EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - EUR-Lex

16. 4. 98 EN C 117/1Official Journal of the European Communities

I

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(98/C 117/01) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0884/97

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Council

(11 March 1997)

Subject: Implications of economic and monetary union

The introduction of the single European currency is currently a highly topical issue. Nevertheless, a large numberof questions remain, concerning not only the countries which are to join the EMU but also those which do notwish to join or plan to join at a later stage.

The issue is an extremely important one, giving rise as it does to a number of questions and metaphysical issues,for example, what would the EU founding fathers have thought of EMU? In view of this, can the Council reply tothe following:

1. Have the consequences of the loss of macroeconomic instruments, such as the possibility of devaluation,been assessed, particularly in respect of the smaller countries?

2. Has consideration been given to ways of compensating for the loss of competitiveness of products from −again − the smaller countries, which will be unable to make even limited adjustments to their currencyparities?

3. Is it believed that a fall in the productivity of the smaller EU Member States and growing unemploymentcould cause their public finances to deteriorate to such an extent as to make increased taxation and drasticcuts in welfare expenditure inevitable?

4. Has the Council considered the possibility of multinational companies transferring their investments withinthe EU to the Euro zone, away from countries with faltering and industrially stagnant economies?

5. Has consideration been given to means of enabling the small EU countries not initially members of the EMUto participate successfully as soon as possible?

Answer

(4 December 1997)

1, 2 and 3: The Council would point out that the primary objective of monetary policy in stage three of EMUis to maintain price stability.

Article 109j of the TEC has laid down four convergence criteria. Meeting these criteria implies, both for MemberStates adopting the single currency from the beginning and for those doing so later, a sustained effort to createmacroeconomic conditions compatible with price and exchange-rate stability.

C 117/2 EN 16. 4. 98Official Journal of the European Communities

The Resolution of the Amsterdam European Council on the establishment of an exchange-rate mechanism in thethird stage of EMU emphasizes that a stable economic environment is necessary for the single market to functionproperly and for higher investment, growth and employment. It is therefore in the interest of all Member States.

The same Resolution reaffirms that sustainable exchange-rate stability demands that Member States pursuedisciplined and responsible monetary policies directed towards price stability and sound fiscal and structuralpolicies.

The new exchange-rate mechanism which, from the beginning of the third stage, will replace the Europeanmonetary system which is now in force, will provide those Member States outside the euro area, but within themechanism, with a reference for conducting sound economic and monetary policies.

At the same time, the mechanism will also help to protect all Member States from unwarranted pressures onforeign-exchange markets and will strengthen market confidence.

4: To date, no study examining the scenario described by the Honourable member has been presented to theCouncil.

5: The new mechanism will support Member States outside the euro area in their strenuous efforts to achieve ahigh degree of sustainable convergence of economic fundamentals and possibly to adopt the euro subsequently,within the framework of the convergence criteria set by the TEC.


by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 1997)

Subject: EU aid to Italy

What aid did the EU grant to Italy in 1994, 1995 and 1996 in the form of allocations in principle andcommitments and payments in respect of policies relating to the following?

CAP − GuaranteeStructural FundsR&TDTENsEnvironmentSMEsCulture

Can the Commission provide details of exemplary and successful measures, if necessary with the aid ofbrochures which have been published about the various policies, to illustrate such data?

What technical resources (e.g. databases, Internet-Europa) does it have at its disposal in order to bring thesefinancial operations to the notice of the general public?

Supplementary answergiven by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1997)

The Honourable Member is referred to the study on contributions to the Community budget transmitted toParliament on 14 October 1997 (1).

The Honourable Member will find data relating to the utilisation of the Structural Funds in Italy for the years1994 to 1996 in the 6th, 7th and 8th annual reports on the implementation of these funds.


The Commission (Directorate-General for Regional Policy and Cohesion) has a database including almost onethousand entries relating to information on successful projects cofinanced by the ERDF. Thirty-six projects wereselected and included in the publication ‘History of the Regions’ (a copy of which is being sent direct to theHonourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat) and distributed free of charge. Moreover, it now publishesbrochures by Member State, which illustrate other projects.

Operational programmes cofinanced by the ERDF and approved by the Commission are announced in real timein Inforegio News, published in eleven languages. This newsletter is available via the Internet on the Europa andEuropa Plus web sites, which also contain an ERDF programmes data-base (http:/cc.cec:8080/en/comm/dg16/re-prog/rphome.htm), where each programme is described briefly and refers to the authority responsible forits implementation.

(1) SEC(97) 1918.


by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission

(9 June 1997)

Subject: Investment in clean coal technology

How much money has been invested by the Commission in clean coal technology demonstration projects since1985?

What proportion of this investment has been spent in each member country of the EU?

What is the current cost per tonne of output of deep-mined coal in each of those member countries which stillhave a deep-mined coal industry?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1997)

The total amount committed by the Commission to clean coal technology demonstration projects from 1985 to1996 inclusive is MECU 212,4 and the breakdown is as follows:

Member StateAid forprojects(MECU)

Belgium 2.9Denmark 6.3Germany 28.6Greece 1.0Spain 82.6France 22.7Italy 11.0Netherlands 9.6Austria 1.3Finland 0.5United Kingdom 43.8

Switzerland (associated third country) 2.1

It should be noted that many projects are of a collaborative nature, involving partners from two or more MemberStates (indeed, this is an absolute requirement under the present rules for the Thermie programme). In the abovetable, the total project funding is attributed to the Member State of the lead contractor in such cases, since it isvirtually impossible to give a precise breakdown among the individual partners.


For example, a large part of the figure for Spain is accounted for by the Puertollano IGCC project, for which theaid of over MECU 50 is shared in varying proportions by several other countries.

The production cost of deep-mined coal in the Member States which have this type of industry is as follows:

ECU/tonne of output

Germany 159Spain 133France 126United Kingdom 43

(98/C 117/04) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1990/97

by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission

(30 May 1997)

Subject: Information on the amount of EC aid granted to the County of Wiltshire since June 1994

Can the Commission state the total amount of Community aid granted to the County of Wiltshire, in the UK,since June 1994, under:

1. the European Social Fund;

2. the Fourth Research Framework Programme;

3. Community programmes in the environment and energy fields;

4. the EAGGF, Guidance and Guarantee sections;

5. other Community Programmes?


(17 October 1997)

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

Since the Honourable Member has stated that this is a priority question, the Commission would remind her thatunder Parliament’s rules of procedure priority questions are those which ‘require an immediate answer but nodetailed research’.


by Inigo Mendez de Vigo (PPE) to the Council

(18 June 1997)

Subject: Cohesion Fund

When he spoke to the plenary of the European Parliament on 14 May 1997 the President-in-Office of the Councilof Ministers said that at present no position could be adopted regarding the continuation of the Cohesion Fund inthe financial perspective after 1999.


Taking into account the first report on progress made in achieving economic and social cohesion within the EU,according to which the cohesion policy pursued to date has made a significant contribution to reducing structuraldisparities between the richest and poorest countries in the Union and the Commission’s belief, expressed in theanswer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies to a Written Question tabled by this Member (E-3430/96) (1), that itundoubtedly remained committed to maintaining the structural policies and was still determined to ensure thatresources are concentrated in favour of the poorest regions, does the Council not consider that continued aid tothe four countries which benefit from the Cohesion Fund is essential to enable them to make more rapid progresstowards the goal of achieving the same level as their European partners?

(1) OJ C 186, 18.6.1997, p. 87.

Answer

(4 December 1998)

In accordance with the rules of the Cohesion Fund, which determine the beneficiary countries and the financialframework of the Fund until the end of 1999, the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, willre-examine the rules before 31 December 1999.

The Commission has not yet submitted a proposal on Fund action from 2000 onwards, but on 16 July 1997 itsubmitted a communication entitled ‘Agenda 2000’ on the development of the Community, in which it proposesthat the Cohesion Fund be maintained in its present form and indicates the amount it considers should beallocated to the Fund. On 15 September 1997 the Council began a preliminary policy debate on thatcommunication.

As it has not yet received a formal Commission proposal on Fund action as from 2000, the Council has not yetadopted a position on the matter.

However, the foregoing in no way prejudices the pursuit of the objective of economic and social cohesionbetween Member States, as provided for in the Treaty and the Protocol annexed thereto.


by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Technical standards and regulations

The Commission has submitted a communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic andSocial Committee concerning regulatory transparency in the internal market for information society services,together with a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending for the third time Directive83/189/EEC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards andregulations (COM(96) 392 final − 96/0220 COD) (1). The proposed transparency mechanism governs draftnational rules on the taking up and pursuit of service activities capable of being provided electronically, at adistance and on the individual request of the receiver (interactive services), with the exception of draft nationalrules designed to transpose an existing or future Community directive.

The transparency mechanism makes use of the procedural rules laid down in Directive 83/189/EEC (2), in otherwords:

− an information procedure for draft rules and regulations concerning the services defined above;

− a consultation procedure;

− a committee of the kind already existing under Directive 83/189/EEC and consisting of representatives of theMember States.

Once the third amendment to Directive 83/189/EEC has been adopted by the Council, will the Commissionpublish the full text as soon as possible, together with a clearly-worded explanatory statement?

(1) OJ C 307, 16.10.1996, p. 11.(2) OJ L 109, 26.4.1983, p. 8.




(2 July 1997)


The Commission has submitted a communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic andSocial Committee concerning regulatory transparency in the internal market for information society services,together with a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending for the third time Directive83/189/EEC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards andregulations (COM(96) 392 final − 96/0220 COD) (1).

The Commission communication and proposal for a Council directive are designed to introduce an informationand consultation procedure at Community level on any future draft rules in the field of information societyservices.

The services, which cover a wide range, are continually expanding in number. They include in particularelectronic newspapers, teaching services, remote selling of tourist services, electronic sales of goods andservices, legal and medical advice, interactive games, entertainment, etc.

The development of these services is not occurring in a legal void at present, since the provisions on the internalmarket laid down in Article 52 (right of establishment) and Article 59 (free movement of services) of the Treaty,and the secondary legislation based on these articles, already provide a basic legal framework. However, thewide variety of activities undertaking in this area at national and Community level in the form of research andstudy group reports would indicate that existing national regulations applicable to existing services clearly needto be adjusted to take account of the specific characteristics of these new information society services.

With this in mind, will the Commission ensure that national and regional authorities are involved in thedevelopment of the information society?

(1) OJ C 307, 16.10.1996, p. 11.



(2 July 1997)


The Commission has submitted a communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic andSocial Committee concerning regulatory transparency in the internal market for information society services,together with a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending for the third time Directive83/189/EEC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards andregulations (COM(96) 392 final − 96/0220 COD) (1).

In order to avoid fragmentation of the internal market and pursue general interest objectives more effectively, itis clear that future legislative activity needs to be coordinated at Community level. Will the Commissiontherefore issue a publication showing who is responsible within the Commission for the development ofinformation society services and what these services involve?

(1) OJ C 307, 16.10.1996, p. 11.



(2 July 1997)


The Commission has submitted a communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economicand Social Committee concerning regulatory transparency in the internal market for information society


services, together with a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending for the third timeDirective 83/189/EEC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technicalstandards and regulations (COM(96) 392 final − 96/0220 COD) (1).

Will the Commission:

1. supply information on the development of information society services and rules and regulations by meansof interim reports?

2. promote the development of programmes to ensure that users can gain access to information society servicesand use them easily?

3. establish an information centre on the development of information society services for workers’ andconsumers’ organizations and for small and medium-sized firms?

4. establish a citizens’ information centre on the development of information society services?

(1) OJ C 307, 16.10.1996, p. 11.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2268/97, E-2269/97, E-2270/97 and E-2271/97

given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1997)

The proposal for a Directive on a regulatory transparency mechanism for information society services, togetherwith the accompanying communication, was adopted by the Commission with the aim of introducing a systemfor information exchange and administrative cooperation between Member States on future national draft rulesand regulations governing those services.

To this end, the Commission proposes extending the scope of the present Directive 83/189/EEC, whichestablishes procedural rules on technical standards and regulations in relation to goods.

As it is concerned solely with procedure, the proposal does not in any way affect national competences and doesnot aim to introduce new rules on the above services. It is not its role or its purpose to address and define insubstance such matters as the development of programmes to facilitate access to those services and how theyshould be used, or the establishment of information centres for interested economic operators or individuals.Such questions could be considered, if necessary, as part of specific studies.

As pointed out by the Honourable Member, the specific aim of the proposal is instead to lay down proceduralrules for notifying the national (central or regional) authorities in good time and involving them actively in thedrafting of future regulatory initiatives on information society services.

The Commission will also be involved in analysing future national plans for information society services since,as the Honourable Member himself rightly points out, they cover a very wide range of activities includingdistance teaching, electronic publications, on-line tourism, electronic commerce, on-line professional services,and interactive games and entertainment.

It should also be pointed out that, under Article 11 of the Directive, the Commission will report every two yearsto Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on the application of the Directive and statistics will bepublished on an annual basis in the Official Journal on the notifications received pursuant to the Directiveconcerning information society services (in addition to those relating to technical standards and regulations forgoods).

Once this new version (the third) of Directive 83/189/EEC has been adopted by Parliament and the Council, theCommission will be able to begin the process of consolidating the entire text of the future Directive inaccordance with its existing proposal for the consolidation of the present Directive (1) following the two earlieramendments.

(1) COM(96) 642 final (OJ C 78 12.3.1997).



by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Shameful attack on the reputation of Sicily by the German press

In May 1997 the German daily newspaper ‘Das Bild’ published an article entitled ‘Unfaithful lover torn to piecesby dogs’, written by journalist Andreas Englisch, which, instead of providing a factual account of a recenttragedy in Catania, includes unverified details of the event so outrageous as to be laughable.

This is the latest in a long series of efforts by the German media to sully the reputation of Italy and its people andin particular Sicily.

1. Does the Commission believe that stricter controls should be imposed on the press, which is clearly in thehands of unscrupulous and unethical journalists who may be acting at the behest of organized interestswishing to undermine the image of itself as a tourist destination which Sicily promotes overseas?

2. Does it not consider that representation should be made to the German Government in order to end squalidbehaviour of this kind, which runs counter to the principles of solidarity and respect among peoplesenshrined in the Maastricht Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1997)

The Commission appreciates that the Honourable Member is concerned by the issue raised in this question.

In response to the specific points, however, it should be noted that, in general, the supervision of the press fallswithin the competence of each Member State, according to the rule of subsidiarity. The rules of the EC Treatyempower the Commission to act in this area, only when the regulatory framework or the behaviour of thepublication in question would be incompatible with Community law, in particular as regards the internal market.


by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: EU contributions to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO)

The European Union has agreed to pay 15 million ecus per annum for five years to the Korean Peninsula EnergyDevelopment Organization (KEDO). Along with US and Japanese contributions, the money will be used to helpthe construction of two Western-designed light water reactors (LWRs) in North Korea, which is currentlyexperiencing a famine.

A Commission report from May 1997 − ‘Activities report related to the use of the intended Community financialcontribution to KEDO’ − states that ‘through KEDO, the EU can support peace and stability in the region’ and‘would make a significant contribution towards upholding international non-proliferation objectives andimproving nuclear safety on the Korean peninsula’.

On what basis did the Commission reach the conclusion that building nuclear reactors in a famine-strickencountry would contribute to regional peace and stability? The reactors financed by the EU will produceplutonium. How will the EU ensure that the resulting plutonium will not be diverted to the manufacture ofnuclear weapons?

Have sites for the reactors been identified? If so, can the Commission give details of the site selection processundertaken?


Once the reactors are built, how will the resulting energy generated be distributed, given that North Korea has nohigh tension network? Does the Commission envisage that any of the energy generated will be used by SouthKorea?

What plans have been devised for managing the waste arising from the operation of the nuclear reactors?

Why did the EU decide to fund the development of nuclear energy in North Korea, instead of the development ofrenewable energy there? North Korea also has a large coal supply − did the Commission study any proposals forsupporting the development of clean coal combustion plants there?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 1997)

The Korean peninsula energy development organization (KEDO) light water reactor (LWR) project is anessential contribution to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula, because it is the key element to implementthe agreed framework signed by the United States and North Korea on 21 October 1994.

Without the agreed framework, North Korea would have withdrawn from the Treaty on the non-proliferation ofnuclear weapons (NPT), without any safeguards agreement with the International atomic energy authority(IAEA) for international control of its nuclear activities. At this time North Korea had developed a fullyoperational nuclear fuel cycle, which included plutonium separation facilities. The situation presented extremelyserious nuclear proliferation and security concerns which have been averted thanks to the agreed framework.

The decision to supply the LWRs was taken in the context of the negotiations on the agreed framework.The reactors to be supplied by KEDO are considerably safer and less conducive to nuclear proliferation than thegraphite-moderated reactors they will replace and which North Korea will decommission and dismantle underthe agreed framework. Moreover, key nuclear components for the new reactors will not be delivered to NorthKorea unless and until it is in full compliance with its IAEA safeguards agreement, which includes peaceful andnon-explosive use of all nuclear material.

Concerning the LWR site, KEDO has examined North Korea's preferred Kumho area near Simpo City, SouthHamgyong Province. KEDO considers that this examination provides sufficient technical basis for North Koreato issue a site take-over certificate, allowing KEDO to begin preliminary activities at the site.

Concerning energy distribution, KEDO and North Korea have agreed that two stable supplies of off-site power,and associated transmission systems, must be in place before commissioning of the reactors. The transmissionsystems to provide these sources of power would also be used to distribute power generated by the nuclearstation. It has also been agreed that responsibility for obtaining the requisite transmission system rests with NorthKorea. Energy generated by the reactors will be the property of North Korea. The question whether any of thatenergy will be used by the Republic of Korea would therefore be a matter for North Korea to determine, togetherwith the Republic of Korea.

Storage and disposal of radioactive waste arising from operation of the reactors shall conform to a set of codesand standards equivalent to those of the IAEA. Low-and medium-level radioactive waste storage facilities with astorage capacity for the two LWR plants will be built. KEDO and North Korea have also agreed to co-operate toensure safe storage and disposition of spent fuel. If requested by KEDO, North Korea shall relinquish anyownership rights over the spent fuel and agree to transfer it out of its territory as soon as technically possible afterthe fuel is discharged, through appropriate commercial contracts.

As stated above, KEDO implements the agreed framework which forestalled major proliferation and securityrisks which would have flowed from North Korea’s withdrawal from the NPT and IAEA safeguards regime.For this reason, Euratom participation in KEDO clearly contributes to maintaining peace and stability in theregion.


Participation in KEDO is without prejudice to Community humanitarian aid to the population of North Korea.On 23 May, the Commission announced a package of MECU 46.3 worth of food aid, to be delivered in closecollaboration with the UN’s world food programme. This has been complemented with MECU 9.5 worth ofpublic health and nutritional support, and is on top of almost MECU 10 of aid already granted since flooding in1995 and 1996.


by Peter Sichrovsky (NI) to the Council

(18 July 1997)

Subject: Failure of government members to attend Council meetings

Do government members commonly fail to attend meetings of the Council?

How often have members of the Austrian Government failed to attend meetings of the Council since 1995?

Is it the Council’s view that decisions it takes in the absence of members of a Member State’s government are ofsecondary political importance for that Member State?

In the absence of members of its government, how has Austria made it known how it wishes to vote?

Answer

(1 December 1997)

Member States of course endeavour to ensure that they are represented at Council meetings at ministerial level;experience shows, however, that this is not always possible and that it is therefore not uncommon for one or moreMember States to be represented by persons other than Ministers or State Secretaries (usually then by PermanentRepresentatives or their deputies). In that case, the representatives may not take part in the voting procedure.

However, Article 150 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 paragraph 3 of the Council’s Rules of Procedure (1) allowany Council member to delegate his/her right to vote to another Council member represented at ministerial level. Combined with the quorum rule provided for in Article 7 paragraph 4 of the Council’s Rules of Procedure, underwhich the presence of eight members of the Council at ministerial level is required to enable the Council to vote,the delegation of vote may result in a situation where, at a given Council meeting, up to seven members maydelegate their vote to the remaining eight Council members.

Since it joined the European Union in January 1995, Austria has been represented at all Council meetings. Ineach case in which the relevant member of government was unable to attend, the Austrian delegation was headedby the Austrian Permanent Representative to the European Union (or his deputy), as is common practice at theEuropen Union.

It is not for the Council to speculate on whether the political importance a Member State attaches to decisionswhich might be taken at a given Council meeting is reflected by the person by whom that Member State isrepresented at the meeting.

The position and the vote of Austria and the issues under discussion at Council meetings are expressed at thatmeeting in conformity with Articles 146 and 150 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 paragraphs 3 and 4 of theCouncil’s Rules of Procedure as explained above. The Honourable Member of the European Parliament willmoreover be aware that when a vote takes place in the Council the record of that vote is made public - through theCouncil’s Press Release - in accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Rules of Procedure.

(1) Council Decision No 93/662/EC of 6 December 1993 adopting the Council’s Rules of Procedure (OJ L 304, 10 December 1993, p. 1)amended by Council Decision No 95/24/CE, Euratom, CECA of 6 February 1995 (OJ L 31, 10 February 1995, p. 14).



by Jesus Cabezon Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(7 July 1997)

Subject: Authorization for insurance companies based in Gibraltar to operate in the EU

The United Kingdom has granted authorization, through the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission, forinsurance companies based in Gibraltar to operate in the countries of the European Union.

Does the Commission not believe that this poses a definite risk of turning Gibraltar into a tax haven?

In granting such authorization, has Community legislation on insurance and financial services been respected?


(24 September 1997)

The Commission has been notified by the United Kingdom of the implementation of all the insurance directivesin its dependent territory of Gibraltar. Directive 95/26/EEC (1) amending Directives 77/780/EEC and89/646/EEC in the field of credit institutions, Directives 73/239/EEC and 92/49/EEC in the field of non-lifeinsurance, Directives 79/267/EEC and 92/96/EEC in the field of life assurance, Directive 93/22/EEC in the fieldof investment firms and Directive 85/611/EEC in the field of undertakings for collective investment intransferable securities (Ucits), with a view to reinforcing prudential supervision which affects insurance as wellas the other financial sectors, has not yet been fully implemented. The United Kingdom has recently indicatedthat the work for such implementation is reaching its final stages.

The Commission is as usual carrying out an examination of the implementing legislation in order to ensure fullconsistency with the provisisons of the insurance directives. The legislation in question is confined to thesupervision of insurance activities and undertakings, and does not concern tax matters.

In the context of the current efforts to combat harmful tax competition, a code of conduct is envisaged, which isdesigned to avoid fiscal paradises in the Community. Such code would also apply to Gibraltar. Additionalmeasures on taxation of savings may also be proposed as part of a wider tax package foreseen in the singlemarket action plan. The cope and coverage of this package will be discussed over the coming months and it ishoped that an appropriate agreement will limit the scope for harmful tax competition.

(1) OJ L 168, 18.7.1995.


by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 July 1997)

Subject: Violation of individual liberties and citizens’ rights through the implementation of the SchengenAgreement

In a resolution adopted on 11.3.1997 (1), the European Parliament points out repeatedly that the implementationof the provisions of the Schengen Agreement violates individual and civil rights and restricts immigration andthe freedom of movement within the Union of citizens of third countries who are legally resident in the EuropeanUnion; it also notes that the implementation of the Schengen Information System infringes the individualliberties of citizens and their private lives and even results in the arrest of innocent people registered without anyreason in the SIS. Furthermore, it is profoundly concerned at the fact that the implementation of this Agreementis not subject to any parliamentary or judicial control.


Will the Commission give its response to this European Parliament resolution and say what measures it intends totake to protect the individual and civil rights of citizens in the European Union?

(1) Minutes of 11.3.1997, Part II, p. 11.


(22 October 1997)

The Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the observations made by the Commission during the debate onthe draft Resolution on the functioning and future of Schengen at the March 1997 part-session of Parliament (1).

(1) Report of Proceedings (March 1997).


by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: European legislation on waste disposal

In its answers to written questions E-1409/97 (1) and E-1410/97 (2) on compliance with European waste disposallegislation in Italy, the Commission mentioned that it would remind the Italian authorities of the need to respectArticle 4 of Directive 91/156/EEC (3).

Can the Commission say which authority it actually dealt with and what exactly it said to this authority?

Can the Commission also provide a general picture outline of the way Community waste disposal legislation, inparticular Directive 91/156/EEC, is applied in Italy?

(1) OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 120.(2) OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 120.(3) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 1997)

The Commission always deals with Member States' Permanent Representation to the European Communities.

The Permanent Representation forwards the letter from the Commission to the relevant ministry, in this case theMinistry for the Environment. The action taken by the Commission consists of outlining the allegations in thecomplaint, petition or written question, reminding the national authorities of the Community environmentallegislation applicable to the case drawn to the Commission's attention and requesting them to obtain informationand comments on the allegations within two months.

As regards the Italian legislation applying the Directives on waste, certain aspects still fail to comply withDirective 91/156/EEC. Infringement procedures have also been initiated in a number of specific cases.




(10 July 1997)

Subject: The role of information in the affair of the Italian peace mission in Somalia

The Italian media have recently made much of a scandal concerning the torture and abuse allegedly inflicted byItalian soldiers on Somali civilians during the international peace mission ‘Restore Hope’ in Somalia. In additionto identifying individuals who may have been responsible for instances of violence incompatible with thehumanitarian spirit of the mission, which should be the task of the military courts, the Italian media have treatedthe affair with excessive sensationalism, often highlighting unsubstantiated rumours and involving indiscrimi-nately all those who took part in the humanitarian mission. This coverage threatens to become an unacceptablesmear campaign against the Italian armed forces. The affair is an outstanding example of the central role playedby the media in modern society − it creates the impression that a peace mission turned into an endless series oftorture and abuse from one day to the next. All this suggests that we should think seriously about the role of themedia. Without prejudice to the right to freedom of information, instruments must be devised to guarantee thepublic’s right to information which is accurate, unbiased and free of sensationalism or the possibility ofexploitation, on both issues involving the national interest and issues concerning individuals. There should beemphasis on the need to ensure that everyone is entitled not to be pilloried or subjected to trial by television.

In view of all this can the Commission say:

1. what it thinks about this affair;

2. whether thought has been given at European level to the ethics and accuracy of information, and if so, withwhat tangible results?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 1997)

The Commission is aware of the news in the press about accusations of ill-treatment of Somalis in connectionwith the United Nations' operation Restore Hope.

To the Commission, such conduct − if proved − merits condemnation but must not be allowed to obscure thepositive outcome of UN action and the key role played in it by the Union and the contributing countries' forces.


by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Failure to implement the EU regulation on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora (338/97) inGermany

The new EU Regulation on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora (338/97) (1) came into force on1 June 1997. Article 16 of the Regulation calls on the Member States to introduce sanctions, seizure andconfiscation in the event of infringements of the new regulation. Germany has as yet failed to do so although ithas had adequate time and warning before the regulation came into force. Species of fauna and flora consideredby the EU to need special protection may therefore from now on be imported or exported scot-free. Nor are thepurchase, offer to purchase, acquisition for commercial purposes, use for commercial gain, display to the publicfor commercial purposes, or the sale, keeping for sale, offering for sale or transporting for sale of the specieslisted in Annexes A or B of the regulation subject to sanctions, as they should be under the Regulation. In allthese cases the German Customs have not been given the power to act.


1. Is the Commission aware of this failure by Germany to comply with the Regulation on the protection ofwild species?

2. If so, how does the Commission intend to improve the situation?

3. Will the Commission be starting proceedings against the German Government before the Court of Justicefor the breach of the Treaty involved in this failure to act?

4. Have there been similar failures by other Member States to implement this Regulation? If so, whatdifficulties have there been, in which countries, and how does the Commission intend to put the matter right?

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997, p. 1.


(11 September 1997)

As the Honourable Member states, Article 16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on theprotection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1) obliges Member States to takeappropriate measures to ensure the imposition of sanctions for a range of infringements of that Regulation.According to its Article 22, Article 16 shall apply from the date of entry into force of the Regulation, that is3 March 1997. According to Article 20, Member States shall notify the Commission of the provisions which theyadopt for the implementation of the Regulation and of all legal instruments used and measures taken for itsimplementation and enforcement.

Germany and all the other Member States have not yet notified legal instruments and measures concerning theRegulation. The Commission therefore will urge the Member States to do so as soon as possible and, if need be,will open infringement proceedings against those Member States which fail to comply with their obligations.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.


by Fernand Herman (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Subsidies granted to the Forest Stewardship Council

The Commission subsidizes the ‘certification’ of wood through aids granted to the FSC (Forest StewardshipCouncil) and the WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature). These NGOs are advocating ‘certification’ at global level,including for European forests.

This is giving rise to serious concern in the European forestry sector because FSC/WWF certification wasdesigned for large forest estates or concessions (from 200 000 to over 1 000 000 ha in Cameroon, Canada,the USA, Malaysia etc.). It is, however, inapplicable and exorbitantly expensive for European forests, which areextremely fragmented (with an average size of 14 ha for European private forests, 2.5 ha for Belgium).

Moreover, given the quality of European forestry management since more than a century, this type ofcertification would not bring any improvement to an already well-established system of forestry management.

Will the Commission state:

1. what brief it has received to subsidize ‘certification’ initiatives which run counter to the interests of theEuropean forestry/wood industry and what scientific foundations it is based on;

2. why the Commission has chosen unilaterally to subsidize the FSC when other certification initiatives existwhich are better suited to European forests;

3. why subsidies in excess of ECU 700 000 have been granted to each of the two associations (WWF and FSC)and an amount of ECU 3 million is reportedly about to be granted to them, apparently without any invitationto tender being made and without any tangible evidence of the competence of these organizations in the fieldof sustainable forestry management and in the wood trade?



(4 November 1997)

1. Council Regulation (EC) No 3062/95 of 20 December 1995 on operations to promote tropical forests (1)constitutes the legal basis for activities under budget heading B7-6201, the overall aim being the conservationand sustainable management of tropical forests. The definition and development of certification systems,combined with independent assessment systems, for timber produced from tropical forests according tosustainable forest management principles, is mentioned in the Regulation as one of the areas to which particularconsideration shall be given (Article 4.1 (b)). Consequently, the contracts which the Commission has signed withthe Forest stewardship council (FSC) and the World wide fund for nature (WWF) cover activities concerningtropical, i.e. non-European forests.

The inclusion of tropical timber certification as one priority field under the tropical forest budget line waswelcomed and supported by the Parliament throughout the procedure under which the Regulation was adopted.

Regarding the scientific basis, it is noted that the various currently available definitions of sustainable forestmanagement are typically based on both accumulated scientific knowledge and private sector processes, andcontain many similarities.

The Commission is aware of the practical problems, specific to the Community, which arise upon the possibleintroduction of voluntary certification systems at the level of small forest estates. These might include, forinstance, high unit costs and excessive bureaucracy. In this context, the Commission recognizes the importanceof finding ways for possible certification schemes to be adapted to European conditions in order to givesmall-scale European forest owners and European industries equal opportunities in the market.

2. The recipients of aid and partners in cooperation may include not only states, regions and overseascountries and territories but also decentralised authorities, regional organisations, public bodies, local andtraditional communities, private industries and operators, cooperatives and non-governmental organisations andrepresentative associations of forest peoples, which include the conservation of tropical forests among theirobjectives or regular activities. The Commission, assisted by independent experts, assesses project proposalsaccording to their compatibility with priorities established by the Regulation whilst applying strict qualitycriteria.

Particularly in the European context, the Commission has supported and promoted an open and free dialoguewith as many as possible of the interested parties from the Member States and partner countries.The Commission has not given preference to any particular organisation in the field of certification and labelling.

In addition to the grants mentioned by the Honourable Member the Commission finances a wide range of otherprojects related to certification which aim to analyze and improve certification as a tool.

3. In the field of development cooperation, the Community’s financial regulation allows for direct agreementwith non-profit making institutions or associations. FSC and WWF-Belgium are charitable organizations underMexican and Belgian law respectively.

FSC has been granted ECU 708 232 for a project covering the consultation among national stakeholders in tenselected countries in Latin America and Asia and the development in these countries of agreed national orregional certification standards accompanied by training activities and a support programme for certifiers.This experimental project will be evaluated at the end of its two-year duration.

The WWF project ‘Promotion of sustainable forest management and certification in timber producing countriesof the Congo basin’ was reviewed and received a favourable opinion by the Commission in March 1997.The project will be cofinanced by the Dutch development cooperation and the Community. The Communitycontribution is likely to be MECU 1.5.

In addition to the grants mentioned by the Honourable Member the Commission finances a wide range of otherprojects related to certification which aim to analyse and improve certification as a potential tool. TheCommission finances also a large number of projects promoting the sustainable management of forests andconservation of biological diversity of forest ecosystems.

