The TRIPS agreement does not lay down a transitional period in which names may be used in accordance with Article 24(4). It should, however, be noted that the Commission hopes to negociate a bilateral protection agreement with the United States with the aim of increasing the protection afforded to geographical indications and designations of origin of wines and putting an end to any generic or semi-generic use of Community indications.

(1999/C 348/082) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0413/99 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission (19 February 1999)

Subject: Illegal restrictions on free competition in the pay-TV sector in Italy

Subsequent to my Written Question E-3876/98 (1), the Italian Government recently adopted a law decree preventing any undertaking which holds authorisation or a concession for radio and television broadcasts from acquiring more than 60 % of the exclusive rights to broadcast the series A football championships in coded form.

This rule constitutes a ban only in appearance since it allows the holders of authorisations who are already in possession of at least 60 % of such rights to retain their advantage and, therefore, to consolidate their dominant position. Furthermore, the rule enables the 60 % limit to be exceeded if the conditions prevailing in the relevant markets dictate that there should be only one purchaser 9 although in such a case the duration of the contracts for the purchase of exclusive rights may not exceed three years.

In the Italian pay-TV sector there are two players: Telepiù and Stream. The first occupies a dominant position as regards football rights, having concluded contracts for the exclusive broadcast of the matches involving the most important teams in series A and series B.

Can the Commission answer the following: 1. Does it not consider the law decree in question to be contrary to the most elementary European rules on competition and the free market (Articles 85 and 86 of the EEC Treaty), which outlaw concerted practices and the abuse of dominant positions, since the law decree benefits companies such as Telepiù which are already present on the market, have links with the state television company and are clearly in a monopoly position? 2. Does it not consider that the Italian Government, by introducing this decree into a still-developing market and by imposing rigid limits such as the 60 % ceiling, may drive away new investors and hinder the development of the pay-TV market in Italy? 3. Would it say what action it intends to take in order to ensure that normal market and competition conditions are restored, so as to protect the consumer’s right to choose freely, particularly in view of the reply to Question E-3876/98 in which the Commission stated that it was closely following the development of the digital television market in Italy and that it would make sure that the relevant Community rules were being correctly applied?

(1) OJ C 320, 6.11.1999, p. 84.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (9 April 1999)

The Commission would point out first of all that the Italian Government’s Decree-Law No 15 of 30 January 1999 (prohibiting the acquisition of more than 60 % of the exclusive rights to broadcast the Italian Series A football championships in coded form) has not yet completed the legislative process and that the text which is finally adopted may differ substantially from the present text. This appears to be a real possibility in the light of the amendments already made, which include recognising that each clubowns the encrypted broadcasting rights relating to its matches and giving the Italian antitrust authority the power to allow exemptions to the 60 % ceiling. The Commission will, if appropriate, be sure to assess the final text in the light of the rules governing the internal market and the free movement of services. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/67

1. However, after a preliminary analysis, the Commission cannot agree that the Decree-Law is in breach of Community competition rules, in so far as it aims to provide opportunities for access by third parties by ensuring that rights are not concentrated exclusively in the hands of a single operator. If one operator were to acquire all the rights, contracts could not extend beyond a limited period.

2. At first sight, the Commission considers that the sharing of sporting rights among several operators, as should result from the Italian Decree-Law, should contribute to the balanced development of the Italian pay- TV market.

3. The Commission will monitor the developments on the market closely in order to ensure that the sharing of sporting rights, as provided for in the Decree-Law, does not have the effect of driving away investors and thereby hindering the development of the pay-TV market in Italy, as the Honourable Member fears.

(1999/C 348/083) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0419/99 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Air pollution in the buildings of the European Patent Office

For several years employees of the European Patent Office have been complaining of health hazards resulting from the air conditioning and air-borne toxic substances in their offices. After several staff members had made complaints of this kind the Patent Office commissioned a number of surveys, most of the results of which have not, however, been made public.

1. What will the Commission do to oblige the European Patent Office to make the results of the studies carried out into air pollution available to the authorities and the individuals concerned?

2. Can the Commission require the Patent Office to state whether the air conditioning in its offices was cleaned with chemicals (and if so, which) in the past?

3. What will the Commission do to ensure that the Patent Office carries out a standardised survey of all users of its premises in order to throw light on the ‘sick building syndrome’ allegedly affecting them?

4. Will the Commission take the necessary measures to ensure that procedures before the invalidity boards are legally regulated?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

International health and safety law applies to agencies as to all other institutions.

The Commission, however, has no authority over the agencies since, in this respect, they are independent organisations. It cannot, therefore, answer the Honourable Member’s question.

(1999/C 348/084) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0420/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Arrangements envisaged by the Commission for the project shared amongst European cities of culture in 2000

In recognition of the symbolic significance of the year 2000, the EU has decided to undertake a project which for the first time will be shared amongst nine European cities of culture: Avignon, Cracow, Reykjavik, Santiago C 348/68 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

de Compostela, Helsinki, Bergen, Bologna, Brussels and Prague. Five cities from EU Member States and four from European countries outside the Union will thus join together in a cultural cooperation project without precedent in Europe, insofar as it brings together three cities from northern Europe, three from central Europe and three from southern Europe. Evidently, such an important and ambitious project requires special support and adequate funding to ensure that it enjoys success by giving prominence to a European cultural project which embraces the entire continent and forging the ties which the project can and must make possible.

In reply to my earlier parliamentary question E-2872/98 (1), the Commission said that ‘as a contribution to the preparatory activities carried out jointly by the nine European Cities of Culture for the year 2000 and on the basis of actual projects presented by the cities, the Commission has granted support amounting to ECU 200 000 in 1997 and ECU 250 000 in 1998. For 1999 the Commission is not in a position to commit itself financially until the Community budget for that year has been formally approved.’

Since the 1999 budget has nowbeen formally approved, can the Commission provide information regarding the aid which it intends to make available in 1999 as a contribution to the extensive, high-cost preparatory work which such an ambitious European project will entail in the year leading up to the major event which is due to take place in the year 2000?

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 156.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

The Commission granted support under the Kaleidoscope programme : by way of exception : to preparatory actions carried out jointly by the nine European Cities of Culture for 2000.

This support, which was granted to specific projects presented by the cities, amounted to € 200 000 in 1997 and € 250 000 in 1998.

The Kaleidoscope programme has been extended for another year in order to cover 1999, with the same budget as for 1998.

Experimental projects for the framework programme will also be supported in 1999 from Item B3-2004 under the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 October 1998 on legal bases and implementation of the budget (1).

Here the Commission intends to support once again, for the third consecutive year, the preparatory actions carried out by the nine cities. It will endeavour, if possible, to make a bigger contribution than in 1998 but it must bear in mind the limits set to the budget for culture and other ongoing cultural projects.

The Commission hopes to be able to support the implementation of the programme presented by the nine cities for the year 2000 as part of the ‘Culture 2000’ programme which should be operational on that date following the decisions which will be taken by the institutions.

(1) OJ C 344, 12.11.1998.

(1999/C 348/085) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0425/99 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Identity cards

Further to its answer to Written Question E-3070/98 (1), could the Commission indicate which Member States require their citizens to possess identity cards?

(1) OJ C 289, 11.10.1999, p. 21. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/69

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

In complement to the information provided in response to the Honourable Member’s written question E-3070/98, to which the Honourable Member refers, and on the basis of the latest information available to the Commission, the following Member States require their citizens to obtain national identity cards: Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal.

Further to the information provided in response to the earlier question, and on the basis of clarifications received on this matter in the interim, as regards France, it should be noted that there is in effect no obligation in law to either obtain or carry an identity card. However for most practical purposes, including the accomplishment of administrative formalities, an identity card is a requirement de facto.

With respect to the addition of Germany to the list, it should be noted that while there is an obligation to obtain a national identity card, there is, on the basis of the information available to the Commission, no obligation to carry the identity card on one’s person, as is the case with the other Member States mentioned.

(1999/C 348/086) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0438/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Subject: Lack of transparency in the recruitment of staff at the European Central Bank

In his answer of 8February 1999 to my Written Question E-3485/98( 1) on the recruitment of staff at the European Central Bank (ECB), Commissioner de Silguy stated that ‘the Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the Honourable Member’s question’.

However, the ECB is funded out of the Community budget, is basically responsible for the smooth introduction of the euro which the Commission is so persistent in promoting and is supported by the Commission in its demands for financial support; at the same time the lack of transparency surrounding recruitment at the ECB and its general working methods have been the subject of very frequent comment both within and outside Parliament.

What measures does it intend to take to ensure that recruitment at the ECB will proceed with complete transparency, and that obfuscation which justifiably arouses the suspicions of European citizens will be avoided?

(1) OJ C 207, 21.7.1999, p. 76.

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

The Commission has no competence for taking measures with respect to the recruitment of the European Central Bank. The Honourable Member may note that the European Central Bank is not funded from the Community budget. The acts of the European Central Bank are open to review or interpretation by the Court of justice.

(1999/C 348/087) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0440/99 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Subject: Lobbying regulations

Does the European Commission have any plans to ask companies within the European Union to include in their annual reports details of who they lobby and how much money they spend? This would bring the European Union in line with the US Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act. C 348/70 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

The obligation for American companies to declare their lobbying activities, including the amount they spend on such activities, derives from the registration system which applies to all organisations lobbying US federal bodies.

This registration system is not compatible with the Commission’s approach, which is based on openness to all interest groups and guarantees them equal treatment while recommending that they apply a system of self- regulation.

This being so, the Commission has no plans to adopt measures which would require a radical change of policy.

(1999/C 348/088) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0444/99 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Subject: Adjusting the definition of small and medium enterprises

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a directive adjusting the financial thresholds used in defining small and medium enterprises in the context of European directives on accounting.

The proposal will allow the Member States to establish exceptions with regard to obligatory financial information for a larger number of SMEs.

What social partners and associations of SMEs and artisans were contacted in the course of preparing this proposal?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EC) of 25 July 1978 on the annual accounts of certain types of companies (1) allows Member States to exempt small and medium-sized companies from certain requirements of the Directive.

Small and medium-sized companies are defined for the purposes of the Directive by reference to three criteria, i.e. balance sheet total, net turnover and average number of employees. The balance sheet total and net turnover amounts are expressed in Euro. In accordance with Article 53(2) of the Directive every five years the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, is to examine and, if need be, revise the amounts expressed in Euro.

As the Directive stipulates that this five-yearly revision has to take place ‘in the light of economic and monetary trends in the Community’ there is no need for special consultation of social partners and associations of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The revision is of a purely technical nature and is based upon statistical figures.

(1) OJ L 222, 14.8.1978.

(1999/C 348/089) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0450/99 by Giuseppe Rauti (NI) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Collapse of the ancient walls of Viterbo

Controversy has arisen in Viterbo over reconstruction of the ancient walls, two stretches of which, measuring some dozens of metres, collapsed in January and March 1997.After so many months the reconstruction has 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/71

practically not started, so that further damage has been caused (by the devastating effect of the bad weather, infiltration of water etc.) to the monumental complex of the castle walls.

Viterbo, the ancient and noble ‘City of the Popes’ has one of the most extensive historical centres in the whole of Europe:

1. Is it true that European Union funds have been allocated for reconstruction of the parts of the walls that have collapsed and the long stretches that are still in danger of falling? If so, what amount was involved and to which Italian body was it granted between January and December 1997?

2. During the same period were official steps taken by Italy on the subject, were requests for appropriations received and, if so, from whom?

3. Does the Commission not think that, following on-the-spot assessment of the extent of the damage and the vast scale of the cultural heritage in question, it should take autonomous and prompt initiatives, including financial ones, to come to the rescue of a city whose splendid historical memory deserves to be safeguarded and of one of the most important cultural sites of Europe and thus of the world?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

In view of the fact that the city of Viterbo is excluded from the zones admissible for financial support by the structural funds, no financial support could have been given for the project mentioned by the Honourable Member.

There was no financial support given for the historical walls of Viterbo in 1997 within the framework of the Commission’s programme in favour of the preservation and enhancement of cultural heritage. No requests were submitted by the local, regional or national authorities for the above mentioned project in the framework of the Raphael programme for 1997. It should be noted that the themes dealt with by the Raphael programme for that year were different from that of the project in question.

On the basis of Article 128 of the EC Treaty, the Commission’s action and programmes in the field of culture and cultural heritage are based on the principle of subsidiarity and can only encourage cooperation between the Member States, which are exclusively responsible for the protection and preservation of their heritage.

(1999/C 348/090) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0452/99

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Epidemic of swine vesicular disease

In the province of Mantua, Italy, there were three outbreaks of vesicular disease at the end of January that led to the slaughter of some 10 000 pigs. Vesicular disease is a mild disease from a symptomatological point of view and, apart from a high morbidity rate, runs its course in a few days with no particular consequences for the animals affected apart from an occasional sloughing of hooves. Vesicular disease is caused by an enterovirus and from a symptomatological point of view has a close affinity to foot-and-mouth disease whose impact on the animals affected (also cattle) can be considerable. The flesh of the pigs struck down by vesicular disease is used for zootechnical purposes.

In the light of the present state of affairs breeders tend not to report cases of vesicular disease because of the drastic health measures in force. Contrary to what happened in the past, the diagnostic means now available make it possible to distinguish the vesicular disease virus from the foot-and-mouth virus more quickly. C 348/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Does the Commission not think it should review the existing health provisions and remove vesicular disease from the list of notifiable diseases? Does it not think that the slaughter measures are abnormal given the mild nature of the disease? How long does it take with the existing diagnostic instruments to distinguish between the vesicular disease virus and the foot-and-mouth one? Does the use of the flesh of the animals infected for the production of meal not conflict with Community provisions following the BSE crisis? What does the total compensation paid to breeders for slaughter in recent years amount to? Has an accurate cost/benefit analysis been made of current preventive measures?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

Current provisions on swine vesicular disease (SVD) are included in Council Directive 92/119/EEC of 17 December 1992 introducing general Community measures relating to swine vesicular disease (1), which was adopted taking into consideration that this disease is classified in list A of animal diseases of the Office international des épizooties (OIE). This body is indicated in the agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures of the World trade organization as the technical referent for the development and promotion of international animal health standards, guidelines and recommendations affecting trade in live animals and animal products. List A includes the animal diseases for which an immediate notification of outbreaks is compulsory due to their major economic importance and rapid spread. Therefore, substantial changes to Community policy on a disease such as SVD are possible only if the current OIE classification is modified.

One of the reasons for including SVD in list A is its similarity with foot and mouth disease. In recent times new diagnostic tools have been developed which allow a quick differentiation between the two diseases, usually within twenty-four hours.

In accordance with relevant Community legislation, meat-and-bone meal from mammals to be used to feed non-ruminant species must undergo a specific heat treatment to inactivate the agent of bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The use of carcasses of pigs slaughtered due to SVD for the production of meat-and-bone meal is not contrary to these provisions.

In the last three years in the Community outbreaks of SVD only occurred in Italy. The compensation for pig farmers following the 1997 outbreaks amounts to 8 833 million Italian lira (euro 4,6 million). The Italian authorities have not yet sent the figures for 1998 to the Commission, but the amount is likely to be close to that of 1997, given the number of pigs slaughtered.

The Commission has not carried out a cost/benefit analysis on the measures established to combat SVD. However, in order to evaluate the benefits of current eradication policy, it must be taken into account that the presence of this disease can represent a serious obstacle to intra-Community trade and the export to third countries of live pigs and their products.

(1) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993.

(1999/C 348/091) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0453/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Korean financial crisis and knock-on effects on Community shipbuilding

In its answer of 23 February 1998 (1) to Written Question P-0134/98, the Commission expressed disquiet regarding the possible knock-on effects of the financial crisis in Asia on the shipbuilding industry. The Commission added that ‘the International Monetary Fund (IMF) plan which Korea has accepted, provides only for financial aid to stave off collapse of the financial and banking system and in no way provides for any allocation of funds to sectors of industry (...). The structural reforms demanded by the IMF, and the drastic conditions imposed (...) will undoubtedly preclude any repetition of the mistakes which encouraged Korean shipyards into ill-considered investments in capacity (...)’. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/73

Nevertheless, in the course of 1998 it became clear that, in contrast to the Commission’s assertions in the answer quoted above, Korean financial and banking institutions have cancelled the enormous debts facing shipyards in that country and/or have provided guarantees in order to aid the renewed utilisation of over- capacity in the Korean shipbuilding industry.

This enabled Korea to attract a 30 % slice of new orders, chiefly owing to the marked distortion of global price levels in the sector. Korea’s increase in shipbuilding capacity may have irreparable consequences for the Community shipbuilding industry.

Can the Commission provide the following information:

1. What action is it taking or will it take to assess the impact of Korea’s industrial and trade policy on the Community shipbuilding industry?

2. Does the Commission consider that the current rules governing the Community shipbuilding industry will enable European shipyards to face up to this new Korean offensive? If not, what changes to these rules will the Commission propose?

3. What other comprehensive measures will the Commission propose to protect the European shipbuilding industry and guarantee fair competition at world level?

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 36.

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

As it pointed out in its answers to written questions E-134/98 (Mr Jarzembowski) (1) and E-265/99 (Mr Cabezon Alonso) (2), the Commission’s view is that the IMF aid is not directed towards any particular sector of industry, including shipbuilding.

The export guarantee systems to which the Honourable Member refers are normal practice and exist in the Community as well They do not, as such, constitute illegal aid. According to information supplied by the Korean authorities the guarantees were provided on a commercial basis and in accordance with market rules, while the cancellation of debt followed on from court rulings under domestic bankruptcy law, with the agreement of creditors, again on the basis of purely commercial considerations.

The Commission closely monitors the exact terms and conditions of these arrangements to ensure that they are compatible with international rules, and together with the Member States is also keeping a close watch on the implementation of the reforms called for by the IMF. However, we would point out that the supervisory responsibility lies with the IMF, not the Commission.

The impact of the devaluation of the won on world ship prices is likely to fade as the currency regains strength, leading to a recovery.

Failing agreement by the OECD the current regulation on aid to shipbuilding is designed to enhance the competitiveness of the Community industry and enable it to cope with international competition. Production aid is to continue until end 2000 at the 9 % ceiling; this should also help the industry gear up to a more competitive environment. At the end of 1999 the Commission will be reporting to the Council on the situation of the world shipbuilding industry, however, and if European shipyards are found to be affected by unfair practices it will propose any necessary measures.

The restoration of fair competition at world level is hampered by the fact that the OECD agreement has not been put into effect and has not been ratified by the United States. The United States is not a major player in this sector and one possibility would have been to apply the agreement on a four-party basis, without US participation. At the moment, however, neither the European industry nor certain Member States are willing to provide the necessary backing for this approach. C 348/74 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Despite this the Commission is still working to secure international disciplines in this sector. In the meantime it is ready to consider anti-subsidy complaints from the European industry or to deploy commercial policy instruments to counter unfair trade practices if sufficient evidence is provided.

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998. (2) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 77.

(1999/C 348/092) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0454/99 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to theCommission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Construction of the solid waste treatment plant at Meia Serra, Madeira

There are plans to build a new solid waste treatment plant in Meia Serra, in the parish of Camacha, municipality of Santa Cruz in the Autonomous Region of Madeira.

Approval of the project obviously depends on the submission of an independent and credible environmental impact study.

Can the Commission provide the following information:

1. Has the above project been the subject of an application for Community co-financing? When? If so, has the Commission already taken a decision on support for the project?

2. Assuming that an application has already been submitted by the Portuguese Government, what action will the Commission take to ensure that the environmental impact study which must be annexed to the project is genuinely independent and credible?

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

(19 April 1999)

The Portuguese authorities submitted to the Commission for part-financing under the Cohesion Fund a project involving solid waste treatment on the island of Madeira in May 1996.

The associated environmental impact assessment, forwarded by the Portuguese authorities in January 1999, will be examined once the Commission has received the opinion of the evaluation committee, duly approved by the environmental authorities, and the report on the public consultation process.

Since project appraisal is currently underway, the Commission is not in a position to give more details at this stage.

(1999/C 348/093) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0455/99 by Carlo Ripa di Meana (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Lyon-Turin-Milan-Venice-Trieste high-speed rail link

The European Council in Essen endorsed the creation of a high-speed rail link between Lyon, Turin, Milan and Venice. This section of railway line, as part of ‘Corridor 5’ of the trans-European inter-connecting networks, would provide a link to Slovenia and Hungary, countries which have applied to join the EU. The project would involve the construction of a second line between Venice and Trieste, originating in a tunnel in southern Ronchi. The line would then cross Goriziano Monfalconese, in the Carso area A including the area of the small Lake Mucille and the important protected ecological area of Lake Pietrarossa, to continue through the Carso area, damaging other important beauty spots around Trieste. This project could lead to the withdrawal of EU funding, earmarked under the Konver II programme, for the protection of the environment and development of tourism and crafts in the Lake Pietrarossa area. Such a railway line would also cause irreparable damage not 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/75

only to the Italian and Slovenian Carso ecosystem, with its specific hydro-geological characteristics, but also to the network of springs created by the confluence of waters from Lake Mucille and Lake Pietrarossa, the Sablici and Lisert wetlands, Lake Doberdòand the eastern Carso. Technically, the original plan could be followed, whereby the existing railway line near Gorizia would be upgraded and reinforced, thus avoiding the abovementioned areas of great ecological importance, while still providing access to the port of Trieste.

The Commission:

1. Does it therefore consider it wise to endorse a project marked by an arrogant disregard for the environment on a transnational level, given that it involves the territory of both EU and applicant countries?

2. Is such a project, which would inflict such great damage to the Carso landscape and to the springs in the entire area, not at odds with the objectives pursued by the EU via the Konver II funding to protect the environment and develop tourism and crafts?