(1) OJ L 327 30.12.1995.



by Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Assistance for the Lake Constance region

Can the Commission say how much assistance the Lake Constance region (Landkreis Konstanz, LandkreisBodenseekreis, Lindau-Bodensee, Land Vorarlberg) has received from the European Union since 1990?


(24 November 1997)



by Carmen Fraga Estevez (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Ban on the transhipment of swordfish catches by the Community fleet in Chilean ports

Since 1990 Chile has been banning the transhipment of swordfish caught outside its waters by the Communityfleet, which constitutes a violation of GATT Article V.1 concerning ‘freedom of transit’. The ban is based on therequest for a health certificate, which is unjustified for merchandise in transit and in practice is equivalent topreventing transhipments, thereby violating the freedom of transit established by the afore-mentioned Article Vof GATT.

In her answer to Question H-0320/96 (1) on the same subject Commissioner Bonino said that the problem couldbe settled under Article 30 of the EU/Chile Cooperation Agreement and that otherwise Article V of GATT wouldbe the only possible solution. Can the Commission therefore say when it intends to call for the application ofArticle V of GATT to solve this problem?

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (May 1996).

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1997)

Article 30 of the new Cooperation Agreement with Chile signed on 21 June 1996 provides for cooperation onfishing matters, including resource conservation.

On the disagreement to which the Honourable Member refers over landing of swordfish caught by Communityvessels outside the Chilean exclusive economic zone the Commission has ascertained Member States' positionsthrough the appropriate channels and agreed with Chile on the need for an initial exchange of information on thisfishery and the state of stocks, with the ultimate aim of establishing technical and scientific cooperation in thisarea.

Owing to lack of available information no progress has so far been made. However, given that cooperation oughtto facilitate the adoption of a mutually satisfactory solution to the present difficulty, both parties are at themoment completing collection of the necessary information with a view to opening technical discussions in thevery near future.



by Carles-Alfred Gasoliba i Bohm (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Environmental damage in the Oliva-Pego marsh

The Oliva-Pego marsh in the Valencia Region has suffered considerable damage in the last few weeks as a resultof fires, ploughing and the drying up of the wetland. All this constitutes a serious environmental problem whichis supposed to be solved by the execution of the project for a national park in the area.

Is the Commission aware of the current situation concerning the project for the national park in the Oliva-Pegomarsh? Can it supply information about the European aid requested by the Valencian authorities to finance thepurchase of land from farmers?


(12 September 1997)

The Commission is aware of what has been happening in the Pego-Oliva marshes, since conservation of this areais one of the objectives of the Life-Nature project ‘Programa de acciones para la conservacion de humedalesvalencianos y creacion de areas de reserva para el samaruc (Valencia hispanica)', the contract for which(B4-3200/92/15183 and B4-3200/95/525) was established in December 1992 between the Commission and theGovernment of Valencia.

The Commission has asked the beneficiary to forward regular information on the action taken to ensure theconservation of this wetland area in the face of activity by certain farmers. The following measures have beentaken:

− lodging of a complaint by the Director of the reserve against the Mayor of Pego (alleged violation againstnatural resources and the environment, serious dereliction of duty, illegal possession);

− order from the Consejerıa de medio ambiente freezing all forms of activity in the marshes;

− order from the competent judge prohibiting all activity in the marshes and asking the civil guard to monitorpotential infringements;

− action taken in defiance of this ban has been reported to the competent national court.

In 1996 the Valencian authorities purchased, or took steps towards purchasing, 569 ‘anegadas' (approximately50 hectares) of the Pego-Oliva marshes for a total of PTA 111 million. Steps are being taken to purchase a similarsurface area in 1997.


by Leen van der Waal (I-EDN) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Recognition of the Logos Bible Academy in Bulgaria

According to reports in the May 1997 issue of Face to Face (published by ‘Droits de l'Homme sans Frontieres')the Logos Bible Academy is still not officially recognized by the Bulgarian Government, in spite of repeatedattempts to obtain recognition. The Academy is supported by the main, officially recognized Protestant churchesin Bulgaria, was certainly recognized by the Sofia courts in 1990 and provides academic training consideredequivalent to that of the Faculty of Theology of St Kliment Ohridski University in Sofia. When religiouslegislation was adopted in 1993 the Logos Bible Academy was refused recognition, as a result of which theAcademy has been facing all kinds of practical difficulties.

1. Can the Commission confirm these reports?

2. To what extent is the refusal of official recognition to the Logos Bible Academy in contravention of theprinciple of freedom of religion as laid down in the Bulgarian constitution and international treaties?

3. Is the Commission prepared to request the Bulgarian authorities to grant official recognition to the LogosBible Academy as soon as possible?


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

(2 October 1997)

1. The Commission confirms the information concerning the non recognition by the Bulgarian government ofthe ‘Logos Bible academy’.

2. It is a matter for the Bulgarian authorities whether or not to recognise a religious institution (group,association or other type of non-profit organisation). Government decisions in this field are based on thefollowing legal texts:

− Article 37, paragraph 2 of the Bulgarian constitution: ‘The freedom of conscience and religion shall not bepractised to the detriment of national security, public order, public health and morals, or of the rights andfreedoms of others’,

− the law on persons and family (Article 133 a),

− the law on the legal system.

The law also provides the opportunity for the institution to appeal to the supreme court if recognition is not given.

3. In its opinion on Bulgaria’s application for membership of the Community (1), the Commission noted that‘some gaps remain in respect for fundamental rights, though the new government elected in April has announceda series of positive reforms’. In general the Commission declared that ‘freedom of association and demonstrationis guaranteed by the constitution and is exercised without difficulty’ and that ‘freedom of expression in Bulgariais evidenced by pluralism in the press and other media’. The Commission concluded that Bulgaria is on the wayto satisfying the political criteria set by the Copenhagen European Council.

In the light of these and other considerations, the Commission considers that negotiations for accession to theCommunity should be opened with Bulgaria as soon as it has made sufficient progress in satisfying theconditions of membership defined by the European Council in Copenhagen. The Commission will present areport no later than the end of 1998 on the progress Bulgaria has achieved. On that occasion the Commission willcarefully look at the respect of fundamental rights and freedoms in Bulgaria. In the mean time the Commissionhas advised Bulgaria to take the appropriate measures on the weaknesses identified in the opinion.

(1) Doc. COM(97) 2008 final.


by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission

(10 July 1997)

Subject: Reform of structural and regional assistance

Accord to reports in the media, the Commission is working on proposals for the comprehensive reform ofstructural and regional assistance. It is also understood that Objective 5b regions are to be abandoned in thiscontext.

On what grounds is structural and regional assistance to be reformed?

What objectives is the Commission pursuing in this connection?

When and how is the reform of structural and regional assistance to be accomplished?

Is it true that Objective 5b regions are to be abandoned?

What implications would the abandonment of Objective 5b regions have for Austria?

Has any thought been given to developing other measures to assist these ‘abandoned’ Objective 5b regions?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 1997)

European-wide solidarity and in this context the major objective of reducing disparities in development, as setout explicitly in Article 130a of the EC Treaty, is an essential political basis of European unity. It is an essential


contribution towards stability in the Community and promoting a high level of employment. Constant effortsmust be made to tackle the regions' uneven capabilities for generating sustainable development and theirdifficulties in adapting to new conditions on the labour market, which call for greater capacity to foresee andprepare for the skills both men and women will need in future. Therefore structural assistance must fosterimprovements in competitiveness and lasting growth to create jobs throughout the Community. The results fromthe Cork conference, the cohesion forum in Brussels and of numerous contacts with Member States have shownthat a better geographical, financial and thematic concentration of structural funds is necessary in order to assistin an efficient cohesion policy. Further to this the forthcoming enlargement to the East, the new challenges by thenext World trade organisation (WTO) negotiation round as well as increased expectations by the public make itnecessary to increase efficiency and to simplify structural assistance.

The objective of a reform of structural funding is to concentrate assistance more on areas and target groupsconfronted with difficulties and to increase efficiency. Simplification of structural funding should help to make iteasier for all participants to operate.

By publishing ‘Agenda 2000’ (1) the Commission already has shown the key issues concerning the reform ofstructural funding and has proposed the financial framework. Those proposals now will have to be detailed in thestructural regulations the Commission should propose early next year. In principle these regulations should bedecided by the Council before the end of 1998 so that the implementation of new programmes should begin from1 January 2000.

Agenda 2000 indeed proposes that regions with important economic and social restructuring should be integratedin a new objective 2. This would include areas affected by change in the industrial, service and fisheries sectors,rural areas in serious decline because of a lack of economic diversification and urban districts in difficultybecause of a loss of economic activities. In this context, Community intervention should combine all forms ofstructural support. In the interest of simplification, this should result in a single programme by assisted region.Furthermore, this assistance should be geographically concentrated on the worst affected areas. The coverageshould be as consistent as possible with the areas assisted by the Member States under Article 92 (3) c of theEC Treaty (so-called national assisted areas). In all rural areas outside objective 1, rural development measures toaccompany and complement market policies will be co-financed by the European agriculture guidance andguarantee fund (EAGGF) guarantee section. They will embrace all types of measures supporting structuraladjustment and rural development as presently co-financed by the EAGGF guidance section. Included in thesame legal framework as the present accompanying measures, they will be applied horizontally and implementedin a decentralized way at the appropriate level, at the initiative of Member States. The same approach will applyto fishery coastal areas as far as the interventions of the financial instrument for fisheries guidance (FIFG) areconcerned.

Eventual consequences for areas in Austria cannot be given for the time being as details of the new structuralfunding still have to be worked out and the final decision will be up to the Council.

Areas currently eligible for objectives 2 and 5b, which will no longer be eligible under the future criteria shouldbenefit from transitional measures from the structural funds, during a limited period after 1999.

(1) Doc. COM(97) 2000 final.


by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(16 July 1997)

Subject: Natura 2000

1. Has the Commission discussed how to cooperate between DGs in order to use structural funds and the CAPto finance management plans and protection of important sites?


2. One of the main problems of the CEECs joining the EU is how to protect their natural heritage from beingdestroyed. How far have the applicant countries come in the process of transposing and implementing the Habitatdirective and Natura 2000? When they join the Union, the PHARE programme (which currently financestransposition and implementation) ceases to exist. How will the Commission ensure that enough resources aremade available for these countries to continue the process after they have joined?


(26 September 1997)

1. Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1), knownas the Habitats Directive, requires the Member States to indicate to the Commission the amounts they considernecessary for conserving the priority natural habitats and priority species on Natura 2000 sites. To date noMember State has forwarded this estimate, which is indispensable for adopting the action framework forCommunity co-financing.

However, the Commission has already had preparatory contacts to determine the extent to which Natura 2000could be incorporated into existing financial instruments, which already in fact include many agro-environmental measures, including for the protection of areas of outstanding natural interest.

2. Following the applications for accession to the Community from 10 countries of central and easternEurope, the Commission is closely monitoring the approximation of those countries' legislation to that of theCommunity, including the nature protection legislation included in the environmental ‘acquis'. The Commis-sion's opinion (2) contains an assessment of the associated countries' position with regard to the acquis. In most ofthese countries there is a long tradition of nature protection and there has been good progress in adoptinglegislation to implement Directive 92/43/EEC.

In the communication ‘Agenda 2000: For a stronger and wider Union' (3), which it has also just presented, theCommission proposes a bolstering of pre-accession aid from 2000 onwards, including − in addition to PHARE −an agricultural development component and a structural component. Once they accede, the new Member Stateswill be eligible for various Community financial instruments capable of assisting action to protect their naturalheritage.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.(2) Doc. COM(97) 2001 to 2003.(3) Doc. COM(97) 2000.


by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(18 July 1997)

Subject: Fire safety in hotels

Further to my Written Question E-1423/97 (1), why has the study not yet been published in English? Is theCommission happy with the low response rate to the questionnaire issued by the group carrying out the study(ceten-apave) i.e. 1 213 returns from 20 000 questionnaires covering only eight EU countries?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 29.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

The Commission can provide further information to complement that given previously in reply to theHonourable Member’s written question E-1423/97.


It is true that the investigative study on fire safety was available only in French. This was due to its lengthincluding annexes (more than 750 pages). It can be used as a basis for information and action by the Commissionwithout it having to be translated.

The enquiry was managed on a large scale. The response, of more than 1 000 replies, was considered as beingsufficiently representative to consolidate and analyse the information collected from private and public officialbodies.


by Giuseppe Rauti (NI) to the Commission

(22 July 1997)

Subject: Refund of income tax to single-income families

Is the Commission aware that an EEC Directive is being disregarded increasingly frequently in Italy − forexample on the basis of an unclear judgment of the Italian Constitutional Court, No 358 of 24.7.1995. Since 1976this Directive has recognized the right of single-income families (i.e. in which only one spouse is in paidemployment) to a 50% income tax refund, together with the relevant interest and currency revaluation?

In view of the great social importance of the issue, does the Commission intend to prevail upon the ItalianGovernment to ensure that the Directive is applied in Italy too?


(28 October 1997)

Income taxation falls within the competence of the Member States. No Community directive (in particular notDirective 76/207/EEC (1)) creates an obligation with respect to the method used for the income taxation ofcouples. Therefore the Commission has no case to raise with the Italian government.

(1) Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regardsaccess to employment, vocational training and promotion and working conditions − OJ L 39, 14.2.1976.


by Renate Heinisch (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1997)

Subject: Level of European Union funding awarded to universities and research institutes in Baden-Wurttemberg in 1996

For what measures was Community funding given to universities and research institutes in Baden-Wurttembergin 1996 and what amounts came from

1. the fourth framework programme on research, technological development and demonstration,

2. Community programmes in the energy and environment sectors,

3. Community Initiatives, especially the Interreg programme,

4. the Socrates, ‘Leonardo da Vinci’ and ‘Youth for Europe’ programmes,

5. the Regional and Structural Funds and

6. other Community programmes?



(24 November 1997)



by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission

(24 July 1997)

Subject: Introduction of the institution of environmental inspectors

Following the amendment to Article 171 of the Treaty on European Union and the decision by the ECJ to beginimposing penalties (OJ C 63, p. 2, 28.2.1997), we are on the threshold of a new era of more vigorousimplementation of Community law. Given that Community environmental law has developed particularlyrapidly over the last twenty years and attracts lively interest among EU citizens and with a view to encouragingand supporting attempts by the Member States to implement the legislation in question and to avoid onerousfines from the ECJ, will the Commission say whether it intends to introduce the institution of Communityenvironmental inspectors, using as a model the arrangements obtaining in other sectors of Community policy?


(15 September 1997)

The Commission is fully conscious of the major role inspection bodies can play in the area of the environment. Itsees it as extremely important that the competent authorities in the various Member States fulfil their inspectionfunctions in such a way as to ensure the effective protection of the environment. It would draw the HonourableMember’s attention, in this context, to its Communication of 22 October 1996 on the implementation ofCommunity environmental law (1), in which it stated its intention to adopt recommendations defining,specifically, guidelines for environmental inspections. In this way it hopes to help reduce the great disparity inthis area between the situations currently obtaining in the various Member States.

The Council, in its Resolution of 19 June 1997, confirms the approach advocated by the Commission and calls onthe latter to draw up, on the basis of the work accomplished in the context of Impel (2), minimum criteria forinspection missions carried out by Member States. The Commission is also called on to look at possible ways ofenabling Member States to ensure uniform application and implementation of Community environmental law.

(1) COM(96) 500 final.(2) European Union Network for Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental Law.


by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE) to the Commission

(24 July 1997)

Subject: Charges for the right to sell alcohol

Only Systembolaget, a state-owned company, currently has the right to sell alcohol to the general public inSweden. Private firms and importers may, however, obtain licences from the Alcohol Inspectorate to sell alcoholto restaurants, or to Systembolaget.


The licences are very expensive and do not take account of the amount of alcohol actually sold. Instead,companies pay for the right to sell up to a given limit. For example, in order to obtain a licence, a company whichsells 250 litres of spirits has to pay for the right to sell 50 000 litres. This both discriminates against SMEs andimpedes the free movement of goods.

Does the Commission take the view that the current system of licensing and the cost of the licences are fair?If not, what does it intend to do about them?


(20 October 1997)

The Swedish state monopoly on the retail sale of alcoholic drinks run by Systembolaget, to which theHonourable Member refers, is currently the subject of a request for a preliminary ruling before the Court ofJustice (1). The Court has been asked to rule on the compatibility of the Swedish alcohol retailing system withArticles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission has also received complaints from members of the public and traders about the system forlicensing sales of alcohol to restaurants or to Systembolaget, as well as about the costs involved. The conditionsthat must be met in order to obtain licences could be impeding transfers to Sweden of alcoholic drinks from otherMember States, in which case they would be incompatible with Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty.The Commission is investigating these complaints and will also take account in its assessment of the preliminaryruling which the Court is expected to deliver shortly in the above-mentioned case.

(1) Case C-189/95 Aklagaren v. Harry Franzen.


by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 July 1997)

Subject: Pollution of Lake Koroneia

Lake Koroneia is one of the Greek wetland biotopes protected by Directive 92/43/EEC (1). Despite the fact that itis a protected site, the Lake is subjected to permanent pollution, since industrial waste from the entire Langadharegion is being illegally discharged into the Lake; ecological disaster is imminent and the relevant Greekauthorities are indifferent to the situation.

In its answer of 22.11.1996 to my Question No E-2677/96 (2) on the problem of pollution facing Lake Koroneia,it stated that ‘(it) has been informed of the environmental problems affecting Lake Koroneia ... (and) hasapproached the Greek authorities and requested all the relevant information’. It goes on to say ‘if theCommission finds that the Community rules in this area have been infringed it will, if necessary, instituteinfringement proceedings under Article 169 of the Treaty’.

Will the Commission say, following the recent findings that suggest that pollution in Lake Koroneia has becomeeven more serious, what information has been supplied to it by the Greek authorities, precisely which measures itintends to take to implement Community environmental law properly in this specific case and whether it intendsto institute infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the Treaty?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.(2) OJ C 72, 7.3.1997, p. 72.


Answer given by Ms Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

Having previously sent letters to a number of environmental associations, the Commission has written severaltimes to the Greek authorities, asking them precisely what measures they intend to take to stop industries in theDrymos area discharging dangerous liquids into Lake Koroneia and what schemes they intend to introduce toprevent further pollution of this lake, particularly in relation to the pollution reduction programme provided forin Article 7 of Directive 76/464/EEC on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into theaquatic environment of the Community (1).

Replying to these letters, the Greek authorities have admitted that pollution of the lake has reached a criticallevel. They have, moreover, sent the Commission precise information on industrial operating conditions in thearea (letters dated 21 February 1997 and 12 August 1997). This correspondence shows that most of these firmsare still discharging effluent into Lake Koroneia and are not complying with the environmental rules laid down inCommunity legislation, in particular Directive 76/464/EEC.

Furthermore, the Minister for the Environment is drafting a ministerial Decision which includes a series ofmeasures to protect Lake Koroneia. To enable the necessary measures to be introduced swiftly, Communityfinancial assistance (from the Structural Funds) has been requested.

It is the Commission's view that, in spite of the Greek government's efforts, the measures which have beennotified are still inadequate. Further action needs to be taken, as swiftly as possible, to stop the pollution of LakeKoroneia.

(1) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976.


by Richard Balfe (PSE) to the Council

(28 July 1997)

Subject: Sri Lanka

Will the Council update its declaration on behalf of the European Union on Sri Lanka, released on 17 April 1997,in the light of recent developments in that country?

Answer

(26 November 1997)

The European Union is closely monitoring developments in the political situation in Sri Lanka and makes itsposition known, where appropriate, by means of declarations and demarches.

In its Declaration of 17 April 1997, the European Union welcomed the exchange of letters between the Presidentof Sri Lanka and the leader of the opposition on a bipartisan approach to the ethnic conflict in that country.

The European Union continues to support this constructive approach and hopes that it will contribute to anending of confrontational politics in Sri Lanka, in particular through the conclusion of a national agreement.

The European Union remains ready to assist reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts as soon as this becomespossible.




(24 July 1997)

Subject: EU support for the slaughter of calves

An article published in July 1997 by An Bord Bia, the Irish food board, states that over 2.3 million animals havebeen killed and taken out of the food chain in response to the BSE crisis. A total of 924 100 of these were calvesless than 20 days old.

Under the EU’s calf slaughter scheme, compensation payments have been paid to farmers for each male calfslaughtered.

Animal welfare and some veterinary groups, including the Irish Veterinary Union, have opposed the scheme,arguing that there was no evidence that it would help the eradication of BSE. These groups argued that therandom nature of the scheme meant that most of the animals slaughtered would probably not be contaminatedwith BSE.

What evaluations has the Commission undertaken of the scheme so far? Has it any evidence to suggest that thescheme is beneficial in terms of eradicating BSE? In the absence of any such evidence, will it end the scheme?


(10 October 1997)

According to information provided by Member States, up to mid-July 1997, the number of young bovinesslaughtered under these measures was about 1 900 000 animals split in the following schemes:

− exceptional measures for Belgium, France and the Netherlands: 98 500 young veal calves;

− processing premium: 993 000 male calves;

− early marketing premium: 808 500 young veal calves.

Only the first scheme which operated between April and July 1996, could be related directly to BSE consumerfears. It had a beneficial effect on the markets concerned. The aim of the other two schemes is to reduce beefproduction, thus helping to restore the beef market balance, either by the exclusion of a certain number of newborn animals from the food chain (the processing premium) or by a reduction of the final weight of commercialveal (the early marketing premium).

The first scheme is no longer in operation, and the other two schemes were foreseen for two years (December1996 to December 1998).

The Commission has already presented to the Council an interim report (1) concerning the processing premiumand the early marketing premium. A second report is being prepared.

(1) COM(97) 165 final.


by Marie-Noelle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

(24 July 1997)

Subject: EU-Japan agreement on motor vehicles

What steps will the Commission take to review the EU-Japan agreement on motor vehicles signed in July 1991?

Can the Commission say whether the level of penetration of Japanese cars in Europe has increased significantlysince the agreement was signed?


Have controls been applied to ensure that Japanese manufacturers have not sold more cars than provided forunder the agreement?

Given the worsening unemployment problems in the sector, will the Commission intervene with regard totraining and restructuring as provided for under the agreement?


(23 October 1997)

The agreement signed in July 1991, known as the ‘elements of consensus', is a transitional measure allowingEuropean manufacturers a period of time to restructure in order to be able to compete in a fully open Europeanmarket on an equal footing with other global competitors. Under the terms of the ‘elements of consensus', and inkeeping with the Community's international obligations under the World trade organisation (WTO), theagreement will expire on 31 December 1999.

The elements of consensus provide that Japan will monitor exports to the Community and the five Member Statesthat previously restricted imports, during this transitional period. The elements of consensus contain forecasts ofexports in 1999, linked to assumptions about demand in that year. The forecasts for the intervening years areworked out through regular consultations between the Commission and the Government of Japan. In the processthey take account of market developments. Forecasts for exports to the five Member States that previouslyrestricted imports from Japan are directly linked to the forecast change in demand for those countries.

As regards the actual number of cars exported from Japan to the Community, it should be noted that in 1993 thiswas in line with the forecast agreed between the Commission and MITI, whereas since 1994 actual exports havelagged behind the forecasts made by the Commission and MITI. Exports to the enlarged Community in 1995were 795 000 units, and exports in 1996 were 808 000 units (1), whereas forecast levels of exports to theCommunity in those years were 1 063 000 units in 1995 and 1 079 000 units in 1996.

Training and restructuring are primarily the industry's responsibility. However, improved vocational training andpromotion of human resource development are also top priorities of Commission policy designed to ensure thecompetitiveness of the industry. To this end the Commission has launched objective 4 of the structural funds, andthe ADAPT and small and medium enterprises (SME) Community initiatives, aimed at funding intangibleinvestment to facilitate the adaptation of workers to industrial change. The principal aim of these initiatives is tostrengthen employment and job qualifications, to address future skills needs and to anticipate the consequencesof industrial change and changes in production systems. Furthermore, two parallel transnational networks ofindustry training experts from the automobile manufacturers and from the automotive component suppliers havebeen set up with funding from the Leonardo programme. The objective of these networks is to stimulate theexchange of information, the dissemination of best practice and the development of innovative new trainingproducts.

(1) Source: Japanese Automotive Manufactures’Association (JAMA) and AAA.


by John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission

(29 July 1997)

Subject: Food aid

How far does the Commission intend to utilize part of the beef intervention stocks for food aid in the form oftinned food, and how does it justify a failure to respond to requests to this effect from aid organizations involvedand countries in extreme need, while at the same time maintaining that there are no outlets for the beefintervention stocks?

Calculations also reveal that tinned meat can be made available in a way that is central in budgetary terms, incontrast to the conventional intervention procedure for beef and veal.



(7 October 1997)

Council Regulation (EC) No 1292/96 on food-aid policy and food-aid management and special operations insupport of food security (1) states that food aid products must reflect as closely as possible the dietary habits ofthe recipient population. The choice of products is therefore determined by need and not by availability.

The products supplied as Community food aid, for which the Commission is responsible, are normally thoserequested by the country in question or the organisation through which the aid is routed. Tinned beef is rarelyasked for and over the last two years less than 400 tonnes has been supplied. The Commission was recently askedto supply tinned beef or pork for use in North Korea but the conclusion from assessments on the spot by both theWorld Food Programme (WFP) and the Commission was that these products were not the most appropriate to theprimary needs of this famine-affected country. On 23 May 1997 the Commission announced significantemergency aid to the people of North Korea. Part of this is some 155 000 tonnes of food aid, to be delivered inclose collaboration with the WFP, mainly in the form of cereal products, and part is a nutritional and publichealth programme. The total value of the aid is ECU 55.8 million.

The Commission has no up-to-date calculations showing that provision of tinned beef is less costly than theconventional intervention procedure. In any case the supply of products as food aid for the sole reason that theyare in surplus and in intervention storage runs counter to the thinking behind the abovementioned Regulation.

(1) OJ L 166, 5.7.1996.


by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission

(29 July 1997)

Subject: Complaint about fixed book prices in the German-speaking area

The Austrian chain of bookshops Libro-Diskont has lodged a complaint with the Commission concerning thefixing of book prices in the German-speaking area.

What is the present state of this procedure, when are decisions likely to be taken, and how is the Commissiontaking account of Article 128(4) of the EC Treaty in this connection?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 1997)

The Commission is still in the process of examining both the notification of the Austro-German book resale pricemaintenance arrangement based on the collective agreement known as the ‘Sammelrevers' and the complaintswhich have been lodged against it. It is unable to say at this stage exactly when further steps will be taken in theproceedings.

In the light of Article 128 of the EC Treaty, the Council (Culture Affairs) has requested the Commission,pursuant to Article 152 of the Treaty (1), to examine the significance of Article 128(4) for the application ofTreaty articles relating to cross-border resale price maintenance systems and, if necessary, to indicate whatchanges are needed if such book resale price maintenance agreements are to remain in force in individuallanguage areas. The Commission is currently examining this matter as well, in accordance with the Council'srequest. At the moment it is unable to say precisely when this investigation will be concluded.

(1) OJ C 305, 7.10.1997.



by Ludivina Garcıa Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Transition costs for the move towards increased competition in the Spanish electricity sector

The Spanish Government has come to an agreemnt with the electricity companies on the regulations governingthis sector. The agreement has resulted in a draft law which has initiated the necessary procedure.

The draft law provides for aid of around Ptas 2 billion to be granted to the electricity companies towardstransition costs for the move to increased competition.

Does the Commission believe that the granting of such aid complies with the principles and proceduresconcerning the transitional arrangements provided for in Article 23 of the directive on the internal market inelectricity?


(14 October 1997)

Directive 96/92/EEC of 19 December 1996 on common rules for the internal market in electricity (1) states inArticle 24 that ‘those Member States in which commitments of guarantees of operation given before the entryinto force of this Directive may not be honoured on account of the provisions of this Directive may apply for atransitional regime which may be granted to them by the Commission’. This permits Member States to derogatetemporarily from the requirements of some of the provisions of the Directive in order to prevent strandedinvestments, committed in the past, causing major difficulties to companies when adapting to the newcompetitive market. It should also be noted that, prior to the introduction of any such measures, the Member Statemust apply and gain acceptance of the proposed measures by the Commission.

The system foreseen in the latest Spanish draft law of implementation, however, sets out the so-called system oftransition to competition of the electricity undertakings in order to ease their evolution to a competitiveenvironment. This scheme does not contemplate any exemption from the application of the provisions ofDirective 96/92/EEC to the electricity undertakings but the mere possibility of granting them an additionalpayment above those they can obtain in the market during a fixed period so as to ensure their financial stability.Thus, it does not appear, at the present stage, that the measures fall within the scope of Article 24.

Notwithstanding this, the Commission is following closely the process of implementation of Directive96/92/EEC in Spanish law, in order to guarantee an exact application of its principles and provisions.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.10.1997.


by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Complaints about the Belgian system for imposing fines on road transport operators

Is the Commission aware that the system for imposing fines on foreign drivers in Belgium is particularlydiscriminating in that, unlike Belgian drivers, they are required to pay fines on the spot?

This system is to be retained until national legislation has been brought into line with European legislation, evenalthough the European Court of Justice has ruled, in case C-29/95 − E. Pastoors and Trans-Cap GmbH vs theBelgian State − of 23 January 1997, that this practice is completely contrary to European rules.

Netherlands road transport organizations recently brought a complaint before the European Commission againstthe Belgian government calling for the Belgian system for imposing fines on foreign drivers to be abolished withimmediate effect.


Is the Commission further aware of arrangements applicable to fines imposed on foreign drivers in other MemberStates and whether these too might frequently be open to interpretation as discriminatory? Would theCommission be prepared to take stock of systems for imposing fines or other discriminatory arrangements inother countries, and to test them against the above judgment?

Will the Commission deal speedily with the complaint by the Dutch road transport undertakings and will itensure the immediate introduction of an appropriate and equitable system of fines in Belgium, and possibly inother Member States where such practices are current, regardless of declarations of intent to bring nationallegislation into line with European law by an as yet unspecified date?

If so, how? If not, why not?



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Presumed corruption of Belgian gendarmerie

Is the Commission aware that the number of complaints about the actions of the Belgian authorities in carryingout checks on road traffic is increasing exponentially (1).

Is the Commission also aware that when foreign drivers in particular are stopped for trivial infringements, finesare imposed that bear no relation to the infringement recorded, and are imposed in ways that amount todiscrimination against foreign drivers? Cases that have come to our attention include the treatment meted out on28 June 1997 to the Kruiningen-based Meijer undertaking, which, because the fine imposed could not be paid inBelgian currency, was, despite offering to pay in Netherlands currency, banned from continuing its journey andhad its vehicle towed away, it being seriously damaged in the process; and the treatment of the Hagestein-basedLeeuw undertaking, also in Belgium, in May 1997.

Is the Commission aware that percentages are paid by tow-away services in Belgium and France to the servicesimposing the fines, including the Belgian gendarmerie?

Does the Commission consider such practices to be compatible with the principle of non-discrimination andfreedom to provide services as laid down in Article 75 of Directive 88/599 (2)?

Is the Commission prepared to contact the national authorities with a view to calling a halt to inadmissiblepractices of this kind (3)?

Is so how? If not, why not?

(1) See my Written Question E-2607/97.(2) OJ L 325, 29.11.1988, p. 55.(3) See my question (H-0082/96) for Question Time at the April 1996 part-session − EP Report of Proceedings 4-480.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2607/97 and E-2930/97

given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 1997)

The Commission receives complaints from time to time concerning the manner in which checks are carried outby the authorities of various Member States. There has been no exponential increase in complaints relating to theBelgian authorities. However, the Commission is aware of the current anomaly within Belgian law under whichnon-resident transport operators in Belgium who do not choose the specified on-the-spot fine but instead opt fortheir case to be pursued through the courts are obliged to pay a higher amount for each offence. The Commissionhas asked for formal confirmation from the Belgian authorities that they have the necessary legislativeamendments in hand to rectify this situation in the near future.


In a different but related exercise, the Commission will ask all Member States for details of the penalty systemswhich they currently operate and is examining whether enforcement activity in some Member States is biasedagainst non-nationals. This examination will take into account the ruling by the Court of Justice (Case C-29/95,E. Pastoors). Should the outcome of the exercise provide grounds for concern, the Commission will opendiscussions with the relevant Member States to address the problem.

The Commission has no evidence of particular arrangements within Belgium or France between the gendarmerieand tow-away firms which might give rise to any possible conflicts of interest. An investigation into a specificallegation was carried out and the Belgian authorities subsequently assured the Commission that no irregulararrangements exist between the gendarmerie and the tow-away firm and that instructions had been issued toensure regular checks are carried out on enforcement practice.


by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Organic farming practices

The organic livestock regulation proposes to prohibit the use of more than two courses of allopathic treatment peranimal in a year or lifetime. What is the scientific basis for the Commission’s recommendations?