3. What measures and action does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the above railway infrastructure be completed while maintaining the utmost respect for the landscape and ecosystem of the Carso?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 1999)

The project for a high-speed line combined transport Lyon-Torino-Milano-Venezia-Trieste is part of the TEN-T guidelines Decision no 1692/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (1) and is included in the Annex III as a specific proposal. According to Article 8.1 of the Decision, when projects are carried out, environmental protection must be taken into account by the Member States through the execution of environmental impact assessments pursuant to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2) and through the application of Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (3).

As far as the section Venezia-Trieste is concerned, the Commission in 1997 co-financed through the TEN-T budget line a feasibility study aiming at identifying the route option for the future high-speed line which provides the highest social and economic return at the lowest environmental cost. However the Commission cannot yet judge the impact of the project as the study is still continuing and the results concerning the route option are not known.

According to the information available to the Commission, the Konver project in the area in favour of the Monfalcone municipality is proceeding normally and the funding has not been put into doubt.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996. (2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 348/094) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0460/99 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Importation into Sicily of cattle, pigs and sheep without health documents

The Commission has given a partial reply to my previous question (E-1182/97) (1). Investigations carried out by the magistrates in Caltanissetta have now revealed that breeding animals intended for human consumption have been imported, without any inspections, not only from Belgium but also from France and the United Kingdom. Owing in addition to the fact that 72 cases of human brucellosis were recorded in 1997 and 18 in 1998, the investigation resulted in dozens of farms and a drugs warehouse being placed under distraint.

In the local press on 19 January 1999, Massimo De Cesare, the Deputy Public Prosecutor, stated inter alia that the magistrates had found the administrative authorities whose task was to inspect the undertakings C 348/76 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

completely uncooperative and that the cattle had been imported into Italy without the inspections required by law even after the ‘mad cow’ affair. After the intervention of the Public Prosecutor many animals had been destroyed but prior to that many had ended up on the tables of consumers.

Has the Commission been informed by the Italian authorities of this affair, which also involves other countries in the European Union?

What measures does it intend to take?

(1) OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 31.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

According to the description provided by the Honourable Member, the question concerns illegal movements of live animals from several Member States to Italy (Sicily).

The Commission has received no information from the Italian authorities on this subject. However, problems concerning the structure of the veterinary service in Calabria and Sicily have been observed during a recent mission in those regions for the control of brucellosis in small ruminants and the Italian authorities will be requested to undertake the necessary steps in order to resolve the situation. At a forthcoming meeting of the Standing Veterinary Committee, a point will be put on the agenda in order to obtain clarification from the representatives of the Member States concerned.

(1999/C 348/095) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0464/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(24 February 1999)

Subject: EU-Argentina fisheries agreement

Fisheries relations between the EUand Argentina have suffered greatly as a result of the changes in the fisheries rules adopted by Argentina which, as acknowledged by the Commission itself, are in blatant contravention of the conditions laid down in the current EU-Argentina fisheries agreement. With a view to the forthcoming meeting on 4 and 5 March of the EU-Argentina Joint Committee, can the Commission provide immediate information regarding the action it intends to take in order to protect Community fishing interests, which have been seriously affected by the changes made to the rules under Argentine law in contravention of what has been agreed under higher international law, such as the current EU-Argentina fisheries agreement?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

On becoming aware of the changes made under Argentine law to which the HonourableMember refers the Commission took immediate action, writing to the Argentine Under-Secretary for Fisheries to voice its dissent as to both the procedures used and the content of the measures, and convening a meeting of the Community/ Argentina Joint Committee. This was held in Buenos Aires on 4 and 5 March and primarily devoted to this matter.

At Parliament’s request a report was made to the members of its Committee on Fisheries on 15 and 16 March. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/77

(1999/C 348/096) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0475/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to theCommission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: The effects of the employment initiative

The European Parliament placedthe emphasis of the 1998 budgeton the so-called‘employment initiative’, to which EUR 150 million was allocated. The same strategy was adopted for this year, as shown in budget line B5-512 on support for SMEs.

1. How does the Commission assess the impact of this initiative so far in the light of the conclusions of the Luxembourg summit?

2. How many jobs were createdor maintainedby means of these funds?

3. How shouldthe European Union’s budgetarypolicy be shapedin future with a view to supporting purposeful andeffective employment policies in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1999)

Given the preparation needed to get the Growth and employment programme up and running, it is too soon to assess the impact of the schemes at the level of enterprises. However, progress is being made for each of the three facilities involved.

The European technology facility (EFT) start-up so far has come from funds in 13 of the 15 Member States. Financial intermediaries have been appointed in two Member States and seven other funds are presently under negotiations with the European investment fund(EIF) with more than 50 proposals being appraised.

Concerning the choice of national intermediaries for the Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) guarantee facility, the EIF has taken contact with all national authorities. Two Member States have signedagreements and are already issuing guarantees. Active negotiations with intermediaries in six additional Member States are under way at present.

In the Joint European venture (JEV) as of 31 March 1999 the Commission has approved18 projects involving 36 Community SMEs. Half of the projects are in the manufacturing, environment or information technology sectors. Basedon the forecasts providedbyeach SME, each joint venture is expectedto create on average 15 jobs.

The overall number of jobs createdis part of the monitoring andevaluation of the facilities andwill, as far as possible, be included in the annual reports by the Commission to the Parliament and Council. The first report will be issuedlater this year.

The employment strategy establishes the orientation for priorities andfocus of future employment policy at national andCommunity level. The main responsibility lies with Member States. The targets andobjectives of the employment guidelines set the course for their action. The principal Community support will be provided by the reformed structural funds, in particular the European social fund.

(1999/C 348/097) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0483/99 by Gianfranco Fini (NI) and Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to theCommission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Enlargement andthe Mediterranean

The fear has been expressedin many quarters among the public at large, that the increase in the EU budget necessitated by enlargement to include the Central and Eastern European countries will work to the detriment of Mediterranean regions. The view being taken in other circles, however, is that enlargement offers a unique opportunity for trade between Eastern European and Mediterranean countries, helping, by means of targeted financial investment, to alleviate unemployment andregulate migration in a more rational way. C 348/78 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The Commission:

1. Does it share this latter view?

2. If so, what steps will it take to foster such relations andhelp establish regular traffic flows insteadof the intermittent traffic which has occurredto date?

3. With the above points in mind, does it not believe that it should consider what large-scale transport infrastructure projects might be undertaken to facilitate passenger and goods traffic between Eastern Europe andthe Mediterranean?

4. Does it not consider that an expansion in tourism in both directions, for artistic and cultural purposes as well as during the holiday season, could afford new development opportunities?

5. What programmes will it draw up to assist SMEs and craft businesses with a view to ensuring that, once enlargement has taken place andfrontiers have been openedup, they will not be swept away by industrial giants andmass marketing?

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

(21 April 1999)

As the Agenda 2000 paper explains, the Community’s enlargement to the applicant countries of Central and Eastern Europe will involve an increase in the size andpopulation of the areas coveredby cohesion and structural convergence policies (paragraph 3.3 of the Impact Study) and produce new market and job opportunities by making the internal market larger (paragraph 2 of the Impact Study). These developments will impose a greater need to compete on parts of Europe which may have difficulty in seeing what immediate benefit they can derive from such a situation.

Much depends on how the transition is handled, and this is why the Commission has set out a pre-accession strategy that takes account of the various considerations. It should be stressed that the process of enlargement shouldactually raise the standardofliving of the inhabitants of the applicant countries andthus increase their buying power, a development which will benefit all the Member States. Another effect will be a reduction in potential flows of migration anda rise in the flow of tradewith the Member States.

The Trans-European Networks will be extended into the applicant countries; in this, the pre-accession phase, substantial assistance is already being given to develop and connect the Networks. Support for investment in infrastructure has moreover been provided as part of the cross-border cooperation programmes between Bulgaria andGreece andbetween Italy andSlovenia.

The opening-up of the Community to the countries of Central andEastern Europe has alreadyprovoked considerable new tourist traffic between those countries and some parts of the Mediterranean.

Since the beginning of the 90s, the Community has been contributing through the Phare programme to the development of small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) in the applicant countries. Such support continues to be one of the Community’s priorities, andis identifiedas such in the Accession Partnerships with the countries in question. The national programmes within Phare are only one component of the large-scale support for this sector; Phare also provides funds for the applicant countries to take part in the third multiannual programme for SME (the Community programme for the sector). Seven applicant countries are alreadyparticipants, andthe process of involving the three Central andEastern European countries still outside the programme, plus Cyprus, shouldbe accomplishedby the endof the year. The applicant countries’ participation in the thirdmultiannual programme will promote closer cooperation between Community and applicant-country enterprises andorganisations andgreater policy dialoguein this field. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/79

(1999/C 348/098) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0484/99

by Jan Lagendijk (V) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Scrapping of European ships in India

Old European ships are being scrapped in Alang (India) without any protection for workers or the environment. Obsolete vessels containing toxic substances are simply being ripped apart with bare hands. The toxic substances disappear into the environment without being processed. This situation is unacceptable, from both the social and the environmental points of view( 1). Is the Commission aware of the way in which European ships are scrapped in India? Does it agree that this scandalous practice must be stopped?

Hoe does the Commission explain the fact that this practice is still being carried out, given that the Basel Convention . to which the European Union is a signatory . became binding on 1 January 1998? What action will the Commission take to ensure that the Convention is implemented? And how does the Commission reconcile the scrapping of old European ships in India with the proximity principle to which it has subscribed? What will the Commission do to implement this principle in respect of the scrapping of European ships?

Nowthat an excellent directive is available for end-of-life vehicles ( 2), I should like the Commission to take the initiative in drafting a similar directive for end-of-life ships in order to encourage the socially and environmentally responsible scrapping of European Union ships. The essential feature of such a directive would be delivering a ship free of charge to an enterprise which would scrap the vessel in a way which is responsible towards humans and the environment. The cost could be financed by imposing a levy on the price of newships to guarantee proper recycling in future. Is the Commission prepared to take such an initiative?

(1) See the report in the (Dutch) edition of the Greenpeace newsletter, No 1, 1999. (2) COM(97) 0358 final . OJ C 337, 7.11.1997, p. 3.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

Over the last months, the Commission has been seised of the problem of the export of European ships to ship- breaking yards in Asia, notably India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. The Commission is aware of the way the scrapping activities are being carried out. It agrees that the conditions under which ships are being scrapped in the countries concerned, posing serious hazards to the health of the workers and the environment, are unacceptable and is currently examining different measures in order to address this problem. Nevertheless, this scrapping activity is important for the economy of these countries and any measure taken to address the environmental problem should take this parameter into account.

One of the questions which has arisen in this context is, whether the export of ships for breaking-up to the countries mentioned above is covered by Council Regulation (EEC) 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the control and supervision of shipments of waste within, into and out of the Community (1) (‘Shipment Regulation’). On this aspect the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-462/99 by M. Skinner (2).

The Regulation is based, as the Honourable Member rightly observes, on the principles of proximity and self- sufficiency in waste disposal. However, these principles do not apply to the shipment of wastes for recovery operations. Accordingly, they are not relevant to the extent that old ships are exported for recovery purposes such as, for example, the recovery of scrap metals from those ships for recycling at steel mills.

Nevertheless, the Shipment Regulation represents a binding legal framework for the Community, which subjects exports of obsolete ships to tight control and supervision procedures. The Commission is currently examining a number of issues related to the effective enforcement of those rules, both in the context of Community legislation as well as in the framework of the Basel Convention. C348/80 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

In addition, the issue is being placed on the agenda of the International Maritime Organisation. In this context, it should be observed that an effective and high-capacity ship-scrapping industry is essential in order to remove ageing, sub-standard ships from the oceans, which in themselves pose a serious environmental threat by increasing the risk of accidents at sea which could result in serious marine pollution and increased loss of life. This would be contrary to the quality shipping campaign to which the Commission and the Member States are already fully committed.

As regards the suggestion by the Honourable Member for the Commission to draft a directive for end-of-life ships similar to that currently discussed for end-of-life vehicles on the basis of a proposal by the Commission, the Commission is doubtful at this stage, whether this would be an efficient way forward to solve the problems at hand. Shipping is a global activity and the problem of scrapping of old ships is a global issue. Solutions should take account of this international aspect.

In conclusion, the Commission is fully aware of the safety, health and environmental problems, which exist in third countries where ships are being scrapped. It is fully committed to explore all instruments at its disposal in order to contribute to a comprehensive solution of those problems.

(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993. (2) OJ C325, 12.11.1999, p. 116.

(1999/C348/099) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0485/99 by Wilfried Telkämper (V)to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Bougainville

1. What steps has the Commission taken so far to support the peace process on Bougainville? What steps does it intend to take?

2. Has the Commission made contact with the parties to the conflict on Bougainville? if not, does it intend to establish contact in future?

3. Does the Commission intend to offer to observe the proposed elections on Bougainville? Has it made arrangements to observe the elections?

4. Has the Commission supported the setting-up of democratic institutions on Bougainville, or does it intend to do so in future?

5. What measures has the Commission taken, or does it intend to take, to rebuild and develop Bougainville, which suffered so much destruction in the war?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 1999)

1. The Commission has contributed substantial emergency and rehabilitation aid, which is part of what is often referred to as the peace dividend for the inhabitants of Bougainville. The main objective is to revive the economy, thereby providing proof that peace also carries material benefits. The total value of Commission projects for Bougainville implemented or approved since hostilities ended is € 8,5 millions, or some € 50 per inhabitant. In addition the Commission has made use of the conflict prevention network to obtain an academic analysis of the situation in Bougainville.

2. The Commission has been in touch with the parties to the conflict several times, most notably in connection with the visit of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP)-Community joint assembly to Bougainville in February 1998 and a mission of senior Commission officials in September 1998. Contacts continue, not least because they are necessary in order to ensure smooth implementation of the various projects.

3. The situation concerning the preparation of the coming elections is unclear. There is at present no definite timetable for the elections. The Commission has not been requested by any actor in Bougainville to participate in the observation of the planned elections. Other donors have indicated that they would be prepared to assist Bougainville with the elections. The Commission is, however, open to consider technical 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/81

electoral assistance, but under two conditions: a) if the parties agree to hold the elections by consensus, and b) if they request electoral assistance and/or observation.

4. The Commission is not at this stage planning to give any additional support to democratic institution building in Bougainville. There are a number of reasons why the Commission is not likely to become a central player in this particular matter. Firstly, the substantial involvement of others in this, including like-minded donors. Secondly, that it is an important challenge to ensure implementation of the peace dividend interventions under the prevailing conditions in Bougainville. The Commission has limited human resources available and must prioritise activities carefully. Thirdly, while it is true that both the Commission and the Community are and are seen as neutral in the Bougainville conflict by all parties, this also goes for a number of countries in the region. It is consequently the Commission’s conclusion that at this stage the Community is not likely to have any significant comparative advantage as facilitator in the conflict, compared to regional actors already involved, and who have the important asset of close cultural affinity. Finally, it is acknowledged that Papua New Guinea is a parliamentary democracy, which already has a long democratic tradition of its own.

The Commission is, however, considering whether it would be useful to launch an identification mission to establish if additional targeted assistance is called for in particular to facilitate the continuation of traditional reconciliation ) in coordination with some Member States ) which is considered important for shoring up the peace process.

5. The Commission’s interventions for Bougainville amount at present to some € 8,5 million. This includes emergency aid; rehabilitation of agriculture, in particular cocoa, as well as rehabilitation of road infrastructure of importance to the agriculture; developing eco-forestry as there is a need for timber for the reconstruction; upgrading of a high school and finally rural water supply. In addition some Member States have contributed in particular emergency aid.

The United Kingdom has made a bilateral contribution to Bougainville, and Finland has supported women groups, which have played an important facilitating role in the peace process.

Further assistance for Bougainville is under consideration.

(1999/C 348/100) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0486/99

by Wilfried Telkämper (V)to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Recurrent reports of dangerous incidents at the nuclear power station in Fessenheim in the Alsace (Upper Rhine, France)

After the shut-down of the two reactors at the nuclear power station in Fessenheim in the Alsace in August 1998 and on 11 December 1998, various organisations and media sources have once again reported two serious developments:

1. The amount of borated water found in the security systems of reactors one and two did not comply with the relevant regulations. This water is used to prevent a nuclear reaction in the event of an accident.

2. Radioactive tritium had leaked into the ground water. Tritium levels of 60 Bq per litre of water were registered.

What is the Commission’s opinion of the nature, extent and consequences of the most recent incidents at the Fessenheim nuclear power station, particularly the pollution of ground water by radioactive tritium? Does the Commission now consider that it is necessary to set up a committee of independent experts? Does the Commission consider that it is necessary to take measures to protect the environment and public health? C 348/82 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Operational aspects concerning the amount of borated water available at Fessenheim nuclear power plant are outside the scope of the responsibilities of the Commission. The overall Community competence in the nuclear safety field is laid down in the Euratom Treaty and covers mainly radiological protection. The French safety authorities are responsible for the licensing of nuclear power installations and the respect of safety practices in France.

The Commission has not yet received official information with regard to leakage of tritium into the environment. The activity concentration of 60 becquerel per litre (Bq/l) is below the indicator parameter value laid down in Annex I part C of Council Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption (1). The protracted intake of drinking water at this level of tritium activity would cause a radiation exposure of about 0.1 % of the annual limit for members of the public established in Council Directive 96/26/Euratom laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation (2). Hence there is no need for the Commission to take further action.

(1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998. (2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996.

(1999/C 348/101) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0488/99 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Delays in the provision of ERDF aid to Spanish SMEs

This year, Spanish SMEs will receive 19 billion pesetas’ worth of aid, 70 % of which will be financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) whilst the remaining 30 % will come from the national budget. The aid will be allocated to projects involving cooperation with new markets, information, financing, innovation and design.

It is reported that certain projects have been adopted but not implemented on account of the delay in the transfer of 5 625 billion pesetas’ worth of ERDF funds.

In view of this would the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What are the reasons for the delay?

2. Has the transfer now been made?

3. What will happen in the case of projects which have been adopted but not implemented?

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

(21 April 1999)

The delay in the transfer of funds to which the Honourable Member refers is due to the fact that both the structure of the measures in the Community Initiative programme for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Spain and its financing tables were amended at the request of the Spanish administration with the approval of the Monitoring Committee. This was required by the administrative reorganisation carried out in 1996 and 1997, which redistributed responsibilities and changed the bodies managing aid for small firms.

The flow of commitments and payments has now resumed and the take-up of funds by the Spanish administration has increased considerably.

The Commission would point out that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, its only task is to approve the selection criteria which will be used to implement the programmes. Selection of the projects to be financed under them is a matter for the national authorities responsible for implementation and it is to those authorities that the Honourable Member should address requests for information on the projects approved. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/83

(1999/C 348/102) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0489/99

by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Rabbit-breeding sector in Aragón (Spain)

The farmers’ trade union ASAJA-Aragón has condemned the critical situation affecting the rabbit-breeding sector in Aragón (the region from which the author of this question comes). According to the trade union the sector in question, which has over 600 rabbit-breeding farms in Aragón, has been in economic crisis since the end ofthe 1998 season; commandind prices ofless than 200 pesetas per kilogram forits product, i.e. 70 pesetas less than the production cost. In spite ofthis there has been no fallin retail prices to the public. In ASAJA’s view, this has enabled intermediaries to make illicit profits at producers’ expense. In addition, rabbits are imported on a large scale from third countries such as China and can then be sold on the Community market for ridiculously low prices on account of their low production costs.

In view ofthe serious situation in the rabbit-breeding sector as described above, could the Commission say whether or not it has considered the possibility ofrestricting, as faras possible, such cheap imports ofrabbits from third countries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 1999)

Imports ofrabbit meat into the Community are covered by several Community acts.

Council Regulation (EEC) 827/68 of28 June 1968 on the common organisation ofthe market in certain products listed in Annex II to the Treaty (1) covers rabbit meat. That Regulation establishes the common customs procedure for third countries, prohibits quantitative restrictions and provides for a safeguard clause and application ofthe articles ofthe EC Treaty on competition and freedomofmovement inside Community territory.

The customs duty applicable to rabbit meat is 7,6 % from 1 January to 30 June 1999 and 7 % from 1 July to 31 December 1999.

The health standards for imports of rabbit meat are included in Chapter 11 of Annex I to Council Directive 92/118/EEC of17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community ofproducts not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC (2). Under that Directive, lists ofthird countries and approved establishments have been drawn up, as has the specimen health certificate for imports of rabbit meat.

According to Article 3 ofRegulation (EEC) 827/68, appropriate measures may be applied in trade with third countries in the event ofa situation likely to endanger the objectives set out in Article 39 ofthe EC treaty. Ifthe situation described by the Honourable Member is substantiated, it could possibly be the subject ofa procedure under the safeguard clause. As yet, no Member State has made any move in this direction. Moreover, the foreign trade statistics available to the Commission show that Spain imported a total quantity of one tonne of rabbit meat in 1997 and the same quantity in 1998. Nowhere is China indicated as the origin ofthese imports.

(1) OJ L 151, 30.6.1968. (2) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993. C 348/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/103) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0495/99 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Welfare of animals at slaughter

In reply to my Written Question of 10 July 1998 on this matter (E-2088/98) (1) the Commission stated that it was the intention of the Commission ‘in the near future’ to submit two reports, one to the Council and one to the Standing Veterinary Committee, on a variety of matters which could improve the welfare of animals at slaughter.

In particular the Commission stated that it is ‘the intention of the Commission to include in the proposal a requirement that animals which have been stunned must be bled by incising both carotid arteries or the vessels from which they arise in order to produce a rapid bleed-out and death, and in addition provisions laying down minimum stunning currents for the various species concerned.’

When does the Commission intend to submit the reports and proposals referred to in their earlier answer?