Does this effectively prevent farmers from using wormers for ewes at lambing?


(6 October 1997)

The Commission proposal (1) for a Council regulation supplementing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organicproduction of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (2) toinclude livestock production, includes a provision that would prohibit the sale of organic products from animalsthat have received more than two courses of treatment of allopathic medicines other than for parasites. Thustreatments for parasites (e.g. wormers for ewes) would not be covered by this provision and in consequencewould be permissible.

In organic farming, the health of animals is centered on three basic principles: choice of breeds resistant todisease, use of organic feedingstuffs and extensive housing conditions. There is evidence that disease problemsare less severe if these principles are applied and recourse to allopathic treatments only necessary in exceptionalcases.

Scientific evidence is taken into account in organic farming but it is not the primary consideration in developingrules. Organic farming constitutes a specific form of production, benefiting from special labelling andguaranteeing a particular quality of product to meet consumers’ expectations of such products

The restrictions with regard to organic husbandry in general, and in particular those with regard to the use ofallopathic medicinal products, have been established after careful examination of existing organic farmingpractices in the Member States and the expectations of consumers with regard to these practices. In this context,the use of allopathic medicinal products has to be limited to a strict minimum. The Parliament delivered in itssession of May 1997 its opinion on the Commission proposal after a detailed examination of proposedproduction standards and confirmed the basic principle of limited treatments.

(1) COM(96) 366.(2) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991.



by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Organic farming practices

In the organic livestock regulation the Commission has recommended the imposition of a limit of 20%conversion feedstuffs.

Does the Commission acknowledge that the limit set is excessively restrictive for many farmers, particularlythose in the process of conversion? Will this proposal not further inhibit farmers from converting to organicpractices?


(6 October 1997)

The Commission proposal (1) for a Council regulation supplementing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organicproduction of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs (2) toinclude livestock production includes a provision permitting the feeding of animals with ‘in conversion’feedingstuffs (up to 20%), i.e. crop products from land under organic production for at least one year. In addition,the proposal also provides that, during a transitional period expiring on 31 December 2000, conventionalfeedingstuffs to a maximum of 10% (for ruminants) and 20% (for non-ruminants) may be used.

The restrictions with regard to organic husbandry in general, and in particular, with regard to the feeding of theanimals concerned, have been established after a careful examination of the existing organic husbandry practicesin the Member States and the expectations of consumers with regard to these practices. In this context feedingwith organic feedingstuffs is considered an essential element, and therefore the use of non organic feedingstuffshas been severely restricted.

The Parliament delivered in its session of May 1997 its opinion on the Commission proposal after a detailedexamination of the proposed production standards. In its amendments Nos 58 and 63, the Parliament proposedmore flexible arrangements with regard to the conversion to organic husbandry:

− an extension of the transitional period for use of conventional feedingstuffs to five years;

− a limitation of the conversion period to an overall maximum of two years when the conversion is made forthe complete holding and covers simultaneously its livestock and crop production.

The Commission accepted these elements and will introduce them in its amended proposal, currently underpreparation.

(1) COM(96) 366.(2) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991.


by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: VAT on sanitary protection

Is the Commission aware that there is widespread support both from retailers and customers of sanitaryprotection for women to remove VAT from these products?

How does the Commission propose to recognize these demands?



(6 October 1997)

The Commission is aware that retailers associations often call for the abolition of VAT on sanitary products forwomen in the United Kingdom.

Generally speaking, the Commission has to stress that VAT is a general consumption tax which should, inprinciple, be levied on all kind of goods and services. Currently existing zero rates in some Member States are anexception to this principle. They are therefore only allowed on a temporary basis and for a restricted number ofproducts. For the time being, the Commission does therefore not envisage to propose exempting from VAT(with or without refund of input tax) sanitary products for women. If Member States consider sanitary productsfor women to be goods of basic need, they may use the existing option for the application of the reduced VATrate.

In fact, under current Community legislation Member States may apply a reduced rate of at least 5% to sanitaryprotection products (Article 12 (3) (a) and Annex H (category 3) of the 6th VAT Directive 77/388/EEC on theharmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes − Common system of value added tax:uniform basis of assessment (1)). This arrangement is, however, an option only and as one can see from the tablebelow the majority of Member States has decided to impose the standard rate on sanitary products for women:

B DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK

21 25 15 8 16 5,5 0 16 15 6 20 17 22 25 17,5

The current situation will be subject to revision in the context of the introduction of the new common system ofVAT which will address the question of VAT rates harmonisation, including a revision of the list of goods andservices qualifying for a reduced rate. More details on the Commission plans in this area are to be found in theappropriate work programme which has been adopted in July 1996 (2).

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.(2) COM(96) 328 final.


by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Morocco’s nuclear energy programme

Is the Commission aware of Morocco’s nuclear energy programmes which, according to an article whichappeared in 1993 in the US publication National Trade Data Bank Market Reports, are aimed at producing3 000 MW of nuclear energy in 2000 and 4 700 MW in 2010?

Is the EU involved, through its cooperation programmes, in Morocco’s nuclear energy policy, which plans to useFrench nuclear technology?

If so, what are the Commission’s views on Morocco’s energy future and its nuclear safety?

Will the high-tension electricity conduit between Spain and Morocco that is currently under construction be usedto transport electricity to Africa or instead to transport electricity to Spain following the development ofMorocco’s nuclear energy programmes?



(14 October 1997)

As far as the Commission is aware, no nuclear power plant is foreseen in Morocco before the year 2010.

Two French companies were awarded a contract by the Moroccan government to build a nuclear research centreat Maamora, just outside Rabat, in collaboration with France’s Commission de l’energie atomique (CEA).

A separate by the Moroccan government contract with General Atomics from the United States covers theturnkey supply of a fully-equipped research reactor building, including a 2 Megawatt Triga Mark II researchreactor.

The Commission does not finance any programme related to nuclear power under its technical and financialcooperation with Morocco.

The high voltage electricity line near to completion between Spain and Morocco will allow the transport ofelectricity from and into both countries with the aim to facilitate network management and peak-shaving.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: The construction of a subway under the Castel Sant’Angelo in Rome

The construction of the Castel Sant’Angelo subway by Rome City Council was the subject of my questionE-1270/97 (1), in which I asked the Commission inter alia whether Rome City Council had contravened Directive85/337/EEC (2) as regards the environmental impact assessment for the project in question. The project,moreover, is expected to receive funding from the European Investment Bank as part of the FrameworkAgreement for the Rome 2000 project.

There have been recent press reports stating that the building of the subway has been seriously jeopardized owingto a series of archaeological discoveries made during the reconnaissance work on the site on which the subwaywas to be built. In particular, the discovery of St John’s Bastion will mean that the actual width of the subway willbe reduced to around 5 metres, as opposed to the 8 metres originally planned (which many had already deemed tobe insufficient), unless the bastion itself is demolished. However, the bastion is a listed archaeological asset.

1. What are the results of the Commission’s talks with the Italian authorities regarding compliance withDirective 85/337/EEC on the environmental impact assessment?

2. What are the Commission’s views on whether the project can be completed within the scheduledtime-frame?

3. Does the Commission believe that any delays in the building of the subway could jeopardize the granting ofEIB funding, thereby leading to the loss of a major source of financing for the project?

4. Does the Commission consider that any demolition of archaeological assets to enable the subway to be builtin accordance with the original plans could jeopardize the granting of funds by the EIB and does it considerthat such demolition might constitute an infringement of Community legislation?

(1) OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 97.(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.



(30 September 1997)

1. The Commission has approached the Italian authorities regarding the case in hand. It is still waiting for areply.

2. The Commission is not qualified to express an opinion on the completion of the project within the giventime-frame.

3. On the question of whether any delay in completion of the work is liable to compromise the EuropeanInvestment Bank (EIB) funding, only the latter can respond.

4. As for the possible destruction of archaeological remains to enable the project to go ahead, it should benoted that this type of project falls within Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC and is not automatically subject tothe environmental impact assessment procedure. However, for each category of project in Annex II, theauthorities have to determine whether or not the abovementioned procedure is necessary, on the basis, inter alia,of the nature, location and scale of the project. If the authorities decide that impact assessment is not necessary inthis particular case, the Commission could challenge their decision only on the basis of particularly importantand specific information liable to prove the project would have a significant impact by virtue of its size orlocation.

As for the EIB, it grants funds only if Community law is observed in the particular case.


by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Safety of blood and plasma products

A substantial number of manufacturers of plasma derivatives have now taking far-reaching measures aimed atfurther increasing the safety margin with these products. These initiatives comprise the following measures forplasmapheresis donors:

− cutting out one-off donors, resulting in the sole use of qualified donors;

− introduction of a minimum storage period of 60 days for plasma, together with monitoring of donors overthis period;

− using genetic engineering test procedures (genome amplification) to detect viruses transmitted by blood andplasma. This will significantly reduce the risk of donations being obtained during the ‘diagnostic window’phase, i.e. the risk of plasma with an undetected infection entering the manufacturing process.

1. Is the Commission aware of this voluntary action?

2. What is the Commission’s view of these measures, and does it feel that they will further increase the safetymargin and that they can be regarded as a significant contribution to public health?

3. Is the Commission taking account of these voluntary standards, as announced by manufacturers of plasmaderivatives, in its current review of measures for selecting donors and for investigating donations?

4. Does the Commission feel there is a need for standards similar to those which have been introduced forplasma donations and plasma derivatives to be considered for blood donations and blood products intended fortransfusion?



(15 October 1997)

The Commission has been aware of the steps taken on their own initiative by a number of manufacturers ofhuman plasma derivatives concerning the draconian selection of blood donors in order to ensure that the latter arefree of certain viral contaminants.

Measures such as the detection, using genome amplification techniques, of viral antigens carried out on batchesof plasma derivatives, the decision not to use blood donated by one-off donors but to give preference to that ofregular donors and storing donors' blood during the theoretical seroconversion period of at least 60 days are, ofcourse, likely to reduce the risks of contamination by pathogenic agents and are thus contributing to the supply ofplasma derivatives offering a high degree of safety for health.

Current thinking with a view to establishing the most appropriate criteria to be adopted at Community levelregarding the selection of donors, namely their suitability according to the use to which their blood will be putlater (transfusion or fractionation) and regarding the investigation of blood donations is setting great store by theinformation acquired from the most rigorous experiments recently carried out in this field. Since such donationscomprise both whole plasma and plasma derivatives for transfusion purposes, in order to attain the greatestpossible safety level for transfusion purposes, they must fulfil stringent specific requirements, notably that of theuse or not of genome amplification techniques, regarding which approval is not yet unanimous.


by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Service contracts awarded by the Commission

Service contracts are contracts awarded by the various directorates-general of the Commission to outside firmsor organizations and mainly involving administrative activities. These contracts are concerned with the technicalmonitoring, coordination and organization of projects forming part of programmes financed with aid from theEU. The aim is to take the pressure of administrative activities off the Commission.

Is there a list of firms tendering for Commission service contracts?

What is the percentage breakdown by Member State of firms tendering for service contracts from the services ofthe Commission?

What is the percentage breakdown of involvement by the Member States in the award of tenders by theCommission?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1997)

While many service contracts do provide administrative assistance in the monitoring, coordination and technicalorganisation of projects financed by the Community, they also provide technical expertise in areas whereCommission staff do not have specialised knowledge. This is evident in service contracts concluded under bothTitle IV of the financial regulation which is applicable to the general budget, and Title IX which governs theprocedures followed by the departments responsible for external policies. Technical expertise is particularly vitalin technical and scientific fields, and in aid and development for ensuring the success of the Commission'sprojects and programmes.

According to Title IV of the Financial Regulation, there is no centralised comprehensive list of all the firms likelyto tender for contracts to provide services for the Commission as a whole. Each Directorate-General isresponsible for its own public service tendering procedures.


The Commission has scrupulously to apply the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the Financial Regulationas well as the Council directives governing public procurement.

It should be noted that a large part of the services required by the Commission come under Annex 1A ofDirective 92/50/EEC relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public services contracts (1),under which invitations to tender over the relevant threshold must be published in the Official Journal.

Since the Commission is one of the contracting authorities subject to the World Trade Organisation agreement onpublic service contracts, authorising departments have been required to apply the agreement since it came intoforce on 1 January 1996. Public service contracts concluded by the Commission are naturally open to businessesin the Member States and also in non-member countries which have agreed to open their own markets forservices of this category to service providers in the Community.

In the case of service contracts for which publication is not required, the Commission authorising departmentscan use the procedure of a call for expressions of interest. The authorising department publishes a call in theOfficial Journal. Applications are examined on the basis of selection criteria. Applications which are accepted areplaced on a list valid for up to three years. In the case of a specific tender, the authorising department may requestall or some of the applicants on the list or those in a sub-category to submit a tender, which will be examined onthe basis of the award criteria. During its period of validity, the list remains open so that any firm filling theselection criteria may be placed on it.

The following data relates to all the tenders for services under Title VI of the Financial Regulation applicable tothe general budget for 1993-97. Services provided under Title IX of the Financial Regulation (special provisionsapplicable to external aid) are not included.

%

Belgium 27.1Denmark 3.3Germany 7.1Greece 4.4Spain 3.4France 11.6Ireland 2.3Italy 5.3Luxembourg 10.9Netherlands 4.6Austria 0.8Portugal 1.5Finland 1.3Sweden 1.0United Kingdom 15.4

TOTAL 100.0

NB: The above data were prepared on the basis of the contractor's address.For example, a contract for services concluded with the Belgian subsidiary of aGerman firm would be included in the data for Belgium.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.


by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Santa Pola − sales of immature catches

Can the Commission please investigate and respond to reports that Santa Pola is being used as a sales point forimmature catches of hake?


Can it also investigate reports that the Santa Pola Regional Government is demonstrating lack of supervisionover the landing of immature and undersize catches?


(30 October 1997)

The sale of small-sized fish has traditionally been a widespread phenomenon in Mediterranean countries. A fairassessment of the situation, however, should take account of the fact that species from different areas can reachmaturity at different sizes. Thus fish exploited locally in the Mediterranean can reach maturity at a much smallersize than the same species from the Atlantic. This is particularly true for hake.

The protection of small juvenile fish has always been at the centre of the Community’s policy of conservation ofmaritime resources. To this effect, the Council adopted in 1994 a series of technical measures for theMediterranean (including Council Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 laying down certain technical measures for theconservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean (1)) which, amongst other things, specifies a minimumlanding size of hake of 20 centimetres and prohibits the retention, processing and sale of undersized fish.

It is the responsibility of each Member State to ensure compliance with the relevant technical measures underCommunity legislation. To that end, the authorities of Member States must monitor landings and carry outinspections at sea and in port.

The Commission monitors the enforcement activities carried out by the authorities in Member States includingthe implementation of rules concerning the minimum size for hake (20 centimetres).

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994.


by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Steroid prescriptions

Many patients have suffered both physically and financially from being prescribed steroids. Is the Commissionaware of the strong public concern over this issue and does it intend to take any action to raise awarenessamongst patients of the risks involved with taking steroids in prescribed drugs?


by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Safety of steroid drugs

Is an investigation into the safety of steroid drugs to be carried out, and if so what is the likely timescale for theinvestigation?

If such an investigation goes ahead, will the Commission be calling for evidence from victims of side-effectsfrom the drugs and if so, how will such evidence by called for?



given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1997)

Steroids have been available for decades. They are powerful medicaments that have proved their effectiveness invarious therapeutic applications. However, in certain situations they may have serious undesirable effects.Therefore their prescription must follow the well known human-medicine principle of the balance between theadvantage and risk deriving from the administration of a given medicament.

All those medicaments containing steroids currently on the market have been authorised by the Member Statesinvolved. They should, under the Community law in force, (a) acquire all of the information needed in order tomonitor those medicaments and in particular that concerning any undesirable effects they may have on humanbeings and (b) assess that information at scientific level by linking it to the consumption of steroids and takingaccount of the − frequently-observed − cases of incorrect use and serious abuse of those medicaments.

Where, in the light of the pharmacological-monitoring information thus received a Member States feels that itshould amend, suspend or withdraw the marketing authorisation for a medicament it is then requiredimmediately to inform the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. In addition thatMember State has the option, where it feels this to be justified, of laying the matter before the Agency before anydecision is taken. So far neither of those two procedures has yet been initiated in the case of medicinal steroids.


by Roberto Mezzaroma (UPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Tax harmonization

The Commission is requested to turn its attention to the serious problem faced by construction companies inconnection with the indirect taxation levied via the Communal Tax on Immovable Property (the ICI) in Italy.

As you may know, since 1993 this tax has been levied ‘indiscriminately’ on buildings, building land andagricultural land, whoever the owner might be, at a rate varying between 4 and 7 per thousand, calculated byreference to the cadastral value plus 10% in the case of buildings, or the market value in the case of building land.

The inequality to which attention is drawn is the fact that the building industry, which is already suffering theeffects of a housing market that has been in the doldrums since 1992, is now liable to pay tax both on the finishedproduct (buildings) and the raw material (building land), which is not the case in any other sector of industry.

So the ICI, in addition to having contributed to the contraction of the housing market, has considerablyaggravated the already precarious financial situation of the building industry in that firms have to pay tax onunsold or yet to be constructed buildings as well as bearing the cost of the financial charges involved.

A further contradiction and inconsistency arises from the fact that, since 1 January 1993, the ICI has replacedboth the ILOR (local income tax) and the INVIM (communal tax on increases in the value of immovableproperty), which were accordingly abolished, and hence it was supposed to operate to the taxpayer’s advantage.

This measure did not, however, provide any relief for the building industry, for the following reasons. ILOR wasnot payable by construction companies because immovable property constituted the goods which it was thebusiness of such firms to produce and trade in, and so the firms were not liable to pay tax on the basis of thecadastral value of such property but on the income it generated.

The ICI, however, amounts to an annual charge on the ownership of immovable property, which, while it mayvery well be an indicator of fiscal capacity in the case of a private citizen, is the exact opposite in the case of abuilding company.

What action does the Commission intend to take to resolve this problem, which seriously affects manyconstruction companies and undoubtedly results in a large number of bankruptcies and significant job losses, andalso means that the question of fiscal harmonization will not yet have been resolved for all countries includingItaly, which is seriously handicapped by problems of this nature, by the date set for the introduction of the singlecurrency?



(8 October 1997)

The Commission would recall that the Member States are free to choose and design their tax systems with theonly condition that the general obligations resulting from Community law are respected. Since these obligationsare not affected in the cases mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission dos not see any possibilityof intervening on legal grounds. Moreover, the Commission, desirous to respect the subsidiarity principle, doesnot have the intention of initiating any political action at Community level, since the problems which have arisenfor the Italian construction industry produce no direct effects beyond the national level.


by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Council

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Indicted war criminals in the former Yugoslavia

Just over two years ago the UN-declared ‘safe haven’ of Srebrenica fell and thousands are believed to have beenmurdered. Many of them were refugees who had survived the ‘ethnic cleansing’ murder campaigns of 1992.

Two years on, 75 people have been indicted on all sides for war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. Only nine havebeen taken into the custody of the International Criminal Tribunal in the Hague. Many continue to exertsubstantial economic and political power.

Even though the NATO-led SFOR troops in Bosnia Hercegovina have promised to arrest indicted war criminals‘encountered in the course of normal duties’ and have a duty to do so under international law, only one has beenarrested and another has been killed in a shoot-out. This was in spite of several encounters between the troops andthe suspects.

What measures does the Council propose to take to ensure that indicted war criminals in the former Yugoslaviaare brought to justice in order to prevent further acts of genocide there? Has the EU conducted any evaluation todate on the effectiveness of the SFOR operation?

Does the Council believe from any evaluations to date that the UN was correct to give NATO control ofimplementing the Dayton Peace Agreement? Has the EU liaised with the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe (OSCE) in monitoring the implementation of Dayton? What conclusions has it reachedfrom any such liaison?

Answer

(26 November 1997)

For the European Union, the bringing to justice of war criminals before the International Criminal Tribunalremains one of the preconditions for true reconciliation and lasting peace in the region. Consequently, in itsconclusions of 29 April 1997 concerning the application of conditionality with a view to developing a coherentstrategy for the EU’s relations with the countries of the region, the Council explicitly cited compliance with theobligations arising from the peace treaties, including cooperation with the ICT, as one of the prior conditions forthe development of those relations. The Union continues to apply pressure and to require of all parties concernedthat war criminals are brought before the ICT. This requirement has also been underlined by the SteeringCommittee of the Peace Implementation Council at Sintra, whose conclusions the European Union fullysupports. In addition, the European Union makes a financial contribution to the ITC.

The Union favours close coordination between all the international institutions, including the OSCE and NATO. The European Council, meeting in Amsterdam in June 1997, reaffirmed the European Union’s determination tocooperate with the other members of the international community to induce the parties concerned inBosnia-Herzegovina to fulfil their commitments in the framework of the peace agreements in their entirety. TheEuropean Union believes that the endeavours of the High Representative and of international organizations andinstitutions such as the OSCE the UNHCR, the Council of Europe and others will be decisive in creating theconditions necessary for implementing the peace agreements. Consequently, it considers that thoseorganizations and institutions should remain engaged in the region until a real stablilization of the situation canbe observed.


Nevertheless, these endeavours have only been possible thanks to the military presence on the ground, currentlyprovided by SFOR, which in any event is only responsible for implementing the military aspects of theDayton/Paris Peace Agreements. This operation has been successful, since SFOR has succeeded in preventingwar from breaking out afresh, thus re-establishing the security needed for the implementation of the civil aspects.The European Union believes that maintaining a military presence is necessary to this end.

The European Union believes that the OSCE’s efforts have been essential to the implementation of the civilaspects of the peace agreements. The OSCE, in the framework of the supervision it has provided, has preparedand organized national and local elections. At its meeting in Dublin in December 1996, the European Councilamong other things declared itself in favour of the OSCE continuing to play a role. Consequently, the EuropeanUnion is in favour of the supervision by the OSCE of other elections in the region, in particular in Serbia andMontenegro, as also in Republika Srpska, if appropriate. As a result of the pressure exerted by the EuropeanUnion to this end, as expressed in its Declarations of 31 July and 7 August 1997, the Belgrade authorities invitedthe OSCE to supervise the elections on 21 September 1997.


by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(24 July 1997)

Subject: Community vessel Arpon arrested by the Argentinean authorities

On 13 May 1997 the Argentinian authorities arrested the Community vessel Arpon, which was fishing ininternational waters off the Argentine coast, and have been holding it since that date.

Can the Commission tell me what steps it has taken to clarify what happened and to get the Argentinianauthorities to release the vessel?

What is the current and future picture with regard to EU-Argentinian cooperation? What benefits does theEU grant Argentina? What aid does the country receive?


(7 October 1997)

The vessel Arpon arrested by the Argentine authorities was not operating within the scope of the FisheriesAgreement between the Community and Argentina. The Commission, anxious to help defend the legitimateinterests of Community vessel owners, has however already several times endeavoured at various levels, bothpolitical and administrative, to clarify the situation. Primary responsibility for resolving situations of this typenonetheless relies in the first place with the owner and then with the flag Member State. The owner, who had thechoice between an out-of-court settlement and court proceedings, has opted for the former.

It is now more than a year since the Commission took the necessary steps on its part towards securing sustainableresponsible exploitation of fishery resources outside the Argentine 200-mile limit. The Arpon incident reinforcesthe need for closer cooperation between the countries involved.

Cooperation between the Community and Argentina has significantly increased in recent years followingsignature of the Cooperation Agreement signed in 1990. The most striking achievements are:

– conclusion in May 1994 of the Fisheries Agreement; this makes available ECU 28 million for scientific andtechnical cooperation

– the Euratom Agreement with Argentina for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, signed atBrussels on 11 June 1996

Activities under the 1990 Cooperation Agreement have embraced various fields:

− ECU 16 million for projects of a social character: ‘Socialization of marginalized juveniles in Buenos Aires’(ECU 9.3 million), ‘Integrated development in Ramen Lista’ (ECU 5.5 million), and ‘Integrateddevelopment of marginalized Areas of Santa Fe’ (ECU 755 000).


− economic cooperation has made great progress in the last few years, notably with the ‘Rational utilization ofenergy’ programme and in the timber sector.

− Argentina is benefiting substantially from the EC International Investment Partners Programme (ECIP),having been assigned ECU 5 million, and from the Al-Invest Programme.

Cooperation on human rights has ensued at the request of the ‘Plaza de Mayo Grandmothers’. The aim isidentification and location of the children who disappeared during the military dictatorship.

Future cooperation is expected to embrace projects on optimum energy utilization, reinforcement of provincialsupport structures for Argentine SMEs, formulation of technical and certification standards and administrativereform.


by Honorio Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Production, importation and marketing of wine designated as ‘port’

The recent Vinexpo-97 world wine and spirits fair, held in Bordeaux, clearly highlighted the fact that producersfrom a variety of regions misuse the designation ‘port’. For example, Californian winegrowers displayed their‘portwine’ products and even had the cheek to present ‘vinhos do Porto’, using labels copied from those of someof the most prestigious Portuguese producers of the authentic Douro wine.

Moreover, in the context of trade negotiations, South Africa is seeking to export to the EU fortified winesdesignated as ‘port’, which of course are no more than poor imitations of the Portuguese product.

Further examples of this can be found in other regions and countries, as the Commission is well aware.

The production of fortified wines designated as ‘port’ − whether in California, South Africa, Australia or anyother country or region, even within the EU − constitutes a clear case of counterfeiting and an infringement ofintellectual property rights and rules on designation of origin.

In view of the above, I would ask the Commission to state:

− what measures it has taken or intends to take, in the context of the external trade policy and the World TradeOrganization, to prohibit effectively the production, importation and marketing in the EU of wines bearingthe designation ‘port’ from California, South Africa, Australia and any other third country;

− what measures it has taken or intends to take at internal level to make the fraudulent marketing of winesbearing the designation ‘port’ illegal and to combat such practices.


(17 October 1997)

1. The name ‘port’, use of which is exclusively reserved for wine originating in the ‘Oporto’ specified regiondelimited under Council Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 laying down special provisions relating to quality winesproduced in specified regions (1), enjoys absolute protection in Community territory. This means that it cannot beused in the designation or presentation of any other wine marketed in the Community, whether Community orimported wine, and also that it may not be used in a derived form such as in ‘port wine’, regardless of whether ornot the actual origin is indicated as in ‘South African port’.


The Honourable Member is also asked to refer to the reply to Written Question E-2485/97 (2) by Mr BarrosMoura also dealing with protection of the designation ‘port’.

2. It is incumbent above all on each Member State to apply Community law properly and combat fraud. Toreinforce control in the wine sector and facilitate direct cooperation between Member States the Council in 1989adopted Regulation (EEC) No 2048/89 laying down general rules on controls in the wine sector (3).The provisions applicable to designation and presentation of wine sector products, which includes Oporto wines,are explicitly included in its scope.

(1) OJ L 84, 27.3.1997.(2) OJ C 82, 17.3.1998, p. 91.(3) OJ L 202, 14.7.1989.


by Inger Schorling (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: EU arms exports

A report published by the Swedish peace movement on arms exports from EU Member States notes that between1989 and 1995, EU Member States conducted arms deals with 32 countries involved in armed conflicts. Thismeans that heavy weapon systems from the Member States could be found in most armed conflicts around theworld. The report also points out that, since 1989, agreements on arms exports have been concluded betweenEU Member States and 27 countries which repeatedly and flagrantly violate human rights.

Has the EU taken any initiatives to restrict international arms exports or required the member States to tighten uptheir policies on arms exports?

Has the Commission drawn up its own report on arms exports or devised a plan with proposals on how armsexports may be restricted?


(2 October 1997)

At their June 1991 meeting the Heads of State and Government agreed that it should be possible to establish acommon approach leading to the harmonisation of national arms export policies and identified certain criteria onwhich such an approach could be based; in June 1992 the Lisbon European Council added to the list of thesecriteria.

In Amsterdam in June 1997 the Heads of State and Government decided that work should be started rapidlywithin the Community to develop a coherent and responsible policy on the control of arms exports.

Community initiatives in this area over recent years have already produced general guidelines on how theabove-mentioned common criteria should be interpreted and implemented. At present particular attention isbeing devoted to the question of what practical measures can be taken to tighten up the procedures relating toend-use accompanying documentation, to ensure that arms are not diverted to another end-use and that exporterscomply with the conditions under which they were granted an export licence.


The Community will be implementing as soon as possible the programme adopted at the end of June 1997 toforestall and combat illegal trafficking in conventional weapons.

In January 1996 the Commission presented a Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on‘The challenges facing the European defence-related industry, a contribution for action at European level’ (1)which included suggestions about arms export policies. The Communication puts forwards a number of pointsfor consideration on action the Community could take, and several of these are being analysed by the Council.During its May 1997 plenary sitting Parliament adopted a report by Mr Titley and a resolution broadly supportingthe Commission's suggestions.

The debate on the Titley report gave the Commission the opportunity to confirm that it intends to continuemaking an active contribution to initiatives aiming to give the Community a coherent policy on this matter.

(1) COM(96) 10.


by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) and Edgar Schiedermeier (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Damage to the environment due to the use of molasses in the yeast industry, at breweries and in thechemical industry

Molasses is a production residue (waste product) of the sugar industry, which is used as a raw material both in thechemical industry and in the production of yeast and by distillers. The residues (waste) are then disposed of bythese industries.

1. What waste is generated by the use of molasses as a raw material:

(a) in production in the yeast industry?

(b) at breweries?

(c) in the chemical industry?

2. How many of the approximately 30 yeast production plants in the EU Member States have their owneffluent treatment plants?

3. What damage is caused to the environment by this waste?


(13 October 1997)

Community legislation on waste does not require Member States to provide the Commission with theinformation requested by the Honourable Members.

Nevertheless, both the chemical industry and treatment and processing intended for the production of foodproducts are covered by Directive 96/61/EC on integrated pollution prevention and control (the IPPCDirective) (1). IPPC sets out the general principles governing the basic obligations of industrial operators, andthese include the avoidance, recovery or disposal of waste while avoiding or reducing any impact on theenvironment.

Three provisions of the IPPC Directive could potentially be relevant for the provision of information such as thatrequested:

− Member States will be required, starting from 30 April 2001, to provide to the Commission representativedata on limit values set by the authorities as conditions contained in operating permits;

− the Commission is required to publish every three years an inventory of the principal polluting emissions toair, water and land as well as the sources responsible;


− the Commission is also required to organise an exchange of information on the best available techniques foreach sector covered by the Directive, and to publish the results every three years. The published resultsshould contain information on all techniques relevant for the protection of the environment as a whole,including for example on-site effluent treatment plants.

(1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.


by Marıa Sornosa Martınez (GUE/NGL)and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Deterioration of the river Segura

The grave deterioration of the river Segura as it passes through Orihuela, the Vega Baja, Murcia and its mouth atGuardamar in Alicante is causing serious environmental and health problems. The stagnant water and putrefyingmud produce insalubrious smells, and cause respiratory and gastro-intestinal problems amongst the population.

For several years, various political parties and citizens’ organizations have been denouncing this situation,without the relevant authorities producing a comprehensive solution to the problem, although a purifying plant isgoing to be constructed for one of the stretches of river in question.

A quality report on the state of the river Segura as it passes through the city of Orihuela produced a generalquality index of less than 70, which was stated to be ‘inadmissible’. This report highlights the total absence ofaquatic life.

The state of neglect of the river could presumably constitute an ecological crime.

1. In view of the situation, does the Commission not believe that Directive 92/43/EEC (1) on the conservationof natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna requires the implementation of a comprehensive programme forcollecting and treating the stagnant water of these stretches of the river with a view to restoring natural life andmaking it possible to use the water for irrigation purposes, once it has been purified, without its indirectconsumption posing any threat to human health?

2. To what extent would the Commission be prepared to consider the possibility of co-funding a plan forreclaiming these stretches of the river, in conjunction with the local authorities?

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


(25 September 1997)

1. The site concerned is neither a special protection area under the terms of Directive 79/409/EEC (1) on theconservation of wild birds, nor a proposed site of Community importance under the terms of Directive92/43/EEC (2) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. The Commission has noinformation about the presence of any species or habitat types of Community interest in the area. For thesereasons Directive 92/43/EEC is not applicable.

2. It is up to the national authorities to submit projects for Community financing within the existingCommunity support framework for Spain. Should this occur, the Commission would carefully assess all aspectsbefore taking any decision with respect to financing.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.(2) OJ L 206, 22.07.92, p. 7.



by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Case of racism in Germany ignored by the authorities

Further to Question E-1239/97 (1) on racism and the Commission’s unsatisfactory answer,

1. what representations has the Commission made to the German Government to condemn the specific act ofracism in question?