(1) OJ C 13, 13.1.1999, p. 146.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1999)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that since its answer to his written question E-2088/98 the scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare has given an opinion (1) on the use of gases (carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and oxygen) to stun or kill poultry. This opinion will be taken into account in the proposal, which the Commission intends to present shortly.

(1) XXIV/B3/AHAW/RO4/1998 final.

(1999/C 348/104) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0496/99 by Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Posting of workers

In 1994 the European Commission had a study carried out on the application of the provisions of Regulation 1408/71 (1) in the case of posting. The results of this study were presented at a conference in Crete. For the first time, actual figures were presented on the posting of workers and self-employed persons and an insight was gained into how the rules on posting were being applied in the Member States. One of the conclusions of the report was that a marked increase in the number of postings and consequently the free movement of workers and self-employed persons was to be observed.

The importance of posting has further increased from the political point of view. New directives have been adopted by the Council and the European Parliament in which posting plays an important role, such as Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and Directive 98/49/EC on safeguarding the supplementary pension rights of employed and self-employed persons moving within the Community.

1. Does the Commission agree that, in view of the growing importance of posting in Community policy in relation to the free movement of workers and self-employed persons, it is necessary to repeat the above research, paying particular attention to:

@ statistical trends in respect of posting;

@ the impact of recent case law and decisions by the Administrative Commission relating to posting (including Decision 162 and case law relating to the posting of self-employed persons) on the implementation of the rules on posting by the Member States? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/85

2. If so, when does the Commission envisage being able to begin such research?

3. If not, what is the reason?

(1) OJ L149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

The study on posting of workers to which the Honourable Member refers was discussed with the Member States in the Administrative commission on social security for migrant workers (CASSTM) notably within the framework of the preparatory work on Decision No 162 of 31 May 1996 concerning the interpretation of Articles 14(1) and 14b (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 on the legislation applicable to posted workers (1) of the CASSTM. The study was also useful in the preparation of Directive 98/49/EC of 29 June 1998 on safeguarding the supplementary pension rights of employed and self-employed persons moving within the Community (2). This Directive applies in particular to ‘posted workers’ within the meaning of Regulation no 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 (3).

In order to update the information, the Commission will ask the Member States to provide the latest data on the numbers of posted workers within the Community.

As far as the case law of the Court of justice is concerned, there are cases pending before the Court on the posting provisions of Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 and the Commission is waiting to see the outcome of these cases before launching any new evaluation of the jurisprudence in this area.

Under Directive 98/49/EC the Commission will submit before 25 July 2004 a report to the Parliament and Council dealing with the application of this Directive and proposing any amendments that may prove necessary.

(1) OJ L241, 21.9.1996. (2) OJ L209, 25.7.1998. (3) OJ C 6, 10.1.1998.

(1999/C 348/105) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0498/99 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(25 February 1999)

Subject: Infringement of Directive 93/119/EC in France during Eid-el-Kabir

The Commission has made it clear on a number of occasions that outdoor ritual slaughter by untrained individuals is not permitted under Directive 93/119/EC (1). Despite this, each year thousands of sheep are ritually slaughtered out in the open in France during the festival of Eid-el-Kabir.

Would the Commission state:

1. What steps it plans to take to persuade the French authorities to enforce Directive 93/119/EC so that outdoor religious slaughter does not take place at this year’s Eid-el-Kabir?

2. Whether it plans to bring infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty in respect of France’s failure to fulfil its obligations to enforce Directive 93/119/EC?

3. Whether it will instruct its veterinary service to attend and monitor this year’s Eid-el-Kabir festival in France to assess the nature and scale of the problem?

(1) OJ L340, 31.12.1993, p. 21. C 348/86 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 1999)

1. and 2. Following intervention of the Commission, France confirmed that Directive 93/119/EC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing has been fully implemented within its territory. However the French authorities have admitted that in certain urban areas having large Muslim populations there are inadequate slaughterhouse capacities to enable the considerable number of animals required for the celebration of Eid-el-Kébir at the time of the festival to be slaughtered in accordance with all the applicable legal requirements.

A number of local authorities have, for reasons of public order and public health, found it necessary to designate certain sites outside slaughterhouses for the purpose of celebration of the festival.

The Commission, taking into account the extreme sensitivity of the issue, has raised the matter within the standing veterinary committee. Most Member States have underlined that they have implemented the Directive in a way that prohibits slaughter outside the slaughterhouses. The Commission intends, however, to discuss the results in the standing veterinary committee again and then draw its conclusions.

3. The Commission has the evidence concerning celebration of the festival outside the slaughterhouses and France has not denied that in certain urban areas these celebrations take place. In these circumstances, an inspection is not considered essential for the time being.

(1999/C 348/106) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0503/99 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Peaceful resolution of dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia

What action is the Union taking to promote a peaceful resolution of the long running dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea?

(1999/C 348/107) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0634/99 by Roberto Speciale (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea

The current border dispute between the Republic of Ethiopia and the State of Eritrea has already caused the death of many civilians and forced some of the population to flee.

In view of the fact that the escalating violence in the area could have adverse effects on the entire region and grave consequences for the population of the entire Horn of Africa, and that a prolonged war could worsen the already harsh living conditions of the local population, the European institutions and the Eritrean and Ethiopian communities in Italy (particularly in the regions of Liguria and Lombardy) have already expressed their concern over the ongoing hostilities.

Will the Commission say:

1. what political pressure has been put on the governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea and what offers of mediation have been made by the EC and international organisations working in the area to put an end to the conflict as soon as possible?

2. whether the two countries have started diplomatic negotiations in order to find a peaceful solution to the conflict, as advocated by the European Parliament in its resolution on the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea (1)?

(1) OJ C 210, 6.7.1998. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/87

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0503/99 and E-0634/99 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalfofthe Commission

(14 April 1999)

The Union, including the Commission, has expressed to both governments its grave concern about this conflict and the fighting along the border. It has strongly called on both sides to cease all hostilities and stop the fighting. It has used all diplomatic means at its disposal to put the maximum of pressure on both parties. Démarches were organised both in Addis and in Asmara. Moreover the Union Presidency addressed strong letters to both governments and a number of Union declarations were issued. During the visit of President Isaias to Brussels at the end of January 1999, the Commission reiterated the need for a peaceful settlement of the conflict and urged Eritrea to accept the Organisation of African unity (OAU) framework agreement. On 19-20 February 1999, the Commission participated in a Troïka mission and had meetings with the OAU, the Ethiopian Foreign minister and the President of Eritrea. Regular contacts were also established between the Commission delegation and the respective governments and between the Commission and the respective embassies in Brussels.

A number of mediation efforts have been carried out. The most serious mediation effort undertaken up till now is the OAU initiative. The heads of state and government of the OAU presented to both governments on 7-8 November 1998 proposals for a framework agreement, including an end of all hostilities, redeployment of troops as well as a demilitarisation process and a delimitation of the border. Ethiopia had accepted the proposals in November 1998, but Eritrea raised a number of questions and requested modifications. The question of withdrawal of Eritrean forces from the occupied territories remained a stumbling block. Eritrea has received (informally) from the OAU at the beginning of February 1999 the requested clarifications. On 27 February 1999, and after having been dealt a blow by Ethiopian forces on the Batme front, Eritrea also accepted the OAU framework agreement. The Security Council supported also the OAU proposals and a United Nations special envoy, M. Sahnoun, toured the region. As mentioned above, a Troika mission visited the region on 19−20 February 1999.

The Union has expressed its unequivocal support for the OAU efforts aiming at a peaceful resolution of the conflict. It has strongly supported the OAU framework agreement and has advocated its acceptance by both countries as the only basis for a peaceful solution.

(1999/C 348/108) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0504/99 by Ursula Stenzel (PPE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Leonardo

The contract with AGENOR as the technical assistance bureau for the Leonardo programme has not been extended by the Commission.

1. Can the Commission say why it has persistently rejected all accusations and inquiries concerning the administration of Leonardo?

2. Can it explain how it came to the conclusion that there was nothing criminal in the irregularities found in the administration of Leonardo, when the UCLAF has identified considerable damage to the Communities?

3. What does it think of the impression which has arisen that it did not proceed satisfactorily or conscientiously in its appraisal of the TAB for Leonardo (Agenor)?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalfofthe Commission

(7 May 1999)

1. The Technical Assistance Bureau (TAB) for the Leonardo programme has been audited annually by the competent Director-General, leading to the non-reimbursement of expenditure deemed to be ineligible. An audit has also been performed by the Commission’s Financial Control, following which Financial Control C 348/88 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

recommended that the contract with Agenor should not be renewed unless it was amended and unless the TAB was radically overhauled (including replacement of the director). In the meantime, the contract with Agenor was merely extended, with the insertion of more stringent terms, for two successive four-month periods, the last of which expired on 31 January 1999. The audits in question did not call into question the programme as such, but rather the internal operation of the bureau that assisted the Commission.

2. The Financial Control’s audit report, with the replies from the competent Directorate-General, was finalised in December 1998. The Commission did not come to the conclusion mentioned by the Honourable Member. Indeed, on 10 February 1999, it drew the attention of the judicial authorities (Brussels public prosecutor) to four cases with potentially criminal implications (two of these had given rise to a refusal to grant reimbursement by the competent Directorate-General, following its own audits).

3. At the end of each of the two first years, the competent Directorate-General performed an audit, following which any expenditure deemed to be unjustified was not reimbursed to Agenor. Likewise, the third year was audited by Financial Control. Following these a posteriori audits, the Commission had, during the first temporary extension of the contract, tightened up various terms of the contract with Agenor. Finally, it did not renew the contract for a fourth year and would only have renewed the contract expiring on 31 January 1999 if the TAB restructuring operation it had requested Agenor to perform had provided the assurance that the irregularities ascertained would be eliminated.

(1999/C 348/109) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0505/99 by Ursula Stenzel (PPE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Application

Last year the Commission held Open Competition COM/A/3/98 (OJ C 30A) for the appointment of Austrians as principal administrators (A 4/A 5) 6 General Administration, Public Administration and Management.

Can the Commission say how many Austrians had applied for this competition by 14 March 1998 and why the original deadline was extended? Can it confirm that this competition consisted solely of an interview? How many of the original applicants were invited to this interview?

Precisely what criteria 6 length and nature of professional experience, knowledge of languages, etc. 6 did the Commission apply when inviting applicants to attend interviews? How many applicants were short-listed after the interviews, and how many were actually recruited?

Can the Commission confirm that no applicant formally satisfying the requirements was excluded from the interviews? Can it rule out the possibility of any irregularities occurring during this procedure?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 1999)

The Commission published (1) the competition in question with a view to drawing up a reserve list of principal administrators (A5/A4) of Austrian nationality. The competition covered five areas: general administration, public administration and management, law, economics, statistics, financial management and auditing. The Commission is looking for highly qualified graduates with a minimum of 12 years’ experience, capable of integrating themselves into the various areas.

A correction (2) was published which stated that periods of in-service, basic or further training would be considered as professional experience. For that reason, the deadline for the submission of applications was extended from 13March to 27 March 1998.

Competition COM/A/3is based on qualifications and oral tests as specified in Article28(d) of the Staff Regulations. The procedure for the oral test is laid down in Section VII.1 and 2 of the notice of competition. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/89

By the deadline for the submission of applications, 602 candidates had applied, including 225 candidates who met all the conditions of admission as laid down in Section III.B of the notice and were thus admitted to the competition.

Article 30 of the Staff Regulations provides that a selection board is to be appointed for each competition, with sole responsibility for deciding on the content of the tests, assessing the candidate and drawing up the reserve list.

As required by Section IV. B. 1 and 2, only the most highly qualified candidates were admitted to the oral test. The criteria for admission to the oral test were set by the selection board, having regard to the nature and scope of candidates’ professional experience in relation to the competition. The selection board, having completed a comparative evaluation of the 225 candidates admitted to the competition, admitted 82 candidates to the oral test; of these, 72 actually took the test.

Following the interviews, as provided for by Section VIII of the notice of competition, the selection board entered the 44 best candidates on the reserve list. Of these 44 candidates, seven are now being recruited.

The selection board adhered to the conditions set out in the notice of competition in question. The Commission is thus in no doubt that the competition was properly managed.

(1) OJ C 30, 28.1.1998. (2) OJ C 58, 24.2.1998.

(1999/C 348/110) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0509/99 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Telecom markets in Estonia

The Estonian Government and AS Eesti Telefon have concluded an exclusive concession agreement granting the latter full monopoly to supply basic telecommunications services in Estonia until 30 December 2000.

Having regard to the Europe Agreement concluded with Estonia, in particular Articles 63 and 65 and the Joint Declaration of the Parties:

1. Has Estonia been under an obligation to ensure free competition on its telecommunications market since 1 January 1998, and does the Commission commend Estonia’s performance in this respect?

2. Since 1 January 1998, has Estonia been under an obligation not to enter into or keep in force any agreements whose purpose and effect is to restrict competition on the telecommunications market, and how does the Commission rate Estonia’s performance in this respect?

3. Is Estonia under an obligation to ensure independent functioning of the regulatory body supervising AS Eesti Telefon, and does the Commission commend Estonia’s performance in this respect?

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

(13 April 1999)

Article 65 of the Europe agreement (EA) establishing an association between the Communities and Member States of the one part, and the Republic of Estonia of the other part, provides for the association council to ensure that the principles of Article 90 of the EC Treaty in relation to public undertakings and undertakings to which special or exclusive rights have been granted are upheld as from 1 January 1998.

By virtue of joint declaration 6 annexed to the EA, the concession agreement between the Estonian government and the Estonian telephony company is compatible with the provisions of the EA (Article 65) on condition that leased lines are made available on request, within reasonable time periods, for corporate C 348/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

networks and closed user groups for their use, comprising voice telephony and data services as from 1 January 1998, and that the regulatory functions are entrusted to an independent body as from 1 January 1998.

The Estonian government has recently adopted the draft telecommunication law, which will introduce the regulatory framework in the sector and in particular will establish an independent regulatory body. Even though it appeared later than planned, this draft appears to be in compliance with Community legislation in this area. The Commission expects a prompt adoption of the law once the recently elected Estonian Parliament starts its activities.

There is no reason to believe that Estonia does not fulfil its obligations under Article 63 of the EA. It does not seem likely that the creation of a new regulatory body could be hastened by making use of Article 65 of the EA. Nevertheless, in the context of the negotiations towards Estonia’s membership of the Community and the pre- accession strategy, the Commission will closely monitor progress by Estonia in this area.

(1999/C 348/111) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0510/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Consumer protection with a view to the liberalisation of the electricity sector

On various occasions during debates and in response to parliamentary question on the liberalisation of the electricity sector, the Commissioners responsible for competition and energy policy have announced that the costs of the transition to competition which may be authorised should relate to real investment arising out of former universal service obligations under previous regulatory frameworks which it will probably not be possible to refund in future.

Does the Commission not feel that it is inconsistent with the principle of economic and social cohesion for domestic consumers and SME, who will not benefit from liberalisation in the medium term, to be the ones to have to meet the cost of investments made in order to comply with public service obligations?

(1999/C 348/112) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0511/99 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Criteria to assess non-profit-making investment in the future of the European electricity sector

What competition policy criteria does the Commission intend to adopt to assess non-profit-making investment effected by the electricity sector arising out of the universal service obligations established within regulatory frameworks prior to the liberalisation introduced by Directive 96/92/EC (1)? Does it intend to consider only the economic evaluations submitted by undertakings and Member States, or will it compare them with independent audits which take the established market value into account? Are its administrative services sufficiently capable of ascertaining whether a part of the investment was financed from State aid at any time?

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997, p. 20.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0510/99 and E-0511/99 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The Commission is examining the notifications given by different Member States of the schemes they intend to apply in order to offset the stranded costs incurred in connection with Parliament and Council Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (1). In the 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/91

decisions which the Commission will be required to take to apply the aforementioned Directive and, where required, Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty, it will give due consideration to all elements which ensure the correct functioningof the electricity market, including,of course, consumer protection.

Given that this is a completely new area, the Commission is currently attemptingto draw up specific assessment criteria for stranded costs in the field of State aid, and these criteria will be discussed with the Member States. For information purposes, it can, however, be stated that the aid should cover clearly determined costs arisingfrom commitments made prior to the entry into force of the Directive; that it may not be granted unless it complies with the principle of necessity; that it may not have the effect of protecting the national market from external competition; and that it should be of a degressive nature over a reasonable period. It would seem premature at this stage to specify whether independent experts need to be called in to analyse these elements. The Commission feels that it does, in theory, have sufficient capacity to carry out a proper appraisal of this dossier.

The Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the Commission to his oral question H-0162/99 duringquestion time at the Parliament’s March 1999 part-session ( 2) and the Commission’s answers to written questions E-204/99 by Mrs Frutos Gama (3) and E-264/99 by Mr Cabezón Alonso (4).

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997. (2) Parliamentary Debates (March 1999). (3) See page 35. (4) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 76.

(1999/C 348/113) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0516/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde (I-EDN)to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Fraud

Does the Commission take the view that there are grounds for dismissing a Commission employee because he has approached a democratically elected member of parliament with information about fraud, and will it ensure that the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Budgetary Control have access to all documents without exception?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 1999)

The Honourable Member’s question appears to refer to the case of Mr Van Buitenen. As the Commission has already stated in its answers to several parliamentary questions (Written Questions E-30/99 by Mr Kaklamanis and E-42/99 by Mrs Piha (1) and E-58/99 by Mr Manisco (2)) the decision to suspend Mr Van Buitenen from his duties was a precautionary measure taken in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 88 of the Staff Regulations, as disciplinary proceedings are under way. The decision is based on failure to comply with the duty of confidentiality and discretion which all public officials must obey.

With regard to access by the Committee of Independent Experts to documents held by the Commission, the Commission can confirm that it has forwarded all the documents the Committee has requested. With regard to information sent to the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Commission would refer the Honourable- Member to the interinstitutional agreement on the transmission of confidential information to the European Parliament under the discharge procedure or for any other purpose in connection with the monitoring of the exercise by the Commission of its powers for implementation of the budget, management and administration, which is submitted to Parliament for its approval.

(1) See page 13. (2) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 41. C 348/92 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/114) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0517/99 by Jens-Peter Bonde (I-EDN)to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Veterinary inspections

Will the Commission allow Member States to introduce veterinary inspections at their borders in order to prevent the spread of swine fever and other diseases?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The free movement of goods, including animals and animal products, is one of the fundamental objectives of the Community. Since the free internal market has been established the frontiers between Member States no longer represent the place where veterinary controls on animals and animal products are carried out.

In accordance with Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990, concerning veterinary and zoo-technical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), the controls necessary to verify if the animals and animal products satisfy the requirements of Community legislation in the veterinary field must be primarily carried out at the place of dispatch, under the responsibility of the Member State of dispatch. However, the Member State of destination may establish non-discriminatory veterinary spot checks at the place of destination. Under certain circumstances veterinary checks can also be carried out during transport or in other places such as markets or assembly centres.

In order to protect the Community from the risk of introducing animal diseases such as classical swine fever, when animals and animal products enter from a third country, veterinary controls must be carried out at the border inspection posts in each Member State, under the responsibility of the Member State itself.

The Commission has no intention to propose any change of Community legislation that may be in contrast with the principles governing the current system of veterinary controls in the Community.

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.

(1999/C 348/115) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0518/99 by Herbert Bösch (PSE)to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Assistance for hydroelectric power stations from the PHARE and TACIS programmes

Rumour has it that no assistance is being provided for the modernization and improvement in the efficiency of hydroelectric power stations or for the promotion of decentralized alternative energies in the CEEC.

Can the Commission say:

1. Is it true that no financial assistance is being provided from the PHARE and TACIS programmes for the modernization and improvement in the efficiency of hydroelectric power stations or for the promotion of decentralized alternative energies in the CEEC?

2. On the basis of what criteria are energy projects assisted under the PHARE and TACIS programmes?

3. For what types of energy (hydroelectric, coal, gas, nuclear) is financial assistance provided?

4. What distribution key is used for the various types of energy? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/93

Answer by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1999)

TACIS

Tacis finances many projects to promote efficient energy use in the New Independent States (NIS) and Mongolia. From 1991 to 1997 an average of 10 % of Tacis funding went to the energy sector, and 20 % to nuclear safety and the environment. The strategic energy plans financed by Tacis in a number of partner countries attach great importance to the reduction of consumption (both in homes and in business and industry) and the development of alternative resources. Tacis also provides support for the restructuring of traditional production sectors. For example, in 1996-1998 it provided € 5 000 000 to restructure the coal sector in Ukraine.

Within Tacis 2 apart from the nuclear sector, which is administered under a special programme 2 energy projects can be divided into two categories: a) energy planning and efficiency (including the restructuring of traditional sectors and the development of alternative sources) financed through national action programmes; and b) further development of energy distribution networks (gas and oil pipelines) financed through the Tacis inter-state programme (Inogate programme).

All types of energy are involved: hydroelectric power stations, coal, gas and nuclear energy. The priorities of the Tacis programme, which has so far been designed to meet demand, have been set by the partner countries under the negotiations of their one- or two-year action programmes. This programming approach means that the share of different types of energy varies from country to country. Coal and nuclear energy predominate in the Ukraine, whereas the demand of specific production sectors in Uzbekistan in 1996-1998 was principally for gas and electricity.

PHARE

Phare supports the development of energy policy, including efficient energy use, through both national and multi-country programmes, including the current 1996 Phare multi-country energy programme. Decisions about the distribution of Phare support in the applicant countries are based on the short- and medium-term priorities set in the accession partnerships. Where these include energy or energy-related priorities, such as restructuring the coal industry in Poland or Rumania or improving nuclear safety in Lithuania and Bulgaria, Phare is in principle ready to provide assistance.