2. why has it not yet asked the German authorities to take appropriate action, when the European Union claimsto promote the campaign against racism and xenophobia and the ideals relating thereto?

3. what measures does it intend to take to ensure that its answer is not seen merely as a list of platitudes?

4. with reference to the Council’s joint action against racism, how does it intend to act whenever a MemberState fails to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms?

(1) OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 244.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

1. and 2. As Community law stands at present the Commission cannot intercede with the national authoritiesin regard to a specific racist act.

Specific measures to counter violence, racism, xenophobia and antisemitism are a matter for each Member State,taking into account its constitutional rules and criminal law.

3. For its part the Commission attaches the greatest importance to the issue of racism, which runs counter toeverything that Europe stands for. It deeply regrets any racist act in the Community.

4. The joint action against racism and xenophobia (1) adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 is designed toensure effective judicial cooperation between the Member States, despite existing differences in nationalcriminal law. Its implementation is a matter for the Member States and their authorities alone, and it is not for theCommission, given the powers it possesses at present, to take initiatives in this area.

(1) Common Action 96/443/IAI, OJ L 185, 24.7.1996.


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

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Legislation on telecommunications

The European telecommunications sector is currently preparing for full liberalization on 1 January 1998. I wouldask the Commission to give detailed answers to the following questions and to throw light on any obscure aspectsof legislation or the communication on access.

1. The tariffs for universal service were recently fixed in France. They seem to be on the high side and to forman obstacle to the development of a competitive telecommunications market. Does the Commission agree? If so,what does it intend to do about it? If not, on what criteria does it base its conclusion?

2. A problem for the telecommunications sector is the procedure that must be adopted when an accessproblem is encountered. An approach can be made to the national regulatory authority, a national court, thenational or European (DG 4) competition authority, the ONP committee and the national media authority (in thecase of cable operators). How does the Commission view this problem? Has it had consultations with theMember States about competence problems arising between different authorities in the Member States? If so,what is the outcome? How does the Commission intend to solve competence problems in the future?



(13 October 1997)

France has notified its universal service scheme under Directive 96/19/EC amending Directive 90/388/EEC withregard to the implementation of full competition in telecommunications markets (1). Under this Directive theCommission has to ensure that possible contributions to universal service provision are compatible with theTreaty. It appears from the data provided by the French government that the universal service contributions couldincrease to a certain extent the cost of terminating local calls (from 6.1 to 7.35 centimes per minute) and, giventhe current level of the local tariffs of France Telecom, reduce the opportunities of competition in the local loop.The Commission is therefore assessing the methodology used by the French government to calculate the netburden of universal service provision and will soon start discussing the matter with the French authorities. TheCommission will only take a final position after these discussions.

As regards the various recourses available in case of disagreement regarding access conditions, no case ofconflict has been brought to the Commission’s attention. In cases where there are a number of authorities arecompetent to handle a case, discussion between the various authorities will be necessary to determine which isbest placed to handle the case, taking into account the nature of the infringement, its importance at the nationaland European level and the ability of the various authorities to take effective remedial action.

In some circumstances it may be appropriate for more than one authority to deal with the matter. All relevantauthorities must then cooperate closely in order to avoid conflicting interpretations by national telecommuni-cation regulatory authorities, competition authorities and the Commission. With this in mind and to clarify theimpact of the competition rules, the Commission will soon issue a notice on the application of the competitionrules to access agreements in the telecommunications sector.

(1) OJ L 74, 22.3.1996.


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

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Legislation on telecommunications

The European telecommunications sector is currently preparing for full liberalization on 1 January 1998. I wouldask the Commission to give detailed answers to the following questions and to throw light on any obscure aspectsof legislation or the communication on access.

1. During conciliation on the interconnection directive the European Parliament had a long discussion withthe Council of Telecommunications Ministers about the definition of ‘interconnection’. Parliament’s aim was tooffer (new) service providers access to telecommunications networks (including non-standard network points).However, many access problems have now arisen, the sector being uncertain whether an access problem must bequalified as interconnection or special network access. Can the Commission state precisely and in detail what, inits view, is the difference between ‘special network access’ and ‘interconnection’, which articles in thelegislation and competition rules in the Treaty are relevant and precisely what, in its view, is the legalconsequence of qualification as special market access and/or interconnection (and above all the differences oflegal consequence)?

2. Can the Commission say precisely what is meant by point 93 in conjunction with endnote 68 of itscommunication on the application of the competition rules to access agreements in the telecommunicationssector (1)? Clarification of this question is, after all, crucial for decisions on investment in infrastructure bytelecommunications firms. To what extent is discrimination in pricing permitted when the capacity ofinfrastructure is underutilized? And what criteria are applied in this respect? What view does the Commissiongenerally take of firms which have invested in infrastructure and claim exclusive rights?

3. According to the aforementioned communication, there are two markets for access: the ‘end-user market’and the market for ‘access to facilities’ (Part II). Can the Commission state rather more clearly what itunderstands by ‘specific product market’ so that the sector may be surer about market definitions?

(1) OJ C 76, 11.3.1997, p. 9.



(2 October 1997)

1. Interconnection is defined in Article 2(1) of Directive 97/33/EC on interconnection in telecommunicationswith regard to ensuring universal service and interoperability through application of the principles of opennetwork provision (ONP) (1). This definition states that interconnection refers to the linking of telecommunica-tions networks. Recital 4 of the Directive clarifies, firstly, that the Directive covers those situations where theinterconnected networks are used for the commercial provision of publicly available telecommunicationsservices, and secondly, that the interconnected networks may be owned by the parties involved or may be basedon leased lines or transmission capacity not owned by the parties involved.

According to Article 7(3) of the Interconnection directive, fixed network operators with significant market powermust publish terms and conditions, including tariffs, for their interconnection offerings. Different terms andconditions may be applied to different categories of organisation, where such differences can be objectivelyjustified, but the terms and conditions must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner (Article 6).The interconnection tariffs must be cost-oriented.

2. Special network access is referred to in Article 9 of Directive 95/62/EC on the application of ONP to voicetelephony (2) (this Article is retained as Article 16 in the draft revision of this Directive (3), currently inco-decision procedure). Special network access is designed to encourage innovation and new applications, asexplained in recital 20 of Directive 95/62/EC. Special network access may be requested by any type of telecomsservice provider, whether or not they are operating a telecoms network, and whether they are offering public orprivate telecommunications services.

Organisations with significant market power must deal with reasonable requests for special network access fromtelecoms service providers. Unlike interconnection, special network access is not a standard offering withpublished tariffs. It is an individually negotiated type of network access which can be requested by a telecomsservice provider if the commonly provided forms of network access are not suitable. Tariffs for special networkaccess granted by organisations with significant market power must be cost-oriented.

3. The communication of the Commission of 10 December 1996’draft notice on the application of thecompetition rules to access agreements in the telecommunications sector’ was published for consultation of allinterested parties. The issues raised in points 2 and 3 of the question of the Honourable Member will, as far asnecessary, be further specified in the final wording of the communication, which the Commission is currentlyfinalising.

(1) OJ L 199, 26. 7.1997.(2) OJ L 321, 30.12.1995.(3) OJ C 234, 1. 8.1997.


by Klaus Rehder (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Payment of ‘grassland premiums’

1. In view of ‘Agenda 2000’, does the Commission feel able to introduce a special grassland premium?

2. Does the Commission believe this grassland premium can be covered by the newly created dairy cowpremium of ECU 215?

3. To what ecological criteria (upper limits on stock, etc.) might this premium be linked?

4. What resources would the European Union have to use to introduce a premium of this kind for theCommunity?

5. Can individual Member States pay such a grassland premium separately?



(25 September 1997)

1. Within its Agenda 2000 the Commission has proposed to compensate price cuts in the milk and beef sectorby headage payments. A forage premium would have the advantage of simplicity, and its use has beenthoroughly evaluated. A change to a forage premium would however cause problems of implementation inparticular due to an uncertain statistical base compared to the system of headage payments which has alreadyproven its practicability.

The proposed headage payments will however maintain the established links between area and stocking density.In addition, the Commission has proposed to adapt the different mechanisms favouring extensification in order tomake them more effective. Proposals made for environmental consideration on less favoured areas paymentstogether with a reinforcement and expansion of the agri-environmental measures will also play an important rolein promoting extensive farming practices.

2. The Commission's proposal is to introduce a premium of ECU 215 per dairy cow, which will be composedof a beef premium and a dairy premium. The Agenda 2000 does not propose that this should be paid in the formof a forage premium.

3. Since there is no proposal to introduce a forage premium, ecological criteria have not been defined. Currentpayments per hectare in less favoured areas are related to stockage density factors. The Commission hassuggested a gradual transformation of the related support scheme into a basic instrument to maintain andpromote low-input farming systems. Moreover, the agri-environmental measures, where limited forage premiumcould be paid will be reinforced to compensate farmers for the extra cost of providing services beneficial to theenvironment. For the beef sector the Commission will reflect on how incentives to extensify can be improvedwithout a major change in the global level of support.

4. Direct income payments caused by reforms of the common market organisations as proposed by theAgenda 2000 are financed under the European agriculture guidance and guarantee fund-guarantee section.

5. Although the Commission has proposed to allow Member States to introduce differentiation criteria on thedirect payments according to commonly rules, additional forage premiums at national or regional level are notforeseen in the proposal. It would appear to be possible to allow Member States within an agreed framework toput more emphasis on forage area payments in the framework of the less favoured areas scheme and theagri-environmental schemes programmes, which are both co-financed regimes.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Marketing of a test kit containing genetically modified micro-organism for detecting antibiotic residuesin milk

In July 1997 the Commission authorized the marketing of a test kit containing a genetically modifiedmicro-organism for detecting antibiotic residues in milk. The test kit is made by the Valio Oy company and willcontain a genetically modified streptococcus thermophilus T102.

What scientific studies were undertaken before the Commission decided that authorizing the marketing of thisproduct would not pose a significant risk to human health or the environment? Who undertook those studies? Arethey available to the public for scrutiny and/or will they be made available?

On the subject of antibiotics in milk, has the Commission any proposals to reduce their use in the dairy industry?The World Health Organization (WHO) has identified resistance to antibiotics among humans as a major healthrisk, with possibly major consequences for modern medical treatment. This resistance is thought to be caused bythe high level of antibiotics to which humans are routinely exposed in food products.



(16 October 1997)

On 14 July 1997 the Commission adopted a decision concerning the placing on the market of the T102 testnotified by the Finnish company Valio Oy (1). The test kit will be labelled indicating that it contains a geneticallymodified organism (Streptococcus thermophilus T102).

The decision was taken following a favourable opinion by qualified majority from the regulatory committeeestablished under Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modifiedorganisms (2). Following the adoption of that decision, consent will be granted by the competent authority ofFinland allowing the product to be used for rapid detection of antibiotic residues in milk.

The authorisation procedure under Directive 90/220/EEC foresees that the applicant provides a notificationdossier including all the necessary data and information to assess the potential impact on human health and theenvironment of the release of the genetically modified organism. In the case of the above-mentioned geneticallymodified T102 test, the notifier submitted such a dossier to the Finnish authority.

The dossier included a considerable number of scientific studies, reports and reviews which are all publiclyavailable and which were mainly drawn up by different scientists of universities or other public institutions. Thenotifier and the Finnish authority are prepared to provide further details on all the information and data submittedin the framework of the authorisation procedure. However, it should be pointed out that, in accordance withArticle 19 of Directive 90/220/EEC, the Commission and the competent authorities must not divulge to thirdparties any confidential information or data, in particular that covered by intellectual property rights or wheredisclosure might harm the notifier's competitive position. The notification dossier shows that the milk samples tobe tested are not likely to contaminate other foodstuffs. According to the notifier the milk sample contained in thetest kit will not re-enter the food chain. The milk from which the sample is drawn will therefore not be affected.

The Commission is well aware of the possible impact on human health from the use of anti-infective drugs inmeat and milk farming but is however not aware that the World health organisation (WHO) has concluded, as theHonourable Member suggests, that the resistance problem in humans would be due to antibiotics absorbedthrough food. It should be noted in this context, that no antibiotic is authorised nowadays as an additive in dairycows feed. The use of antibiotics in dairy herds can lead to residues in milk at a level exceeding the maximumresidue limits authorised. Council Directive 96/23/EC on measures to monitor certain substances and residuesthereof in live animals and animal products (3) introduced annual surveillance plans for residues in milk, and inparticular antimicrobial substances. Official samples must be taken by each Member State, on farms or on dairiesin order to be examined for the presence of residues of antibiotics in milk. According to Article 18 of thisDirective, where there is evidence of residues of a level exceeding the maximum limit authorised, the competentauthority shall carry out an investigation in the farm of origin or departure, and shall take all necessary measuresto safeguard public health, with specific measures in the event of repeated infringements.

The Commission, in collaboration with the industry, has prepared a programme for surveillance of antimicrobialresistance in animals receiving feed additive antimicrobials. Moreover, the Commission is involved in reviewingpossible in antimicrobial resistance in humans related to the use of antibiotic drugs in food producing animals.The Commission will actively participate in the next WHO meeting on the medical impact of the use ofanti-microbial drugs in food animals, which will be held in Berlin in October 1997. The Biomedicine and healthresearch programme (1994-1998) has financed with up to MECU 3 projects which are directly or indirectlyrelated to the resistance to pharmaceutical products of human pathogens such as mycobacteria, enterohaemorr-hagic escherichia coli, salmonella and listeria.

(1) OJ L 225, 15.8.1997.(2) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.(3) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996.



by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Council

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Mission to Colombia

In October 1995, during the Spanish Presidency, a Council troika visited Columbia in connection with the state ofhuman rights in that country. On its return the troika called for support for projects to do with human rights,education, health care and infrastructure. It was recently decided during the Dutch Presidency, to send anothermission to Colombia.

1. a) What action has the Council taken since October 1995 to implement the support called for at that time,and what results has this produced in Colombia?

b) If there was no follow-up to the troika visit in 1995, can the Council explain why?

2. a) When will the new mission be departing for Colombia?

b) What will its terms of reference be?

c) How is its programme being drawn up?

3. Is the Council prepared, once the mission has been completed, to send a report of its findings and the policyimplications to the European Parliament?

Answer

(4 December 1997)

The Council has always followed the situation in Colombia very closely and will continue to do so, encouragingall sides to follow the path of dialogue and reconciliation to put an end to the internal conflict which rages inColombia and its tragic and frequent outbreaks of violence. The opening in Bogota of an office of the UnitedNations High Commissioner for Human Rights − which receives EU funding − is an important event forcooperation with Colombia.

With particular reference to the questions raised by the Honourable Member, the Council would point out that theTroika as such did not visit Colombia in October 1995. The Deputy Heads of Mission of the Troika Embassies inBogota visited Uraba and Medellin on 27 and 28 October 1995 to take stock of the human rights situation.

After that fact-finding mission, the plan was for the European Commission’s office in Bogota to send a technicalmission to Uraba to identify potential cooperation projects. Owing to staff shortages and for security reasons,that mission to investigate the local situation could not be carried out until 1997. The Commission has recentlydecided to provide ECU 400 000 to finance a project for the Uraba region, the aim of which is to support localNGOs working in the area of human rights.

The Commission will be able to give the Honourable Member more detailed information on these initiatives.


by Joan Vallve (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: The Interreg III initiative

At the informal meeting of the Council held in Nordwijk on 10 June 1997, it was decided that cross-bordercooperation was a fundamental aspect of European regional planning. In application of the principle ofsubsidiarity, the states and regions involved should participate fully in such cooperation.

Does the Commission believe that the new regulations governing the Community initiatives, more specificallyInterreg III, should be adapted in such a way as to facilitate the participation of local and regional authorities?


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

(7 October 1997)

The Commission included in Agenda 2000 (1) provision for a Community Initiative on cross-border cooperationfor the next period of programming of the Structural Funds. It also intends to table a communication to dealspecifically with this topic and set out the operational conclusions which can be drawn from earlier InterregInitiatives and future arrangements for cross-border, inter-regional and trans-national cooperation.

The border regions and those active there have an important contribution to make to the success of cross-bordercooperation and should play an active part in the arrangements for promotion and management. Dialogue stilldoes not always take place and genuine cross-border and trans-national cooperation should develop to the full.The Commission has been working in this direction for some time. Subsidiarity should assume a higher profile inthis area than it has done hitherto.

The Commission's future guidelines on cross-border and trans-national cooperation will be based on thisapproach.

(1) COM(97) 2000.


by Cristiana Muscardini (NI), Claudio Azzolini (UPE),Elena Marinucci (PSE), Carlo Secchi (PPE), Gastone Parigi (NI),Guido Podesta (UPE) and Enrico Ferri (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Payment of the super-levy on milk quotas

The Commission is no doubt aware that the Lombardy Regional Administrative Court (RAC) has suspendedpublication of the Italian State Intervention Agency’s bulletin published on 28 January 1997, which covered theperiod 1 April 1996 to 31 March 1997, in response to the appeal submitted by the Interprovincial Association ofMilk Producers and the Milan and Lodi Provincial Union of Farmers. The appeal argued that the bulletin inquestion was unlawful owing to material errors and the failure to include correctly drawn up contracts for thelease and/or sale of milk quotas.

The Commission will also be aware that the Italian Government has set up a Customs Service Committee ofInquiry and has decided to postpone the deadline for payment of the super-levy, which was first set at30 September 1996 and subsequently extended to 30 June 1997, until 30 September 1997.

1. Does the Commission not consider that these decisions, enabling the committee of inquiry to finish itswork, have been damaging to those producers from whom the entire amount of the super-levy was deducted ayear ago?

2. Does it not consider that such differences in treatment are upsetting the balance between producers, withadverse effects on the economy of farms and considerable repercussions for competitiveness and competition?

3. Does it not consider it fair, therefore, that the sums deducted in advance should be refunded to theproducers in question, with an extra allowance for devaluation and interest, pending the conclusions of thegovernment’s committee of inquiry?


(8 October 1997)

1. Decree Law 118 of 7 May 1997 as converted with modifications by Law 204 of 3 July 1997 extends to30 September 1997 the timelimit for payment by purchasers of the balance of the additional levy due for the1995/96 period.


This is without bearing on deduction of an amount, by way of an advance on the levy due from producers whoexceeded their individual reference quantity for that period in accordance with Law 468/92 and Regulation(EC) No 3950/92 establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector (1). The Commission'sinformation is that these amounts were systematically either deducted from payments to producers for their milkor secured by bank guarantee.

2. In the circumstances the Commission does not consider that the producers in question have beendiscriminated against.

3. Before entry into force of the deferring provisions the sums paid by purchasers amounted to around 20% ofthe total due following the national redistribution exercise in December 1996. These sums relate to levy amountsundisputed by purchasers against which no appeal was launched. The Commission sees no reason why theyshould be refunded.

The Commission regrets the delay in definitive recovery of the levy due for 1995/96 and 1996/97. The work ofthe committee of inquiry will however enable problems in connection with the milk year bulletin such as thoseraised by the Honourable Members to be avoided in future.

(1) OJ L 405, 31.12.1992.


by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: UK banking practice

Many UK banks and building societies do not accept European credit references, and refuse to open accounts forpeople from other EU Member States, or UK nationals who have been resident in another Member State. Suchbarriers continue to hamper the mobility of European Union citizens.

How does the Commission view such practices, are they legal, and will it take action to remove such barriers inthe near future?


(7 October 1997)

The Commission is aware that some UK banks and building societies are reluctant to accept customers notresident in the United Kingdom. According to the information available to the Commission, it would appear thatthis reluctance on the part of a minority of credit institutions is based on the costs involved in meeting the legaland tax obligations associated with non-resident customers. These credit institutions take the view that, given thecircumstances, it is not worthwhile for them to have non-resident customers.

Although the Commission's view is that these practices are regrettable in the context of the internal market and inthe run-up to the single currency, they are not incompatible with Community law. Under current Communitylaw, there is no obligation on banks to accept a customer or to provide a given service, such as opening a bankaccount, irrespective of whether the customer is resident in the country. This is a choice made on commercialgrounds and based on the legal principle of contractual freedom.

As it stated in its Communication of 26 June 1997 on follow-up to the Green Paper entitled ‘Financial Services:Meeting Consumers’ Expectations’ (1), the Commission supports all initiatives taken at national level to improveaccess by the greatest possible number of Community nationals to basic banking services. Although studies arecurrently being carried out on access to banking services, the Commission does not, at present, envisage takingmeasures in this area at Community level.

(1) COM(97) 309 final.



by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: UK motor insurance − Green Cards

Many insurance companies in the United Kingdom continue to charge extra premiums for issuing ‘Green Cards’,place time limits on their use, and in some cases refuse to issue them for cars of ‘European specification’,i.e. left-hand drive.

Such practices continue to hamper the freedom of movement of UK nationals in the single market.

Does the Commission share this view? Are such practices legal under European law and what action will theCommission be taking to remove them?


(8 October 1997)

Regarding the granting of green cards and insurance certificates, under the terms of Article 2 of Directive90/232/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability inrespect of the use of motor vehicles (1), all Member States are obliged to ensure that all compulsory insurancepolicies against motor vehicle liability (i.e. the green card) cover the entire Community on the basis of a singlepremium. This means that Community insurance companies are not allowed to charge extra for green cards.The third motor insurance Directive requires that a policy automatically provides either the level of third partycover required by law in the Member State visited or the level of third party cover enjoyed in the ‘home’ MemberState, if this is greater, without the insurer charging an additional premium.

Granting green cards in the United Kingdom after the adoption of the third motor insurance Directive has alreadybeen the subject of several discussions in the past between the Commission and the British authorities. Morespecially, the Department of transport position on this matter is that (i) under Community requirement a Britishinsurance certificate is valid in all other Member States, but only provides third party cover; (ii) it is not thereforenecessary to have a green card when driving within the Community, as this too only provides evidence that itsholder has third party cover; (iii) insurers nevertheless recommend that drivers carry a green card, as it has beenan internationally recognised document for some 40 years; (i) drivers who want the full (i.e. comprehensive)cover of their British policy need to request an extension of cover from their insurer, who may charge anadditional premium. This extension of third party element of cover is unrelated to the green card.

According to the information available to the Commission, in the United Kingdom, additional costs are chargedby several companies for a ‘foreign use extension’ though without specifying to their clients the differencebetween this extension and the green card charges. In most cases there is a lack of information concerning thedifference between granting a green card, which will be used in other Member States, and a foreign use extensionof the contract. The insurance industry has recently prepared a leaflet to clarify this situation.

In fact, the third motor insurance Directive does not prevent insurers from charging an additional premium forextending the non-compulsory element of cover (i.e. over and above third party cover).

Nevertheless, the Commission is continuing discussions with the British authorities as well as with theAssociation of British insurers in order to settle some issues, for example the presentation of insurancedocuments and certain questions related to the form, colour or content of those documents, in order to renderthem easily recognisable abroad.


Finally, the Honourable Member raises a problem that many insurance companies in the United Kingdom refuseto issue green cards for left-hand drive cars. This implies that they refuse to conclude an insurance contract withdrivers owning cars of this type. Insurers assess risks in the light of information at their disposal, including theprobability of an event occurring and the seriousness of the risk. In this context, and in conformity with theprinciple of contractual freedom, insurers may reject offers from clients who represent a very high risk. In fact,cars not responding to British specifications could be considered a serious risk for British insurers. Britishinsurers are free to develop their commercial policy in that direction and to refuse to conclude an insurancecontract or levy additional charges on their clients owning left-hand drive cars.

(1) OJ L 129, 19.5.1990.


by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Statements by the Commission President in relation to Spanish-British joint fishing ventures

At Parliament’s sitting of 26 June 1997 Mr Santer stated, in relation to the letter sent by the CommissionPresident to the British Prime Minister on the subject of Spanish-British joint fishing ventures, that Mrs Bonino,the Commissioner responsible, and he himself had taken care to ensure that the Spanish authorities were alwayskept informed of contacts with the British authorities (Verbatim report of proceedings, 26 June 1997, p. 31).

Can the Commission say on what dates, by what means and through whom the Commission has kept the Spanishauthorities informed of the contacts between the Commission and the British authorities on the subject ofinvestment from other Member States in the British fishing industry?


(6 October 1997)

The Commission can confirm that the Spanish authorities have been kept aware of developments in the matter towhich the Honourable Member refers, including its contacts with the United Kingdom authorities.

This information has been supplied by the means normally used for contacts between the Commission and theMember States, principally the Office of the Permanent Representative of Spain to the European Union.


by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Municipal elections

1. Can the Commission confirm that it is possible for European citizens to stand as candidates at municipalelections in the Netherlands even though they are not resident in that country?

2. Can it indicate the extent to which this tallies with Article 8b of the EC Treaty which lays down that: ‘Everycitizen of the Union residing in a Member State of which he is not a national shall have the right to vote and tostand as a candidate at municipal elections in the Member State in which he resides, under the same conditions asnationals of that State’.


3. Should the answer to Question 2 indicate that the absence of the residence requirement is not in accordancewith the Treaty establishing the European Community, what measures will the Commission take?

4. What is the Commission’s view of the liberal interpretation of Directive 94/80/EC (1).

(1) OJ L 368, 31.12.1994, p. 38.


(23 October 1997)

On the basis of the Dutch electoral law, it is in fact possible for anybody, whether or not they are resident in theNetherlands, to stand as a candidate in municipal elections. However, if they are elected, they may only takeoffice if they reside in the municipality for which they sought office.

It should be noted that Directive 94/80/EEC of 19 December 1994 on the right to vote and stand as a candidate inmunicipal elections for citizens of the Union resident in a Member State of which they are not nationals does notprovide for an harmonization of electoral law throughout the Community, but simply aims to abolish thenationality requirement for the exercise of electoral rights. Moreover, Article 1 (2) specifically indicates that‘... nothing in the directive shall affect each Member State’s provisions concerning the right to vote or to stand asa candidate either of its nationals who reside outside its territory or of third country nationals who reside in thatState’.


by Esko Seppanen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1997)

Subject: Net contributors to EU funding

The enlargement of the EU to the east and the Agenda 2000 programme involve a redistribution of financialcontributions to the EU among the various countries. In the past too, some Member States have been netcontributors and others net recipients.

How, in the Commission’s view, are the Member States now to be divided into net contributors and netrecipients?

How, for example, does the customs revenue which the Netherlands has reported to the EU affect its position inthese comparisons?

Is the Commission preparing a reform under which countries would be permitted to keep their customs revenueand EU membership contributions would be levied solely on the basis of percentages of VAT and GDP?


(12 November 1997)

Enlargement will inevitably involve costs for the current 15 Member States, and Agenda 2000 has explicitlyrecognized this. Agenda 2000 has made it clear that ‘enlargement will inevitably provoke a deterioration in thebudgetary positions of all the current Member States’ and it went further warning that this deterioration ‘cannotcome as a surprise and should not give rise to claims for compensation’. However, over the same period, themaintenance of the current financing arrangements and the effects of the reform of the main Community policiesare not expected to lead to major changes in the relative budgetary positions of the Member States.


The current system of Community financing balances two elements, namely each Member State’s contributivecapacity to the Community budget and the need to finance the common policies which constitute the foundationof the Community. With regard to the first element, it is essential that the system of financing is fair andequitable. Indeed, according to a recent review of these issues by the Commission, equity, measured bycontributions to the budget relative to the size of each Member State’s economy in the Community total, hasimproved and it is expected to improve even further. This improvement has been the result of the 1988 and 1992reforms which raised the importance of gross national product (GNP), and limited that of value added tax (VAT),as a base for financing the Community. It is forecast that by 1999 the share of the GNP resource will exceed 50%of the budget.

Community expenditure reflects a political consensus between the Parliament, the Council and the Commissionregarding the Community’s common policies, especially the common agricultural policy (CAP) and thestructural funds. While contributions are proportional to the Member State’s GNP, expenditure is not strictlyrelated to GNP and, as a result, it plays a major role in the determination of the balance between contributions toand receipts from the budget.

Many of these issues are addressed in ‘Budget contributions, EU expenditure, budgetary balances and relativeprosperity of the Member States’, a paper presented by the Commission at the Ecofin Council of 13 October1997 (1). It is important to note that the Commission does not prepare data on the net budgetary positions of theMember States, neither does it consider such data represent accurately the benefits from membership of theCommunity.

The contribution of traditional own resources (TOR), that is customs and agricultural duties and sugar levies, tothe financing of the Community budget has declined significantly. They still play a more than proportional rolefor some Member States which have particularly important port facilities through which foreign goods enter theCommunity. Thus, for example, in 1996 contributions from TOR collected by the Netherlands amounted to11.9% of total TOR receipts, while the Netherlands’ share in Community GNP was 4.6%.

As noted in Agenda 2000, there are no plans to review the system of own resources at this stage. However, theCommission has also recognized that it may be appropriate to replace contributions from TOR with contributionsbased on GNP. Agenda 2000 mentions that with the declining importance of TOR in the budget, ‘the balancebetween their advantages and disadvantages as a source of Community finances shifts towards the latter. Inparticular, their collection and recovery procedures are very complicated, exposed to fraud and very constly interms of controls. This would not mean that the Union could ignore the effective collection of customs duties byMember States since these duties constitute an instrument of Union trade policy, but would modify substantiallythe perspective of its involvement in this complex area’.

(1) SEC(97) 1918.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Community contributions to animal experiments

The communication of 18 September 1995 to the orthopaedic clinic of the Sacred Heart catholic university,Rome, concerning experiments on 72 rabbits, on analysis of the characteristics of in vivo biocompatibility ofceramic material for orthopaedic purposes mentions under ‘Funds’ an ‘agreement No 7090699 with the EEC’without giving any details.

What type of experiments were involved and what is the total Community contribution?

What results beneficial to man were obtained?

Will the undertaking given in the Fifth environmental programme to reduce experiments on animals by 50% bythe year 2000 be adhered to?




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Undertaking to limit experiments on animals

The fourth call for proposals for RTD projects under the specific programme for research, technologicaldevelopment and demonstration in the field of biotechnology (1994 to 1998) has been published (1).

Does the Commission intend to fulfil the undertaking given in the Fifth environmental programme to reduceanimal experiments by 50% by the year 2000 when allocating funds?

Why does the Commission state that animal welfare and animal genetic diversity will be respected only in thecase of point 3.2.1 ‘Genome mapping and improvement of farm animal selection’ and not in the case of point3.2.2 ‘Animal models’ in area 3 ‘Plant and animal biotechnology’ of the fourth call for proposals?

(1) OJ C 183, 17.6.1997, p. 8.


given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1997)

The Commission, when allocating research funds, exercises its influence in favour of the political objectiveformulated in the fifth environment programme (1), that is to say the reduction of animal experiments in theCommunity by 50% in the year 2000. The Commission has been funding research for the replacement of animalexperimentation by alternative methods since 1986. In particular the successive Biotechnology and biomedicineand health programmes (2) have made major contributions to the development of alternative tests inpharmaco-toxicology.

Moreover the fourth framework programme for research (3) sets the principles according to which Communityfunded research should be conducted. In line with Council Directive 86/609/EEC on the approximation of laws,regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used forexperimental and other scientific purposes (4), it states that ‘whenever possible experimentation and testing onanimals should be replaced by in-vitro and other methods’.

The development of ‘animal models’, to which the Honourable Member refers is addressed in point 3.2.2. of theBiotechnology work programme. As the well-being of these animals is protected under Council Directive86/609/EEC, no special mention of animal welfare was necessary in the work programme. All contractors arecommitted to adhere to their national legislation in particular the safety and ethical provisions applicable wherethe research is performed.

The Honourable Member refers to a research project funded under the Brite Euram programme aimed atdetermining the optimal criteria for covering metallic hip prosthesis with ceramic material mimicking bonetissue. The task of University Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Rome was to study the interaction between the coatedprosthesis and animal tissue. This involved 72 rabbits which received a model implant and were observed overtime to study how the implants behaved. The total Community contribution was ECU 974 000 over three yearsfor the five universities involved. This project contributed improving the ceramic coating of hip prosthesis andtherefore improving the quality of life of people suffering from multiple unrecoverable fractures or when thenatural bone degenerates as a consequence of aging.

(1) COM(92) 23.(2) COM(94) 68.(3) COM(92) 406.(4) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986.




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Cycling facilities in Dublin

Almost no cycle lanes have been developed in Dublin’s inner city over the past five years.

It is beyond question that Dublin is far behind many other EU capitals in providing for cyclists. Munich, forexample, has 650 km of cycle lanes, whereas Dublin has less than 20 km.

Under the Operational Programme for Ireland, the EU has agreed to co-finance various measures to improveIreland’s transport infrastructure, including the development of cycle lanes.