Alternative energy sources

Extensive support for the development of renewable energy has been provided under Phare and Tacis programmes, and has been instrumental in developing a decentralised approach to energy consumption. Various projects in Central and Eastern European Countries and the NIS have facilitated the identification of suitable projects for investment in alternative energy sources. However, such sources can only be developed where the economic situation allows and the energy prices can withstand the pressures of competition. Outside Phare and Tacis, other Community programmes have also considered and promoted alternative energy projects.

(1999/C 348/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0522/99 by Françoise Grossetête (PPE) to the Commission

(8 March 1999)

Subject: Scope of Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, division, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States

Could the Commission confirm that its supplementary answer to Written Question E-3558/96 (1), from which it appears that ‘Apart from the internal market and the environment, there are no problems of any note in other areas of Community law’, implies that Directive 90/434/EEC (2) referred to above (the ‘Mergers Directive’) does in fact apply to Gibraltar? C 348/94 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

When the United Kingdom joined the European Community in 1973, it was specified that the Treaty would also apply to Gibraltar with the three exceptions of the Customs Union, VAT and the Common Agricultural Policy.

However, Gibraltar has its own legislation in internal policy areas, such as company law and taxation.

Although Gibraltar is a British colony, Article 3 of the Mergers Directive 90/434/EEC (3) nonetheless states that the term ‘company from a Member State’ means ‘any company which ... takes one of the forms listed in the Annex, ... moreover, is subject to one of the following taxes, without the possibility of an option or of being exempt: ... corporation tax in the United Kingdom’.

It has been conceded that holding companies established in Gibraltar may benefit from Directive 90/435 of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States.

Can the Commission confirm that Directive 90/434/EEC applies to the holding companies known as ‘qualifying companies’ subject to company tax in Gibraltar?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 3. (2) OJ L 225, 20.8.1990, p. 1. (3) OJ L 225, 20.8.1990, p. 6.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

Article 227(4) of the EC Treaty provides that the Treaty applies to Gibraltar except as specified in Article 28 of the 1972 Act of Accession @ direct taxation is not among the listed exceptions.

434343/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, division, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States therefore applies to Gibraltar in full.

(1999/C 348/117) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0536/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union

At its June 1998 part-session the European Parliament debated and adopted the own-initiative report on the fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union (A4-0137/98) (1), in the conclusions to which, inter alia, it considered that ‘there is a need to set up within the EU Anti-Fraud Unit (UCLAF) a department specialising in fisheries, capable of stepping in to investigate the correct application of the rules on product origin and Community legislation on the marketing and transport of fish products’.

Can the Commission say what measures have been taken to comply with Parliament’s request?

(1) OJ C 210, 6.7.1993, p. 295.

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

The Commission has, within its Task force for the coordination of the fight against fraud, a specific unit dealing with own resources. This unit is responsible for launching investigations, including investigations into fisheries fraud, on the basis of Community legislation such as Council Regulation (EC) 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/95

between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters (1). One of the principal tasks of the specialised investigators within this unit is therefore to ensure the correct application of the rules of origin.

The Commission adopted on 17 March 1999 (2) a package of proposals to strengthen its antifraud service (Commission Decision establishing a fraud office, proposal for amended Council regulation concerning investigations conducted by the fraud office and draft inter-institutional agreement).

These proposals will give an opportunity to the Commission to reinforce its antifraud activities, including the control of the correct application of the rules of origin.

(1) OJ L 82, 22.3.1997. (2) COM(99) 140 final.

(1999/C 348/118) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0542/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union

At its June 1998 part-session the European Parliament debated and adopted the own-initiative report on the fish product canning industry and aquaculture in the European Union (A4-0137/98) (1), in the conclusions to which, inter alia, it declared ‘the tuna canning industry is the most important Community canning sector in terms of employment and the volume of trade, and that to encourage the huge growth prospects in this sector there is a need (...) to carry out rigourous checks on the origin of products and the quality and technical and health conditions of imported products so as to prevent consumer fraud and unfair competition for the Community industry’.

Can the Commission say what measures have been adopted to comply with Parliament’s request and thereby encourage the growth prospects in the Community tuna canning industry?

(1) OJ C 210, 6.7.1993, p. 295.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1999)

The Commission can reassure the Honourable Member that the Community legislation is in place to carry out rigorous checks on imported fishery products.

Under Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products (1) provisions applied to imports of fishery products from third countries shall be at least equivalent to those governing the production and placing on the market of Community products (Article 10).

Imports of fishery products are only allowed from third countries fufilling the conditions of Directive 91/493/ EEC and Commission Decision 97/296/EC of 22 April 1997 drawing up the list of third countries from which the import of fishery products is authorized for human consumption (2) as last amended by Decision 99/136/ EC (3).

Finally there is Council Directive 90/675/EEC of 10 December 1990 laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (4) which is replaced from 30 June 1999 by Council Directive 97/78/EC of 18 December 1997 (5).

(1) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991. (2) OJ L 122, 14.5.1997. (3) OJ L 44, 18.2.1999. (4) OJ L 373, 31.12.1990. (5) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998. C 348/96 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/119) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0545/99 by Christian Rovsing (PPE)to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Tendering by the state-owned Danish bus company COMBUS A/S

Considering that the state-owned Danish bus company COMBUS A/S has forced a large number of private tenderers to close down, does the Commission consider it in keeping with EU competition rules, including the ban on predatory pricing, and EU rules on state aid that COMBUS A/S has increased its share of the Danish market for contract bus services from 22-25 % to 35-40 % by offering cut prices financed by state aid earmarked to cover pension contributions and wages for officials, by funding of the deficit mentioned in the remarks on Bill 1998-99 L 127 corresponding to loss of one third of the company’s net capital, and by further state aid laid down by law in December 1998? If not, will the Commission initiate an inquiry?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Allegations of state funding by undertakings may entail an examination under the Community regime governing the payments of state aid by administrations. However, the Commission is only obliged to start formal procedures under Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty if it has doubts about the existence and compatibility of state aid. In particular the application of Article 92 para 1 requires that the aid distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings and affects trade between Member States.

With regard to land transport, full market access is not provided for directly by the EC Treaty, but must according to Article 75 be achieved through Community legislation. In the case of regular bus services, competition on Community level is only open for international services and a restricted number of national services (services for workers, pupils and students 9 until 11 June 1999 only in frontier zones) (Council Regulation (EEC) 24/54/2 of 23 July 1992 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road passenger transport services within a Member State was declared void by the Court of justice for formal reasons on 1 June 1994 (case C-3882, European Parliament v. Council [1994] ECR I-2081), but its legal effects were upheld until such time as the Council adopted new legislation on the matter. Council Regulation No 12/98 of 11 December 1997, replacing Regulation No 2454/92, is to be applied as from 11 June 1999 (1)).

In the event of alleged state aid to regular bus services in geographically restricted areas on the territory of a Member State, therefore, the effect on trade between Member States must be established and verified in each individual case. Whenever the effect on trade between Member States cannot be proven, state aid rules are not violated.

(1) OJ L 251, 29.8.1992.

(1999/C 348/120) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0548/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL)to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Transfer to Italy of cultivation of the ‘Katerini’ tobacco variety

The Commission has tabled a proposal concerning the transfer to Italy of cultivation of the ‘Katerini’ tobacco variety. However, it is a known and scientifically documented fact that this variety is peculiar to the Pieria region, given its particular soil quality and climatic conditions, and unsuited to cultivation in any other areas since this would result in a lower quality product and an immediate fall in prices.

Will the Commission consider withdrawing its proposal concerning the cultivation of the ‘Katerini’ tobacco variety in Italy also? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/97

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

In the report submitted to Parliament and the Council on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco (1), the Commission stressed the need to ensure that higher incentives were available to the quota for the best varieties than to the quota for those varieties which are difficult to market and command very low prices. The third paragraph of point B4 of that document (page 41 of the Greek version, 36 of the English version), proposes that the volume of the quota for group V (sun-cured) tobaccos should be reduced, and the corresponding quantities transferred to other groups, such as groups VI and VII, in compliance with the principle of budgetary neutrality.

The Commission’s proposal to the Council for a Regulation (2) amending Council Regulation (EEC) 2075/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco (3) and fixing the premiums and guarantee thresholds for leaf tobacco by variety group and Member State for the 1999, 2000 and 2001 harvests follows the lines of the reform by transferring quotas from group V to group VII in Italy.

Moreover, this transfer concerns only a small quantity of 1500 tonnes and will therefore have a minimal impact on the tobacco sector at Community level and in Greece in particular.

In view of the above, the Commission considers that its proposal is completely justifiable.

(1) COM(96) 554 final. (2) OJ C 361, 24.11.1998. (3) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.

(1999/C 348/121) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0549/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Measures to replace the cultivation of ‘Tsempelia’ and ‘Mavra’ tobacco varieties in Greece

The Commission has proposed measures to replace the cultivation of the ‘Tsempelia’ and ‘Mavra’ tobacco varieties, which are grown in some of the poorest and most infertile areas of Greece, where no alternative forms of cultivation are possible. If the proposal is adopted, tobacco growers in these areas will be forced to cease their activities since the soil quality, together with climatological and other conditions make it impossible to cultivate other varieties. The Commission’s assertion that the ‘Tsempelia’ and ‘Mavra’ varieties are not marketable does not hold water since almost the entire crop is sold to eastern European countries.

Will the Commission withdraw its proposal to end the cultivation of the ‘Tsempelia’ and ‘Mavra’ tobacco varieties in Greece, given that such a move would cause severe hardship to tobacco producers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

The Commission’s proposal for transfers from certain groups of varieties which are hard to market to other varieties which are easier to market, and for which producers will get higher prices, was based on information available at that time, which also appeared in the report (1) submitted to Parliament and the Council.

Moreover, as the Honourable Member indicates, a large quantity of group V tobacco is exported to Eastern European countries. However, although the production of these varieties is again on the increase, there are no sure outlets in the long term.

After consultating the Greek authorities, the Commission has agreed to propose a moderate transfer of Mavra and Tsebelia until 2001 (i.e. to keep 11 000 tonnes of production) and to review the situation after that date.

(1) COM(96) 554 final. C 348/98 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/122) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0551/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Improved library facilities in the European Union

In the resolution contained in an own-initiative report (A4-248/98), the Commission is urged to support the creation of libraries in the European Union under the fifth framework programme of research.

Has the Commission taken steps to create new libraries?

If it has when can those concerned table proposals for the creation or improvement of libraries and to whom should such proposals be addressed?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

The Commission is positively pursuing the need for further action in response to the own initiative report A4-248/98 on the role of libraries in the modern world. It is therefore currently preparing a communication addressing a number of specific issues facing libraries and raised in the report, such as lifelong learning, copyright, services in support of literacy, and wider collaboration between libraries on access to knowledge resources and services.

In addition the Information society technologies (IST) programme in general , and key action 3 ‘multimedia content and tools’ in particular , offers a large scope for libraries to participate in cooperative research under the fifth framework programme. Two calls for proposals are already scheduled in 1999 for the IST programme and will be advertised in the Official journal.

(1999/C 348/123) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0555/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: India and the environment

Who will take part in the forthcoming high level meeting between the EUand India on environmental issues?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1999)

There are currently no plans to hold a Community-India high level meeting on the environment. Environ- mental issues are, however, discussed regularly in the framework of Community-India cooperation, as was the case recently in the meetings of the sub-commission on development and of the joint commission that took place on 13 and 14 January 1999, respectively.

As a follow-up to the joint commission meeting, bilateral discussions are under way on the establishment of a number of working groups of experts, including a working group on the environment.

Environment has been designated as one of the three main areas of the cooperation programme with India, in addition to primary education and basic health. This is in line with the Commission’s communication on an ‘EUIndia Enhanced Partnership ( 1)’.

Furthermore, the Commission has in recent months made proposals to the Indian side to deepen the bilateral dialogue and cooperation on the environment, also as part of the Commission’s endeavour to promote exchanges on soft security issues. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/99

The Commission specifically raised the environment at the last Community India annual ministerial (Troika) meeting at New Delhi on 13 November 1998, proposing to organise jointly a Community-India conference on the environment as a first step towards a ‘new partnership on the environment’.

(1) COM(96) 275 final.

(1999/C 348/124) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0564/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Telecom’s monopoly over district telephone calls

There appears to be absolutely no justification for the high cost of telephone calls in Italy within a given district if the destination is more than 30 km away. Making a telephone call from the ‘hinterland’ to a town or city can cost up to 8 times as much as a normal urban telephone call, whereas this would cost twice as much at the very most in Germany, slightly over twice as much in Spain and just under four times as much in France.

A call to Rome from Velletri (which is in the Rome province and the same telephone district) costs LIT 535 per minute, in other words, the same as a call to New York.

Given that Telecom still has a monopoly over calls within a given district, can the Commission state:

1. whether there is any Community legislation governing such matters;

2. whether Telecom’s continuing monopoly over calls of this type, despite the fact that calls between districts have been liberalized, is unlawful;

3. how it views this matter overall?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

The abolition of exclusive and special rights on 1 January 1998 did not, in most MemberStates, alter the de facto monopoly which incumbent operators enjoyed over the provision of local services. The establishment of local loop infrastructures by new entrants calls for considerable investment and will take many years. In MemberStates where cable networks exist, these may be used to provide local voice telephony services in competition with the existing operator. In countries such as Italy, such competition is possible only if the existing operator is obliged to give its competitors access to its local loop, thus enabling them to offer local calls on that network. Italian law provides that such access must be given, but the conditions have yet to be laid down.

The Community directives on the subject require Member States to allow incumbent operators to rebalance their charges and to ensure that the charges of major operators are based on underlying costs. For several years now the Commission has pointed out to the Italian authorities that TelecomItalia should be allowed to rebalance its charges. It was only recently, on 22 December 1998, that the new regulatory authority for communications allowed Telecom to adjust some of its charges. The authority’s decision also provided for the introduction of charges for local calls in 1999.

It is not only in Italy that the consumer cannot choose another operator for local calls. Up to now, the Commission has never challenged this restriction of choice, since where the caller and the person receiving the call are both served by the incumbent operator, such a service would not be economically justified. However, if the caller or the person receiving the call is connected to the network of a new entrant, the incumbent operator cannot justify refusing to offer a choice of operator for local calls.

The Commission will continue to monitor closely the progress of competition in the supply of local communications and, where necessary, will propose specific measures when revising the present regulatory framework. C 348/100 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/125) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0565/99

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Paleontological and ichthyological park

A number ofItalian citizens have set up a company to promote various cultural and scientificprojects with the aim ofsetting up a ‘Paleontological and Ichthyological Park’. They also plan to produce biomodels and studies and put them onto the Internet so that they can be accessible to the widest possible public.

The scheme, which is ofa particularly advanced type, would also be backed by the ‘Ingen’ company which would employ workers from the poorer sections of society and thereby provide an opportunity to generate employment and show solidarity.

Can the Commission state whether:

1. there are any programmes which this project would be eligible to join;

2. there are any similar schemes in the other Member States and, ifso, can it name them;

3. there are any studies on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

1. The plan to set up a palaeontological and ichthyological park could come under the Raphael programme on the grounds ofits cultural aspects, provided the subsidiarity principle is observed and at least three MemberStates or countries which have concluded association agreements with the Community participate in the project. However, since the deadline for submitting projects for 1999 has passed, we will have to await the developments following from the adoption of the Culture 2000 programme.

The specific programme ‘Improving Human Research Potential and the Socio-economic Knowledge Base’ includes a new activity the main objective ofwhich will be to raise public awareness ofscientificand technological research, in particular that undertaken under European research programmes, thereby bridging the gap between science in its European dimension and the public. This should help European citizens to understand more fully the beneficial impact of science and technology on their day-to-day lives as well as the limitations and possible implications ofresearch and technological developments. Participants will include organisations involved in promoting science communication and awareness ofscience, in developing policy and understanding in the area ofpublic awareness ofscience and technology, or in encouraging the dissemination and the impartial, balanced use ofscience-related information.The term ‘science communication’ covers in particular the media, producers ofeducational material, museums ofscience and technology, and providers ofscience-related electronic informationservices. The establishment ofa palaeontological and ichthyological park could be eligible under the measures to raise public awareness. The first call for proposals was launched on 16 March 1999. The deadline for submitting proposals is 2 June 1999. A second call for proposals will be issued next year.

2. The Commission does not have the information requested.

3. In the past one project concerning palaeontology was submitted and received financing. It was the Mopem project (97/M/TV/20) coordinated by Bologna University, with the officially backed participation of France and Portugal. It received a Community contribution of€ 250 000 under the Raphael programme. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/101

(1999/C 348/126) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0566/99

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Recognition of alternative medicine

There are various organizations in Italy, such as the Accademia ‘Homo Sapiens’, the MC4 Association, etc., which carry out research into and promote ‘alternative’ medical and scientific disciplines such as phytotherapy, homeopathy, yoga, acupuncture, naturopathy, kinesiology and bioenergetics.

Although they are frequently viewed as a valid alternative to ‘official’ medicine, these disciplines do not appear to be recognized and/or regulated in any way.

Can the Commission state:

1. whether there are any studies and documentation on this subject at EU level;

2. whether there are any laws or regulations governing this sector in the other Member States;

3. how it views this matter overall?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 1999)

1. The Commission is not aware of Community-wide studies on the subject of ‘complementary’ or ‘alternative’ or ‘parallel’ ‘medicines’, whether by such terms products or services are implied. Several national studies on these matters do, however, exist, which contain information on the situation concerning selected practices and products in a number of Member States, such as the King fund report and the University of Exeter report to the Department of health presented in 1997 and the report in 1998 by the Académie nationale de médecine on behalf of the Federation of the academies of medicine of the European Union.

2. All Member States have provisions covering aspects of these practices and products whether in the context of medical education, training and profession, or in the context of products or services.

Community legislation (1) provides for a general system of recognition of diplomas which also applies to these practices (see answer to written question no 1743/98 by Mrs Kestelijn-Sierens (2)). In the area of medicinal products, Community provisions exist for homeopathic medicinal products (3). Moreover, the Treaty provisions on the free circulation of products and services also apply to these products and services.

3. The practices and products covered under these terms are counted in thousands and have different meanings in the Member States. They are also the object of rapid change both in terms of understanding of underlying processes and in terms of regulatory development covering educational, training, and professional aspects. The Commission is following this evolution with a view to action, if necessary, at Community level. It has also requested the relevant scientific committee to review the situation and provide advice as to risks and health protection measures that might be deemed necessary at Community level.

(1) Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC . (2) OJ C 386, 17.12.1998. (3) Directives 92/73/EEC and 92/74/EEC. C 348/102 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/127) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0567/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Update on the central dairy in Rome

Various questions have been asked about the conformity of the procedure for the privatization of the central dairy in Rome. Having regard to the answer given by Commissioner Fischler to Written Question E-3408/ 97 (1), in which he referred to a complaint about the grant of public funds for the restructuring of the central dairy, can the Commission say what has happened since then in relation to the complaint and what steps it intends to take?

(1) OJ C 158, 25.5.1998, p. 103.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

Following the initiation of the procedure provided for in Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty with regard to the grant of public funds by the municipality of Rome for the operation and privatisation of the Centrale del Latte di Roma, the Commission hopes soon to be in a position to adopt a final decision on the matter.

(1999/C 348/128) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0574/99 by Carlos Bru Purón (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Alteration of the course of the River Jarama

On Wednesday, 17 February 1999 the Spanish development minister, Mr Rafael Arias-Salgado, announced plans to alter the current course of the River Jarama to make way for the expansion of Barajas airport.

Is the Commission aware of the risk involved in such activities, which have wreaked havoc in the past?

Does it know whether a report of any kind on the environmental impact of this project has been drawn up?

Is it true that this project would constitute an infringement of at least three European directives?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

The Commission had been unaware of the situation described by the Honourable Member.

However, as part of its examination of the complaints concerning the extension of Barajas airport, the Commission has contacted the Spanish authorities in order to obtain details of the situation described in your question.

Owing to the lack of more precise information on the intended relocation of the river Jarama’s course, the Commission is currently unable to confirm whether the project in question could be in breach of any Community Directive. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/103

(1999/C 348/129) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0576/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: European recognition for the profession of family adviser

Several European Union Member States already recognise the profession of family adviser, a practitioner who uses psychotherapeutic techniques in the provision of help to individuals, couples and family groups.

Does the Commission believe that procedures should be set in motion for the Europe-wide recognition of a profession that is bound to play an increasingly important social role in the future?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Under the approach followed by Directives 89/48/EEC (1) and 92/51/EEC (2) on a general system for the recognition of diplomas and other professional qualifications, each Member State remains free to regulate (or not to regulate) a given profession, or to decide on the level and content of the training required for the exercise of that profession. These directives are intended only to establish the legal framework for the free movement of the regulated professions within the European Economic Area, and they would of course apply to the profession of family adviser or psychotherapist if that profession were regulated in the host Member State.

Since the adoption of the above directives, the Commission has adopted an extremely restrictive approach as regards the possibility of new regulations specific to a profession. In this context, the Commission would refer the honourable Member to its reply to Written Questions E-4094/93 Mr Chiabrando and Pisoni (3) and E-2133/98 by Mr Paasilinna (4).

The Commission would therefore inform the honourable Member that it does not intend to present a proposal for a regulation specifically for the profession of family adviser or psychotherapist.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989. (2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992. (3) OJ C 332, 28.11.1994. (4) OJ C 118, 9.4.1999.