Has it made any representations to the Irish authorities about the virtual absence of improvements in cycle lanesin Dublin’s inner city? If so can it give details of any such representations and/or of any it proposes to make?


(8 October 1997)

Provision has been made for cycle facilities in Dublin's inner city as part of several schemes co-financed underthe operational programme for transport (1994-1999). This has been done as part of Talbot street environmentaltraffic scheme, Malahide road to Amiens street cycle route and Quality bus corridor (QBC), as well as City quays(QBC) scheme, which includes cycle parking. Further additions to the cycle facilities along the city quays areexpected in the coming months.

Construction of a cycle way along the Finglas road between Glasnevin and Finglas village, and of the Ashtownroundabout to North circular road section of the Blanchardstown cycle route, will commence in coming weeks.Further linking of both routes to the city centre will follow in the near future. It is anticipated that construction ofa cycle lane along the Grand canal, linking Portobello college with Clanbrassil street, will commence in 1997. Inaddition, cycle track provision at several locations alongside the proposed light rail transit system (LUAS) line isbeing actively supported. Discussions are also ongoing to incorporate additional facilities at or near the LUASstations.

While many of the cycle facilities have not yet appeared on the ground, much of the necessary backgroundstudies, public consultation and detailed design has been undertaken and it is expected that significant cyclefacilities will be constructed in Dublin's inner city over the rest of the current programming period.


by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Distribution of German-language films in South Tyrol

Bearing in mind that minorities need special protection, that their culture (including films in their mother tongue)should receive special promotion but that these are disadvantaged by the fact that film rights are distributed on anational basis, and that free competition across national frontiers is a basic principle of the single market, wouldthe Commission explain why Austrian and German film distributors cannot expect to distribute films to SouthTyrol without legal difficulties?


Is a special arrangement for the distribution of film rights for linguistic minorities feasible? If so, is it beingactively pursued?

Is the Italian Law No 1213 of 4 November 1965 governing the allocation of film distribution rights (Nuovoordinamento dei provvedimenti a favore della cinematografia) contrary to EU law?


(17 October 1997)

The Commission cannot comment on the legal difficulties experienced by Austrian and German filmdistributors, as described by the Honourable Member.

In respect of the promotion of films for linguistic minorities, Member States may encourage such distributionprovided that the schemes are compatible with EC Treaty rules.

Film distribution is governed by Article 59 of the EC Treaty concerning the freedom to provide services (CaseC17/92). Restrictions on this activity must pursue a general interest objective at Community law and beproportional to that objective. The issue of whether the Italian law cited is compatible with Community lawcannot be assessed from the details given by the Honourable Member.


by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: The NASA Cassini-Huygens probe project

As part of the Cassini-Huygens project, NASA intends to fire the probe into space in October 1997 on a Titan IVrocket with a plutonium power supply.

1. Is the Commission aware of this event?

2. Is the project receiving support from European funds?

3. How does the Commission assess the mission's safety risk?

4. Will the Commission be urging the United States Administration to use hazard-free alternatives, such assolar panels?


(16 October 1997)

The Commission is aware of yesterday’s launch of the United States led Cassini/Huyghens mission, intended toexplore the planet Saturn over a four year reconnaissance period (Cassini), and to land the European spaceagency (ESA) Huyghens probe on the Titan moon of the planet.

ESA is providing the Huyghens probe (prime contractor, Daimler Benz Aerospace) as part of the interplanetaryexploration element of its scientific programme. In addition, there is Italian national involvement in the mainspacecraft under a bilateral agreement with the National aeronautics and space administration (NASA), theamerican space agency. There is no direct involvement of the Commission.

The Commission reviewed available documentation on the possible risks of the mission, arising particularlyfrom the use, to generate the necessary on-board electricity, of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs),which rely on the heat generated by the decay of plutonium to generate the required power, and judged that therisk has been held to an acceptable level. The final launch decision was for the American authorities to take andwas taken by the American President rather than at the level of NASA.


The ESA management assured the Commission that solar cells were not a possible alternative to provide powerfor the Cassini/Huyghens mission. This is particularly important, since it is an ESA/Italian development of solarcells that was cited both in the United States and Europe as a possible alternative to the use of RTGs.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Property finance in the EU

In spite of the internal market it is still very difficult in the European Union to obtain finance from banks based inone's home country to purchase property abroad. Thus if a German wants to buy a house in Italy he must also setup the finance in Italy, because German banks do not accept Italian property as security.

1. Would the Commission not agree that it is high time a uniform internal market was also created to coverfinance for the purchase of property?

2. Are efforts already being made by the Commission to regulate this aspect by law? If not, why not?


(8 October 1997)

The existing Community legal framework permits Community credit institutions to provide mortgages onproperty in other Member States (1).

It is quite true that some credit institutions are reluctant to agree to finance purchases of property in MemberStates other than their own. However, according to the information at the Commission's disposal, a number ofspecialist institutions allocated between 30% and 40% of their loans abroad in 1996.

The main reasons generally given by the more reluctant lenders are as follows:

− the mortgage market is still regarded as a geographically limited market calling for a detailed knowledge onthe part of the lender of the property market and property laws, as well as of local practice as regards thevaluation of property;

− differences in national tax legislation create a number of problems for lenders. Some Member States, forexample, charge withholding tax on the net interest paid to foreign lenders, thereby reducing margins. Othersdo not allow insurance premiums paid in respect of a mortgage loan from an insurance company notestablished in the country to be offset against tax. The Commission is currently examining the compatibilitywith Community law of some of these tax provisions;

− in the event of any default in payment, the lender is at the mercy of enforcement deadlines and procedures inthe other country.

These problems are particularly difficult to resolve. Taxation, for example, is a delicate area in which it has so farproved particularly difficult to legislate. Moreover, resolving these problems through harmonisation wouldrequire the Community to legislate in the field of civil property law, and this could pose a number of problems,particularly in relation to the principle of subsidiarity.

However, the Commission believes that the introduction of the single currency will have a beneficial effect oncross-frontier property transactions since the exchange risk will disappear and consumers will find it easier tocompare mortgage rates. To increase this comparability, the Commission is currently looking into the possibilityof extending the provisions on the annual percentage rate of charge (APR) in Directive 90/88/EEC concerningconsumer credit (2) to the field of mortgage credit.

(1) Directive 90/88/EEC, 22.2.1990 (OJ L 61, 10.3.1990).(2) Directive 89/646/EEC, 15.12.1989 (OJ L 386, 30.12.1989).




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Directive 89/686/EEC · my question of 15 May 1996

In its answer to my question E-1173/96 of 15 May 1996 (1) the Commission says that fire brigades are not ‘forcesused in the maintenance of law and order' within the meaning of the above directive. A forthcoming meeting ofthe Working Party would accordingly be discussing how to assess the fact that Bavaria does classify professionalfire services as such forces and is therefore endeavouring to exclude them from the directive.

Has the Commission now raised this matter in the Working Party or some other forum? If so, with what result?If not, why not?

(1) OJ C 345, 15.11.1996, p. 36.


(16 October 1997)

At its meeting on 24 February 1997, the Working Party concerned did indeed discuss the question of whether firebrigades may be considered as forces used in the maintenance of law and order within the meaning of Directive89/686/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to personal protective equipment(PPE) (1).

The experts from the Member States took the view, as expressed in the answer given to the Honourable Member'swritten question E-1173/96 (2), that fire brigades cannot be considered as ‘armed forces’ or ‘forces used in themaintenance of law and order’ and that, consequently, the equipment covered by Directive 89/686/EEC and usedby fire fighters is not excluded by the Directive.

The Commission will therefore take all necessary steps to ensure that the Member States apply the Communitylaw in a uniform manner.

The Commission wishes to remind the Honourable Member that Directive 89/686/EEC provides for the freemovement of the products it covers and is not concerned with the use made of products already in service.The various fire brigades may therefore continue indefinitely using the equipment they have and to which theyare accustomed.

(1) Council Directive 89/686/EEC of 21 December 1989 (OJ L 399, 30.12.1989), as amended by Council Directive 93/68/EEC of 22 July 1993(OJ L 220, 30.8.1993), Council Directive 93/95/EEC of 29 October 1993 (OJ L 276, 9.11.1993) and Council and European ParliamentDirective 96/58/EC of 3 September 1996 (OJ L 236, 18.9.1996).

(2) OJ C 345, 15.11.1996.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Protection of consumers from genetically manipulated products

Given the discoveries made in recent years as a result of scientific research in the field of genetic engineering andfuture prospects in this area and in view of the fact that genetic engineering is to a large extent already part of oureveryday life, although no reliable methods have yet been developed to assess scientifically the medium andlong-term impact of the irreversible release into the atmosphere of genetically manipulated organisms, can theCommission provide the following information:

1. Has a more comprehensive assessment and evaluation been made of the social, economic, ecological, public,health, ethical and legal aspects of new developments in the field of genetic engineering?


2. Are steps being taken to develop a comprehensive policy and measures to protect the consumer in legal,moral and public health terms?

3. Has the Commission, while fully respecting the basic principle of freedom of scientific research, made fulluse of its powers to monitor research in this area, seeking to establish a common policy in all MemberStates?

4. Have measures been taken in response to the European Parliament’s proposal for the setting up of aEuropean Union Ethics Committee to evaluate the ethical aspects and applications of genetic engineeringand monitor developments in this area?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 1997)

The Commission attaches great importance to modern biotechnology for its economic potential and itscontribution to human health and the improvement of the environment. Given the rapid progress of geneticengineering technologies, the Commission recognizes the importance of keeping Community policies andregulation up-to-date to facilitate the development of these technologies while assuring a high level of protection.

1. A growing body of assessments and evaluations of different aspects of biotechnology is available.The Commission has, under successive Community framework programmes for research and technologicaldevelopment, supported research into areas such as safety (including for the environment), socio-economicaspects, and ethical and legal aspects. The Commission has proposed to strengthen such research under the fifthframework programme (1).

2. Protection of the consumer is a constant concern in development of the Community’s regulatoryframework. Community rules impose high safety standards on the use of these technologies, in particular ingranting approvals for the release into the environment and placing on the market of genetically modifiedproduce. Community frameworks for labelling, as adopted, under discussion or under preparation by theCommission, and the broader on-going information activities of the Commission intend to provide transparencyfor consumers on the use of these technologies and their implications. Council Regulation (EC) No 258/97 onnovel foods and food ingredients (2) sets out a framework for labelling of foodstuffs which also takes intoaccount needs for labelling related to particular health problems for certain sectors of the population or ethicalreasons. In addition, the Commission has decided to develop a general labelling approach applicable to allproducts entering the food chain. This approach will be based upon strict science and will include mandatorylabelling to indicate the presence of material originating from genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It will beimplemented both through existing legislation and new legislation to be introduced as necessary.

3. Under successive framework programmes for Community research and technological development (RTD),the Commission has imposed strict ethical guidelines for research carried out with Community support. Allresearch has to comply with the relevant Community and national legislation. In addition, research into theethical, legal and social aspects of the life sciences has been supported at the European level. The ethicaldimension will be enhanced in the fifth RTD framework programme. Ethical considerations are also integratedinto legislative actions, e.g. the Commission’s proposal for a directive on the legal protection of biotechnologicalinventions (3).

4. The Commission created in 1992 the independent group of advisers on the ethical implications ofbiotechnology which has presented a series of opinions on different issues, either upon request of theCommission or on its own initiative. The Commission has asked the group to give an opinion on the proposal forthe fifth RTD framework programme. The group has actively promoted an open dialogue on ethical issues withall interested parties which has been welcomed by the Commission. In the light of the positive experience gainedwith this approach to ethical advice, the Commission intends to adapt the terms of reference of the group whenthe current mandate expires at the end of 1997. In doing so, the Commission will take into consideration thesuggestions made by the Parliament.

(1) COM(97) 142.(2) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997.(3) Amended proposal for a Parliament and Council directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, COM(97) 446 final.




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Fish kill at the Sellafield nuclear complex, Britain

On 18 July a leak of non-radioactive caustic soda into the River Calder occurred at the Sellafield nuclear complexin Cumbria, Britain. The British Environment Agency (EA) has estimated that over 1 000 eels and a further1 000 juvenile salmon and sea trout and many other fish were killed due to the spillage.

The cause of the spillage is believed to have been a defective valve from a storage facility on the Sellafield site.

Previous fish kills of this type have occurred at Sellafield. In April 1991, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) wasprosecuted by the National Rivers Authority for an acid spill into the Calder which killed over 1 500 fish and aleak of polyelectrolyte in the nearby Black Beck which killed over 2 000 fish. BNFL was found guilty of bothoffences and fined £2 000.

Has the Commission been notified of the recent fish kill? If so, what action has it taken and/or what action does itpropose to take?


(1 October 1997)

The Commission has seen the reports in the press about the leak of non-radioactive caustic soda from Britishnuclear fuels Ltd (BNFL) plant at Sellafield. However, there are no requirements for the company or the Britishauthorities to inform the Commission about such an incident. The Commission will not be taking any actionregarding this matter.

The investigation into the origin of the incident and requests for possible modifications to the installations orprocedures are only within the competence of the national authorities.


by Encarnacion Redondo Jimenez (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Protecting appellations of origin for European wines

There have been various reports in the media that the United States is drawing up legislation to continue using theappellations of origin of EU wines for wines produced in the US, in order to protect the interests ofUS winegrowers.

If this proves to be the case, what steps would the Commission take to safeguard the interests of Europeanwinegrowers, for whom such legislation would obviously be damaging?

Answer given by Mr. Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1997)

The Honourable Member refers to an amendment to the 1997 Revenue Reconciliation Act introduced inCongress by Mr d'Amato and subsequently adopted, which codifies certain terms used for many years inconformity with United States legislation in the labelling of wines. These terms are names of European origin,such as Champagne, Moselle, port and sherry, used in the United States for American and imported wines.The list of terms in the amendment is in fact identical to that figuring in the technical rules in force (1).

The Commission is at present carrying out a legal analysis of the amendment to check its compatibility with theWorld Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.


The Commission would remind the Honourable Member of its reply to written question E-2485/97 byMr Barros Moura (2) on protection of Community designations of origin. One of the main objectives pursued inthe wine sector is to defend, both in the Community and internationally, the protection afforded by theCommunity designations of origin and geographical indications. Negotiations are in progress between theCommission and the United States on improved protection of Community names on the American market, inparticular on termination of any use of the terms covered by the amendment in question.

(1) See Title 27 FR Ch. 1§4.24 (b)(2) of the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Products and Firearms) Code of American FederalRegulations.

(2) OJ C 82, 17.3.1998.


by Angela Sierra Gonzalez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Seizures of Spanish fishing vessels and contravention of the fisheries agreement between Morocco andSpain

Since 1995 Spanish fishing vessels in Moroccan fishing grounds have been seized on 17 occassions by theMoroccan authorities.

It would appear, as the Spanish consul in Agadir (Morocco) has publicly stated, that the Moroccan authoritiesnever notify the Commission of the seizure of the vessels within the 48-hour deadline laid down in the fisheriesagreement concluded between the European Union and Morocco.

Moreover, the sanction proceedings subsequently instigated against the Spanish shipowners apparently fail toprovide the guarantees required in any contentious procedure, in that no reliable proof is provided of theinfringement committed, there is no notification of the vessels’ cargos, etc.

Is the Commission aware of these facts?

Is the Commission notified by the Moroccan Government of the seizure of Spanish vessels working in Moroccanfishing grounds, in accordance with the fisheries agreement between Morocco and the EU? Has it received anysuch notifications and, if so, how often?

What steps does the Commission intend to take if it proves to be true that the agreement is being contravened?

Does the Commission know whether the sanction proceedings instigated in respect of the vessels seized fulfil theminimum requirements for ensuring transparency and veracity?


(3 October 1997)

Since the new fisheries Agreement between the Community and Morocco came into force, the Moroccanauthorities have normally informed the Commission Delegation in Rabat of the boarding of vessels within48 hours, as provided for in Chapter VIII of Annex II to the Agreement.

When a fishing vessel is boarded, Chapter VIII(3) of the Annex gives the owner the choice of paying a finedetermined within a bracket laid down by Moroccan legislation or contesting the alleged infringement before ajudicial body.

The Commission has always been informed, through the Delegation in Rabat, when the Moroccan authoritieshave boarded Community vessels.

The Commission has spared no effort in requiring the Moroccan authorities to comply with all the provisions ofthe Agreement concerning the boarding of Community vessels authorised to fish in Morocco's fishing zone sothat Community owners can exercise their rights.


However, because of the boardings which have taken place recently, the Commission has requested a meeting ofthe Joint Committee under the Fisheries Agreement to look at ways of improving the procedures as regardsboarding in order to ensure the greatest possible transparency and maximum information.


by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Report on the economic consequences of the ending of tax-free sales

In 1991 Parliament called on the Commission to report on the economic consequences that might ensue whentax-free sales were abolished. The Union’s Ministers of Transport made a request to the same effect in July of thisyear. Appearing before the Committee on Economic Affairs on 7 July 1997, a Commission representative saidthat there was no need for a report.

According to my information, a report has been requested in several written questions to the Commission. I alsofind the matter disquieting as far as parliamentary prerogatives are concerned. Does the Commission consider thewishes of Parliament and the Member States’ Ministers of Transport to be of no account, given that the report hasnot been drawn up and the reason for this inactivity has not been revealed? If the foregoing assumption isincorrect, when will the Commission produce the report that it was asked to submit in 1991?


(22 October 1997)

The Commission has already stated its position on the request for a report on the economic consequences of theending of tax-free sales within the Community (1).

When, in 1991, the Council decided to maintain tax-free sales on a temporary basis in support of certainoperations, the intention was that the sectors concerned should adapt to a new situation over a period of morethan seven years, thereby taking into account the specific nature of each sector.

While the parties who benefited from this transitional period are now seeking a further period of exemption, thearguments they use are in fact no different from those put forward in 1991. The Council took those argumentsinto account in 1991, and there is no reason to reassess their importance or to re-open the debate on specialarrangements which, as decided, are due to come to an end.

The Council confirmed its position on this matter at the Ecofin Council meeting on 11 November 1996; inparticular, it rejected the need for a report of this kind. The Transport Council which met in July 1997 left thematter to be decided by the Ecofin Council.

(1) See, for example, the answers to parliamentary questions H-552/97 and H-21/97 by MrAndersson (Debates of the European Parliament −July and February 1997), H-409 by Mrs Banotti (Debates of the European Parliament − June 1997), E-1089/97 by Mr Mather(OJ C 367, 4.12.1997, p. 77), E-4116/96 by Mr Kaklamanis (OJ C 217, 17.7.1997, p. 66) and H-908/97 by Mrs Schorling (Debates of theEuropean Parliament − December 1997).



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Unification of the economic professions

Following a detailed study in the countries of the European Union it has been ascertained that Italy is the onlycountry which has not yet created a unified professional body consisting of chartered accountants and businessconsultants, of whom there are nearly 100 000 in Italy at present.

Until this happens, can the Commission try to persuade the Italian Government to undertake a legislativeinitiative to unify the economic professions?



(27 October 1997)

There is no Community rule requiring Italy to create a unified professional body for the professions exercised inItaly under the titles ‘dottore commercialista’, ‘ragioniere’ and ‘consulente del lavoro’. It is not for theCommission, therefore, to exert pressure on the Italian Government in this respect.


by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Commission funding of a report on minorities in Europe

Last year, an organization called ‘The Minority Rights Group’ based at 379, Brixton Road, London SW9 7DEreceived ECU 118 775 under budget heading B7-7040 ‘Training and internship for minorities on internationalstandards relating to minorities’ for an initiative which began in April 1996 and is due to end in September 1997.

Recently, the same organization published a report entitled ‘Protection of Minority Rights in Europe − PolicyRecommendations’. Among the many inaccuracies in the report there is also a map which shows the northernpart of Greece supposedly inhabited by ‘Macedonian Slavs’. This assertion is flagrantly untrue and might bedescribed as extremely tendentious.

Did the Commission fund this particular initiative and by what amount? How many other initiatives by the aboveorganization have received Commission support?


(14 October 1997)

The financing of human rights and democracy schemes from the Community budget is the subject of variousannual reports that the Commission addresses to Parliament and the Council, notably a November 1991 report onthe implementation of the resolution of the Council and the Member States meeting within the Council on thehuman rights aspects of development cooperation policy (1) and a report on the implementation of measuresintended to promote observance of human rights and democratic principles which covers all the budget headingsof Chapter B7.70 ‘European initiative for democracy and the protection of human rights’ (2).

Community support for this kind of scheme is contingent on prior examination of each project to check that theactivities to be implemented are in keeping with the Community's priorities. That said, the opinions expressed bythe beneficiary organisation in the context of each project commit only the latter and do not necessarily reflectthose of the Commission.

The Minority Rights Group (MRG) is well known in international and regional forums for its solid commitmentto the protection of minorities over the years and has received Community support for a number of projects toprotect minorities. As the Commission does not have a copy of the annual report referred to by the HonourableMember it cannot comment on it. It is possible that it was produced with the NGO's own funds or with othersources of funding.

In 1996 the Commission gave the MRG, based in London, a grant of ECU 95 000 to run training workshops overa two-year period for representatives of minorities in connection with UN working groups on minorities. Theproject is currently under way.

Other MRG (London) projects receiving Commission support are:

− 1994: ECU 60 000 for the ‘Communication and networking programme’ designed to strengthen thedissemination of information on minorities' problems in the world, chiefly through publications.


− 1993: ECU 154 360 for the ‘Programme of the United Nations Declaration on the rights of minorities’ aimedat covering the costs of the Cairo conference on minorities in the Arab world, a number of research projects,publication of information on the concept of minorities rights, appeals and the scope for obtaining financialsupport and on work within the United Nations.

− 1993: ECU 30 000 for the ‘Minority rights group’ project, also aimed at strengthening the NGO's activity inthe field of publications and education on minority rights.

− 1992: ECU 40 000 for the ‘1992 programme of activities’.

− 1990: ECU 25 000 for the 1990/1991 programme of activities’.

Another branch of the NGO, based in Finland, also received ECU 18 000 from the Commission in 1995 for aproject on ‘minorities and their right of political participation’. It involved an international seminar on minoritiesto relaunch the debate within the United Nations and the Finnish parliament, plus the financing of publicationsrelating to the seminar.

(1) Doc. SEC(96) 378.(2) Doc. COM(96) 672 Final.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Reduction of need to travel in Europe

Does the Commission support initiatives to ‘reduce the need’ to travel in Europe?



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Reduction of need to travel in Europe

What measures does the Commission advocate to reduce the growth in travel demand in Europe?



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Mobility and accessibility in transport policies

Does the Commission encourage ‘mobility’ and ‘accessibility’ in its transport policies?



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Reduction in the growth of road travel

What measures does the Commission advocate to reduce the growth of road travel in Europe?




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Reduction in the growth of air travel

What measures does the Commission advocate to reduce the growth of air travel in Europe?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2808/97, E-2809/97, E-2810/97, E-2811/97 and E-2812/97

given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1997)

The substantial and rapid growth in mobility in Europe has undoubted social and economic benefits. In order totry to ensure that those benefits are not offset or even outweighed by the disadvantages caused by increasingdemand for movement of people and freight, however, the Commission continually emphasises the importanceof a range of policies, all of which are geared to securing sustainability in that mobility.

In those efforts the support and co-operation of the Parliament, the Governments and Parliaments of MemberStates, transport professionals, voluntary organisations and academic bodies are greatly valued.

The Commission believes that it is important to understand the causes of the rapid growth in mobility in order toasess whether this trend will continue, and to introduce the most effective solutions.

Changes in lifestyle are an important cause of the growth in personal travel with more time and money availablefor leisure travel. There are also demographic changes such as an increase in the number of active elderly peoplewho, unlike their predecessors, are maintaining higher rates of car ownership and mobility well into old age. It isalso clear that factors like commercial development and the range of accessible and affordable transport systemshave a very important influence on the volume and patterns of travel and significant implications for themanagement of demand.

A better use of land use planning can help to bring about a better modal balance in the transport system.Technological development can also assist and in some cases, information technology could be used as asubstitute for journeys. In addition, movement towards a system in which the price of transport reflected its fullcosts (including the costs to society of pollution, congestion and accidents) and charges were differentiatedaccordingly would assist in efforts to achieve economic efficiency and sustainability in transport.

The Commission is actively promoting such initiatives. As the rising demand for travel has been mainly met bythe increased use of cars and trucks, the freedom of movement has contributed in many urban areas to a loss ofmobility due to congestion. To counter these trends the Commission is in favour of an integrated approach whichincludes a strategy for increasing the use of public transport for passenger and rail, short sea and inlandwaterways for freight.

With the ‘The citizens' network’ (1) green paper the Commission has promoted a policy on public passengertransport, which puts the mobility and accessibility needs of citizens in the centre of transport provision and totheir credit several local authorities and operators are developing ways of applying those concepts. In the sameperspective, the guidelines on the trans-European transport network favour those links which interconnect withlocal systems and which promote environmentally friendly transport.


Where the growth of air travel is concerned, the Commission is seeking to promote intermodality so that the mostappropriate mode of transport is used in each segment of a passenger or freight journey. It is, for example,fostering the development of the connection of large airports to rail networks, including high speed rail whichoffers a means of enabling rail to compete more effectively with short and medium haul air services.

In the context of the existing legal framework and the eligibility criteria of cohesion instruments, priority inselecting projects to be co-financed is given to projects that contain integrative, intermodal features while at thesame time fulfilling the employment and development objectives of regional and structural policies.

In all activities, the Commission is conscious that improvements in the quality and use of infrastructure and inlogistics organisation can produce significant cost savings, reductions in environmental pressures, and extraemployment. In the use of resources and in policy and legal initiatives we therefore work consistently for thoseadvances.

(1) Doc. COM(95) 601 final.


by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Chiropractic profession in Spain

The case of Penny Teshak DC was recently brought to my attention following her recent sentence of 6 monthsimprisonment in Spain. She qualified as a chiropractor in the USA and subsequently set up her own practice inSpain. Due to the fact that she has qualifications from outside the EU, she stands accused of practising without alicence.

Can the Commission explain why a qualified professional who is supported by the Spanish ChiropractorsAssociation faces such an unjust sentence?

Does the Commission propose any action on a European level to curb such an outrageous court ruling?


(17 October 1997)

On the general question of pursuing the profession of chiropractor in the Member States, the Commission wouldrefer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written Questions E-2139/95 by Mrs Muscardini (1) andE-1706/95 by Mrs Banotti (2).

With regard to the specific case mentioned by the Honourable Member, it appears, from the information given inthe question, that the person concerned started practising without obtaining the necessary authorisation, thuslaying herself open to the charge of illegal practice and to the consequent penalties under the law of the hostMember State.

The Commission therefore does not intend to intervene in this case, which does not fall within its sphere ofresponsibility.

(1) OJ C 326, 6.12.1995.(2) OJ C 311, 22.11.1995.



by Andre Sainjon (ARE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Boeing − McDonnell Douglas merger

The Commission’s acceptance of the Boeing − McDonnell Douglas merger poses fundamental problems:

1. What industrial policy should the Union adopt in response to American provocation?

2. Can it encourage the large European groups to come together, and how?

3. Can it give new momentum to aeronautical and space research in the context of the Fifth FrameworkProgramme?


(20 October 1997)

In July 1997 the Commission announced that it would be presenting a communication on the future of theaerospace industry to Council and the Parliament in the autumn. This document was adopted by the Commissionon 24 September 1997 ‘The European aerospace industry meeting the global challenge’ (1) and covers the pointsraised by the Honourable Member.

The Commission agrees that in the face of mounting international competition it would be in the aerospaceindustry's interest to be able to benefit from the economies of scale and synergies which larger Europeanindustrial groups could provide. The Commission also believes that any industry consolidation effort must beindustry-led and be based on sound economic and commercial criteria which would allow the aerospace industryto be a dynamic and flexible player in the international aerospace market.

As far as the fifth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities(1998-2002) (2) is concerned, acknowledging the importance of technology acquisition in the aeronautics sector,the Commission has proposed a key action ‘New perspectives in aeronautics’. Within this the Commission willimplement co-ordinating actions to support the strategic objectives of the European aerospace industry.Similarly, in the domain of space technologies and space applications the Commission will ensure a coherentapproach in its Community research and technological development (RTD) actions under the different specificprogrammes of the 5th framework programme, as well as synergy with other policies relating to spaceapplications. Such co-operation stimulates synergy between applied and fundamental research in the manyinterrelated aerospace disciplines and increases the impact at all levels of the supply chain. Also the Commissionhas put into operation a reinforced co-ordination with the European space agency in general and its RTDprogrammes in particular.

(1) COM(97) 466.(2) COM(97) 142.


by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Marine science and technology projects

According to the Agence Europe bulletin of 7 July 1997, the Commission has approved funding for 56 projectsunder the marine science and technology research programme.

What Portuguese projects, if any, are included among the above?


Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 1997)

On 26 March 1997 the Commission decided to finance 55 shared-cost projects, one concerted action and twodemonstration projets in the context of the marine science and technology programme (1994-1998) (1).

Portuguese institutions participate in 11 of these projects. They are listed in a table which is sent direct to theHonourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament.

(1) OJ C 262, 20.9.1994.


by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dorfler (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Photovoltaic energy/Full Cost Rate system

In his answer on behalf of the Commission to Question E-1359/97 (1) on 20 June 1997, Mr Papoutsis said thedifferences in cost between conventional and renewable energy were the main obstacle to the introduction ofrenewable energies into the market. These differences must be evened out. To this end, in a transitional phase,renewable energies need to be put on an equal footing with conventional energies by means of market aids.The best instrument for this is the Full Cost Rate system used in many towns in Germany for network access forelectricity from renewable energies.

1. From which German towns and which organizations has the Commission obtained reports of experiencewith Full Cost Rate systems, as called for by Parliament on 4 July 1996 in paragraph 19 of its resolution on aCommunity action plan for renewable energy sources (A4-0188/96) (2)?

2. What results have been achieved with Full Cost Rate systems?

3. What is the Commission’s assessment of these results?

4. What rules does the Commission propose for payment for renewable energy input in order to speed up itsintroduction into the market?

(1) OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 47.(2) OJ C 211, 22.7.1996, p. 27.


(24 October 1997)

As stated in its Green Paper on renewable energy sources (1), the Commission is preparing a White Paper on aCommunity strategy for renewable energy sources extending to the year 2010, together with a plan of action.

Against this background the Commission is contemplating a proposal on access to the supply grid for electricitygenerated by renewable energy sources, and on payment for this. However, systems other than that adopted byseveral German cities may be considered.

With this in view the Commission is analysing the experiments conducted in the Member States in order, at theappropriate time, to draw up proposals at Community level.

Concurrently with the proposal on network access the Commission is analysing the treatment of renewableenergy sources as part of the transposition of Directive 96/92/EEC on the internal electricity market (2).


In addition the Commission feels that the cost of renewable energy sources is not the only barrier to their marketacceptance. It therefore intends to put forward measures to apply to differing areas such as standardisation,research, demonstration, dissemination, local and regional planning, taxation, institutional and commercialfunding, promotion, information and training.

The Commission feels that, in order to guarantee renewable energy sources a wider market in the medium andlong term, the support for the development of these must be well targeted and consume little time in order toboost their use and competitiveness during the transitional stage referred to by the Honourable Member.

Indeed, the cost may vary enormously as a function (a) of the technologies used and (b) of the specific conditionsand in particular those such as location and infrastructure density.

(1) Doc. COM(96) 576.(2) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Action from 1995 Beijing Conference on women

What action has been taken and is being planned by the Commission to further the goals agreed at the 1995Beijing Conference on women contained in the Platform for Action with regard to women and the environmentand women and health?

Answer given by Mr Marın on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1997)

The Commission's follow-up to the Beijing conference began with preparation of a communication (1) onintegrating gender issues across all sectors of development co-operation. This resulted in a Resolution (2) of theCouncil and Member States which endorses the communication’s analysis and recommendations, and translatesinto the field of development co-operation the political commitments undertaken at the fourth world conferenceon women.

At policy level, the recent Council regulations on human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiencysyndrome (HIV/AIDS) and on population in developing countries (3) take account of the main principles andgoals set out in Beijing and Cairo. Gender issues have also been included in priorities under the recentenvironment regulation (4). At procedural level, all programmes in Asia and Latin American countries andMediterranean third countries over MECU 2 are required since 1994 to incorporate gender impact assessment intheir design and implementation. More recently, gender impact has been included in requirements for smallerprojects under budget lines such as tropical forests (B7-6201).

At programming level, since the beginning of 1995 the Commission has committed over MECU 300 toreproductive health and HIV/AIDS projects and programmes in developing countries. These focus on improvingthe reproductive lives of women and men through better understanding of issues and rights and through betteraccess to good quality non-coercive services for the provision of family planning, safe motherhood, sexualhealth, prevention and care related to HIV/AIDS. A number of initiatives also aim to prevent violence againstwomen. All of the programmes supported in the reproductive health area have integrated gender concepts intotheir design. In other health projects, increasing attention is also paid to gender issues. In environmentalprogramming, all newly prepared rural development programmes seek to focus on sustainable management ofnatural resources, in particular land, soil and water, while integrating local people, particularly women, in overallplanning and implementation as well as in training in environmental sensitivity and income-generating activities.


Concerning African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, the Commission has a programme of technical assistanceto eleven priority countries, under a contract with the Royal tropical institute of Amsterdam, which includesadvisory work to make projects more focused on gender issues. This includes also projects on environment andhealth. In addition, the Commission is about to start a study on gender issues in the delivery of health services inAfrica, which will complement two current studies on mother and child health.

Finally, the Commission has also prepared a report (5) on the state of women's health in the Community whichcontains an overview of major health trends, patterns of mortality and morbidity as well as relevant healthdeterminants of womens’ health.

A list of examples of gender integration in recent health and environment programming is being sent directly tothe Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1) Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament on integrating gender issues in development co-operation,COM(95) 423.

(2) Resolution of the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States on integrating gender issues in developmentco-operation, 20.12.1995, ref. No 12627/95.

(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 550/97 of 21.3.1997 on HIV/AIDS related operations in developing countries − OJ L 85, 27.3.1997.Council Regulation (EC) No 1484/97 of 22.7.1997 on aid for population policies and programmes in developing countries −OJ L 202, 30.7.1997.

(4) Council Regulation (EC) No 722/97 of 22.4.1997 on environmental measures in developing countries − OJ L 108, 25.4.1997.(5) COM(97) 224 final.


by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Macro-financial assistance package to Bulgaria

Can the Commission clarify whether the ECU 250 million macro-financial assistance package to Bulgariaapproved on 13 June 1997 by Parliament, (COM(97) 234) included the proposed Euratom loan of ECU 150million. If not, what is the status of this loan? Has it been approved by the PHARE/TACIS Nuclear Safety ExpertGroup? If so, under what criteria and with what conditions attached? Is the proposed loan being reviewed by theEuropean Investment Bank, and if so, under what criteria? How does a loan for safety upgrade provide extrarevenue in such a case so as to justify the expenditure, which would also provide the extra revenue with which torepay the loan financing? Will it be necessary to make a provision to the Guarantee Fund for this loan, sinceBulgaria is an applicant country?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 1997)

There is no link between the MECU 250 macro-financial assistance package in favour of Bulgaria decided by theCouncil in July 1997 and the proposed MECU 150 Euratom loan.

For the latter, a loan application has been received from the Bulgarian national electricity company, and theCommission is now proceeding with the preparatory work to enable it to make a decision on such a loan.

In line with Council Decision 94/179/Euratom of 21 March 1994 amending Decision 77/270/Euratom, toauthorize the Commission to contract Euratom borrowings in order to contribute to the financing required forimproving the degree of safety and efficiency of nuclear power stations in certain non-member countries (1) andits attached guidelines, the PHARE/TACIS nuclear safety expert group has already discussed the technicaldetails of the project and submitted in July 1997 an opinion to the Commission. This opinion indicates that theimplementation of the proposed modernisation programme and of the measures recommended by Riskauditwould achieve an internationally acceptable safety level. It also insists on the adequate involvement of the


Bulgarian nuclear safety authorities and technical safety organisations in the licensing process and recommendsthat Community support should continue to be extended to the Bulgarian nuclear regulator during the licensingprocess. The opinion is given subject to a satisfactory conclusion of the assessment of the environmental impactof the project.

As part of the Euratom loan procedure, the European investment bank (EIB) is required to deliver arecommendation on the financial aspects of the project to be financed, for example on whether the project issuitable for loan financing or whether the borrower is likely to be in a position to service and reimburse theEuratom loan envisaged.

It is not expected that the proposed safety measures will directly provide extra revenue. However, the increasedefficiency of operation should have some financial impact. This issue is expected to be addressed in therecommendation required from the EIB.

In accordance with Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2728/94 of 31 October 1994 establishing a guaranteefund for external actions (2), a payment to the guarantee fund is required for all loans or loan guarantees in favourof third countries. Such payment has therefore to be made also for Bulgaria, irrespective of its status as anapplicant country.

(1) OJ L 84, 29. 3.1994.(2) OJ L 293, 12.11.1994.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Euratom loan for the Russian NPP Kalinin Unit 3

What is the current status of the proposed Euratom loan for the Russian NPP Kalinin Unit 3? Has the applicationbeen approved by the PHARE/TACIS Nuclear Safety Expert Group, and if so, under what criteria and with whatconditions attached? Is the proposed loan being reviewed by the European Investment Bank, and if so, underwhich criteria?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

On the basis of a request for a Euratom loan from the Russian state electricity concern Rosenergoatom, theCommission is preparing all the studies required to enable it to make a decision on such a loan.

In line with Council Decision 94/179/Euratom of 21 March 1994 amending Decision 77/270/Euratom, toauthorize the Commission to contract Euratom borrowings in order to contribute to the financing required forimproving the degree of safety and efficiency of nuclear power stations in certain non-member countries (1) andits attached guidelines, the Phare Tacis nuclear safety expert group has already discussed the technical details ofthe project and submitted in July 1997 a statement to the Commission. The statement indicates that theimplementation of the proposed modernisation programme and of the measures recommended by Riskauditwould achieve an internationally acceptable safety level. It also insists on the adequate involvement of theRussian nuclear safety authorities and technical safety organisations in the licensing process and recommendsthat Community support should continue to be extended to the Russian nuclear regulator during the licensingprocess. The opinion is given subject to a satisfactory conclusion of the assessment of the environmental impactof the project.

As part of the Euratom loan procedure, the European investment bank (EIB) is required to deliver arecommendation on the financial aspects of the project to be financed, for example on whether the project issuitable for loan financing or whether the borrower is likely to be in a position to service and reimburse theEuratom loan envisaged.

(1) OJ L 84, 29.3.1994.




(1 September 1997)

Subject: Agreement between the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Atomic EnergyAgency (IAEA), approved by the WHO Assembly on 28 May 1959

Does the EU have particular relations with, or a role in, the World Health Organization (WHO) or theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) outside those of the Member States, and does the EU contribute anyfunds to these organizations?

Is the Commission aware of the Agreement between the WHO and the IAEA, approved by the WHO Assemblyon 28 May 1959, which has the effect of restricting the activities of the WHO in relation to projects connectedwith nuclear matters? Article 3: ‘Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on asubject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult theother with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement.’

Surely in the interest of global and EU health, WHO should have the freedom to investigate any matter and in anymanner it so chooses, especially on nuclear matters (where the Commission has a particular responsibility to EUcitizens) without being beholden to an Agency whose mandate is to promote that same energy source, as citizens’health must be the overriding interest, and would the Commission agree to support or encourage either directly,or through Member States, a revocation or appropriate revision of the said agreement?


(15 October 1997)

In respect of relations between the Community and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),the Community has an important role in the areas of safeguards, research and safety. For example theCommunity is party to three agreements between IAEA and Member States (INFCIRC 193, 263, 290) and has aframework cooperation agreement with the IAEA signed in 1975. The Community co-organises and contributesoccasionally to the cofinancing of certain IAEA activities, in particular in the area of nuclear and radiologicalsafety. As for the World Health Organisation (WHO), though the Community funds none of its activities, it issometimes involved as a subcontractor in Commission projects, especially in the humanitarian sphere.

The 1959 Agreement between the WHO and the IAEA has been published (INFCIRC 20). It must be emphasisedthat it is not for the Commission to intervene in relations between two international organisations.

However, the Agreement clearly states that the two organisations ‘will act in close cooperation with each otherand will consult each other regularly in regard to matters of common interest’ and that this should take place‘without prejudice to the right of the World Health Organisation to concern itself with promoting, developing,assisting and co-ordinating international health work’. Thus, as is evident from the text, the Agreement simplyseeks to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure collaboration on matters of mutual interest. An example of suchcollaboration is the ‘Basic Safety Standards’, jointly sponsored by the IAEA and WHO − together with theInternational Labour Organisation (ILO), the Panamerican Health Organisation (PAHO) and the Organisation forEconomic Cooperation and Development-Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA).


by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Temelin nuclear power station in the Czech Republic

In Temelin, in the Czech Republic near the Austrian border, two pressurized-water nuclear reactors(type-VVER-1000) are currently under construction. Their completion has been plagued by enormous technical,


financial, organizational and legal problems. The original commissioning deadline of 1992 has been officiallypostponed several times and has now been put forward to 1999/2000. The original overall construction cost ofKc 26 billion is now calculated as at least Kc 85 billion (about DM 5 billion). The cost overruns are primarilyattributable to the retrospective decision to commission the US firm Westinghouse to install a control andfuel-rod system which, owing to the absence of Russian design blueprints and numerous demonstrablecompatibility and quality deficiencies, gives cause for concern that safety standards might well be reduced ratherthan improved.

1. How does the Council assess the circumstances that, despite fundamental retroactive design changes to theTemelin nuclear power station and the resultant emergence of a globally untested VVER-1000 mixed reactorprototype in immediate proximity to the EU’s borders, no new approval procedure, no environmental impactassessment, no least-cost studies, no probabilistic safety analysis and no public participation process were carriedout?

2. What importance does the Council assign to the above circumstances in relation to the Czech Republic’santicipated accession to the EU?

3. Is the Council aware of the unanimous decisions adopted by the Austrian Parliament on 9 July 1997 andurging, in connection with the forthcoming EU accession negotiations with Central and Eastern Europe inparticular, the devising of new approaches to opting out of nuclear energy and the establishment of EU financinginstruments to that end, and how does it assess that initiative in general and in relation to the Temelin nuclearpower plant and the Czech Republic in particular?

Answer

(4 December 1997)

The Council is aware of the problems to which the Honourable Member refers. In the context of the EuropeanUnion’s privileged relations with the associated countries of Central dn Eastern Europe, and hence with theCzech Republic, the Council has on several occasions drawn the attention of the Czech authorities to thesequestions. Thus, while noting the undertakings given by the Czech authorities to improve nuclear safety and theprovision of information on nuclear installations in their country, the Council has stated that it attaches thegreatest importance, also with accession in prospect, to a high level of nuclear plant safety and to closecooperation to achieve that objective.

As for the Czech Republic’s impending accession in relation to nuclear energy, the Council would point out thatit is of the utmost importance that the candidate countries - and therefore the Czech Republic - adopt as swiftly aspossible the whole of the Union’s acquis, and that they lose no time in honouring the undertakings they havegiven regarding the modernization and/or shutting down of nuclear power stations, adn waste managementpolicy.

Moreover, it is recognised that one of the objectives of adhesion is to ensure that applicant states acceptinternationally recognised principles of nuclear safety as laid down by the International Nuclear SafetyConvention and to accede to and ratify this Convention.



(1 September 1997)

Subject: Irregularities in the tender procedure regarding computerization of the Italian Ministry for Education

Article 85 of the Treaty stipulates that: ‘The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the commonmarket: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practiceswhich may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention,restriction or distortion of competition within the common market’.


In Written Question P-1972/97 (1), the Commission’s attention was drawn to a situation which might constitute abreach of Article 85, namely the award by the Italian Ministry for Eduction of a contract for the computerizationof its services worth 640 billion lire to a temporary consortium consisting of EDS Electronic Data Systems ItaliaSpA and Ferrovie dello Stato SpA (Italian State Railways).

By selling off the company Telesistemi Ferroviari in August 1996 while the tender procedure was in progress,Ferrovie dello Stato SpA would seem to have lost its operational capacity in the IT sector, thus casting doubt onits ability to meet the tender requirements. This matter was raised in the opinion delivered by the State LegalAdvisory Office in December 1996, which ruled that the consortium was unfit to take part in the tenderprocedure.

The award of the contract to a consortium deemed unfit to take part in the tender procedure would suggest thatthe rules of competition have been breached.

In the light of the above considerations, will the Commission say:

1. Whether the sole purpose of the temporary consortium comprising EDS and FS was to bid for the contract inquestion and whether this fact might have a bearing on the Commission’s decision regarding a possiblebreach of Article 85 of the EC Treaty?

2. Whether it considers the temporary consortium fit to take part in the tender procedure?

3. What response it has received from the Italian authorities regarding compliance with the rules on publiccontracts and what its views are on the matter?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 132.


(21 October 1997)

The agreement in question was not notified to the Commission, which is therefore unable to form an opinion as toits compatibility with Article 85 of the EC Treaty. However, the fact of forming a partnership with anothercompany to help in obtaining a public contract would not in itself constitute a breach of the prohibition laid downin that article.

Shortly after answering written question P-1972/97 from the Honourable Member, the Commission received acomplaint about the public service contract for the computerisation of the Italian Ministry for Education. On thebasis of information supplied by the complainant, the Commission is in the process of drafting a letter to theItalian authorities asking specific questions about the award procedure.


by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs)

Can the Commission indicate how it intends to comply with its obligations under Part Four of the EC Treaty, theassociation arrangements derived therefrom and the Declaration in the Treaty of Amsterdam which restates in amore precise form the OCT decision?

As far as the rice market is concerned, can the Commission explain its approach towards the OCT, given thatunder the WTO the Community market has to be opened up, yet by taking exemption measures the Commissionis in fact protecting the Community market from products − in particular, rice − from the OCTs? Is this nottantamount to passing on the obligations under the WTO to the OCTs?


Can the Commission say why the Eighth European Development Fund has not yet been approved? Is it true thatrelease of the funds has been blocked until the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba accede to the Commission’swishes with regard to rice exports? Does not the Commission feel that this is an unfair and inappropriate meansof enforcing cooperation by improperly linking trade and development? Is the Commission aware that importantsocial and economic programmes are being delayed, such as SAPNA (the Social Action Plan for the NetherlandsAntilles) and essential repairs to the Queen Emma bridge, and what is the Commission’s response to this?

Is the Commission aware that businesses in the Antilles are subject to additional constraints in their exports ofrice to the Community as the requisite import certificates can be requested only by a person or businessestablished in a Member State who, or which, has been actively involved in the rice trade for at least one year?What explanation does the Commission have for this discriminatory practice?

Can the Commission say why the annual partnership meeting with the OCTs has been postponed?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 1997)

Part Four of the EC Treaty relating to the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) has since 1957 beenimplemented regularly through six successive five-yearly decisions, in 1964, 1970, 1976, 1981, 1986 and 1991.The latest Commission proposal concerns the mid-term review of Decision 91/482/EC on the association of theoverseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community (1). It was tabled on 14 Februa-ry 1996 and has been under discussion in the Council since then.

The declaration on the OCT to be inserted into the Final Act of the Treaty of Amsterdam relates formally to theperiod after 1 March 2000. Until then the Commission will conduct relations with the OCT, as ever, bearing inmind the objectives set out in that declaration.

As regards the effects of the WTO on the preferential arrangements granted to the OCTs, notably for rice,the Commission considers that the tariff reductions adopted as part of the Uruguay Round could over time reducethe relative importance of investments in these sectors in the OCTs. That is one of the reasons for doubting thelong-term viability of investments made over the last few years in certain OCTs, in particular in this sector.The Commission did on several occasions advise the operators concerned about the risks as the investments wereessentially speculative and had only a limited effect on sustainable development. The Commission stressesfinally that the safeguard measures taken for rice do not affect a product of OCT origin but exports to theCommission of rice originating in the ACP States and having undergone (minimal) processing in the OCTconcerned. Moreover, the Commission's safeguard measures do not affect implementation of the undertakingsmade in respect of that product for the ACP States.

The overall amount of the eighth European Development Fund for the OCT has been known since the CannesEuropean Council at the end of June 1995, but its breakdown between instruments and between the OCTs of thevarious Member States and its implementing methods (linked to those for the eighth EDF for the ACP statesadopted in Mauritius on 4 November 1995) are contained in the Commission proposal of 14 February 1996.As that proposal must be adopted unanimously by the Council, the Honourable Member will readily understandthat the opposition of one of the Member States to some parts of it has prevented the other countries fromaccepting the other parts.

There is no question of forcing certain OCTs to ‘accede to the Commission’s wishes’ on rice exports but rather toreach an agreement within the Community on the unanimity procedures set out in the EC Treaty. Council bodiesare not therefore acting in an ‘unfair and inappropriate’ spirit by ‘improperly linking trade and development’ butare seeking to adopt an overall decision covering the whole gamut of EC-OCT cooperation, including tradearrangements.

The two projects cited by the Honourable Member are not being held up because the eighth EDF has yet to beapproved:

− Queen Emma bridge: this project will be financed entirely under the 7th EDF, which has been available forsome considerable time. The delay mentioned by the Honourable Member is due to the fact that the initialstudy assigned by the Curaçao port authority a local consultant did not produce the invitation to tenderdocuments in the format required by the EDF’s rules. The local consultant declined the offer to amend theexisting documents so this task had to be assigned to another firm.


− Social action programme (SAPNA): it was agreed from the outset with the local authorities to finance thisproject from the 7th and 8th EDFs. It is still at the study and preparation stage, with the studies still inprogress (until the end of this year). The Commission will then appraise the dossier before it is presented tothe EDF Committee.

By contrast, many other OCTs less developed than the Netherlands Antilles have exhausted their seventh EDFallocation and for them the absence of a decision on the eighth EDF means a serious gap in the support for theirdevelopment process.

Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1036/97 Council Regulation (EC) No 1036/97 of 2 June 1997 introducingsafeguard measures in respect of imports of rice originating in the overseas countries and territories (2) requiresthat the applicant be a natural or legal person who has carried out a commercial activity in the rice sector for atleast 12 months and be registered in the Member State in which the application is submitted. This is designed toensure that the operator is reliable and avoid any possible risk of speculation on the import certificates. That is allthe more necessary in the light of the quantity set in the safeguard measures and the advantage stemming fromnon-collection of customs duties.

No decision was ever taken that the Commission − Member State − OCT partnership meetings should be annual.It should be noted that the Commission delegation on the ground had numerous contacts with the localauthorities and firms, that many visits were made to Brussels by Antilles' entrepreneurs, that partnershipmeetings were organised by the Commission before it adopted safeguard measures and that, above all, thepartnership has been an intensive one since, for more than one and a half years, the weekly discussions in theCouncil have taken place in the presence of a representative of the Netherlands Antilles alongside the Dutchrepresentative, the only such case among all the OCTs.

(1) OJ L 263, 19.9.1991.(2) OJ L 151, 10.6.1997.


by Edith Muller (V) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: EU policy in the former Yugoslavia

The Commission services entrusted with the EU’s diverse aid and reconstruction activities on the territory offormer Yugoslavia seem to have been subject to frequent redeployments of staff. This may − next to theunderstaffing of the respective service − have damaged the continuity of the programmes and the smoothness ofthe reconstruction process.

Can the Commission provide a complete organigramme of the respective services in DG 1A (includingdelegations and technical assistance) from 1995 until now by post (or function for TA) including eachredeployment (replacement/reorganization/ ...) by indication of date and function?


(27 October 1997)

The Commission has taken three measures to cope with its political and administrative tasks relating to countriesformerly part of Yugoslavia.

Firstly, it took steps in December 1995 to set up an internal inter-departmental working party and the firstrepresentative office, in Sarajevo.

This was done by internal redeployment because the amendment by the budgetary authority providing for thespending of ECU 100 million on former Yugoslavia did not include any additional staff. Commissionrepresentation on the spot was covered by a combination of redeployment and the use of four new posts grantedby the budgetary authority for the unified external service (operating costs having been covered by the PHAREprogramme during the first ten months of 1996).


Secondly, the Commission decided on 26 November 1996 to make a number of adjustments to the organisationchart of the Directorate-General for External Relations: Europe and the New Independent States, CommonSecurity Policy and External Service with the aim in particular of bringing together in Directorate D (Relationswith other European countries) political relations and administration of instruments relating to all countriesformerly part of Yugoslavia (except Slovenia, responsibility for which was transferred to Directorate B,Relations with Central Europe) and Albania. Unit D1 has been replaced by two new units whose spheres ofresponsibility are as follows:

D1 - Bosnia-Herzegovina and reconstruction, including international coordination; Horizontal questions andmultinational programmes in aid of former Yugoslavia.

D2 - Albania, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Croatia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

These transfers of responsibilities went hand-in-hand with transfers in both directions of staff responsible foradministering the related files. In the light of the available human resources, and in the interests of administrativeefficiency, it is planned to give Unit D1 entire responsibility for the implementation of financial assistance to thecountries concerned and to assign to it the personnel responsible for dealing with that task. Naturally, the head ofUnit D2 will also be able to call on the personnel of Unit D1, so that instruments will be administered byagreement between the heads of both units. Internal arrangements will be adopted to make clear the allocation ofstaff between the two new geographical units.

The new unit dealing with former Yugoslavia also gained from the new financial direction of 1 October 1996concerning budgetary tasks in contracts, finance and evaluation.

Lastly, it is possible that at the end of 1997 the Commission may decide to carry out further adjustments atheadquarters to take advantage of experience and to improve the efficiency of management in theimplementation of Community reconstruction programmes.

The more detailed information requested is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament'sSecretariat by the Commission.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that there have been frequent redeployments. These werenecessitated because this Directorate-General has had to adapt itself, within the constraints of virtually constantstaff numbers in recent years, to the need to administer increasingly large budgets (in particular for Phare).

It has also had to strengthen its internal expertise by calling in contract and auxiliary personnel, whoselimited-term contracts and excessive mobility do not make it any easier to run reconstruction programmes. Thissituation is not confined to programmes in aid of former Yugoslavia and has been highlighted in the annualreport of the Court of Auditors since 1994, but it is keenly felt in the case of former Yugoslavia. It is this shortageof staff which is holding back the establishment of a network of representations throughout the countriesformerly part of Yugoslavia.


by Leen van der Waal (I-EDN) to the Council

(13 September 1997)

Subject: Acquisition of arms by Syria, Iraq and Iran

In recent months the Council has taken a number of initiatives to support the peace process in the Middle East,including the appointment of a Special Envoy, Mr Moratinos. The focus has been on promoting the peace processbetween Israel and the Palestinians. Recent reports indicate, however, that countries such as Syria, Iraq and Iranare rapidly building up stocks of arms − not simply conventional, but also chemical and biological arms − whichare far in excess of the levels needed for their national security.

1. Can the Council confirm these reports of an excessive build-up of arms by Syria, Iraq and Iran?

2. Does the Council share my view that these rearmament programmes might impede the progress of thepeace process in the Middle East, since they are a threat to Israel and they could encourage terrorist activitiesaimed at Israel?


3. With a view to the progress of the peace process, does the Council therefore see any grounds for raising thequestion of this rearmament in its contacts with Syria, Iraq and Iran?

4. Is the Council prepared to ensure that no know-how or equipment for making nuclear, chemical orbiological weapon are exported from the Union to Syria, Iraq and Iran?

Answer

(26 November 1997)

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to the fact that, following the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq is subject to aUN sanctions regime aiming at full dismantlement of the mass destruction capability built up by that countrybefore the war.

The Council is concerned about the effects on regional secuirty of Iran’s arms procurement and developmentactivities. It raises these concerns with countries from which Iran is known to be trying to achieve technologyand known-how which could enable it to develop a mass destruction capability. Until the discontinuation of theEU-Iran Critical Dialogue following the verdict in the so-called ‘Mykonos Trial’ in Berlin earlier this year, theCouncil also raised these questions with Iran itself.

The Council conducts a close dialogue with Syria, inter alia through its Special Envoy for the Middle East PeaceProcess. It encourages that country and Israel to continue their efforts to find a mutually acceptable basis forresuming the bilateral talks which were broken off in 1995.

The European Union is an active player in international efforts to prevent and counteract the proliferation ofweapons of mass destruction. It seeks universal adherence to relevant treaties: the Nuclear Non-ProliferationTreaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, to which threetreaties all Member States are Parties; the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, already signed and in the process ofratification by the EU Member States, as well as regional arrangements, etc. The Union also seeks to developstrengthened verification measures to ensure compliance with these treaties (IAEA safeguards, Biological andToxin Weapons verification). At the same time, the Union seeks to counteract proliferation whenever it occurs.

Futhermore, the Honourable Member will note that all Member States of the Union are active members of allexport control regimes: the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Australia Group, the Missile Technology ControlRegime and the Wassenaar Arrangement.

The Dual Use Regulation, accompanied by a Joint Action adopted in December 1994, requires Member States toimpose export controls on all dual-use goods covered by these regimes.

Following the invitation of the European Council of 16-17 June 1997, and in the framework of the CommonForeign and Security policy, the Council is currently engaged in the follow-up to the common criteria to beapplied to arms exports, identified in the conclusions of the European Councils of 29 June 1991 and 26-27 June1992.

The EU Member States are therefore committed, both by international legally-binding instruments and politicalundertakings and by the European Union Regulation and Joint Action, to apply the strictest controls to all exportsof arms and dual-use goods.

As to the countries mentioned by the Honourable Member, Syria, Iraq and Iran are parties to the NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty. Iran has signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

Iran is in the process of ratifying the Chemical Weapons Convention.



by Werner Langen (PPE) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Repayment of French textile subsidies

On 9 April 1997, the Commission decided in regard to the subsidization of the French textile and clothingindustry through the waiver of some DM 600 million in social security contributions that the aid was notconsistent with European law, with the exception of those funds which fall under the ‘De-Minimis’ rule.Accordingly, the Commission regards Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty as inapplicable only where the total amountof aid does not exceed the sum of ECU 100 000 within a period of 3 years.

The French Government was, therefore, requested to ensure that the aid was repaid within 2 months or to notifythe Commission of the measures it would take to repay the funds.

As the deadline for the French Government’s reply expired on 10 July 1997, will the Commission say:

1. what measures the French Government will take to repay the unjustified aid to the French textile andclothing industry in accordance with its obligations under Community law?

2. how it intends to carry out its task of overseeing the repayment of the subsidies?

3. what further action it will take in respect of any future multisectoral aid scheme operating in conjunctionwith regional aid instruments and what further steps are planned in regard to checks on aid to the textileindustry?


(4 November 1997)

On 28 April 1997 the Commission informed France that, in its view, reductions in social security contributions inthe textile and clothing industry and in the leather and footwear sector exceeding the de minimis threshold ofECU 100 000 over a three-year period were incompatible with the EC Treaty. Following this notification,numerous contacts of both a political and a technical nature have taken place between the French Governmentand the Commission to discuss replacement of the sectoral approach, which is incompatible with the Treaty, by anew general scheme based on the reduction of social security contributions. The French scheme would falloutside the scope of Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty only if the measures in question were applicable across theboard.

Following the French general elections, the new government has informed the Commission that it intends todevise a new scheme for the reduction of social security contributions which will be quite different from thesectoral measures previously in force. In addition, France has brought proceedings before the Court of Justicewith a view to having the negative decision on the above-mentioned sectoral measures declared void.

If the new scheme were indeed a general measure, the Commission could decide that it was not subject to theprovisions of the Treaty governing state aid. However, such a decision would not prejudge the issue of France'scompliance with the Commission's decision that the previous sectoral arrangements were incompatible with theTreaty.

As regards the future multisectoral framework for regional aid to major investment projects, the Commission iscurrently discussing a draft document with the Member States on a bilateral basis. It believes that it may bepossible to adopt this framework by the end of the year. The framework may also include a specific notificationthreshold for the textile industry, with a view to meeting the latter's concerns about the maintenance of strictcontrols on state aid.



by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraft

In view of the fact that:

− it is technically possible to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraft by up to 60%,

− there is no Directive on exhaust emission limits for aircraft,

− the issue of nitrogen oxide emissions is of particular interest to the Union in terms of environmentalprotection and the competitiveness of industry,

− the Commission stated its intention in the communication on the way forward for civil aviation in Europe(COM(94) 218 final) to cultivate a stronger role for Europe on exhaust and noise emissions within theInternational Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),

will the Commission say whether a Commission proposal on reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraftwill be forthcoming in the foreseeable future and, if not, whether the Commission intends to submit such aproposal?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 1997)

The Commission has been working closely with the Member States within the International civil aviationorganisation (ICAO) to promote the adoption of more stringent, yet technically feasible, global standards on thelimitation of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from aircraft engines. However, faced with the lack of progressin that forum, the Commission will shortly decide whether to propose a directive which would require asubstantial reduction in those emissions compared to the current international standard.



(11 September 1997)

Subject: Comparison between the proposed completion of Khmelnitski Unit 2 and Rovno Unit 4 (K2/R4) inUkraine and the ongoing completion project on the Temelin reactors in the Czech Republic

Bearing in mind that the Temelin reactors are of the same basic original design as the Ukrainian Khmelnitski andRovno nuclear reactors (Soviet VVER-1000), and that the project to complete the two reactors in the CzechRepublic using a mixture of Eastern and Western technologies and safety systems has run into endlessdifficulties, so that unit one is presently scheduled to start in 1999/2000, which would be 8 years later thanoriginally planned (in 1987, start date from Czech Government was 1992), and the project is $2.2 billionoverbudget at the last count (1986 estimate by Czech Government $1 billion, 1997 estimate is $3.2 billion),mainly due to the need for a new Instrumentation and Control System, re-cabling, and other factors relating tomeeting Three Mile Island, Browns Ferry Fire and Chernobyl accident criteria, and considering that there are noapparent plans at the moment at K2/R4 for a full Probabilistic Safety Assessment or a new Instrumentation andControl System or the full separation of power and control cabling (although all of these are being carried out atTemelin), are high costs and long lead times currently being avoided by not including these safety features in theproposed project, and can the Commission be certain that such changes would not have to be introduced into theK2/R4 project at a later stage to meet proper safety criteria, thereby giving rise to exactly the same problems as atTemelin?



(10 October 1997)

For the two reactors at Rovno 4 and Khmelnitsky 2 (R4/K2) results of probabilistic safety assessments (PSA) onsimilar reactors have been used. A full scope PSA is foreseen on the basis of the modernised installation.

The instrumentation and control (I&C) as foreseen in the original project has a certain number of shortcomingswhich have been identified through assessment and operating experience. They are subject to specific correctivemeasures.

At Temelin, the choice has been made to replace fully the I&C. It is uncertain whether the result would be betterthan the solution retained for R4/K2.

The separation between cabling for I&C and cabling for power supply is not a safety related requirement. On theother hand the separation of the redundant trains of safety systems needs to be achieved either by geographical orphysical separation. Both principles will be used concurrently at R4/K2 to achieve independence of trains.

As for the general question as to whether the lessons from the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents aretaken into account, it can be confirmed that is indeed to the case the extent that these lessons are relevant.

Riskaudit, an organisation composed of independent technical safety organisations from France and Germany,has evaluated the full modernisation programme proposed by the operating organisation with the assistanceprovided, under the Tacis programme, by Community operating and engineering organisations. This review isdone on the basis of guidelines produced by the International atomic energy agency (IAEA) and on the basis ofapproved practices in similar reactors operating in the Community and has led to the conclusion that the resultingmodernisation programme, which includes the recommendations made by Riskaudit, completed by additionalspecific measures by the Ukrainian organisations, represents the state of the art and is fully consistent in itself.


by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Pesticide Lindane

Under the Authorizations Directive, the Commission must initiate the Pesticides Review Procedure, a review ofthe 600 active ingredients used in pesticides in Europe. I understand that the process that was started in 1993 hasbeen stalled due to funding problems. Can the Commission indicate how it is solving this funding problem andwhen it expects the review procedure to be completed?

There has been some concern in the UK about the pesticide Lindane. Some interested parties have claimed thatLindane is having a detrimental effect on several different species and is a possible cause of breast cancer. Couldthe Commission report on the latest developments in the Austrian review of Lindane? Could the Commissionalso reveal whether they have any evidence that Lindane does pose a health and safety risk to both humans andanimals?


(15 October 1997)

Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing on the market of plant protection products (1) provides for thereview of active substances which were already on the market when the Directive entered into force. The firstphase of this review programme concerning 90 important active substances is in hand and funding is assuredwithin existing budgetary credits until February 1999. Moreover, the launching of further phases of the reviewprogramme is in preparation. The first phase has shown, however, that the re-evaluation of existing activesubstances requires in the longer term additional technical and administrative resources as well as new budgetaryresources, both in the Commission and in Member States, to accelerate the momentum of the work and to ensurethat it is done in acccordance with the high safety and environmental protection requirements required byDirective 91/414/EEC. The Commission is currently considering different options for further progressing thework.