(1999/C 348/130) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0582/99 by Mark Killilea (UPE) to the Commission

(3 March 1999)

Subject: State aid to commercial property

Can the Commission provide full details of operating aid to commercial property that has been approved for State aid purposes in all of the Member States? In particular, can the Commission categorise and quantify the volume of aid as it relates to capital allowances or accelerated depreciation arrangements, rent subsidies or other similar arrangements and waivers from local or regional authority charges?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

A detailed breakdown of state aid grants as requested by the Honourable Member is not readily available. The Commission’s surveys on state aid only distinguish according to the following types of aid: grants, tax exemptions, tax deferrals, equity participation, guarantees and soft loans. Tax exemptions and deferrals together amounted to 24 % of the state aid to the manufacturing sector in the period of the last survey (1994-1996). C 348/104 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The research required to retrieve all the requested information from the notifications and annual reports of Member States and to provide a detailed answer to the Honourable Member’s question would be out of all proportion to the result obtained and would be inappropriate in the context of answering a written question.

(1999/C 348/131) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0586/99

by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Fourth report on the present situation and prospects for radioactive waste management in the European Union (COM(98) 799 final)

In the Commission Communication and Fourth Report on the present situation and prospects for radioactive waste management in the European Union (COM(98) 799 final, dated 11 January 1999), the Commission refers to numerous previous Council resolutions dating back to 1989 on which the strategy has been based, for instance in section 1.8. Why has the Commission made no reference at all to Parliament’s report on the transport and storage of radioactive waste drawn up by Mr Llewellyn Smith, A3-0220/93 (1), adopted with amendments by Parliament on 16 July 1993? In particular, why has the Commission not responded to recommendation 19 of the report calling upon the Commission to establish a complete database of all categories of radioactive waste by location in the Community?

(1) OJ C 255, 20.9.1993, p. 255.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

The main reference in the fourth report concerns the Council Resolution of 15 June 1992 that approved the plan of action in the field of radioactive waste management (1). The first point of this plan ; the requirement to provide the Council with an analysis of the situation and prospects in the field of radioactive waste management in Member States ; is the basis for the fourth report. This analysis specifically requests information on a number of topics, including ‘the administrative, regulatory and legal structures and frameworks’ relating to radioactive waste management in the Community. The other references to directives, resolutions and communications in the section (Section 1.8) to which the Honourable Member refers respond specifically to that request for information.

Recommendation No 17 in the Parliament Resolution on the environmental and public health aspects of the storage, transport and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuels (2) called on the Commission to establish a complete database of all categories of radioactive waste by location in the Community. This goes well beyond the requirements of the plan of action which only require the Commission to compile a list of storage installations ‘having regard to the nature of the product to be stored’. It could be added that to produce the type of database suggested in the Parliament’s report would be, to say the least, impractical. A complete database for one Member State, for example the database for the United Kingdom produced by NIREX (DOE/RAS/96.001), contains 444 pages, excluding several hundreds of pages of annexes. The report established for France by ANDRA contains a similar number of pages. Republishing such information, that is already publicly available, could be regarded as an improper use of scarce resources. Furthermore, the Commission believes that the condensed summary of the data contained in its fourth report would be appreciated by a much wider audience.

On a more positive note, the Commission may shortly adopt a Recommendation on a Community classification scheme for radioactive waste that should, in future, help to improve the collection and communication of information on all forms of radioactive waste.

(1) OJ C 158, 25.6.1992. (2) OJ C 255, 20.9.1993. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/105

(1999/C 348/132) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0588/99 by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Revisions to the Commission proposals in COM(92) 56 final

What revisions have been made to the Commission proposals (COM(92) 56 final) (1) on the security measures applicable to classifiedinformation producedor transmittedin connection with EEC or Euratom activities, of 24 February 1992, in respect of the classification as confidential of information transmitted on Sellafield by the UnitedKingdomauthorities to Euratom or the Commission?

(1) OJ C 72, 21.3.1992, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Honourable Member is invitedto note that the proposal she cites has been withdrawnby the Commission.

(1999/C 348/133) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0613/99 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: The Tibetan Antelope 3 extinction andfur trade

The Tibetan Antelope has been included on the list of species for which trade is strictly forbidden under CITES since 1979, as it is under threat of extinction.

Despite this ban, the animal’s fur, known as Shahtoosh, became very popular in the 1980s andis, accordingto Friends of Nature, available for sale in a number of markets throughout the European Union, including London.

Given this situation, andthe fact that the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has pledgedtoraise this issue with the relevant UK andEuropean Union authorities, what action has the Commission taken to put an endto this trade, being a clear breach of the CITES ban?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

The Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (CITES), is strictly implementedin the Community with Council Regulation (EC) 338/97 ( 1) andCommission Regulation (EC) 939/97 (2).

Shawls containing the hair of the Tibetan antelope have indeed been on sale within Europe despite a total ban on imports and sale under the regulations concerned. The Commission is not aware of this being a recent problem but will raise the matter again in the committee on wildfauna andflora establishedwith the above Council Regulation andwill urge Member States to take the necessary measures to avoidthis kindof trade taking place.

(1) OJ 61 of 3.3.1997. (2) OJ 140 of 30.5.1997. C 348/106 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/134) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0614/99 by Patricia McKenna (V)to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: European funding of Irish railways

The European Commission has channelled millions of pounds over the past years into the Irish railway company, Iarnrod Eireann, through the Cohesion and European Regional Development funds.

Despite this, a recent report for the Irish Government by International Risk Management Services explicitly criticised the lack of a safety culture in Iarnrod Eireann as a serious threat to passengers and staff.

Given this situation, and the fact that the safety principle is enshrined in the Community’s transport policy, what is the Commission’s reason for not having investigated the ways in which the Irish Government has been spending European money on its railway network, to ensure that funds have not been misdirected into projects which do notaddress safetyconcerns?

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

(26 April 1999)

The mainline rail development programme outlined in the Irish operational programme (OP) for transport (1994-1999) recognises that much of the track and signalling infrastructure on the network is obsolete and that the majority of the locomotive fleet is life-expired. Community assistance for rail projects in Ireland has therefore been targeted specifically on addressing safety concerns.

Focusing on the key corridors radiating from Dublin, provision has been made under the Cohesion fund for track renewal and signalling, and under the European regional development fund (ERDF) assistance has been provided towards new rolling stock. Furthermore, following decommitment of € 150 million from the LUAS light rail project, € 85 million was specifically reallocated towards improvements in the rail network. This included actions such as mainline rail track renewal, improvements in Dublin suburban rail and DART services, as well as platform lengthening to accommodate longer trains, all of which will help ease overcrowding and improve the safety standard of the Irish railways.

The Honourable Member may be assured that the Commission is actively involved in monitoring how European funds are spent in Ireland. The Community support framework (CSF) monitoring committee monitors structural fund spending at OP and sub-programme level, and through the transport OP monitoring committee progress is monitored at measure level. Likewise, implementation of Cohesion fund projects is monitored through the Cohesion fund monitoring committee. Through the ongoing monitoring of the above committees, all of which meet on a bi-annual basis, it has been ensured that Community resources have been directed towards the intended projects, which have contributed to improved safety on the Irish rail network.

While there is undoubtedly much work remaining, it should be noted that following the International risk management services report, the Irish authorities have recently announced their intention to commit significant resources over the next five year period towards improving rail safety standards. Furthermore, the Commission expects that further resources will be allocated towards tackling this issue during the next programming period.

(1999/C 348/135) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0618/99 by Peter Crampton (PSE)to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Fishing agreementwithIceland

With regard to the 1 000 tons UK quota of red fish and the fact that no factory trawlers are allowed, are UK ships able to head and gut fish they catch? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/107

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

Under the Community-Iceland fisheries agreement, the United Kingdom enjoys a quota of 1 160 tons of redfish (out of a total Community quota of 3 000 tons).The agreement provides for ‘the issuing of a limited number of fishing permits to trawlers, other than factory trawlers’, thereby in effect prohibiting Community fishing vessels from heading and gutting the catch at sea or engaging in other processing activities in Icelandic waters.This processing prohibition and the underlying insistence on catches of fresh fish was one of Iceland’s essential requirements at the time of the conclusion of the fisheries agreement in 1993.Since 1997 factory vessels which have either removed or sealed all equipment necessary for the operation as a factory vessel may also be granted a fishing permit.This has not, however, removed the general processing prohibition which also covers heading and gutting.

(1999/C 348/136) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0622/99 by María Izquierdo Rojo (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Disrespect and ill-treatment suffered by Moroccan musicians applying for visas

The members of one of the most famous music groups in Morocco, The Master Musicians of Jajouka, based in the Rif, told an audience of more than 2 000 people at the Granada Congress Centre of the ‘ill-treatment and humiliation’ they had suffered in applying for an EU visa.

In justifying this unwarranted disrespect and ill-treatment, Spanish consular officials in Tetouan have alleged that visa formalities must be followed because Spain forms part of the Schengen area.

This is just one of many instances, some of them borne out by my own personal experience, which prove that such humiliating treatment is too frequent an occurrence to warrant describing the above case as isolated.It was these considerations which prompted a previous question a year and a half ago, condemning this situation and warning that ‘Moroccan citizens 8 professional people, teachers, doctors, distinguished writers, artists, etc.8 are often subject to contemptuous and humiliating treatment when they apply for visas for temporary visits to the European Union’ [Question No 2 (H-0686/97)] (1).In its reply, however, the Council rejected this charge and stated explicitly that it had ‘no knowledge of the visa-issuing practices referred to by the Honourable Member, which might give rise to numerous protests and merit being described as dysfunction’.

Given the resumption of such incidents, and pending a response to this serious problem, which has been condemned repeatedly, what coordinated measures will the European Union be taking to avoid a future repetition of instances such as the one above?

(1) Debates of the European Parliament, No 4-507, October 1997.

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

At the time of the events mentioned by the honourable Member the requirements concerning the issue of visas were not yet governed by Community law.

Following the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty:

8 firstly, the Schengen acquis which includes provisions harmonising the requirements and procedures for issuing visas is integrated into the framework of the Union; henceforth, the institutions of the Union are required to perform their functions in the light of the this Schengen acquis which is integrated into the framework of the Union;

8 unlike the previous situation whereby only two aspects of visa policy were the responsibility of the Community (see ex Article 100c of the EC Treaty: the list of third countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Community and the uniform format for visas), the entire visa policy, including the requirements and procedures for issuing visas, now comes within the scope of the Community; proposals on this matter will be drawn up in the light of the timetable C 348/108 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

indicated in Article 62 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 73j) and the action plan adopted by the Vienna European Council on how best to implement the provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty on establishing an area of freedom, security and justice.

(1999/C 348/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0624/99 by Gianni Tamino (V) and Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Introduction of rainbow trout into the river Serpis (Community of Valencia, Spain)

The samaruc (Valencia hispanica) is an endangered native species found in various rivers in the Community of Valencia. The Environment Institute (former ICONA), the National Museum of Natural Sciences in Madrid, the Centre for Experimental Aquaculture in Valencia and various Spanish universities and experts have confirmed that this species is present in the river Serpis. The EU has allocated EUR 984 000 from the LIFE programme to assist with its protection.

Nevertheless, on the basis of a 1993 technical report, the environment service of the autonomous government of Valencia, has disregarded the presence of this species in the river Serpis and restocked the river with rainbow trout, which by virtue of their size are a natural predator of the samaruc, in breach of the provisions of Directive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats, which prohibits the introduction of non-native species into a habitat if they might be detrimental to native species.

In the light of these considerations, the Centre for Experimental Aquaculture of Valencia submitted a complaint to the European Ombudsman in July 1998 (789/98/JMA) alleging that the abovementioned directive had been infringed.

Does the Commission not consider that a comparison should be made between the 1993 technical report, denying the presence of samaruc in the river Serpis and the opinions of other scientists?

Does it consider that the inclusion of the river Serpis as one of the special conservation sites provided for in Article 5 of the directive on natural habitats could help achieve the objective of protecting this species?

In the light of the infringements cited by the abovementioned complaint, does the Commission not think that it should investigate the way in which the funds from the LIFE programme are being used for the protection of the samaruc?

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

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1999)

The Commission is aware of the facts raised by the Honourable Members, since a complaint on the same subject was already lodged with the Commission.

The introduction of a non-native species which may have a negative effect on a native species falls under the scope of Council Directive 92/43/EC, of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora and in particular Article 22 b which requires Member States to:

ensure that the deliberate introduction into the wild of any species which is not native to their territory is regulated so as not to prejudice natural habitats within their natural range or the wild native fauna and flora and, if they consider it necessary, prohibit such introduction. The results of the assessment undertaken shall be forwarded to the committee for information.

In the framework of the Commission investigation of this complaint, the Spanish authorities indicated that the presence of the ‘Valencia hispanica’ in the river Serpis had not been confirmed, according to available scientific evidence. A scientific study of the CSIC (Spanish superior council for scientific research) supplied by the Spanish authorities explained that, even assuming that ‘Valencia hispanica’ were present in that river (which has never been confirmed until now), its habitat differs from that of the non-native species and therefore the latter would never represent any threat to the former. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/109

This information was transmitted to the complainant, who did not bring to the attention of the Commission new elements helping to identify a breach of Community law in this case. In the light of the above, the facts raised by the Honourable Members do not disclose a breach of Directive 92/43/EEC.

As no breach of Directive 92/43/EEC has been identified, the Commission does not consider it necessary to open a special investigation about the way in which Community funds have been used. Nevertheless, as any other Life-Nature project, this project is subject to regular technical and financial controls.

(1999/C 348/138) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0625/99 by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: The Commission’s replies to written questions

According to Rule 42 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, the Commission is required to reply to written questions from Members of the European Parliament within six weeks. In practice, however, it often takes nearly 3 months for the Commission to reply.

Why is the Commission often unable to abide by the six-week deadline laid down in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 1999)

The Commission does its best to carry out its duty under Article 140 EC Treaty to reply to parliamentary questions. It devotes considerable resources to giving replies which are as complete and rapid as possible. These replies sometimes require extensive investigation or even enquiries of Member States.

The Commission replies to a large number of the questions inside the six week period set down in Parliament’s internal rules, but is not able to do so in all cases. The average reply time of six weeks and four days in 1998 is capable of improvement. The Commission is attempting to reply within the period identified by the Parliament.

The Honourable Member will appreciate that recourse to the formal method of interrogating the Commission provided by Article 140 EC Treaty implies certain consequences (use of 11 languages, coordination between services, adoption in a way ensuring collegiate responsibility, publication in the official journal) which inevitably take a certain time.

(1999/C 348/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0629/99 by Anne McIntosh(PPE) to theCommission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Working-time Directive

Has the Commission assessed the impact on the transport industry of the proposed extension of the Working- time Directive?

Does the Commission not consider that the cost involved would be prohibitive, and risk putting some road hauliers out of business? C 348/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission assessment of the impact on the transport industry of the proposed extension of the working time Directive is indicated in its proposal (1) under ‘Impact of the proposal on business,with special reference to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’. This assessment concludes that a precise estimate of the costs and benefits of implementing the Directive is not possible. The best indication of the likely order of magnitude of the net impact of the proposal is in the region of a net cost of 0,2 % of the wage bill. Taking into account the benefits of the proposal (better social conditions and increased road safety) it is not considered that the Directive,once adopted,would lead to prohibitive costs or bankruptcy in the road transport sector.

(1) OJ C 43,17.2.1999.

(1999/C 348/140) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0631/99 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Dos Aguas solid waste tip (Valencia,Spain)

Work to set up a municipal solid waste tip in Dos Aguas (Valencia) is continuing in spite of repeated protests from local residents. The tip could pose a serious danger of contamination,since it is to be sited close to a well that supplies drinking-water to a number of towns and villages on the Valencian coast.

Parliament recently endorsed the proposal for a Council Directive laying down a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. The tip project may be in breach of several environmental Directives including,for example,Directive91/156/EEC (on waste) ( 1),Directive 85/337/EEC (on environmental impact assessment) (2),and Directive 80/778/EEC (on the quality of water for human consumption) ( 3). When she addressed the House in the February debate on the landfill of waste,the Member of the Commission responsible for the environment agreed that minimum separation distances needed to be established between tips and population centres. In its answer to Written Question E-1261/98 the Commission stated that it would ask the Spanish authorities for information about the Dos Aguas tip (4).

In the light of the foregoing,can the Commission say whether the Spanish authorities have supplied the details required in order to ascertain whether any of the above Directives are being infringed on account of the tip?

What steps will it take to preserve the surrounding area and avert all danger to public health?

(1) OJ L 78,26.3.1991,p. 32. (2) OJ L 175,5.7.1985,p. 40. (3) OJ L 229,30.8.1980,p. 11. (4) OJ C 402,22.12.1998,p. 103.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

After receiving the Honourable Member’s written question E-1261/98 (1) the Commission decided to launch a fact-finding procedure on its own initiative,which was recorded under reference number B-98/2202. While examining this matter the Commission asked for comments from the Spanish authorities on the situation described in the written question referred to above.

In reply to that request for information the Spanish authorities stated that the project in question had been subjected to the environmental impact assessment procedure required by Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment. Studies certifying the hydrogeological suitability of the area chosen to house the tip were provided as part of that procedure. The project received a positive declaration of environmental impact issued by the environmental authority empowered to do so. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/111

In view of the above, and on the basis of the information available on the situation described by the Honourable Member, the Commission has not identified any infringement of Community environmental law in this instance.

(1) OJ C 402, 6.1.1999.

(1999/C 348/141) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0635/99 by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Presence of uranium in building cement

With reference to the reply to question E-3490/98 (1) on the presence of uranium in building cement.

Will the Commission specify:

1. Whether Italy has adopted Directive 96/29/Euratom (2) of 13 May 1996?

2. If so, what national and European bodies are responsible for monitoring the situation?

3. Whether the above directive provides for the marking of the level of radioactivity on cement containers, to protect both users and workers?

4. If not, whether it considers it fair and necessary to impose such an obligation on European cement factories?

(1) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 6. (2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions to comply with Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation (1) before 13 May 2000. The Commission has not yet been informed that this is the case for Italy.

2. Under Article33 of the Euratom Treaty Member States shall submit to the Commission draft provisions for the implementation of the basic standards. The Commission may issue recommendations with regard to such draft provisions within three months of the date of communication.

3. The Directive does not require cement with high levels of natural radioactivity to be made subject to the requirements for the protection of workers or members of the public. In case of work activities within which the presence of natural radiation sources leads to a significant increase in the exposure of workers or members of the public, Member States may nevertheless identify such work activities to be of concern and require the application of radiation protection measures pursuant to all or part of the Directive.

4. The Commission has no information as to whether Italy or another Member State imposes an obligation on European cement factories to mark the level of radioactivity on cement containers. Whether this would be justified must be examined not only in the light of Directive 96/29/Euratom but also of Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products (2) and Commission Recommendation 90/143/Euratom of 21 February 1990 on the protection of the public against indoor exposure to radon (3) which have been cited in the Commission’s reply to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-3490/98 (4).

(1) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996. (2) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989. (3) OJ L 80, 27.3.1990. (4) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 6. C 348/112 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/142) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0636/99 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission

(16 March 1999)

Subject: Indication of the country of origin on packaging containing fresh vegetables or fruit

Regulation (EC) 2200/96 (1) of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables states that standards are laid down for a number of types of fresh fruit and vegetables. These standards state that each packaging unit must consist of uniform product, which means that the product must come from the same country of origin.

Because of market reasons, auction houses are increasingly forced to cooperate on a regional or cross-border basis; in some instances this results in an international merger. In effect, this means that products from different European countries are brought together at the same auction. However, in accordance with the standards for sorting, packaging and labelling, batches of comparable product must be kept separate. The administrative costs are substantially higher than in cases where batches do not necessarily need to be kept separate.

Under certain circumstances it is already possible for apples originating in different countries to be brought together in a small packaging unit.

Can the Commission give the reasons for the provision that each packaging unit must consist of uniform product, why / under certain circumstances / this provision does not apply to apples and why the standards are relaxed only in respect of small packaging units and not sales in bulk?

Is the Commission prepared to submit a proposal to amend the abovementioned standards, firstly, to permit mixed large and small packaging units for all varieties of vegetables and fruit and, secondly, to prescribe the indication ‘originating in the EU’ or a similar designation if these products all come from the same region or from the EU, and if it is not possible to indicate the Member State(s) of origin of the products?

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

The system of product classification provided for in Council Regulation (EC) 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables has several aims, including the establishment of a frame of reference contributing to fair trade and market transparency and, consequently, improved profitability for the fruit and vegetables sector. The origin of the products is one of the main classification criteria. Production conditions vary greatly depending on the geographical area, and these variations have a profound influence on the fundamental characteristics of the products concerned. Moreover, the origin of the fruit and vegetables constitutes important information for the consumer, and this information often determines the choice of product. This explains why uniformity of geographical origin is a key feature of the marketing standards for fresh fruit and vegetables, alongside uniformity of class, size and variety.

Exemptions exist not only for apples but also for sweet peppers. For these products there is a demand for small packs intended for the final consumer containing different products, such as different varieties in the case of apples and different colours in the case of sweet peppers. For practical reasons, uniformity of origin is not required for such small packs involving different products.

The Commission is sensitive to the fact that the recent development of certain markets and marketing structures in some Member States means that, for certain cross-border regions, the provisions on uniformity contained in the marketing standards can prove awkward. This question is being studied at present by the group of national experts which assists the Commission in connection with the standardisation of fresh fruit and vegetables. The discussions could lead to the possibility of grouping together, both in bulk and in packs intended for the consumer, products of the same geographical origin but originating in different Member States. Wording such as ‘EU origin’, however, does not seem appropriate, because of its lack of precision, which would not make it possible to meet the objectives of standardisation or to ensure that consumers receive correct information.

For the reasons set out above, the Commission does not intend to permit the mixture, in large and small quantities, of all kinds of varieties of fruit and vegetables. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/113

(1999/C 348/143) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0639/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(16 March 1999)

Subject: Detention of Aliakram Gummatov in Azerbaijan

The ‘Help Alikram Gummarov’ committee in the Netherlands is very concerned about Mr Gummarov and at the decreasing likelihood that he will leave prison alive.

Is the Commission prepared to ask the government of Azerbaijan for details of Alikram Gummarov and of the way in which he is being treated in prison, and is the Commission prepared to report back on this?

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

(13 April 1999)

Via regular diplomatic channels, the matter will be raised with the Azerbaijan authorities.

(1999/C 348/144) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0647/99 by Ben Fayot (PSE) to the Commission

(16 March 1999)

Subject: Liaison committee for senior citizens’ organisations

The liaison committee for senior citizens’ organisations, composed of 5 major European organisations, is run by the Commission and seems at present to be in suspended animation.

It is rumoured that the Commission wishes to reorganise this committee, turning it into a full-time senior citizens’ forum, enlarged to cover a whole range of associations.

Can the Commission state whether the forum will be established, and if so, what the criteria will be for its composition? Care must be taken in particular to ensure that its member associations are representative at European level.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

The liaison group for older people is active and is being run in accordance with the procedures set out in Commission Decision 91/544/EEC of 17 October 1991 (1) establishing it. The liaison group meets twice a year and the agenda always covers a wide range of issues relating to the interests of the elderly, including social protection, employment and pensions.

Discussions have been held with the members of the liaison group on ways of strengthening co-operation and co-ordination between pan-European non-governmental organisations (NGOs) working in the field of the elderly in order to raise the profile of this target group at European level, particularly during this United Nations International year of older people.

At the last meeting of the liaison group on 8 March 1999, a majority of members voted in favour of setting up a working group to look into the possibility of creating a European older people’s platform. If this working group wishes to submit a proposal for the establishment of such a structure, aspects such as aims, tasks, rules and internal regulations (including questions concerning the degree of representation of potential platform members) will have to be addressed.

(1) OJ L 296, 26.10.1991. C 348/114 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/145) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0652/99

by Ioannis Theonas (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 March 1999)

Subject: Threats to public health and the ecological balance from waste on Santorini

The inhabitants of the Aegean island of Santorini are facing a huge accumulation of problems over their water supply, sewage system and waste management. The problems are exacerbated by the island’s high population density, especially in the summer months when, with the added number of tourists, there is a steep increase in the volume of effluent and rubbish, creating grave problems affecting both the health and quality of life of the islanders and the balance of the ecosystem (soil and groundwater pollution) and the island’s outstanding beauty and cultural and archaeological heritage. Aparticularly acute problem is posed by rubbish, the disposal of which by the outdated method of incineration, against all safety rules, in residential areas, constitutes a direct threat to public health.

In view of the gravity of the problems and the immediate need for action to deal with them, and the fact that Santorini is included in an EU pilot programme under the Cohesion Fund (with 85 % of its finance from the fund and 15 % from the Greek State), for an integrated waste management and water supply and sewage scheme, will the Commission indicate the stage that has been reached in the implementation of this programme, whether the competent Greek authorities and ministries have approved the planning and siting of the works, and whether it is aware of the identity of the private contractor who will be carrying out the work or the terms of the competition and the criteria for awarding the contract? Is it also true that incineration, which has already roused public opposition because of its grave risk to public health and the balance of the ecosystem, has been preferred as the method of waste disposal?

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

(21 April 1999)

The Commission has on several occasions discussed the pilot project on integrated water-supply management, waste-water treatment and solid-waste disposal for the island of Santorini, both with the national Ministries for Economic Affairs, the Environment and the Aegean and with the local authorities of the island.

However, it has not yet received any official request from the Greek authorities for Cohesion Fund financing for this project. The Commission is therefore unable to answer the various questions put by the Honourable Member.

The Commission wishes to stress that it adopts decisions on part-financing by the Community Funds only if the projects concerned comply with Community legislation, including the rules on the environment.

(1999/C 348/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0685/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: 1999 tariff quotas for tuna loins

Given that it would not make sense to grant new countries the preferential conditions enjoyed by the ACP and GSP-Andean Pact countries, and that opening the market to South-East Asia, i.e. to countries to which this preferential situation does not currently apply, would upset a hard-won equilibrium, does the Commission agree that the suggested opening of a new tariff quota for tuna loins for 1999 would lead to a difficult political situation with unpredictable consequences? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/115

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (3 May 1999)

No, the Commission has observed that the imports from countries qualifying for preferential treatment (the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific ACP States) or under the generalised system of preferences (the GSP Drugs scheme) are insufficient for the needs of the Community’s canning industry.

(1999/C 348/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0693/99 by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Ban on importing grape must from third countries

The Commission proposal on the new COM provides for the possibility of importing grape must from third countries and using it to make wine.

This would amount to a serious threat to winemaking in Sicily and the Mediterranean in general, and would also be in clear contradiction with the policy guidelines of the Commission which, on the one hand, is calling on Italian winegrowers to limit production and, on the other hand, is urging the Community to open up to the production of third countries.

Moreover, such non-Community production entitles users in the Member States to be recognized as ‘producers’ for all purposes and hence to benefit from the same aid as producers who use grapes grown in the Community.

What steps does the Commission intend to take: 1. to ensure that grape must from non-Community countries is not imported into Italy, thereby further penalizing Italian agriculture, whose wine sector can be said to symbolize Mediterranean production? 2. to take to ban the current practice in some countries of enriching grape must by adding sucrose?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1999)

The Council has reached agreement on the proposal for a reform of the common organisation of the market in wine.

This agreement preserves the existing situation where imports of grape must from third countries are concerned and, consequently, prohibits the production of wine from such must.

On the other hand, for a political agreement to be reached on this proposal it was essential to maintain the status quo as regards oenological practices, including the possibility of enriching wines with sucrose in certain regions.

(1999/C 348/148) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0697/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Community aid.

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. C 348/116 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on MonetaryAffairs of 17 February1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What criteria is the Commission following in order to estimate the ‘hidden economy’ of the various European regions?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

As alreadyexplained in the answer given to the Written Question P-1784/97 byMr Pomés Ruiz ( 1), the underground economyis indeed verydifficult to measure and to control. In order to address the issue of the measurement and coverage of ‘underground’ activityin the statistical data, the Member States make many explicit and implicit corrections to their calculations of gross national product (GNP), the precise nature of which varies from one Member State to another.

Eurostat does not directlymeasure the extent of the underground economyin the Member States. However, the Commission has asked the Member States to supplement the coverage of the underground economyby carrying out a number of procedures to verify and to improve estimates of GNP and gross domestic product (GDP). A description of this work can be found in a report to the Council and the Parliament (2) which describes the responses made to the requirements of the GNP Directive 89/130/EEC, Euratom of 13 February 1989 on the harmonization of the compilation of gross national product at market prices (3), and in particular to Article 7, which calls for special attention to be given to the verification and improvement of the exhaustiveness of the estimates of GDP and GNP, and to the coverage of the underground economy.

The verylatest available national GDP figures based on all these efforts have been used in the recently published estimations of regional GDP per capita for the years 1994 to 1996. The national GDP figures have been split between the regions according to the share of their gross value added in the national gross value added figure, as supplied bythe national statistical services.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998. (2) COM(96) 124 final. (3) OJ L 49, 21.2.1989.

(1999/C 348/149) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0698/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in the Autonomous Community of Valencia in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/117

(1999/C 348/150) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0699/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Andalusia in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/151) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0700/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Aragon in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/152) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0701/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. C 348/118 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Asturias in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/153) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0702/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in the Balearic Islands in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/154) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0703/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in the Canary Islands in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/119

(1999/C 348/155) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0704/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Cantabria in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/156) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0705/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Castille and León in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/157) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0706/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. C 348/120 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Castilla la Mancha in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/158) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0707/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Catalonia in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/159) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0708/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Estremadura in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/121

(1999/C 348/160) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0709/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Galicia in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/161) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0710/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in La Rioja in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/162) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0711/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. C 348/122 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Madrid in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/163) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0712/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Murcia in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/164) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0713/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Communityinhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Communityaid.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Navarre in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/123

(1999/C 348/165) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0714/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in the Basque Country in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/166) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0715/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament’s Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Ceuta in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

(1999/C 348/167) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0716/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. C 348/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the ‘hidden economy’ and what proportion to the ‘regular economy’ in Melilla in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/99, E-0699/99, E-0700/99, E-0701/99, E-0702/99, E-0703/99, E-0704/99, E-0705/99, E-0706/99, E-0707/99, E-0708/99, E-0709/99, E-0710/99, E-0711/99, E-0712/99, E-0713/99, E-0714/99, E-0715/99 and E-0716/99 given byMr de Silguyon behalf of the Commission (6 May 1999)

As explained in the answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-0697/99 (1), Eurostat does not directlymeasure the extent of the underground economyin the Member States. However, the Commission has asked the Member States to supplement the coverage of the underground economybycarryingout a number of procedures to verifyand to improve estimates of gross national product (GNP) and gross domestic product (GDP).

The national data for the years 1994 to 1996 submitted by Spain in October 1998 incorporate the result of this exercise. Therefore, theyare exhaustive and cover the underground economy.

However, on the basis of the national data supplied to Eurostat it is not possible to identifywhat proportion of the overall figure is attributable to the underground economy. Any such assessment at regional level is accordinglyalso impossible.

(1) See page 115.

(1999/C 348/168) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0734/99 byJames Moorhouse (ELDR) to the Commission (29 March 1999)

Subject: Funding of the Turkish European Foundation

Can the Commission answer the following: 1. Is the EU funding the Turkish European Foundation (TEF), a bodythat has been set up in London to promote EU-Turkish relations, and if so, what is the sum involved; 2. If the answer to the above is negative, would the TEF be eligible for funding, and has it approached the Commission in this regard; 3. If the TEF is receiving, or is eligible to receive, EU funding, can the Commission explain how it can ensure that the TEF does not publish misleading or inaccurate information about Turkeyat EU taxpayers’ expense?

Answer given byMr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1999)

The Communityis not funding the Turkish European foundation (TEF) which has been set up in London. Following an approach bythe TEF, the Commission informed its executive director that it could not fund the expenses linked to the activities of his foundation. The Commission indicated that it would be up to the Turkish authorities or business communityto finance activities geared towards ‘enlightening public and official opinion concerning the reasons for the Turkish quest for Union membership and the reasons why Member States should respond favourablyto this quest’. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/125

(1999/C 348/169) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0738/99 by Alessandro Danesin (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Negotiations on Slovenia’s accession to the European Union

Thanks to the genuine progress made by the country’s institutions, with the political stability and economic reliability they have achieved, Slovenia is one of the six countries in the first (priority) group with which the European Union began negotiations for accession as early as March 1998 (even though the Europe Agreement only entered into force on 1 February).

However, the question of how to return properties belonging to the Italian minority that has always been in its territory has still not been resolved (confiscation of property still occurs, although to a lesser extent, and was part of an arrogant policy of expropriation under the preceding Yugoslav regime).

Despite the agreements between the Italian and Slovenian Governments, this situation continues to represent a clear case of discrimination against the rights of the Italian minority and, in the light of the European Union’s new relationship with Slovenia, it seems even more unjustified now that accession negotiations are under way.

The accession criteria laid down at the Copenhagen European Council in 1993, which applicant countries are required to meet prior to accession, include only one political criterion, namely full respect for minority rights, including the return of property confiscated in the past.

The Commission:

1. Is it aware of this outstanding issue?

2. Has it already considered the matter during its talks with the Slovenian authorities (the first Association Council meeting is due to be held very soon)?

3. Does it believe that progress in the negotiations should be made conditional on a solution to this question?

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

(7 May 1999)

The Commission is aware that the process of denationalisation in Slovenia is proceeding very slowly. The Commission is not aware of any discrimination of the Italian minority in Slovenia regarding the process of denationalisation. The current law on denationalisation does not foresee any discrimination of this kind. According to the law, members of the Italian minority enjoy equal rights when they apply for Slovene citizenship.

The general issue of the denationalisation process was recently discussed with the Slovene government at the meeting of the association committee Community/Slovenia held in Ljubljana on 25 March 1999. The government provided updated information on the status of this process.

In view of the above considerations, there is no need to alter the course of the accession negotiations.

(1999/C 348/170) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0739/99 by Alessandro Danesin (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Recognition of qualifications in the EU

In at least two regions in Germany, Hessen and Lower Saxony, local legislation (Article 231 and Article 5 respectively, regarding legal practice) stipulates that anyone wishing to practise as a lawyer must have obtained a degree in the Federal Republic of Germany. C 348/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

This means that European citizens who have graduated in law in an EU Member States other than Germany cannot practice law in that country even if they live there.

Is the Commission aware that the general system of recognition of diplomas (according to Directives 89/48/ EEC (1), 92/51/EEC (2), 94/38/EEC (3) and 95/43/EEC (4) ) provides that nationals of a Member State, who wish to pursue a regulated profession (such as that of a lawyer), in another Member State and who hold the qualifications necessary to do so are entitled to obtain recognition of those qualifications? Can it confirm that discrimination no longer exists in this field?

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989, p. 16. (2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25. (3) OJ L 217, 23.8.1994, p. 8. (4) OJ L 184, 3.8.1995, p. 21.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 1999)

Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher- education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration, allows nationals of a Member State to take up in another Member State a profession for which they are fully qualified. It has to be underlined that this Directive applies only for lawyers who meet all requirements for taking up the profession in the Member State of origin.

The host Member State can require the applicant to pass an aptitude test if there are significant differences between the qualifications of his professional diploma and the qualifications required. In particular, this is true for the profession of lawyer. Article 4 of the Directive permits aptitude tests for professions which require precise knowledge of national law.

Germany implemented this Directive for the profession of lawyer by federal law of 6 July 1990 under which lawyers qualified by the law of another Member State have to pass an aptitude test to acquire the title of a German lawyer (‘Rechtsanwalt’). Applicants can claim the rights under this law (1) and there seems to be no infringement of Community law.

Supplementary to Directive 89/48/EEC, Directive 98/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained, provides further possibilities to practice as a lawyer in another Member State on the basis of professional experience. Under certain conditions, fully qualified lawyers can practise under their home title in other Member States and can receive the title after at least three years full- time practice in the national law there. Directive 98/5/EC has to be implemented in Member States by 14 March 2000.

(1) Although the relation between federal and local law in Germany is outside the competence of the Commission, it can be mentioned that basically German federal law ranks higher than local law. Thus, if the local law of certain German ‘Länder’ does not explicitly contain a provision on the access of lawyers of other Member States, this does not mean that there is no possibility to receive the title of ‘Rechtsanwalt’ through an aptitude test.

(1999/C 348/171) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0742/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Redundancies at the Milani Fabriano paper mills

The recently revealed plans designed to improve the efficiency and organisation of ‘Cartiere Milani Fabriano SpA’, of which 98,2 % belongs to the Italian State Printing Works and therefore the Ministry of Finance, include the aim of making redundant 430 of the 950 workers, while at the same time continuing to make new investments, launch new industrial initiatives and to make use of outsourcing. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/127

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1. whether it believes that the business policy approved by the State Printing Works, and therefore the Ministry of Finance, should include the protection of jobs as one of its main objectives;

2. whether it considers it appropriate to monitor these current developments, given the sensitive nature of the sector, which produces watermarked paper for banknotes and other securities, and which may produce the paper for the euro;

3. whether the inevitable weakening of the company caused by the above plan and its expected privatisation could result in its being placed on the market at a much lower price than its true value, thereby distorting free competition and the market;

4. what measures it could take to protect the prestigious brand-name of the company in question;

5. what its general views are on the matter?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

The Commission by decision of 28 October 1998, decided to open an Article 93(2) procedure, with respect to possible aid granted by Italy to Poligrafico and its controlled companies. The Italian government submitted observations on 1 February 1999. The Commission found those observations incomplete and requested additional information in order to assess the case. At present, the Commission has not received any restructuring plan for the Poligrafico group, nor for Cartiere Miliani which it controls.

The Commission is not competent to evaluate the decisions of industrial policy adopted by national governments aimed at restructuring their undertakings. However, should the Commission establish, on the basis of the information received, the presence of state aid in the sense of Article 92 of the EC Treaty in favour of Poligrafico or Cartiere Miliani, it will assess it under Article 92, paragraph 2 and 3, of the Treaty.

Should the Italian government decide to privatise public undertakings, such as Cartiere Miliani, the Commission will follow the matter, in order to ensure that the procedures adopted will guarantee transparency and the absence of state aid to both the privatised company and the possible buyers.

In any event, if there are collective redundancies falling under Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) the national implementing measures will be applicable to them.

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.

(1999/C 348/172) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0744/99 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Maríne resources

In the Agenda 2000 regulations, is the Commission seeking to shift resources away from investment in increased fisheries capacity towards locally appropriate management of marine resources?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission would point out that Community assistance can only be granted to investments aiming at the renewal of the fishing fleet if conditions are met ensuring that fishing capacity is not increased. In particular, Member States must comply with the objectives of the multiannual guidance programmes for their fishing fleets. C 348/128 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Under the current structural programming period 1994-1999 the overall size of the Community fishing fleet has decreased by approximately 13 % in tonnage and 11 % in power as can be seen in the yearly reports from the Commission to the Parliament and the Council on the multiannual guidance programmes.

In its proposal for structural assistance in the fisheries sector (1), which is currently being discussed in the Council and the Parliament, the Commission is proposing a continuation of the permanent cessation scheme and additional conditions for granting assistance to the renewal of the fleet. Furthermore, the Commission proposes that Member States must demonstrate that public aid is necessary with regard to the objectives pursued and in particular that without public aid the fishing fleet concerned could not be renewed or modernised and that the planned measures will not jeopardise the long-term equilibrium of fishery resources. In addition, permanent arrangements for controlling fleet renewal must be established in all Member States.

Community assistance is granted in the framework of national structural programmes, which are presented by Member States and approved by the Commission. Moreover, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity these programmes can contain additional provisions in favour of locally appropriate management of marine resources.

(1) OJ C 16, 21.1.1999.

(1999/C 348/173) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0756/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Funding by the Commission

Can the Commission say whether it has ever provided funding, through any channel whatsoever, for ‘organisations’ engaged in the ‘protection of the rights’ of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace? If so, exactly how much money was allocated?

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

(27 April 1999)

According to the information delivered by the Member State to the Commission during the meetings of the monitoring committee for the operational programme ‘Eastern Macedonia and Thrace’, no organisation for the protection of the rights of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace has been funded up to now by this programme.

(1999/C 348/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0757/99 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Funding by the Commission

Can the Commission say whether since 1995 it has provided funding, through any channel whatsoever, for ‘organisations’ or ‘foundations’ based in the occupied part of Cyprus? If so, what are they, when were the payments made and exactly how much money was involved?

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

(15 April 1999)

The Commission acting on the invitation of the Council, as stated in the Council conclusions of the 6 March 1995, launched a series of activities to inform the Turkish Cypriot community on the advantages deriving from accession to the Community. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/129

Based on this request, the Commission has sponsored, in consultation with the Cypriot government, bi-communal activities both inside and outside the island that have resulted in a better understanding of the Union and its policies and in reinforcing direct contacts between the two Cypriot communities. The Commission, however, has not financed any ‘institutions’ or ‘organizations’ that have their seat in the north of Cyprus.

(1999/C 348/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0760/99 by Roberto Speciale (PSE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Civil and political rights in Cuba

Four political dissidents, in detention for more than 18 months without their rights being protected in any way, are currently being ‘tried’ in Cuba. At the same time dozens of dissidents are in custody or preventive detention apparently in order to prevent any demonstration of public protest.

These people (intellectuals and journalists) are accused of having expressed opinions and drafting a text entitled ‘The country belongs to everyone’.

1. What has the Commission done and what does it intend to do to convey to the Cuban authorities the EU’s firm opposition to a method that violates basic civil and political rights and to call for the release of the dissidents?

2. How does the Commission intend to again urge an end to the unreasonable and harmful economic blockade imposed by the USA 40 years ago and the opening up of Cuban society to political pluralism and freedom of thought and speech repeatedly called for by the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

The Cuban courts have sentenced the members of the Grupo de Trabajo de la Disidencia Interna (Internal Dissidents’ Working Group), Vladimiro Roca (five years), Félix Antonio Bonne (four years), René Gómez(four years) and Marta Roque (three years) after putting them on trial for having exercised their right to freedom of expression, a right which is universally recognised.

Once the trial verdict was made public, the European Union immediately issued a statement expressing its deep regret at the dissidents’ sentences and the way in which the trial had been conducted; it called for the four to be rapidly released.

The Commission will continue to use the means at its disposal to give positive encouragement to the process of transition to pluralist democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, in the context of the Common Position of 2 December 1996.

Against this background, the Commission has been closely monitoring the state of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cuba and has been taking part in the European Union’s political dialogue. It has also been providing humanitarian aid and targeted economic assistance to encourage the country to open up its economy to the outside.

(1999/C 348/176) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0763/99 by Petrus Cornelissen (PPE) to the Commission

(11 March 1999)

Subject: Avalanche disasters in the Alps

1. Does the Commission propose to contribute to the debate on possible measures to limit as far as possible the likelihood of avalanche disasters in the Alps, and the consequences of such disasters when they do occur? C 348/130 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

2. If so, will the Commission give particular consideration to:

(a) careful planning of ski slopes and of the location of accommodation;

(b) further development of warning systems making use of new high-technology equipment in combination with advanced weather forecasting systems (1)?

(1) With reference, for example, to the current EU research programme on environment and climate research.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1999)

The Commission supports numerous activities to prevent disasters such as those caused by the avalanches in recent weeks.