Concerning the active substance lindane, which is one of the 90 substances covered under the first phase, theCommission can confirm that it is waiting for the report of the rapporteur Member State, Austria, which shouldbe available in the middle of 1998. When the Commission receives this report an intensive scientific andtechnical examination with all the Member States will take place. The Commission will only be able to take afinal position on this active substance when the examination has been completed.

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991.


by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Live transportation of poultry

Has the Commission considered that Article 39 3 A of the European Convention for the Protection of Animalsduring Transport (19 December 1968) is unreasonable in setting a 12 hour limit for the transportation of liveanimals, given that chickens, ducks, geese and turkeys do not eat or drink while roosting?

Will the Commission consider that, given that in the Scottish Highlands and Islands birds will roost for up to18 hours of winter darkness without food and water, and that birds sitting on eggs may go for much longerperiods without sustenance, birds transported in a darkened space for over 12 hours will not be harmed?

Will the Commission consider changing present legislative provision in this area, which uses the 12 hour limit setby the abovementioned European Convention?

What steps has the Commission taken or does it plan to take, in order to consult recognized NGOs when decidingpolicy in this area?


(8 October 1997)

Article 39(3)(a) of the European Convention for the protection of animals during international transport does notlimit the transport of poultry to 12 hours. It requires suitable food and, if necessary, water to be available duringtransport in adequate quantities, except in the case of a journey lasting less than 12 hours. The Commission hasno grounds for considering this to be unreasonable, and has no plans to amend the provisions of CouncilDirective 91/628/EEC on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directive 90/425/EEC and91/496/EEC (1) based on the Convention. The Commission has no information to indicate that poultrymetabolism during transport is the same as that during roosting or brooding.

It should be noted that, in accordance with Article 16 of Directive 91/628/EEC, as amended by Directive95/29/EC, Member States may derogate from the provisions of the Directive to take account of the remoteness ofcertain parts of their territories.

The Commission regularly consults non governmental organisations on policy in the area of animal welfare, inparticular the European umbrella organisation for animal welfare groups, Eurogroup for Animal Welfare.

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, as amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC, (OJ L 148, 30.6.1995).



by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Council

(13 September 1997)

Subject: Aid to developing countries

Following findings by UNICEF that aid from industrialized nations to developing countries has fallen to an alltime low, will the Council consider reaching an agreement to increase such aid from the Member States whilst atthe same time reviewing its effectiveness and encouraging mutually beneficial trade?

Answer

(26 November 1997)

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn first of all to the fact that aid from Member States of the EuropeanUnion for developing countries is entirely a matter within their own competence.

The most recent figures supplied by the OECD concerning development aid from the industralized countriesmeeting within the Development Aid Committee (DAC), which relate to 1995, show that contributions by theMember States of the European Union amounted to 26 910 billion dollars, exceeding by a large margin thecontributions of other major donors such as the United States (7.4 billion dollars) and Japan (14.5 billion dollars).Adding the share of development aid financed by the European Community and the EDF, this aid amounts to31 411 billion dollars, which represents 53.5% of the development aid given by all the industralized countries. Furthermore, since 1990 combined aid from the Member States and the Community has risen both in absolutefigures (from 25 to 31 411 billion dollars) and in percentage terms (from under 50% to 53.5%].

With regard to the European Community’s policy objectives in the field of development cooperation,Article 130u of the Treaty on European Union lays down as objectives the campaign against poverty, thesustainable economic and social development of the developing countries and the integration of those countriesinto the world economy.

Concerning the effectiveness of Community aid, it should be noted that, further to the (Development) Council’sstatement of 25 November 1994 and in accordance with the detailed arrangements it set out on 1 June 1995, a full,in-depth evaluation exercise is currently taking place of the programmes and instruments of Community aid,aimed at making an assessment of results in the light of its objectives and at drawing lessions from pastexperience. The first phase (“desk phase”) of the evaluations of the ALA and MED programmes and ofcooperation with the ACP countries has been completed, and the second phase, consisting of on-the-groundmissions, has begun. The overall summary report covering the whole exercise will be drawn up by theCommission and is expected for the second half of 1998.



(11 September 1997)

Subject: A serious human rights abuse by the Israeli government

Israel is in the process of introducing legislation preventing Palestinians from seeking compensation through itscourts from Israeli security forces or the state for injury or death. This law is clearly racially discriminatory, as itdoes not apply to Israeli or foreign residents, and has been condemned as such not only by Palestinian authoritiesbut by the independent Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories.

Will the Commission raise this matter in its trade negotiations with the government of Israel or its agents, or takesome other form of action to demonstrate that such laws are unacceptable to the European Union as anassociation of democratic nations?


Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

The Commission is highly concerned about the draft Israeli law for handing of claims arising from security forceactivities in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, 5757-1997. The Commission has been made aware of the fact thatthe proposed legislation would effectively exempt Israeli security forces from most tort liability towardsPalestinian victims of the former’s activities in the Occupied territories during the ‘Intifadah’.

The draft law largely expands the definition of ‘combatant activity’ to encompass the vast majority of incidentsprovoking injuries to Palestinians, in a manner contradictory to prior rulings of Israeli courts, including theSupreme court.

The draft law underwent its first reading at the Israeli Knesset on 30 July 1997. The Knesset committee must nowmeet to decide to which committee to send the draft law. The relevant committee will then review the draft lawand decide whether or not to return it to Knesset (with any amendments it may decide to make). If returned, itmust then pass a second and third reading before becoming law. Knesset committees can meet during the recessthat will last until the Knesset plenary reconvenes on 2 November 1997.

Despite the active mobilisation of Israeli human rights organisations, the draft law has not generated a great dealof discussion among the public at large.

The Commission believes that the draft law in its present form would violate international human rightsstandards by undermining the basic principle of the right of victims of human rights abuses to seek faircompensation recognized inter alia in the International covenant on civil and political rights and the UnitedNations Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. As the draftlaw only applies to Palestinians and not to other nationalities, it would also violate the prohibition ondiscrimination in international human rights law.

The Israeli authorities are well aware of the importance which the Community, and the Commission, attach to therule of law and to strict respect for international human rights standards. The monitoring of human rights andrespect of democratic principles in countries linked to the Community by association agreements is done inaccordance with the rules of the common foreign and security policy. Under the present interim agreement withIsrael, the latter is already subject to a periodic monitoring regarding respect of these principles. TheCommission uses every appropriate opportunity afforded by its regular contacts with the Israeli authorities toexpress its views on the human rights situation in Israel.

Once ratification of the recently concluded Euro-Mediterranean association agreement between the Communityand Israel is completed, the Community as a whole will be in a better position to exercise a positive influenceregarding all human rights-related issues in the framework of the political dialogue with Israel established by theagreement. A particular human rights clause stipulates that respect for human rights constitutes an essentialelement of the agreement.



(11 September 1997)

Subject: Havoc caused by hailstorm in region of Greece

On 9 August 1997, an unprecedented hailstorm struck farms in the Thessaly region, killing animals and severelydamaging houses and barns. Given the enormous extent of the damage caused over an area of more than7 000 hectares, mainly to farms growing cotton, maize, vegetables and tobacco, which will result in financial ruinfor producers in these regions, what measures will the Commission take to provide the necessary compensationfor the producers affected?




(1 October 1997)

Subject: Hailstorm damage to the prefectures of Xanthi and Rodopi

During the last ten days of August, hailstorms caused major damage to seasonal crops over about 7 000 hectaresin the prefectures of Xanthi and Rodopi, which were already facing serious problems.

In view of the fact that producers in the areas affected are facing financial ruin as a result of the damage causedthis year in addition to that caused last year, what measures will the Commission take to ensure that they receivethe necessary compensation?


given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

The Commission expresses its sympathy to the farmers whose crops were damaged by hail. It fully understandsthe problems that may occur from a natural disaster of this extent.

However, it should be stressed that the Community budget is not provided with instruments to compensate lossesof harvests or annual production which are in fact the most frequently observed damage that hail may cause.Nevertheless, if it were to be proved that farm buildings or livestock were affected by natural disasters, then theCommission could examine any possible request of the Member State in the context of the structural fundsthrough an adequate re-deployment of the financial allocations of the Community support framework (CSF),following the re-direction of the priorities that the Member State should first carry out. The opportunity for thiscould be, for example, the mid-term review of the CSF for Greece.


by Kenneth Coates (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Freedom of movement

Following the European Court judgment in the Antonissen case, Commissioner Monti informed me in the answerto Written Question E-0060/97 (1) that the Commission considers at least six months as a reasonable time toallow a European citizen to seek work in a Member State other than his own.

Why, then is the export of unemployment benefits limited to up to three months when an unemployed persongoes to look for work in another Member State?

(1) OJ C 186, 18.6.1997, p. 217.



by Kenneth Coates (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 September 1997)

Subject: Freedom of movement

Mr Alan Howarth CBE MP, speaking for the British Government, says that, ‘ ... in general, legislation does notallow Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) to be paid for periods when jobseeker’s are absent from Great Britain. This isbecause JSA is payable to people who meet certain labour and market conditions ... Absence abroad preventspeople from being able to meet these’.

Do these provisions of the Jobseeker’s Allowance contravene the Treaty on European Union, Article 8a(1),which states that ‘Every citizen shall have the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the MemberStates ...’?


given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1997)

The social security systems of the Member States are coordinated by Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and574/72 (1). These Regulations foresee the right to export certain social security benefits to people residing inanother Member State. It must be noted, however, that under Article 69 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 the rightto export unemployment benefits is limited to a period of three months and only if the aim is to look for a new jobin another Member State.

This system has been upheld by the Court of justice on the grounds that entitlement to unemployment benefits islinked to availability for work and that the beneficiary should be available for work in the competent MemberState. In attaching conditions to the facilities granted to the unemployed who are actively seeking work, theCommunity legislature has made correct use of its discretionary powers in respect of the implementation offreedom of movement of workers (2).

However, the Commission is of the opinion that the period of three months should be extended, taking intoconsideration that as a result of the situation of the employment market, a much longer time is needed to find ajob. Therefore, it already proposed in 1980 to extend this period (3). This proposal has been re-tabled under anamended version in January 1996 (4).

(1) Updated by Regulation (EEC) No 118/97 (OJ L 28, 30.1.1997) lastly amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1290/97 (OJ L 176, 1.7.1997).(2) Judgment of 8.4.1992, Case C-62/91, Gray, ECJ law reports, 1992, I-2737.(3) OJ C 189, 9.7.1980(4) OJ C 68, 6.3.1996


by Wayne David (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: German coal subsidies

The continued practice of allowing state aid to be paid to certain sections of the German coal industry is resultingin below-cost pricing and the subsidizing of less efficient producers of anthracite; it is also against the specificconditions of aid approval and the fundamental principles of the ECSC and the EC. The result is that anthraciteproducers in the UK, for example, are facing unfair competition.

Can the Commission inform the Parliament what action it is planning to take on this matter?



(1 October 1997)

By letter addressed to the German Government on 1 August 1997 and published in the Official Journal (1), theCommission informed that Government of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88 of theECSC Treaty. The letter concerned sales of anthracite by the German coal undertakings Sophia-Jacoba GmbHand Preussag Anthrazit GmbH on Community territory.

Upholding the right of defence, the Commission asked Germany to submit, within one month, various reportsexplaining the circumstances of these sales with regard to competition law.

The Commission also allowed the other Member States and interested third parties to submit their comments onthis matter within one month from the date of publication in the Official Journal.

(1) OJ C 258, 23.8.1997.


by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Integrated pollution prevention and control, and access to information

1. Is the Commission aware of the pollution of the soil and the crops grown on it which has been identified inZelzate, Belgium, and has the Commission considered it in the light of the relevant European legislation?

2. As this is an instance of crossborder environmental pollution with public health aspects, can theCommission indicate whether the approach adopted by the Belgian authorities and the VFT refinery complieswith Directive 96/61/EC (1) on integrated pollution prevention and control?

3. Did the parties concerned supply information promptly and correctly pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of theaforementioned Directive and pursuant to Council Directive 90/313/EEC (2) on the freedom of access toinformation on the environment?

4. So far as I am aware, information is currently exchanged on the basis of bilateral agreements. Do thesesufficiently guarantee compliance with the obligation to provide information?

5. What international agreements can be applied in the event of crossborder claims for damages?

6. Does the Commission consider that the existing legislation − provided that it is applied correctly − entailsadequate guarantees with regard to crossborder pollution and if so, can it give reasons? If not, measures shouldbe taken to perfect European legislation by means of further harmonization of provisions; will the Commissiontake the necessary steps?

(1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26.(2) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.


(8 October 1997)

The Commission is aware to some extent of soil pollution in Zelzate. As far as compliance with Directive91/61/EC on integrated pollution prevention and control is concerned, it should be noted that the deadline forimplementation in national law is 30 October 1999. The Commission is already engaged in a number of activitiesdesigned to ensure that the Directive will be successfully implemented.


In particular, the provisions on transboundary impact have already been identified as an issue requiring closeattention. These involve informing both the Member States and the members of the public concerned in caseswhere a significant transboundary effect is expected. Coupled with the obligation to use the best availabletechniques for the prevention and control of all types of pollution, these provisions should go a long way towardsachieving adequate protection from transboundary pollution.

As regards Directive 90/313/EEC on access to environmental information, it is to be noted that the Directive isonly applicable to public authorities and bodies with public responsibilities for the environment and which areunder the control of public authorities. Moreover, subject to the provision of general information on the state ofthe environment, the Directive does not require that environmental information be released automatically and onthe own initiative of the holder of the information. The Directive only concerns the case where an applicantrequests access to certain environmental information. The Commission is not aware of any applications made inpursuance of Directive 90/313/EEC nor of any exchange of information on the basis of bilateral agreements inwhich the Community takes no part.

Crossborder claims for damages are covered by the Council of Europe's Convention, signed in Lugano on21 June 1993, on civil liability for damage resulting from activities dangerous to the environment (1).This Convention has been signed by several Member States (Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,Portugal and Finland) and third countries (Cyprus, Iceland and Liechtenstein) but is not yet in force.

It is worth mentioning in this respect that the Commission is currently preparing a white paper on environmentalliability which should be finalised at the beginning of 1998. The white paper will consider the issue oftransboundary pollution and will contain proposals for an environmental liability regime which will also apply totransboundary pollution cases.

(1) European Treaty Series 150.


by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Vision requirement for driving licences

On 29 July 1991 the Council passed Directive 91/439/EEC on driving licences (1) which lays down a number ofrequirements regarding physical and mental fitness to drive motor vehicles, including a number of new sightrequirements. For a first driving licence or renewal of a driving licence in Group 2, a driver must have a visualacuity of 0.8 in the better eye and 0.5 in the worse eye. Many driving instructors now find that they no longersatisfy the new tighter requirements and are therefore unable to continue exercising a profession they havehitherto exercised without any problem.

Will the Commission ensure that a transitional arrangement is made whereby those people who, when choosingtheir profession, did not have to take these rules into account, and who probably only have a few years ofworking life left, can be granted an exemption?

(1) OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 1.


(26 September 1997)

Directive 91/439/EEC (1) sets the minimum standards of physical and mental fitness for driving a power-drivenvehicle. The aim of these standards is to improve road safety, as well as to enhance mutual recognition of drivinglicences within the Community. The standards of visual acuity for Group 2 drivers for categories C and D (forexample lorries and buses) are laid down in point 6.3 of the Annex. These standards were established with thenational authorities and endorsed by all Member States in 1991 when the Directive was adopted. A recent reviewdid not put into question the standards of visual acuity (0.8 and 0.5).


The Directive requires all drivers to meet the minimum standards and does not provide for transitional periods orderogations from these standards. However, Member States may fix stricter standards if they so wish.

Although the Commission had proposed to provide a clause giving Member States the possibility of renewingdriving licences under the same conditions for medical standards as those which were applicable at the time ofthe first issue of the licence, such a derogation was not retained by the Council when adopting the Directive.The Commission will, consequently, not come forward with the proposal suggested by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 237, 24.8.1991.


by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Dumping − Potash industry

When Commissioner Sir Leon Brittan met the Russian Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Anatoly Chubais, in Moscowin June 1997 to discuss trade issues between the EU and Russia, in particular problems relating to anti-dumpingduties, did the Russian Minister raise the issue of the current anti-dumping measure with regard to potash and, ifso, what was the Commissioner’s response?


(16 October 1997)

At the meeting between the member of the Commission in charge of common trade policy and the Russiandeputy prime minister, in June 1997 in Moscow, the issue of the anti-dumping proceeding concerning potassiumchloride was not discussed.

However, the review investigation concerning the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of potassiumchloride from Russia is now coming to its conclusion and the Commission will submit a proposal to the Councilshortly.


by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Listing of soap and cosmetic ingredients in Latin

Can the Commission confirm reports that a directive has been introduced requiring all ingredients of soap andcosmetic products to be listed in Latin on the product packaging?


(8 October 1997)

Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating tocosmetic products (1) (the cosmetics directive) as amended (2) provides for the labelling of ingredients on allcosmetic products, including toilet soaps and decorative cosmetics.


The Commission has established (3) a common ingredients nomenclature that makes it possible to identify thesubstances by using a single name in all Member States. The INCI (International nomenclature cosmeticingredient) names that have been adopted best meet these requirements in that they are relatively simple andalready in use at international level. Such practices enable consumers to recognise substances that they have beenadvised to avoid(for example because of allergies), no matter where the product is purchased.

In some cases, in which an ingredient was known by a different common name in various geographies, the Latinname was adopted for labelling purposes e.g. Aqua is the INCI name for water. This was certainly the approachtaken for a number of plant extracts and similar natural ingredients. However, the published nomenclature hasbeen agreed at an international level.

(1) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976.(2) OJ L 151, 23.6.1993.(3) Decision 96/335/EC of 8 May 1996 establishing an inventory and a common nomenclature of ingredients employed in cosmetic products −

OJ L 132, 1.6.1996.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: European grants to Donaldson, Leuven

Can the Commission confirm whether European Union grants have been given to Donaldson, manufacturers ofcartridge filters and extraction units based in Leuven, Belgium, to assist with its enlargement plans?


(8 October 1997)

No Structural Fund assistance has been granted to the enterprise Donaldson based in Leuven, an area not eligibleunder the Funds' regionalised objectives.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Age discrimination in recruitment for the European institutions

Does the Commission know of any research which supports its claim that age discrimination is necessary whenrecruiting for the European institutions in order to overcome geographical imbalances in staff membership?

Would such imbalances be improved if the age restrictions did not apply to recruitment from peripheral areas ofthe European Union?


(23 October 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1623/97 byMr Smith (1) concerning the link between the application of age limits and maintaining a geographical balancefor recruitment purposes.

The Commission is reviewing its policy on age limits for recruitment of officials.


The Board of Heads of Administration has held an initial discussion with a view to developing a commonapproach for the European institutions. Discussion will continue in this forum.

The question of age limits for recruitment will be discussed along with other matters in the context of theforthcoming entry into force of the new Article (Article 6a) inserted in the EC Treaty by the Amsterdam Treaty,prohibiting discrimination on various grounds, including age, and in the light of general practice in this field inthe Member States.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 63.


by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Council

(16 September 1997)

Subject: Religious persecution in Sudan

Is the Council aware of the lack of tolerance shown by the Sudanese government towards non-Islamic religiousgroups within the country?

What actin is the Council taking to pressure the Sudanese authorities into halting these abuses of human rights?

Answer

(26 Novembr 1997)

The Council notes with regret that for several years now Sudan has not been respecting the United NationsConventions on Human Rights, inter alia regarding religious freedom. This was moreover confirmed byResolution 51/112 of the United Nations General Assembly of 5 March 1997. In its contacts with the Sudaneseauthorities, the European Union has always urged them to halt the intolerance and violence towards non-Islamicsectors of the population. In this context, the Union has frequently reaffirmed its support for the efforts made tobring peace to Sudan and in particular for the initiatives taken by the IGAD countries. The Union remainsprepared to contribute in every way possible to the peace process and the conclusion of an agreement whichallows all Sudanese to live freely together.


by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Council

(16 September 1997)

Subject: Death of Rev. Yusefi in Iran, September 1996

Can the Council provide information on what action it has taken following the murder of Rev. Yusefi, a pastor ofthe Iranian Assemblies of God, in Iran in September 1996?

Is the Council aware that Rev. Yusefi was possibly murdered simply because of his Christian beliefs? Does thisnot constitute an abuse of human rights?

Answer

(26 November 1997)

Mohammad Yusefi, who converted to Christianity at the age of 24 and who pastored Christian congregations inIran, was found dead on 28 September 1996 near his home city of Sari, in Mazandaran province. Reports aboutthe circumstances surrounding his death suggested that he might have been murdered and several persons weredetained for questioning. The Iranian authorities however maintain that Mr Yusefi had committed suicide andthat neither the church to which he belonged nor Mr Yusefi himself had any problem with the Iranian authorities.


The European Union raised the case of Mr Yusefi with the Iranian authorities in the framework of the EU-IranCritical Dialogue, which until April 1997 served as a framework for raising inter alia human rights issues withIran.

The Union and its Member States furthermore play an active part in the work of the UN Human RightsCommission and of the Third Committee at the UN General Assembly, the principal fora for addressign thehuman rights situation in Iran.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Harmonization of vitamin and health supplements

Is the Commission aware that plans to harmonize vitamin and health supplements could result in thesesupplements having a limited amount of vitamin content?

Does the Commission accept that high dosages of vitamins have in some cases proved tremendously successfulin improving patient health?


(15 October 1997)

A discussion document on the addition of vitamins and minerals to foods and on food supplements prepared bythe Commission was made available to the public and is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to theParliament’s secretariat. The document raised a number of issues and requested comments by 30 Septem-ber 1997. The Commission will carefully evaluate the comments received before taking any steps towardsharmonisation. At this stage the Commission cannot foresee the results of such possibile harmonisation on anypossible issue such as vitamin content.

The Commission will consider evidence, substantiated by generally acceptable scientific data, as to the doserelated benefits of vitamins for consumer health.


by Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Sickness insurance in the European Union

Privately insured persons in the Netherlands have no right, on moving within the European Union, to form E-111for urgent medical treatment in another Member State on the basis of Annex VI to Regulation 1408/71 (1)(application of social security rules to employees and self-employed persons and members of their familiesmoving within the Community).

1. Is it true that in Sweden, where a national sickness insurance scheme applies, other EU nationals to whommedical treatment is provided are expected, regardless of whether or not they are privately insured in theirMember State of origin or are covered by the national scheme, to produce a form E-111?

2. In what other EU Member States operating a national sickness insurance scheme is form E-111 asked forwhen medical treatment is provided?


3. To what extent are those who are unable to produce a form E-111 − because, for instance, they cannotobtain one − required to pay for medical treatment at a price higher than that required to cover the cost price?

4. a) Are privately insured Netherlands nationals being denied their right to free movement pursuant toArticles 7a, 8a and 51 of the Treaty on European Union because they have no right to reimbursement forurgent medical treatment when staying in another Member State where a national sickness insurancescheme is in operation?

b) Does this not amount to a loophole in the European Union’s social security legislation?

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


(10 November 1997)

The Commission would like first of all to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that Form E 111 isissued in compliance with the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and Regulation (EEC) 574/72 (1) topersons who are insured for health care under the legislation of a Member State. The form attests this insuranceand the right of the holder, inter alia, to receive health care benefits in kind, on behalf of the Member State inwhich that person is insured, from the Member State on whose territory he is staying temporarily and inaccordance with the legislation applied by it (application of Articles 22 and 22a of Regulation No 1408/71). TheMember State which provided the benefits may ask the Member State in which the person is insured to refund theactual costs it has incurred (application of Article 93 of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72). This system applies onlyto statutory insurance and not to private insurance.

On the basis of this information, the Commission can give the following answers to the various questions raisedby the Honourable Member.

1. According to the information available to the Commission, the Swedish authorities require Form E 111 fromany person who wishes to receive health care in Sweden, is staying temporarily in that country and is insuredin another Member State. However, only those people insured under a statutory scheme will be able toprovide this form and to invoke the above-mentioned provisions of Community law.

2. The Commission would point out that a Member State is entitled to ask a person who is staying temporarilyon its territory to provide Form E 111 even if the Member State concerned has a national health service. It istrue that certain Member States do not ask for this form in certain situations, but this means that they prefernot to use the system of refunds between Member States provided for by Regulation (EEC) No 574/72.

3. The Commission has no precise information on the costs of health care charged to persons who do not haveForm E 111.

4. The Commission believes that the question of the geographical coverage of private health insurance isgoverned by the contract between the private insurer and the person insured.

However, the Commission is currently considering whether the private insurance schemes in the Netherlandscould not be considered to be statutory in the light of the recent amendments to legislation in this Member State.If so, these schemes would come under the scope of the above-mentioned provisions.

(1) These Regulations were updated by Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996 amending and updating Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to slf-employed persons and to members of their families moving withinthe Community and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71− OJ L 28, 30.1.1997.



by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Implementation of Council Resolution on Integrating Gender in European Development Cooperation,December 1995

In its Resolution of 20 December 1995 on Integrating Gender issues in European Development Cooperation theCouncil issued the following two statements:

‘17. The Council calls on the Commission, after consultation with the gender and development expertsfrom the Community and the Member States, to draft precise proposals for common criteria and indicatorsfor reporting on the implementation of this Resolution ...’

‘18. With a view to ensuring a concrete and effective follow-up of the implementation of this Resolution,the Council will review the progress made by the Community and the Member States at its meeting ofsecond half of 1997.’

Further to this Council Resolution, what steps have been taken to agree common criteria and indicators forreporting on the implementation of the Resolution?


(10 October 1997)

Following the Council Resolution of 20 December 1995, initial proposals for a methodology on the difficultquestion of drafting common criteria and indicators were presented by the Commission to a meeting of expertsfrom the Member States in 1996. Following the discussions at this meeting, a questionnaire using precisecommon criteria and indicators was presented by the Commission to a second meeting of experts from theMember States on 11-12 September 1997. This draft was approved with some small revisions, and will come intooperation shortly.

In the meantime, a detailed progress report on implementation of the Resolution by the Community and MemberStates will be completed in time for the meeting of the Development Council in November 1997.


by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) and Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: IPC Directive − integrated environmental pollution control

At the beginning of August it was revealed that a huge soil-pollution incident had happened at Zelzate inBelgium, caused, as shown by test results, by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The PAHs, which arespread through the atmosphere, have been detected in weaker concentrations as far afield as the Zealand-Flanders border area, in particular in the localities of Sas van Gent and Axel in the Netherlands. A chemicals firmis suspected of having caused this pollution.

Can the Commission state whether that firm falls under the IPC Directive on integrated environmental pollutioncontrol?

Should the Belgian authorities not have immediately announced, in accordance with the rules, that this seriouspollution incident had happened and notified the Netherlands and Zealand authorities forthwith?


If the IPC Directive proves not to be applicable in this case, would the solvents Directive provide a possible basisfor appropriate measures to be imposed immediately on the firm concerned?

Can the European Commission ensure that such action will be taken as quickly as possibly, not least on groundsof public health?


(7 November 1997)

The Commission has been in contact with the Belgian authorities concerning the alleged ‘soil-pollution incident’in August 1997. In fact, the concern has arisen as a result of a survey of soil pollution recently carried outthroughout Flanders, which revealed a particularly high amount of pollution near Zelzate.

The chemicals firm believed to be responsible has been in production for more than a hundred years. In recentyears the environmental performance of the installation has improved dramatically so that there are no longersignificant emissions. The pollution is not therefore the result of a ‘serious pollution incident’ but rather, sincepollution can persist in soil for many decades, the result of a gradual build-up over the many years of operation.

The installation is covered by Directive 96/61/EC on integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) (1).However it should be noted that the provisions of this Directive do not have to be implemented by Member Statesbefore 30 October 1999. The Commission is already engaged in a number of activities designed to ensure that theDirective will be successfully implemented. In particular, the provisions on transboundary impact have alreadybeen identified as an issue requiring close attention.

Information concerning other relevant Community legislation is contained in the Commission reply to writtenquestion P-2879/97 by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (2).

(1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.(2) See page 90.


by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) and Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Liability

At the beginning of August it was revealed that a huge soil-pollution incident had happened at Zelzate inBelgium, caused, as shown by test results, by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The PAHs, which arespread through the atmosphere, have been detected in weaker concentrations as far afield as the Zealand-Flanders border area, in particular in the localities of Sas van Gent and Axel in the Netherlands. A chemicals firmis suspected of having caused this pollution.

Can the Commission clarify the procedures that must be followed to force the Belgian polluter to assume liabilityfor the damage that has been caused in the Zealand-Flanders region?

If the Belgian authorities are unable to arrive at a definite conclusion as to the identity of the PAH polluter inZelzate, to whom must the injured parties in the Netherlands turn in seeking compensation for their losses?


(10 November 1997)

The Honourable Members are referred to the replies given by the Commission to written question P-2879/97 byMrs Boogerd Quaak (1) and to their written question E-2900/97 (2).


The Brussels and Lugano conventions on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercialmatters cover the procedures to be followed with a view to ascertaining liability of the polluter. According tothese conventions and the jurisprudence based on them, both the courts of the place where the damaging act tookplace (Belgium) and of the place where the damage occurred (also the Netherlands) would be competent. It is upto the judge to decide, on the basis of international private law rules, which national law, including liability rules,would have to be applied to the case.

(1) See page 90.(2) See page 97.


by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: CE conformity marking

Does the Commission accept that the CE conformity marking regulations serve to restrict free and faircompetition?

An electronics company in my constituency, although favourable to the concept of the CE mark, is frustrated attheir lack of choice when purchasing their electrical equipment, confined to approved manufacturers or theirappointed agents within the Community.

The company in question feels that should they be permitted to have equipment approved by an appointedlaboratory within the EU (and meet this cost), their needs would be better served.


(3 November 1997)

The Commission feels that the principles concerning the affixing of the CE mark to those industrial products thatare covered by a technical regulation within the Community in no way restrict free and fair competition since thatmandatory system applies in the same way to all products so covered that are marketed within the Community,whatever their origin.

On the contrary, the Commission feels that a regulation of this type that is based on new principles − the newapproach to standardisation and the global approach as regards conformity assessment − has enabled the systemspreviously predominating in the Member States to be simplified. It is thus likely to breed healthy, faircompetition among industrialists. If they are to be marketed or used within the Community all of the productsthat are subject to these Community regulations must bear a CE mark that has been affixed by their manufactureror their manufacturer's representative.

In principle three Directives apply to electrical and electronic products: Directive 73/23/EC, as amended by93/68/EEC on electrical safety (1), Directive 89/336/EC, as amended by 92/31/EEC and 93/68/EEC onelectromagnetic compatibility (2) and Directive 91/263/EEC, as amended by 93/68/EEC, and supplemented by93/97/EEC in respect of satellite earth-station equipment] (3), In the case of the first two Directives the CE markis in essence affixed on the basis of the ‘manufacturer's declaration’ where the manufacturer applies harmonisedEuropean standards. Where this is not the case the manufacturer must turn to a competent body in order to havehis structural design assessed in pursuance of the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive. Where the thirdDirective applies bodies notified by the Member States act, at the manufacturer's request, before the CE mark isaffixed. Those technical bodies must meet certain criteria, more particularly as regards independence andtechnical competence. Strictly speaking there is no approval of manufacturers or their representatives. However,that Directive offers manufacturers the option of having their quality-assurance system approved. This is not arequirement.


On the basis of the above all UK operators may procure products that have had the Community logo affixed tothem by their manufacturers (or the manufacturer's representatives) in accordance with the relevant provisions ofthe Directives concerned. These are listed above and are to be implemented in the same manner by allmanufacturers, whatever their location.

These harmonised technical regulations transfer responsibility for the marketing of products within theCommunity to their manufacturers (or manufacturer's representatives) via the affixing of the CE mark, and in nocase to any notified bodies that may be involved in the assessment procedure. This is why products cannot be‘approved’ by those bodies.

(1) OJ L 220, 30.8.1993.(2) OJ 126, 12.5.1992.(3) OJ 290, 24.11.1993.


by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Acceptance of Eurocheques in France

1. Is the Commission aware that no bank in France is any longer prepared to cash Eurocheques?

2. Does the Commission agree that the Eurocheque is a lawful means of payment in Europe on the basis ofagreements between banks?

3. Does the Commission take the view that French banks are unilaterally infringing European bankingagreements?

4. Can the Commission confirm that this action is distorting competition in banking transactions in Europe?

5. Does the Commission take the view that this action restricts the free movement of persons and regularlycauses financial embarrassment to European citizens by preventing them from withdrawing cash or paying bills?

6. What action will the Commission take?


(15 October 1997)

The legal arrangements governing the acceptance of international Eurocheques by French banks are purelycontractual in nature. They are laid down in the Package-Deal Agreement on commissions, value dates, thecentralised clearing of uniform Eurocheques drawn in local currency and the opening-up of the non-bankingsector, which was notified to the Commission under Article 4 of Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962,the First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (1). The agreement does not require all thebranches of a bank belonging to the international Eurocheque system to accept Eurocheques drawn by a bearerresident in a third country.