As far as prevention is concerned, the Community is able to assist mountain regions through the programmes for the afforestation of agricultural land implemented under Council Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 of 30 June 1992. The programmes co-financed by the Structural Funds under Objective 5b may also include forestry measures. The section of Agenda 2000 on rural development will also increase the scope for aid for afforestation and forestry improvement. Payments for measures to preserve and improve the ecological stability of forests in areas where they play a protective and ecological role which is in the public interest may also be co-funded by the Community.

The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is also able to co-finance mapping studies in endangered mountainous areas in the framework of trans-national cooperation programmes.

Under the Community civil protection action programme, the Commission is prepared to consider, subject to the limits of its funding and coordinating ability, any Community proposal which would improve prevention or the ability of the authorities concerned to provide assistance in the event of disasters.

In the field of research, the ‘Environment and climate’ programme is funding various projects which are helping to improve knowledge about this sector. The SAME project (Avalanche mapping, model validation and warning system) has enabled 14 laboratories in seven countries to cooperate in fields such as: the comparison and testing of avalanche models at five different locations; the development of technical specifications for avalanche detection and warning systems, guidelines for experiments coordinated at the Community level. All of these results will very soon be disseminated to a broad audience. In addition, a concerted action which is in progress (CALAR = Concerted action on forecasting, prevention and reduction of landslide and avalanche risks) is intended to improve coordination and the exchange of experience and know- how between scientists and authorities in the countries concerned. Lastly, the ‘Provost’ project (Prediction of climate variations on seasonal timescales) is aimed at improving seasonal and interannual forecasts over a six month period.

It is also useful to draw attention to the important work carried out by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts which, in close cooperation with the national meteorological services, is increasingly improving weather-forecasting capability.

(1999/C 348/177) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0768/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Archaeological excavations at ancient Nikopolis, Epirus

The site of ancient Nikopolis occupies an area of 900 hectares in south-eastern Epirus, comprising buildings from the Roman period, walls, a council chamber and music academy, baths, thermal springs, a stadium and villas. Many of the surviving monuments are unknown to the public at large and lie abandoned, whereas they need maintaining and protecting. The creation of a museum has been approved under the 2nd CSF and the Central Archaeological Council endorses the conclusions of a study to locate it at Preveza. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/131

In addition to setting up the museum, does the Commission also consider the maintenance, development and promotion of the site of ancient Nikopolis to be worthy of support?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission has not yet received any funding request for the work at the Nikopolissite.

However, the Greek authorities may, if they wish, submit such a request in accordance with procedures for the Community Support Framework (CSF). The Commission is willing to cooperate with the authorities in examining funding options within the CSFbudget.

(1999/C 348/178) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0770/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Traditionally made ice cream

An application for registration of the designation ‘helado artesano’ pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) 2082/92 (1) on certificates of specific character was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (OJ C 329/97) on 31 October 1997. No decision has yet been taken.

What stage in the Community procedure has been reached?

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.

(1999/C 348/179) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0771/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Traditionally made ice cream

Is there any reason why it should not be possible for consumers to distinguish between traditionally made ice cream and industrially produced ice cream?

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.

(1999/C 348/180) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0772/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Traditionally made ice cream

Regulation (EEC) 2082/92 (1) was adopted in order to protect specific and traditional recipes defined in accordance with a set of conditions.

Article 13 makes provision for two types of protection: ‘partial’ protection (Article 13(1)) and ‘total’ protection (Article 13(2)). C 348/132 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

How many products have been granted the partial protection referred to in Article 13(1)?

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.

(1999/C 348/181) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0773/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Traditionally made ice cream

Regulation (EEC) 2082/92 (1) was adopted in order to protect specific and traditional recipes defined in accordance with a set of conditions.

Article 13 makes provision for two types of protection: ‘partial’ protection (Article 13(1)) and ‘total’ protection (Article 13(2)).

How many products have been granted the total protection referred to in Article 13(2)?

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0770/99, E-0771/99, E-0772/99 and E-0773/99 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

An application has been made for registration of the designation ‘Helado artesano’ under Council Regulation (EEC) 2082/92 of 14 July 1992 on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs, which provides for the protection of specific and traditional methods or modes of production at the initiative of a producer group. The application in question was for protection under Article 13(2) of the above Regulation (‘absolute’ protection of the name, as the name alone is protected).

Once the Commission had checked the information submitted and found it to comply with the provisions of the Regulation, and in particular Articles 2, 4, 5 and 6 thereof, the main points of the application for registration were published in the Official Journal. Following publication objections may be submitted by the Member States or by any person who can demonstrate a legitimate economic interest. A total of nine objections were sent to the Commission within the given time limit, in accordance with the right to object to the intended registration granted by the above Regulation.

In accordance with the procedure provided for in the Regulation, the Commission asked the Member States concerned to seek agreement between themselves. However, following a number of exchanges of information, the Spanish Government confirmed that it had not been possible to reach an agreement under the terms of Article 9. It is therefore up to the Commission to decide, through the regulatory committee, whether or not to register the specific character of the designation in question. Work is currently underway in the Commission to find a solution to this case.

In the product specifications drawn up by the producer group it is made quite clear that the proposed method of production is that used to produce a specific and traditional type of ice-cream. Reference is made to hand production of ice-cream in a number of points. The aim of this application is therefore to allow consumers to distinguish hand-made ice-cream from other types of ice-cream easily, by providing a Community guarantee.

It should be noted, that in accordance with the principle laid down by the above Regulation, once a designation has been registered any Community producer is free to use it as long as he complies with the relevant production conditions in accordance with that Regulation.

Fifteen applications for a certificate of specific character have been sent to the Commission to date. Only three were submitted under Article 13(2), while the others were submitted under Article 13(1). This offers limited protection: the name may be used freely but if the producer wants to use the reserved indication ‘traditional speciality guaranteed’ and the Community logo, he must comply with the published product specifications. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C348/133

Five types of beer and one cheese have already been registered under Article 13(1), while no designations have yet been registered under Article 13(2).

(1999/C348/182) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0776/99 by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Persecution of a religious minority in Iran

In view of recent events, as well as the context of long-standing extreme harassment in which they took place, would the Commission consider raising, in its negotiations with the Iranian authorities in the new situation created by the disavowing of the fatwah against Mr Salman Rushdie, the position of the Baha’i and other religious minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran? In the last few months, at least 36 faculty members of the Baha’i Institute for Higher Education have been arrested, two members of the community have been sentenced to death, over 500 homes have been raided, and personal property, as well as BIHE equipment, has been removed. More than 200 Baha’i have been killed since 1980 because of their beliefs. Baha’i are routinely denied their constitutional rights and are subject to confiscation of property and denial of pension rights. Baha’i cemeteries and holy places are repeatedly desecrated. Baha’i are denied access to normal university education, which is why the BIHE was established. What action is the Commission prepared to take in defence of the human rights of the Iranian Baha’i people?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

The Commission follows with deep concern the issue of human rights in Iran. In the comprehensive dialogue between the Union and Iran, questions regarding human rights in general are always raised by the Union.

The Commission does not have any bilateral contractual relationship with Iran. However, the Commission associates itself to the demarches made by the Union Troika in this respect. A demarche to the Iranian Government in Tehran was made on 5 August 1998, regarding the execution of Mr Ruhu’llah Rawhani. A further demarche was made on 4 October 1998 regarding the death sentences against Sirus Dhabihi- Muqaddam and Hidayat-Kashifi Najafabadi, where the Union called upon the Iranian authorities to take actions in order that these sentences would not be executed. The Troika was informed that the death sentences were not final, but were subject to confirmation by the Supreme Court.

In the demarche of 4 October 1998, the Union restated its position on the death penalty, and recalled the United Nations human rights commission resolution 1998/80, which expresses concern at the continuing grave violations of the human rights of the Baha’i and calls upon Iran to refrain from pronouncing death sentences on the grounds of religious beliefs and apostasy. In the session of the United Nations human rights commission from March 22 until April 30, 1999 in Geneva, the Union will again introduce a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Iran. In the draft text, which is currently under discussion, there is a clear reference to the discrimination and persecution of religious minorities and, in particular, to the Baha’i.

The treatment of members of the Baha’i faith in Iran was also specifically raised by the Union Troika during a meeting with the Iranian government on 18 December 1998. This pressure will be maintained.

(1999/C348/183) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0789/99 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(6 April 1999)

Subject: The Falkland Islands > EU funding

How much EU funding has been received by the Falkland Islands in the past five years and through which instruments has this been paid? C 348/134 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

In the past five years the Falkland Islands has received € 8 266 799 of Community aid from the European Development Fund (EDF): € 700 000 as programmable aid, € 5 066 799 under Stabex and a low interest loan of € 2 500 000 from the European Investment Bank (EIB).

(1999/C 348/184) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0799/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(6 April 1999)

Subject: Refugee projects

On the initiative of Commissioner Gradin the Commission has decided for the second time running to grant financial support (EUR 16,75 million)for projects to assist refugees in the EU states. These projects include support for projects to improve the reception structures for asylum-seekers and displaced persons in the Member States (EUR 3,75 million), but also provide appropriations to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of refugees (EUR 13 million).

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Has Austria submitted any programmes for either phases of the project, and how many Austrian projects have been approved?

2. If so, what was the substance of such projects and what share of the funding was borne by the EU?

3. What were the criteria for the acceptance of the 76 projects? Which Member States received the allocations and what amount of money was allocated on which projects?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 1999)

Austria submitted projects in both phases (1997 and 1998)under the programme to improve the infrastructure for the reception of asylum-seekers, refugees and displaced persons (B5-803)and the programme to facilitate the voluntary return of refugees, asylum-seekers and displaced persons (B7-6008).

The breakdown of approved projects is as follows:

< 1997: < B5-803 < 3 projects: < Volkshilfe Oberösterreich, Linz (two projects), < International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD), Vienna. < B7-6008 < 5 projects: < Österreichisches Studienzentrum für Frieden und Konfliktforschung (ÖSFK), Stadtschlaning, < Volkshilfe Österreich, Vienna, < International Centre of Migration Policy Development (ICMPD), Vienna (three projects).

< 1998: < B5-803 < 2 projects: < Österreichische Forschungsstiftung für Entwicklungshilfe, Vienna, < Asyl in Not, Vienna. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/135

B7-6008 5 projects: Caritas Österreich, Vienna (also Salzburgand Graz), Verein Susret-Begegnung, Bregenz, Berufsförderungsinstitut, Vienna, International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD), Vienna (two projects).

Owingto the volume of detailed information on the projects referred to above, this has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1999/C 348/185) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0809/99 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(22 March 1999)

Subject: Progress of work to complete the northern road axis in Crete

According to information published recently by the Greek Ministry for Regional Planning, the Environment and Public Works, 55 km. of the northern road axis in Crete are expected to be opened to traffic in the Year 2000. This is an infrastructure project of capital importance for the development of the island, but implementation has for years been progressing at a snail’s pace. This is confirmed by the recently published information which merely adds urgency to the question why completion of this project has been delayed for so long.

In particular, why was a time-consumingsolution adopted under which the national authorities award contracts on a section by section basis, instead of a project manager being recruited, as occurred in the case of other road projects (for example, the Egnatia road project)?

Given that this project forms part of the CSF for Greece (Crete Regional Programme), will the Commission say what are the grounds for the excessive delays, whether there exists a time schedule for the completion of the project and when construction work is finally expected to be completed so that the road axis can be opened to the inhabitants of Crete?

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

(21 April 1999)

The improvement of the northern road axis in Crete is indeed a priority project of importance for the development of the region. The roads operational programme (OP) for 1994-99, the regional OP for Crete for the same period and the InterregCommunity Initiative are all part-financingthe construction of several sections of this road axis, which is due to be completed in 2000-01. So far there is no delay in implementation.

The Commission does indeed consider that the best way to ensure that major infrastructure construction projects part-financed by Community funds in Greece are carried out within a foreseeable and reasonable time, at a cost and to a quality that meet the standards and comply with the legislation in force, is generally for them to be managed by public limited liability companies. However, in the case of the part of the northern road axis in Crete to be built in 1994-99, since all the sections together will cover only 55 kilometres, there was no justification for creatinga public limited liability company for this purpose alone.

(1999/C 348/186) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0821/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(6 April 1999)

Subject: ENEL power line in Valnerina

The Italian national electricity company has decided to build a power line across a section of the areas covered by the Terni and Spoleto town councils and to erect pylons in inhabited areas and areas of outstandingnatural beauty. C 348/136 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

The Terni town council has expressed its opposition to the project. At the same time, in other Italian regions (Tuscany and Lazio) high-voltage power lines are in the process ofbeing dismantled and the power lines buried (for example in the Parco dell’Aniene).

Does the Commission consider that the decision taken by ENEL is in breach oflegislation on electromagnetic pollution and the protection ofthe environment and public health?

What measures does the Commission intend to take?

Answe given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

The decision taken by the Italian National Electricity Company does not give rise to comments by the Commission as to its legality, in the absence ofCommunity provisions in this field.

The Commission has put forward a proposal for a Council recommendation on exposure to electromagnetic fields (1), which is presently being discussed by that institution.

(1) COM(98) 268 final.

(1999/C 348/187) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0833/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Slate industry and generalised system ofpreferences

According to the answer given by Sir Leon Brittan, on behalfofthe Commission, to my previous Written Questions E-4009/97 and E-4011/97 (1), finished slate was classified as a non-sensitive product under the GSP scheme for developing countries, which means that slate imports into the EU are exempt from customs duty. Sir Leon’s answer also indicates that the Commission does not plan to review the classification of these products before the current GSP scheme expires on 31 December 1998.

Now that the scheme has expired, can the Commission say whether it has started to review the GSP scheme for developing countries or, ifit has not done so, say when that review will take place?

Specifically, can the Commission say whether the classification of slate as a non-sensitive product has been reviewed and can it provide information on the outcome of and reasoning behind that review? If no review has taken place, can it say when it will carry out such a review and whether it intends to change the current classification of this product?

Can the Commission say what specific criteria are generally followed in classifying a product as non-sensitive under the GSP scheme?

(1) OJ C 196, 22.6.1998, p. 56.

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

On 21 December 1998 the Council adopted Regulation (EC) 2820/98 applying a multiannual scheme oftariff preferences for the period 1 July 1999 to 31 December 2001 (1), the second such scheme within the ten-year framework laid down for the period 1995-2004. Products remain classified by sensitivity in the same four categories as under the previous regulation. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/137

As was pointed out in the answer to the Honourable Member’s written question E-1580/98 (2), for the purposes of the GSP, the classification of products according to their degree of sensitivity broadly reflects their sensitivity on the Community market as established at the time of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations. This classification underpins the ten-year guidelines and will not be substantially amended during their currency, since one purpose of those guidelines was precisely to ensure that the GSP schemes operated with some consistency over the ten-year period.

Obviously, limited adjustments can be made when each successive scheme is adopted, but the Commission saw no need to propose adjustments for the second scheme and no Member State asked for any change when the scheme was adopted by the Council.

(1)OJ L 357, 30.12.1998. (2)OJ C 402, 22.12.1998, p. 145.

(1999/C 348/188) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0847/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) and Alan Donnelly (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Ombudsman

Does not the President of the Commission feel that, in the current situation, it might be appropriate for the three institutions, Council, Commission and Parliament, to have an Ombudsman responsible for ensuring that standards in public life and codes of conduct and rules are respected by the Members and staff of the three institutions and that full transparency and openness are maintained?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

In order to generate consultation between the three institutions, the Commission has sent the Presidents of the Council and Parliament the three codes of conduct applying, respectively, to Members of the Commission, to relations between Members and Commission departments, and to Commission officials.

The code of conduct for officials sets out in easy-to-read fashion the ethical and professional rules of behaviour arising from the Staff Regulations, which are common to the three institutions.

It is for each institution to ensure that all the rules which govern the behaviour of their officials are applied both within their institution and in their relations with the outside world.

As regards relations with the outside world, the European Ombudsman has authority to deal with complaints made by citizens of the Union or by natural or legal persons residing in a Member State regarding cases of maladministration, particularly in the three institutions referred to. If the concept of maladministration is interpreted broadly, the Ombudsman’s authority can also extend to all complaints which challenge administrative decisions.

The Ombudsman is thus already competent to deal with all cases covered by part 5. (‘Serving the Public’)of the Commission’s code of conduct for officials. C 348/138 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/189) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0848/99 by Tony Cunningham (PSE) to theCommission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Barbarity of the fur trade in China

Is the Commission aware of the barbaric treatment of animals in China, in particular of Alsatian dogs, involved in the production of fur for the international market?

Can the Commission supply details of any fur trade between the EU and China and provide assurance that it has no connection with the perpetrators of this horrific aspect of the trade?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(3 May 1999)

The Commission shares the opinion of the Honourable Member that animals should not be treated in a cruel manner, notably in order to produce fur for international trade.

However, the Commission is not collecting any specific information concerning trade and processing of dog fur in China. It is therefore not possible to confirm whether this business is growing.

Given that animal welfare is becoming increasingly relevant in terms of international trade, this issue may in the future be raised in the World trade organisation (WTO) context. The possibility of amending WTO rules to address welfare concerns more generally will be addressed in the context of the determination of the Community’s negotiating objectives for the next stage of the WTO negotiations.

(1999/C 348/190) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0849/99 by AnneAndré-Léonard (ELDR) to theCommission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Reductions in old age pensions for those already receiving a pension in another Member State

In April 1998 it was reported in the press that proceedings were to be brought against Belgium before the European Court of Justice following complaints about reductions in old age pensions for persons already receiving a pension in another Member State.

Will the Commission say what progress has been made in this matter?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

It seems that the question posed concerns the application by the Belgian National Pensions Office of national anti-overlapping? rules to reduce the amount of the supplement added to a mining worker’s old-age pension when the person was already receiving one or more pensions of the same kind from one or more Member State.

In its judgment of 22 October 1998 in case C143/97 ; Conti v ONP, the Court of Justice found for Mr Conti, holding that a national rule such as the one in question constitutes a reduction clause? within the meaning of Article 12(2) of Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 as amended by Regulation (EC) 118/97 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).

(1) OJ L 28, 30.1.1997. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/139

(1999/C 348/191) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0855/99 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Excise duty

Does the Commission believe that the 1994 Bossard study and its results are still relevant? If not, does it intend to update the study?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 1999)

The Bossard study of 1995 was based on statistics dating from the late eighties and early nineties. The Commission has therefore decided to call for an update of that study before producing its report on the minimum rates of duty on alcoholic drinks. Similarly, it will consult once more all interested bodies requesting an update of their views on those minimum rates in the light of developments since the last review of minimum rates (1).

(1) COM(95) 285 final.

(1999/C 348/192) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/99 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Discrimination against women in a municipal transport company in Murcia (Spain)

The transport company LAT Ltd operates in the Murcian capital and all the surrounding districts, providing both municipal transport and discretionary and school transport services. It employs over 300 people, and operates under a municipal concession from Murcia City Council.

Iam informed that this company employs no women bus drivers, and does not even invite women to sit the technical exams required for the job. Within the establishment, however, it so happens that those responsible for cleaning the buses are mainly women, and they do have to drive the vehicles for cleaning purposes, a fact which is in flat contradiction with the company’s policy of not contracting women as drivers.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. Does the Commission not believe that the municipal authorities, specifically the Murcia city councillor responsible for town planning and transport, should have examined the company’s policy on the employment of women when they granted it a municipal concession?

3. Does the Commission not believe that the municipal authorities are responsible for ensuring that labour legislation on quality of opportunities for men and women is actually complied with?

4. Does the Commission not believe that the right of European women, and more specifically, Directive 76/ 207/EEC (1) on implementing the principle of equal treatment for men and women is being infringed, particularly with reference to access of employment, vocational training and development, and working conditions?

5. What is the Commission doing about this situation?

(1) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40. C 348/140 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

1. The Commission was not aware of the situation outlined by the Honourable Member.

2. The Commission agrees that it would have been welcome if the municipal authorities had examined the transport company’s policy on the employment of women before awarding it a municipal contract. The Commission’s communication of 11 March 1998on public procurement in the European Union ( 1) emphasised the importance of the elimination of inequality and the promotion of equality between men and women as an aspect to be taken into account in awarding public contracts. However, there is nothing under the existing Community rules on public procurement that would legally require such a practice to take place.

3. On the basis of the information provided, the municipality cannot be held legally responsible for any eventual breaches of equal treatment legislation. Any action brought by a complainant should be taken against the private company or employer involved.

4. From the information given it is not clear whether LAT Ltd operates a formal ban on women being employed as bus drivers or whether it happens to be the case that no women are employed as bus drivers. A formal ban would be contrary to Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions.

5. The right to equal treatment in access to employment, contained in Article 3(1) of Directive 76/207/EEC, has direct effect (2) and can be relied upon by an individual as against a private enterprise before the national courts. It is therefore up to individuals who feel they have been discriminated against to take legal action against the company in the Spanish courts.

(1) COM(98) 143 final. (2) Case 222/84 6 Johnston v Royal Ulster Constabulary.

(1999/C 348/193) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0860/99 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Policy for the deaf

Further to Resolution B4-0985/98 of 18 November 1998 on sign languages, can the Commission indicate its response to the following matters of concern to the European Parliament:

1. Does the Commission intend to submit a proposal on harmonising standards for the various teletext and videophone systems in the EU?

2. What initiatives does it intend to take to ensure that a minimum percentage of news programmes and programmes of political importance broadcast by public television companies are provided with subtitles or interpreted into sign language?

3. Does the Commission ensure that public meetings organised by the EU institutions are accessible to the deaf?

4. What measures could the Commission or the Member States take to support the training of tutors and interpreters in sign language?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 1999)

The Commission is aware of the importance of sign language for hearing-impaired people and supported the research project on sign language carried out by Bristol University in the wake of Parliament’s resolution. That study showed that official recognition of sign languages varies between Member States. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/141

1. There are indeed problems of incompatibility between the various text telephone systems in use in the Community. These can best be rectified through the implementation of agreed standards and the Commission is supporting work on this.

2. Primary responsibility for action in this area rests with the Member States. The Commission has no plans at this stage to present specific proposals on the matter.

3. There are many sign languages in the Community and deaf people are educated in only one of them, so the presence of one sign language interpreter at public meetings of the Community would not necessarily guarantee accessibility to a meeting for a deaf person.

However, in order to allow the widest participation possible in the work of the Community, deaf people can bring their own sign language interpreters. The Joint Interpreting and Conference Service (JICS/SCIC) treats sign language interpreters on the same basis as other interpreters, charging their remuneration against the budget lines managed by the JICS/SCIC for freelance interpreters.

4. The Commission has supported projects on the use of sign languages, such as the Lingua Surda project under the Lingua part of Socrates, the Community action programme in the field of education. It has also supported exchange and information activities concerning education for a specific group of deaf and hearing- impaired people during the three years of existence of the Helios II programme (1993-1996). A synopsis of this work, which also covers the subject of sign languages, will be contained in a special publication which will become available for consultation on the Commission’s Europa/DG XXII server during the first half of this year.

Other projects concerning training of people with special needs, such as deaf people, may be supported within the many programmes financed through the European Social Fund (ESF). The Commission has proposed that one of the five policy fields for the ESF in the next programming round should be ‘equal opportunities for all in accessing the labour market’. In this context, not only can special provision be made for deaf people, but training could also be provided for sign language tutors or interpreters.

(1999/C 348/194) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0880/99 by Werner Langen (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Promotion of women, families and senior citizens

1. What measures is the Commission taking to ensure equal treatment for men and women at work? Do binding rules exist concerning the promotion of women in the private sector?

2. Does the Commission support a programme to encourage the education and training of young women and female entrepreneurs?

3. What action is the Commission taking to relieve the tax burden on families?

4. What is the Commission’s policy towards senior citizens? How does the Commission ensure the quality of care for old people?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(3 May 1999)

1. The principle of equal treatment between women and men is enshrined in Article 141 (ex Article 119) of the EC Treaty as regards equal pay. The same principle was also implemented in various directives, and notably in Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (1) and Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security (2). The 1999 guidelines for Member States employment policies include the need to mainstream equality between women and men in all pillars. This will encourage Member States to take into account the specific needs of women when C 348/142 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

implementing the employment guidelines. Community provisions on the principle of equal treatment (equal pay; access to employment, vocational training and promotion; working conditions) apply to both the public and private sectors.

2. The Commission is very much aware of the problems and challenges that women face when they want to enter and remain in the labour market and to start up their own business. The structural funds, especially the European social fund, have financed measures for training and employment of women, including through specifically targetted actions since the 1970s. Community initiatives have been tackling the issue of women setting up business for the past 10 years, through the instigation of programmes (LEI, NOW, Leader, Recite). The improvement of the position of women in the labour market and the development of women’s entrepreneurship is an important component of the new structural funds (2000-2006). The European employment strategy has specifically identified as objectives the need to improve entrepreneurship in Europe and to boost the ability of women and men up to take new jobs.

3. As far as relieving the tax burden on families is concerned, taxation policy in this area falls within thecompetence of Member States.

4. The promotion of specific policies for senior citizens and the provision of care services for older people are matters which fall within the competence of the Member States. The Commission’s role in these fields is to encourage the exchange of information and experience in order to promote the transfer of best practice.

As its main contribution to the United Nations international year for older people the Commission is preparing a communication entitled ‘Towards a Europe of all ages’ to focus attention on ageing and older people’s issues in 1999 and beyond. It is intended that this should contain a short analysis of the character of the demographic challenge facing the Community and outline a strategy of active ageing as a plausible response.

(1) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976. (2) OJ L 6, 10.1.1979.

(1999/C 348/195) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0904/99

by Vincenzo Viola (PPE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Alleged state aid for the Banco di Sicilia

Transfer of the assets and liabilities of the Sicilcassa Spa to the Banco di Sicilia was made possible by intervention by the inter-bank deposit protection fund and implementation of the relief measures provided for in the Ministerial Decree of 27 September 1974. The advances paid by the Bank of Italy under that decree, the amount of which is known as payment has already commenced > 5 000 billion lire > can be regarded as state aid as mentioned by the Commission in one of the 14 points on which the Italian Government has been asked for clarification.

Has the Commission received the explanations requested about the intervention of the Bank of Italy, particularly as regards the amount involved, and is it compatible with freedom of competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 1999)

The Honourable Member has enquired as to whether exhaustive documentation was submitted to the Commission by the Italian Government following the initiation of proceedings under Article 93(2) of the ECTreaty (1). He also asks for the Commission’s views on whether the measures taken by the Banca d’Italia in the winding-up of Sicilcassa are compatible with Community law. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/143

Firstly, it should be pointed out that the Italian Government has submitted all of the documents requested by the Commission, except for the final version of the strategy devised by Mediocredito Centrale, which sets out the industrial plan underpinning the increase in the capital of the Banco that is underwritten by Mediocredito. This plan will be submitted to the Commission in the near future.

As soon as the Commission has all the information requested it will examine the compatibility of the measures proposed by the Italian Government to rescue and rehabilitate the Sicilian banks.

(1) OJ C 297, 25.9.1998.

(1999/C 348/196) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to theCommission

(8 April 1999)

Subject: Workplace Directive

Will the Commission list the countries which have complied with the fire-safety requirements of the Workplace Directive (89/654/EEC) (1), indicate what checks and inspections it is implementing to ensure compliance with the fire-safety requirements of the Directive and which countries are facing infringement proceedings for failure to ensure compliance and the nature of those proceedings?

(1) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 1999)

All Member States have informed the Commission of their national implementing measures transposing Council Directive 89/654/EEC of 30 November 1989 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the workplace (first individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/ EEC (1)).

It is the task of the Member States to ensure adequate checking and monitoring of the national provisions transposing the Directive. Consequently, all matters relating to the implementation of those provisions come under the jurisdiction of the national authorities, which must organise and carry out the inspections and checks needed to ensure proper application of the measures.

The Commission has assessed the conformity of the national implementing measures transposing Directive 89/654/EEC and has taken appropriate action where necessary. For example, it has requested additional information from Member States where the fire-safety requirements did not seem to have been fully or correctly transposed.

After studying the replies, it is possible that the Commission might initiate infringement proceedings under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989.

(1999/C 348/197) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0922/99 by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(8 April 1999)

Subject: ‘Laboratoires Boironm’ = the case of Mr Mariano Parrucci

Mr Mariano Parrucci, resident in Italy and registered on the provincial list of disabled persons available for suitable employment, was sent by the Bologna employment office to the company ‘Laboratoires Boironm’ to fill a vacant position. C 348/144 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

In October 1998 the above-mentioned company rejected Mr Parrucci, claiming it was awaiting instructions which never arrived from its head office.

This is a clear breach ofthe law in general and ofexisting legislation in Italy.

Will the Commission take urgent action to protect one ofthe rights ofa disabled person, a right that is enshrined in the law ofan EU Member State?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

On the basis of the information furnished by the Honourable Member, it appears that the case of the person in question does not come within the remit ofCommunity law.

Italian Act 482 of15 April 1968 provides that private or public sector firmsemploying more than 35 persons must reserve 15 % oftheir posts fordisabled people in several categories. In the event ofnon-compliance, the firms must pay a fine as determined by each competent provincial committee.

It should be noted that the system ofreserved placings or quotas is exclusively a matter forthe Member States.

Hence it is for the interested party to lodge a complaint with the competent Italian institution in order to benefit from the provisions of the aforementioned act.

(1999/C 348/198) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0924/99 by Christa Randzio-Plath (PSE) to the Commission

(8 April 1999)

Subject: European itinerant trade licence

The Commission has still not done any preparatory work on introducing an itinerant trade licence, valid in all EU Member States, which would contribute towards completion ofthe Internal Market and facilitatecross- border trade. Why has the Commission rejected all efforts to introduce an itinerant trade licence, valid in all EU Member States? How can it reconcile this with the principle offreedomofmovement?

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission would like to inform the honourable Member that the Council Directive of 16 June 1975 on measures to facilitate the effective exercise of freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services in respect ofitinerant activities and, in particular, transitional measures in respect ofthose activities (75/369/ EEC) (1) stipulates that where a host Member State regulates such activities in respect ofits own nationals it shall accept as sufficient evidence documents issued by the Member State of origin of nationals of other Member States.

In particular, when the pursuit ofsuch activities in a Member State is subject to the possession ofspecific knowledge, the effective pursuit of these activities for a certain period in another Member State must be recognised.

The Commission has submitted a proposal (2) for a directive establishing a mechanism for the recognition of qualifications for the activities covered by the directives laying down transitional measures (such as Directive 75/369/EEC). The aim ofthis mechanism is to allow migrants to apply forthe recognition oftheir diplomas, even if they lack the professional experience required to invoke the directive in force relevant to their activity. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/145

According to the Commission, Directive 75/369/EEC and the proposal referred to above are intended to eliminate the barriers to the freedom to provide services in the area of itinerant trade. The Commission therefore has no plans at the moment to put to the Member States any proposal for ‘harmonised’ training or for a convergence of their respective systems governing access to the profession leading to the creation of a ‘European’ licence or qualification.

This kind of project may be carried out by the relevant authorities in the field in question. It goes without saying that the Commission is ready to consider any initiative and it has always encouraged the various professional sectors to advance along these lines inasmuch as they can help to facilitate the free movement of the members of the professions concerned.

(1) OJ L 167, 30.6.1975. (2) OJ C 264, 30.8.1997.

(1999/C 348/199) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0942/99 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(13 April 1999)

Subject: Canadian Fisheries Bill C-27

Given that the Canadian Fisheries Bill C-27 has not yet been amended by the Canadian authorities and that, in the Commission’s view, that bill does not comply with international law, can the Commission say, with a view to the forthcoming EU-Canada summit to be held in June, what measures it will take in connection with the summit in June if the Canadian authorities have not responded to the repeated requests to amend the above Bill C-27?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

Much will depend on whether and how the Canadian draft legislation to implement the 1995 United Nations agreement on straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks (Bill C-27) will have completed its passage through the legislative proceedings in the Canadian Parliament by the time of the Community-Canada Summit on 17 June 1999. Depending on these factors, it may have to be restated on that occasion that the extra- territorial aspects of Canadian fisheries legislation and, in particular, of Bill C-27 are a matter of grave concern for the Community.

In the event that Bill C-27 is not modified substantially during the course of the legislative proceedings, it will also be necessary to reserve the Community’s position on those parts of the Canadian legislation which are considered to be inconsistent with international law. The Commission sincerely hopes that the Canadian government will find a way to meet the Community concerns and has underlined, in this context, that Community-Canada relations should not be allowed to be damaged by this or any other single issue.

(1999/C 348/200) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0954/99 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(13 April 1999)

Subject: EC terminology and the difference between ‘mentally handicapped’ and ‘with a learning disability’

Will the EC cease to use the term ‘mentally handicapped’ and instead use ‘with learning disabilities’ which is less pejorative? C 348/146 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

The Commission aims to avoid the use of such terms as ‘mentally handicapped’, ‘handicap’, or ‘handicapped’ in English language texts being aware that people with disabilities consider them to be pejorative terms in English. The preferred usage is, respectively, ‘with learning difficulties’, ‘disability’ and ‘disabled’.

(1999/C 348/201) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0975/99 by Eluned Morgan (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Ritual slaughter of animals in religious festival

Can the Commission clarify the legal situation with regard to the ritual slaughter of animals in religious festivals in the open in Member States and how is this enforced?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

Council Directive 93/119/EEC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter and killing (1), requires that ritual slaughter must take place in an abattoir and must comply with other Community public health, animal health and welfare requirements.

The Commission is aware that in certain Member States some slaughtering of animals during the religious festival of Eid-el-Kabir may take place outside slaughterhouses. The Commission has raised the matter within the standing veterinary committee. Most Member States have underlined that they have transposed the Directive in such a way to prohibit slaughter outside the slaughterhouses.

However, in a minority of Member States ritual slaughter outside slaughterhouses either takes place illegally or is subject to a certain degree of toleration by the competent authorities.

The Commission intends to raise the situation in the standing veterinary committee again and then draw its conclusions.

(1) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993.

(1999/C 348/202) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0983/99 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Subject: Action to eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade with the United States

The customs formalities imposed by the United States are particularly detailed and require a large amount of information, most of which would appear to be irrelevant for customs or statistical purposes. This is prejudicial to European exporters, especially those in the textile sector.

Does the United States plan to act to resolve this problem? If not, does the Commission intend to take any action in this area? 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/147

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(3 May 1999)

The Commission can confirm that the Community textiles industry considers that clearance formalities by the United States customs present various problems including requiring detailed information particularly on product composition.

Despite these difficulties the United States remains the Community’s largest export market with exports of €4 430 million in 1998 (12.6 % of the Community’s total exports of textiles and clothing).

The Commission will use its on-going contacts with the United States’ authorities to raise these issues with a view to seeking improvements failing which the Commission will consider whether it is opportune to make formal complaint to the World trade organisation (WTO) in respect of potential breaches of the general agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT).

(1999/C 348/203) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1024/99 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Commission Communication of the development of public health policy and women’s health

Will the European Commission ensure that in drafting future public health policy documents women’s health issues are highlighted beyond usual women’s health issues to include research and support for programmes to combat diseases to which women are particularly prone such as osteoporosis and arthritis?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 1999)

The Commission gives particular attention to women’s health. Within the current public health programme, a number of particular issues related to women’s health are addressed. In 1997, the Commission published a specific report on the state of women’s health in the Community (1). Issues related to women’s health will receive full attention in future public health policy development.

As for research supported by the Community’s successive research and development framework programmes, although no specific emphasis or priority has been given to projects concerning women’s health, many projects have dealt with women’s health and diseases. In the new fifth framework programme (1998-2002), the key action concerning ‘The ageing population and disabilities’ of the specific programme ‘Quality of life and management of living resources’ will devote a significant part of its resources to women’s issues. Indeed, women form the majority of the aged population (58 % of population over 60 and 69 % of that over 80 in the Community), and various diseases particularly affect women in their old age. Osteoporosis and degenerative joint diseases (like arthritis) are explicitly mentioned as priorities in the 1999 call for research proposals.

(1) COM(97) 224 final.

(1999/C 348/204) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1025/99 by Rinaldo Bontempi (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Closure of frontiers to block a peaceful demonstration

On the night of 27 March 1999, a large number of young people (around 2 000), attempting to travel to Paris C 348/148 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

to demonstrate in support of the rights of illegal immigrants, were stopped from crossing the Franco-Italian border at Ponte San Luigi by French police wearing riot gear. Apart from the fact that this display of force was out of all proportion to the nature and purpose of the journey by the group of young people, who planned to exercise their democratic right to demonstrate in an area without frontiers, the response by the French police was an infringement of Article 8a of the Treaty.

Furthermore, the preventive use of the exceptions on grounds of public order provided for under the Schengen Convention seems totally unwarranted to deal with what to all intents and purposes was a peaceful demonstration.

1. Does the Commission not consider that there has been a clear breach of the principles of freedom of movement and freedom of expression?

2. What steps will it take to ensure that there is no recurrence of such episodes, which hinder the right to move freely and demonstrate within a single European area?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

Union citizens have the right to move freely within the territory of the Member States. However, this is not an absolute right, being conferred by Article 18of the EC Treaty (formerly Article 8a)‘subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in this Treaty and by the measures adopted to give it effect’. These limitations can be justified on grounds of public policy or public security (1). The grounds of public policy or public security can be invoked by the authorities of the Member States when a person attempts to enter their territory (2). In accordance with the provisions of Directive 64/221/EEC (2), a Member State can therefore turn back a citizen of another Member State from its borders if it regards that citizen as posing a serious, effective and genuine threat to its public order and safety.

The above comments apply to the persons referred to in the Honourable Member’s question if they enjoy the right of free movement in the Community. Until now, Community law has not afforded third-country nationals this same right of free movement, even if they are legally present on the territory of one of the Member States, except in the specific case of a family member accompanying a Union citizen. However, the Schengen Convention affords third-country nationals legally present on the territory of Member States who have implemented the convention the right to travel to the other Member States concerned for a period not exceeding three months. However, the Schengen Convention also provides for limitations to this right which can be justified on grounds of public policy or national security, and these limitations are not nullified by the incorporation of the Schengen arrangements into the Union.

(1) See, in particular, Article 39(3) of the EC Treaty (formerly Article 48(3)). (2) See Article 2(1) of Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health, OJ L 56, 4.4.1964.

(1999/C 348/205) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1054/99 by Angela Billingham (PSE) to the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Subject: European travel pass for the elderly

Would the European Commission consider putting forward a proposal to introduce a European travel pass which would simply offer a 20 % deduction on rail for the elderly in all Member States and passing from one Member State to another with freedom to stop over throughout the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

The Commission Recommendation 89/350/EEC of 10 May 1989 (1) called for the introduction of Community wide over-sixties’ card, which would facilitate access to travel and other concessions. However, progress on implementation of the Recommendation has been slow owing to several practical difficulties encountered by 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/149

the Member States. In order to help take the matter forward the Commission carried out two feasibility studies. The first in 1993 covered the then 12 Member States,while the second in 1997 looked at the situation in more detail in five Member States " Denmark,France,Ireland,the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Copies of the final reports of these studies have been given to the members of the Parliament’s Intergroup on ageing.

These reports show that although all the Member States offer some form of concessionary scheme to older people,many do not use a card system as such,and the conditions entitling people to transport and cultural concessions also vary greatly from one Member State to another. Several Member States have no national concession scheme but rely instead on a decentralised localised approach with variations between regions.

The sheer number and variety of schemes operated by Member States,combined with the fact that the situation is constantly changing,make it difficult to gain an accurate,up-to-date picture at European level.

The Commission remains convinced of the usefulness of an Community wide older persons’ card in promoting a stronger sense of European citizenship and in encouraging greater mutual acquaintance and understanding between citizens of the different Member States. The Commission is currently discussing the conclusions and recommendations of the latest feasibility report with Member State representatives.

(1) OJ L 144,27.5.1989.

(1999/C 348/206) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1056/99 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Subject: Award of contracts

The city of Vienna is the owner of some 220 000 homes. For decades these have been insured by the same insurance company,even though there has never been any call for tenders.

1. Should there be an invitation to tender,in accordance with relevant EU directives,for individual service and building contracts above the threshold value for homes owned directly or indirectly by the city of Vienna? If not,why not?

2. If so,what action will the Commission take to put an end to this state of affairs which is in violation of the Treaties?

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

1. The service contracts and the works contracts which reach the thresholds laid down in the directives (1) and which are awarded by the City of Vienna for housing which it owns directly or indirectly must be awarded in accordance with one of the procedures and according to the rules stipulated in these directives.

2. The Commission would need to have more precise information about the type of insurance services in order to decide whether Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts and Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (2) were applicable in this instance.

The Commission has therefore contacted the Austrian authorities to ask for information on the type of insurance services and the items covered and on existing insurance contracts.

(1) OJ L 209,24.7.1992. (2) OJ L 199,9.8.1993. C 348/150 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3.12.1999

(1999/C 348/207) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1062/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 April 1999)

Subject: Payments to flax farmers

In view of the immense hardshipcaused to flax farmers by the introduction of new conditions to EC flax regulations which delay payment of subsidies for up to 12 months, would the Commission not consider the possibility of granting interim part payments as a compromise which would help ease the burden on farmers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

The common organisation of the market in flax and hempintroduces new constraints, from the 1999/2000 marketing year, into the conditions for granting aid for fibre flax.

The recent requirements pertaining in particular to checking the minimum flax straw yield at the processing stage can indeed give rise to an additional delay in the payment of aid. In order to limit the disadvantages of this, the Commission is currently examining the possibility of introducing a system of advances on the aid involving the lodging of a security.

(1999/C 348/208) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1065/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Subject: Bringing the additional provisions of the French law 97-1051 of 18 November on sea fishing guidelines and marine crops into line with Community law

With reference to the Commission’s answer to my written question E-0301/99 (1), once it has requested and examined the provisions referred to in my question, will it say whether it considers them to be in conformity with Community law as interpreted by the Court of Justice, with particular reference to the provisions laid down in the circular on stable establishment?

(1) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999, p. 87.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it considers the circular of the French administration on the new conditions for the fishing of French quotas, which was addressed to the fishing companies late in 1998, to be compatible with Community law.

The Commission however has emphasised once again to the French authorities the need to show some flexibility in the initial application of the new conditions to allow fishing companies to adapt themselves smoothly to the new situation.

The French authorities have reassured the Commission that this will be the case. 3.12.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 348/151

(1999/C 348/209) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1073/99 by Anne McIntosh (PPE) to the Commission (13 April 1999) Subject: Social security requirements What action does the Commission intend to take against the French authorities in the Pyrénées-Orientales for breaking Article 84(4) of Regulation 1408/71 (1), given the Commission’s admission to me in a letter from Padraig Flynn of March 1999 that it is forbidden under this Regulation to ask a non-French EU national resident in France for a translation of his birth certificate when applying for a national identification number?

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

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (3 May 1999) The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that it will be writing to the French authorities concerning the case to which she refers. The French authorities will be asked what measures they intend to take in view of the fact that the French social security institution in the Pyrénées-Orientales requested a non- French Union citizen to present a French translation of his birth certificate in order to be given a national identification number, although Article 84(4) of 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 provides that authorities, institutions and tribunals of a Member State may not reject claims or other documents submitted to them on the grounds that they are written in an official language of another Member State.