According to the information at the Commission's disposal, certain banks refuse to cash Eurocheques, but this isnot true of all banks operating in France. The banks which refuse to cash Eurocheques appear to be actingunilaterally and not on the basis of an agreement or concerted practice, which are the only cases covered byArticle 85 of the EC Treaty. Finally, it should be pointed out that paper Eurocheques are always accompanied bya cheque guarantee card, which also enables the holder to make cash withdrawals from cash dispensers. Almostall the cash dispensers in France accept Eurocheque cards.

(1) OJ 13, 21.2.1962.



by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 September 1997)

Subject: Implementation of the Directive on the business of credit institutions

With reference to Council Directive 89/646/EEC (1) on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrativeprovisions relating to the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions, will the Commission explainhow and when the provisions in Article 16 of that directive concerning the parties involved and professionalsecrecy were implemented by the Member States?

(1) OJ L 386, 30.12.1989, p. 1.


(8 October 1997)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat a table containingreferences to the national measures implementing the Second Banking Directive (89/646/EEC).

As regards the way in which Article 16 has been transposed, the Commission is currently carrying out awide-ranging study analysing in detail the transposal into national law of the provisions of the Second Directive.This study will be completed towards the end of the year.


by Klaus Rehder (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Development of the fruit and vegetable in the European Union

According to the union of consumer associations (AgV), since 1990 (as at 1994) a total of nearly DM 15 billionhas been spent in the European Union on the production and disposal of fruit and vegetable surpluses;DM 4.5 billion of that sum came from the German taxpayers’ pocket. In the 1993-94 financial year alone some2.5 million tons of fruit and vegetables were bought in and destroyed using taxpayers’ money (direct cost in theEU DM 1.2 billion, 360 million of which in German taxes). This destruction would probably be costing theGerman taxpayer a further DM 4-5 billion.

1. How much has been paid out, on the Commission’s calculations, between 1990 and today on thedestruction of surpluses and withdrawals from the market in the individual Member States and by the EuropeanUnion?

2. In that process, what quantities of intervention stocks have been processed into alcohol, used as animal feedor dumped?


(24 October 1997)

1. Tables are being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat showing theamounts, by Member State and budget year, paid out since 1990 in compensation for withdrawn fruit andvegetables.

2. They also show, for the 1970/71 to 1992/93 marketing years (the last for which figures are available) thequantities withdrawn and give a percentage breakdown of what was done with these.




(17 September 1997)

Subject: Laboratory rodents

A recent report by Michael Festing of Britain’s Medical Research Council’s toxicology unit at the University ofLeicester has shown how thousands of laboratory rodents are being sacrificed each year in toxicity tests whichare scientifically flawed.

Has the Commission studied this report?

What proposals does the Commission have to phase out the use of animals in toxicity tests and to facilitate thedevelopment of alternatives to animal testing?


(23 October 1997)

The work to which the Honourable Member refers is well known. It shows that toxicology studies often involvethe use of unnecessarily large numbers of animals, and sometimes produce data which are inadequately analysedbecause of the use of inappropriate statistical methods.

Through its European centre for the validation of alternative methods (ECVAM) of the Joint research centre(JRC), the Commission is coordinating the validation of alternative methods at Community level and a localpoint of information exchange about the state of the art of alternative methods is being built.

In addition, research into the development of in-vitro tests as alternatives to animal experiments has been one ofthe priorities for the various Community Biotechnology indirect action programmes for more than 10 years.


by Anne McIntosh (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Funding of Higher Education in the United Kingdom

The report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education in the UK, chaired by Sir Ron Dearing,has recommended that emphasis should be placed on an increase in the provision of one and two year courses.

Can the Commission confirm that such study periods would be eligible for European Union funding and if thereis a minimum duration course period to qualify for EU financial assistance?

Will such courses, of one or two years duration, be recognized as higher education qualifications in otherMember States?


(14 November 1997)

Community funding is available to support cooperation between higher education institutions in the MemberStates, notably through the Erasmus chapter of the Socrates programme and through the Leonardo da Vinciprogramme.


As far as the Erasmus chapter of Socrates is concerned, eligible higher education institutions (1) may apply forCommunity funding to support the development of course moduls or full courses jointly with institutions in atleast two other participating countries (2). One-or two-year courses would normally be eligible for such support.

Community grants are also available through Erasmus for the additional costs of students undertaking a studyperiod abroad as part of a formal programme of higher education leading to a degree or diploma recognised bythe authorities of the participating country concerned. The minimum period of stud abroad that may besupported through such grants is three months, and the maximum period is twelve months. Erasmus studentgrants are not available to students undertaking an entire programme of higher education studies in anotherMember State or European economic area (EEA) State.

The recognition of higher education qualifications issued in other Member States is the responsibility of theauthorities of each Member State. Supported through the Socrates programme is a network of national academicrecognition centres (NARICs) designed to facilitate the comparison and recognition of qualifications.

(1) Those universities and other institutions of higher education recognised by the authorities of the Member State to participate in theprogramme.

(2) The 15 Member States and Iceland, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Norway and Rumania.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Discrimination against the Roma population in the Czech Republic and Hungary

1. Is the Commission aware that in the Czech Republic and Hungary, the Roma population is still beingdiscriminated against in an inadmissible fashion, in particular by being excluded from education and work?

2. What reactions has the Commission received from the Czech Republic and Hungary to warnings that theyshould take steps to counteract discrimination against their Roma populations and improve their situation?

3. What action is being taken in the context of pre-accession negotiations and aid programmes such asPHARE to improve the situation of Roma people in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and what havebeen the specific results of such action?

The separation of the Czech Republic and Slovakia has left many Roma people stateless, and the so-called ‘gypsyclause’ in Czech law, which requires two years of residence at a fixed address, makes it extremely difficult forthese people to obtain Czech nationality.

4. Will Roma people be entitled, after the accession of the Czech Republic (and Hungary) to the EuropeanUnion, to enjoy the benefits of free movement of persons if they are themselves stateless? If not, how does theCommission intend to guarantee treatment of this population group as full European citizens?



(27 October 1997)

1. The Commission is well informed about the situation of the Roma in the countries of central and easternEurope.

2. In the Czech Republic, the Council for national minorities is preparing, for government approval later thisyear, an action plan to improve the situation of the Roma. Last September an inter-ministerial commission wasestablished to act as the official body for Roma affairs. In recent years Czech authorities have introduced stiffersentences for acts motivated by racial hatred and intolerance for minorities. In Hungary, the government adoptedin July 1997 a medium term programme to address the situation of the Roma, namely the reduction ofunemployment and the improvement of housing and education.

3. In its opinions on the central and eastern European countries which have applied for membership, theCommission has, where appropriate, evaluated each country’s treatment of the Roma. In all applicant countriesin central and eastern Europe the Commission finances projects in the field of human rights and minorities. In theCzech Republic concrete projects for the Roma include support to an educational centre for Romas, support forthe establishment of a consulting, information and educational centre for Roma organisations as well as supportfor the publication of the information bulletin ‘Romano Dzaniben’. In Hungary, projects include support for the‘Roma press centre’, preparation for university entrance exams as well as provision of health care and socialsupport to Roma families.

4. Under Community law, stateless people cannot, in principle, avail themselves of the benefits deriving fromArticle 8a of the EC Treaty. However, they will benefit from the principle of free movement of people within themeaning of Article 7a of the EC Treaty (the abolition of checks at the internal frontiers) as this concernseveryone, independent of nationality or stateless status. Nevertheless the Commission would also recall thatArticle 7a of the EC Treaty is not yet fully implemented among the Member States.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: European subsidy for Netherlands undertaking

It is reported that Flevonet, a Netherlands undertaking that has been offering free personal access to the Internetsince 18 May 1996 in the province of Flevoland, has received a one-off European subsidy of 350 000 guilders. Ithas also received subsidies from private firms. The province of Flevoland has granted a loan of 50 000 guildersfor the initiative.

1. From what funds did Flevonet receive the European subsidy?

2. Was this matched by the minimum 50% national counterpart financing? If not, why not?

3. Is a one-off European subsidy to an undertaking that uses it to offer free Internet subscriptions, even whenthat undertaking’s prospects of continuing in business are uncertain, compatible with the Structural-Fundobjective of promoting long-term development?


(27 October 1997)

1. A subsidy of 350 000 guilders (about ECU 159 000) has been allocated to Flevonet from the Europeanregional development fund (ERDF) in the framework of the objective 1 programme for Flevoland. The project issupported under priority 8 (research and development), measure 2 (realisation of a network of telecommunica-tion centres).


2. The total cost of the Flevonet project is 1 443 990 guilders (about ECU 656 359). ERDF contributes 24% ofthe total cost. This is under the financial limits indicated for measure 8.2: ‘ERDF will grant aid up to 50% of thecosts to establish these facilities (investment). ERDF may also make a contribution of 25% to the operating costsof the centres for the first two years of operation’.

3. Flevonet is the digital computer network in Flevoland. It is a single network for the province, with freeadmission for all residents in Flevoland after fixed connection charges of 49.50 guilders (ECU 22.5). Otherinterested parties that want to use Flevonet (especially enterprises) have to pay in order to do so. The computernetwork is also mentioned in the regional technology plan developed for Flevoland. This report concludes that‘.... in order to keep pace with the digital revolution it is necessary for Flevoland to lower the thresholds forentrance to computer networks and databases. A special facility has to be created for this purpose’.

Facilities were necessary for the setting-up, management and operation of the network. For this reasonFlevonetwerken BV was founded. The feasibility of the project was tested by PTT Telecom and Intercaintelematics consultants. Their recommendations were positive, subject to noting the possibility of a shortfall inearnings during the first years.

The Flevonet project has, after one year of operation, over 10 000 connections (0-accounts), which is twice tothree times the national average. Until now 160 paying accounts have been opened, which is at the momentinsufficient to cover all expenditure. The expectation is that the number of paying accounts will increasesubstantially in the near future.

The Commission is of the opinion that the project meets the objectives of the structural funds. An ERDFcontribution was necessary for the realisation of the computer network. The feasibility of the project was testedin advance. The project contributes to the introduction and acceptance of information technologies and theirapplication in society. The project may function as a catalyst for the development of other projects in the field ofinformation technologies in Flevoland, such as tele-working.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Unacceptable ‘non-paper’ Commission reports concerning the Cyprus problem

The Greek ‘Tempo Newsweek’ periodical refers to secret ‘non-paper’ Community reports recommending theimmediate commencement of proceedings with a view to dividing Cyprus definitively into two communities,since it has to date been impossible to reach any agreement with Ankara concerning the Cyprus question. Theseunacceptable reports, which are being circulated in the Commission in the form of ‘working documents’, indicatethat the Greek Cypriot representatives will be required to recognize the unacceptable Turkish Cypriotpseudo-State as it now stands − the result of the 1974 invasion and, furthermore, to encourage its Europeanoutlook.

This is a particularly serious matter, affecting the already weakened credibility of EU efforts to resolve theproblem concerning the invasion and occupation of the island. In view of this what is the Commission’s officialposition regarding these ‘non-paper’ reports which have now been made public and faithfully echo officialTurkish policy on this matter?


(17 October 1997)

The Commission has no knowledge of the secret non-paper reports on Cyprus cited by the Honourable Memberand is therefore not in a position to comment on them.




(17 September 1997)

Subject: Illegal freight pick-ups by Turkish lorries in Greece

There have recently been a growing number of complaints by Greek transport companies concerning the illegalpractice involving Turkish lorries picking up freight in Greece on their return from Italy to Turkey, a practicewhich also undermines fair competition.

More specifically, Turkish international transport vehicles are picking up freight in Greece on their return fromItaly and continuing towards Turkey using their transit licences instead of the paper licence form specified in thebilateral agreement between Greece and Turkey. As a result, business is − illegally − being taken away fromtransport companies in a Member State, namely Greece, which has, furthermore, issued 3 500 (fully exempt)bilateral or transit licences to Turkish transport companies, a measure which has not been reciprocated byTurkey. Can the Commission intervene and what measures can it take to persuade the Turkish authorities toensure compliance with the rules by Turkish transport companies, whose current illegal practices are seriouslyundermining the interests of hundreds of Community transport companies?


(31 October 1997)

The Commission has not been informed of complaints by Greek transport companies concerning Turkish lorriespicking up freight in Greece without the proper authorization on their return from Italy to Turkey.

Article 1.2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 relates to access to the market in the carriage of goods byroad within the Community to or from the territory of a member State or passing across the territory of one ormore Member States (1). Pursuant to that measure the Commission made a recommendation to open negotiationswith a number of third countries, including Turkey, on road transport market access. To date the Council has notagreed with the proposal relating to Turkey.

In the absence of a specific agreement between the Community and Turkey in road freight transport, theregulation of traffic between Greece and Turkey is a matter for the two countries concerned, subject tocompliance with the relevant international rules.

(1) OJ L 95, 9.4.1992.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Commission initiatives for the development of Internet

US President Clinton has recently promised aid of $100 million to the American data processing industry in orderto improve the efficiency of Internet services in the United States.

This initiative is known as NGII (‘Nxt Generation Internet Initiative’), and is accompanied by many others,including a second Internet initiative (‘Internet II Initiative’).

These developments reflect intensive efforts on the other side of the Atlantic to take the lead in a sector which hasdecisively influenced developments in the field of communications this decade and will probably continue to doso early in the next century.


The EU cannot afford to remain aloof if it is to avoid finding itself in the unenviable position of being forced tofollow the lead given from the other side of the Atlantic. What measures has the Commission taken and whatimmediate action does it intend to take to bring the EU to the forefront of this leading sector, enabling it to takethe initiative regarding the future development not only of Internet but also the information industry worldwide?


(4 November 1997)

The Commission is extremely interested in the development of the Internet (1) as regards the development of ahigh-output transmission network, communication protocols, applications, systems for the protection ofintellectual property rights (IPR), tools for the marking and filtering of contents for the protection of minors(PICS), domain management and naming (DNS), and other areas.

The Fourth Research Framework Programme (2) therefore contains a number of initiatives which are supportedby the ACTS, Telematics Applications and IT programmes both for the commercial Internet, in particular forelectronic commerce, and for the Internet for use by scientists and schools. In particular, the TEN-34 project forvery-high-output interconnection of the national research networks in Europe began in the Spring this year.

The current proposal in the Fifth Research Framework Programme (3) recommends grouping the ACTS,Telematics Applications and IT programme together in one single programme of information societytechnologies, which should facilitate the integration of developments relating to the Internet, whether theseconcern tools or applications. In this programme, special attention is paid to telematic infrastructures for use byscientists. These are defined as a horizontal measure to support all research areas, e.g. genome mapping, globalwarming and aeronautics.

The Commission is also participating in the projects being launched by the G7 to support the concept of a globalinformation society, one project being concerned with interlinking the US, Canadian, Japanese and Europeanbroadband sites.

To broaden the group of people benefiting from the Internet, particularly in the field of education, theCommission has organised special ‘Netdays’ to encourage the use of the Internet in schools by bringing togetherthe educational authorities and local industry.

(1) OJ L 192, 16. 7. 1991.(2) OJ L 334, 22.12. 1994.(3) COM(97) 142.


by Luigi Florio (UPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Violations of the rule of law in Italy

A few days ago Oscar D’Agostino, an Italian Sergeant in the Customs Service, was forcibly transferred toanother region because he was considered to be ‘incompatible’ with his surroundings.

The real reasons for the transfer were his ‘non-aligned’ and ‘inconvenient’ views, since he had often condemnedcorruption in the Customs Service and had made no secret of his sympathy with trade union organizationsunpopular with the Italian government and the left-wing majority which supports it.

This is yet another sign of the deterioration in respect for the rule of law in Italy which has been going on forsome time.


Does the Commission not consider that it should take practical steps to ensure, throughout the Union, respect forthe basic principles of law frequently referred to in the Treaty on European Union, failure to comply with whichmay seriously compromise the completion of the internal market?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 1997)

European law covers both the question of corruption and the protection of the basic principles of law.

As far as corruption is concerned, two instruments have been established by the Council and signed by MemberStates, namely, a Protocol of 27 September 1996 to the Convention on protection of financial interests of theCommunity and a Convention on corruption of officials of Community institutions and Community MemberStates of 26 May 1997. In addition, the Commission’s communication to the Council and the Parliament of21 May 1997 (1) advocates the adoption of a comprehensive policy against corruption incorporating measures inthe area of criminal law, as well as a number of measures which promote transparency and have ananti-corruption effect, namely concerning public procurement, taxation, company accounts, blacklisting andexternal assistance and co-operation. In individual cases, however, it is the task of the national authorities to takedecisions.

Concerning the transfer of the person mentioned by the Honourable Member, it is for him to take the proceduralsteps before the competent authorities at national level so as to enable them to consider whether or notfundamental principles have been violated.

(1) COM(97) 192.


by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: The internal market and ‘internal’ emigrants

An Italian citizen, who emigrated to Germany forty years ago, is a Veneto regional councillor and owns a housein his town of origin, where he spends his holidays and lives when he is not working. He has been prevented fromre-registering his old car or even registering a new one, by something referred to simply as circular ‘DG No 65’,issued by the Italian Ministry of Transport on 20 June 1997. This circular ‘forbids’ Italians listed on the ‘registerof residents abroad’ to register and hence also to own cars in Italy. Can the Commission say:

1. whether it is aware of the contents of this circular,

2. whether this ban is compatible with the principles on the basis of which the internal market operates,

3. why, if freedom of movement and freedom of establishment are granted, discriminatory restrictions are seton the free movement of goods?

4. how it is conceivable that the right of purchase and hence the right of ownership can be regulated in theinternal market by a ‘circular’ (rather than a law) and be based on the concept of ‘residence’,

5. what steps it intends to take, after all the talk about European citizenship:

(a) to prevent a citizen of a Member State residing in another Member State of the Union from being penalizedbecause of this situation, and

(b) to ensure that the ‘internal market’ is valid for the motor vehicle sector too?



(27 October 1997)

The Commission is not aware of the circular to which the Honourable Member refers.

It has contacted the Italian authorities asking for information on all the relevant legislation.

It will, where appropriate, investigate the matter under the procedure provided for in Article 169 of theEC Treaty.


by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Attitude of European Member States to refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran

Is the Commission aware that refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran are treated very differently in the EuropeanMember States, with the UK, Denmark and France adopting a mild attitude, the Netherlands and Germany beingfairly strict and Sweden even stricter?

Is the Commission aware that, as a result, in the UK, Denmark and France virtually all refugees andasylum-seekers are permitted to remain, while the Netherlands and Germany send some asylum-seekers andrefugees back, and Sweden currently sends nearly all of them back?

Does the Commission not agree that the information which the various embassies of the Member States in Iransupply to their capitals ought to be coordinated in such a way that the European Member States treat refugees andasylum-seekers from Iran similarly? What measures can the Commission take to bring about such coordinationand uniformity of policy?

What is the Commission’s own view of Iran? Is Iran a safe country or should it still be regarded as a countrywhere people with certain political or religious convictions face serious dangers?


(11 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the difference in recognition rates between the individual Member States. In the lastyears, applications from Iranian nationals constituted, depending on the Member State, between less than 0.5%and close to 10% of the total number of asylum applications. During the same period, the recognition rate variedbetween 4% and 80%. On a Community wide basis the recognition rate was 31% over the last four years.According to the United Nations commissioner for refugees (UNHCR), in 1995 some 48 000 Iranians weregranted Convention refugee status in Europe, slightly more than in 1994 (47 000). Almost half of all Iraniansrecognised as refugees under the 1951 Convention were recognised by Germany (23 500 or 49%). If one looks atthe granting of both Convention refugee status and the granting of humanitarian status, no less than eightMember States have important recognition rates. Thus, the difference in treatment referred to by the HonourableMember might not be as clear-cut as it seemed.

The common basis for the Member States for asylum status determination is the 1951 Geneva conventionrelating to the status of refugees. In 1996 the Council also adopted a Joint Position on the harmonized applicationof the definition of the term ‘refugee’ in Article 1 of the Geneva convention (1). Up to the present, no furtherinstruments on alternative protection, e.g. on humanitarian grounds, have been developed in the Communitycooperation. The question of subsidiary forms of protection, is however, included in the Council resolutionlaying down the priorities for co-operation in the field of justice and home affairs for the period from 1 July 1996to 30 June 1998 (2).

As the Honourable Member requested, mechanisms for the co-ordination and assessment of country of origininformation already exist between the Member States in the framework of the Title VI cooperation. It is one of


the tasks of the centre of information, reflection and exchange on asylum (CIREA). This working group of theCouncil prepares joint reports on the assessment of the situations in third countries based on contributions of theMember States (3). CIREA also normally invites representative of the UNHCR to participate in thoseassessments. The Commission takes full part in all CIREA deliberations.

(1) Joint position of 4 March 1996 defined by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the EC Treaty on the harmonized application of thedefinition of the term ’refugee’ in Article 1 of the Geneva convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the status of refugees(OJ L 63/2, 13.3.1996).

(2) OJ C 319/1, 26.10.1996.(3) See the second report on the activities of CIREA in OJ C 274, 19.9.1996.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Rail infrastructure

Is the Commission aware that major differences in maximum axle load exist for different national railinfrastructures?

Will the Commission make proposals, in connection with the proposal on freight freeways and with theTrans-European Networks, to harmonize maximum axle loads and loading-gauges, so to eliminate this technicalobstacle to European rail transport?

If so, what maximum axle load and what loading-gauge does the Commission envisage?

If not, why does the Commission not believe that there is any need for harmonization?


(4 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the variety of national rail infrastructures throughout the Community, whichinclude differences in maximum axle loads and loading gauges. These differences result from the developmentof separate national networks over many years.

The Commission supports interoperability of national networks and took a first step towards that in presenting itsproposal for a directive on the interoperability of the high speed train (HST) network (1) which was adopted bythe Council on 23 July 1996. In addition, in order to find the best ways of improving the competitiveness ofinternational freight and passenger services (other than the high speed links) the Commission has launched astudy on interoperability covering a number of questions including gauges, and plans to make proposals in late1998 on cost-efficient measures to help integrate the conventional national networks.

(1) Directive 96/48/EC − OJ L 235, 17.9.1996.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: European Train Control System (ETCS)

Is the Commission aware that different safety and traffic control systems exist for rail transport in the variousMember States?

Is the Commission aware that a proposal has been made for a European Train Control System (ETCS), for whichoperational specifications would have to be drawn up?


Is the Commission aware, furthermore, that Netherlands Railways intend to upgrade their ATB safety system,which will result in a new version of the ATB, after which they will adjust to the ETCS only well into the nextmillennium?

With a view to freight freeways, and in connection with the Trans-European Networks, ought not theCommission to ensure, as a consequence of its proposals on inter-operability, that all railway companiesoperating in the Member States make the adjustments required by the ETCS as soon as possible?

Could not the Commission ensure, at the minimum, that the existing systems and their upgrading are compatiblewith the future ETCS?

If so, how?

If not, why not?


(24 October 1997)

Following the Council resolution of 17 December 1990 regarding the establishment of a set of preparatoryactivities to improve the interoperability of the high-speed rail network (1), the Commission initiated anintegrated programme of research work supporting the development of a European rail traffic managementsystem (ERTMS). The ERTMS will create the standard for a European rail signalling system. It will include atrain management system and an automatic train protection system (ETCS-European train control system). Whendeveloped, the system will complement and gradually replace the 13 different systems which operate in theCommunity today. The system will also be the first step towards integrating traffic and infrastructuremanagement with customer services.

The Commission is developing a set of specifications which can serve as a common basis for the implementationof ERTMS/ETCS everywhere in the Community and in Central and Eastern European countries.

The Dutch ‘automatische trein beınvloeding’ (ATB) signalling system is one of the 13 different systems existingin the Community. The Betuwe line in the Netherlands should be among the first lines to be equipped with theERTMS/ETCS system. However, the ERTMS system is to be deployed either as a stand-alone system or as anoverlay to an existing signalling infrastructure. In any case specific transmission modules will perform thetranslation between the national signalling coded information and the ERTMS format. This will also allow thecirculation of ERTMS equipped trains on lines with the existing system.

Since 1989 and in order to establish interoperable networks, much effort has been put into the promotion of theERTMS/ETCS system. The system will be tested in the near future on several trial sites (Florence-Arezzo,Berlin-Halle-Leipzig, Paris junction, Vienna-Budapest, Madrid-Seville). The first implementation of theERTMS/ETCS system is foreseen on the following main lines: Koln and Frankfurt, HST (high speed train) East,Betuwe line, HST South, Vienna Budapest, West Coast main line, Madrid-Barcelona, Zaragoza-Vitoria-SanSebastian and Turin-Venice.

(1) OJ C 33, 8.2.1991.


by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: The cultivation and use of hemp in Finland

The EU grants financial aid for the traditional cultivation of industrial hemp. Unfortunately, there are noarrangements for making use of the harvested hemp and, at least in Finland’s case, there are no processing firmsrequiring hemp as a raw material and no export markets.

Is the Commission aware that hemp is being grown in Finland without there being any market for it? What stepswill it take to remedy this problem?



(20 October 1997)

Under Council Regulation (EEC) No 1308/70 of 29 June 1970 on the common organisation of the market in flaxand hemp (1), aid per hectare is granted in the Community for hemp grown from seed of varieties with anintoxicating substance (tetrahydrocannabinol) content of no more than 0.3%. The area must have been fully sownand harvested and normal cultivation work carried out. There are no requirements as to storage, processing orexportation of the harvested hemp.

The area sown to hemp in Finland although increasing is very low: 2 hectares in 1996 and 74 (provisional figure)in 1997. The quantities yielded by such small areas are obviously an inadequate incentive to investment inprocessing facilities in Finland. Undertakings in the rest of the Community already have adequate raw materialsupplies and export outlets are very limited.

On 20 January 1997 the Commission undertook to the Council to propose suitable measures for hemp as soon aspossible. When the agricultural prices for 1997/98 were set the Council accepted the Commission's proposal thatthe aid be reduced by 7.5% in order to diminish the effect it has had of increasing areas grown.

The Commission continues to reflect on what would be the most appropriate measures for the sector.

(1) OJ L 146, 4.7.1970.


by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission

(10 September 1997)

Subject: Antibiotics in livestock production

Is the Commission aware of the UK Soil Association Campaign to halt the rise of drug-resistant disease andsafeguard the future effectiveness of antibiotics? Is the Commission aware that the Swann Committee, jointlyestablished in 1968 by the UK Ministers of Health and Agriculture stated: ‘There is ample proof that the giving ofantibiotics to animals encourages the emergence of resistant strains of micro-organisms. Equally there is nodoubt that many micro-organisms, whether resistant to antibiotics or not ... can be transmitted from animals toman’? As with BSE, we are in danger of ignoring the scientific warnings until it is too late.

The Soil Association believes that the use of antibiotics should be restricted to the therapeutic treatment ofdisease and occasional use as part of a disease control programme which should normally include changes inmanagement practice.

The Soil Association is proposing:

1. An immediate ban on all performance-enhancing antibiotics;

2. The phasing out of prescription only medicine in feed antibiotics, in conjunction with legislation requiringchanges in management practice;

3. New controls on the use of intramammary antibiotics which are currently routinely used in conventionaldairy herds.

What steps is the Commission taking to end the routine use of antibiotics by farmers?



(16 October 1997)

1. The Commission is aware of the concern expressed by both the Soil Association and other organisations atthe increase in the number of cases of bacteria showing resistance to antibiotics used in human medicine.

The Commission is also worried by this phenomenon of resistance and has therefore, as a precautionary measure,prohibited the use of avoparcin in animal feed in order to avoid any risk of reducing the effectiveness of astand-by antibiotic used in human medicine. Scientific data currently available do not indicate that the increasedfrequency of cases of resistance to antimicrobial drugs used in human medicine is linked to the use of antibioticsin animal feed and that the use of such substances should be totally prohibited.

In line with the recommendations of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, given in its opinion of21 May 1996 on avoparcin (1), and Directive 97/6/EC concerning additives in feedingstuffs (2), prohibiting theuse of avoparcin, the Commission has drawn up a plan for monitoring bacterial resistance which should beoperational by the beginning of 1998. There are also plans to carry out or coordinate a series of studies at the levelof the Member States or international organisations so as to gain a better understanding of the molecularmechanisms involved in bacterial resistance and of possible transfers along the food chain and in theenvironment.

The Commission does not so far have any data justifying a total ban on the use of antibiotics in animal feed.

The Commission will also actively participate in the conference to be organised by the World HealthOrganisation in October 1997 on the consequences for health of the use of antimicrobial drugs in feedingstuffs.

2. The Commission is currently studying the best method of approving additives and medicines to ensuregood farming practice.

Under Community rules, veterinary medicines, including antibiotics, may only be used, except in exceptionalcircumstances, for stipulated purposes, i.e. for the treatment of specific diseases in specific species.

3. The use of intramammary antibiotics in dairy herds can lead to residues in milk at a level exceeding theauthorised maximum residue limits. Council Directive 96/23/EC on measures to monitor certain substances andresidues thereof in live animals and animal products (3) introduces annual monitoring plans for residues in milk,and in particular for residues of antimicrobial substances. Official samples must be taken on farms or at dairiesby the competent authorities of each Member State for examination for the presence of antibiotic residues in themilk. Under Article 18 of that Directive, where there is evidence of residues at a level exceeding the authorisedmaximum limit, the competent authority must carry out an investigation on the farm of origin or departure andtake all necessary steps to safeguard public health, with specific measures in the event of repeated infringements.

(1) The opinion was sent to Parliament's Secretariat on 13 August 1996.(2) OJ L 35, 5.2.1997.(3) OJ L 125, 23 5.1996.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Scraping of the radioactive discharge pipe at the La Hague nuclear complex, France

Greenpeace has filed a complaint with the European Commission over the scraping of the radioactive dischargepipe at the French nuclear complex, Cap de la Hague.


The environmental group has argued that France has allowed Cogema to undertake this delicate operation, whichis likely to produce a great deal of radioactive waste, without following the proper procedures. In particular,Greenpeace alleges that France has not respected Council Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on environmental impactassessment, Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty under which it should have first notified the European Commissionof this operation, the 1972 International Convention of London and the Convention on Marine Pollution in theNorth Atlantic (OSPAR).

What action will the Commission be taking in respect of this complaint?

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


(20 October 1997)

The French authorities have been invited to provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning theremoval of the scale in the discharge pipe at La Hague. This is the first step of a thorough legal and technicalexamination, taking into account the environmental and radiological risks involved in the operations.


by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Council

(16 September 1997)

Subject: Imprisonment of Xanana Gusmao, leader of the Timorese independence movement

In a letter he wrote to the Indonesian President General Suharto in July 1997, the South African President NelsonMandela called for the release of the leader of the Timorese independence movement, Xanana Gusmao. He wrote‘You will understand that we cannot normalize the situation in East Timor unless all the political leaders,including Mr Gusmao, are freed’.

Mr Gusmao, a leading member of the Timorese independence movement Fretilin, was sentenced to lifeimprisonment in May 1993. He was convicted of rebellion, illegal possession of firearms and attempting toseparate part of the territory of Indonesia.

Human rights groups have widely criticized the nature of his trial. There were numerous reports that prosecutionwitnesses, many of whom were political prisoners, were subjected to undue pressure from the militaryauthorities, the presiding judge refused to allow Mr Gusmao to enter much of his defence plea as it dealt with thepolitical situation in East Timor, and the trial was conducted in Bahasia Indonesia, a language of which many ofthe witnesses had limited knowledge, and without proper translation facilities.

Does the Council agree that the release of Xanana Gusmao and all Timorese political prisoners is necessary toensure a just resolution of the problems facing East Timor? What representations has it made to the Indonesianauthorities over the detention of Timorese political prisoners? What action will it take in respect of PresidentMandela’s initiative?

Answer

(4 December 1997)

1. Respect for human rights is one of the cornerstones of the European Union’s common foreign and securitypolicy. In that context, the Council calls for all prisoners held on political grounds to be freed, including those inIndonesia. As the Honourable Member knows, the Union seizes every opportunity to raise the situation in EastTimor with the Indonesian authorities, particularly as regards human rights, in accordance with the objectives ofthe common position defined by the Council in June 1996.


The troubling situation in East Timor was the reason for the presentation this year, by all the Member States ofthe European Union, of a draft Resolution that was adopted at the last session of the UN Commission on HumanRights in Geneva. That Resolution in particular calls on Indonesia to take all necessary measures to ensure fullrespect for the human righs and fundamental freedoms of the people of East Timor. It also asks the Indonesiangovernment to ensure taht all Timorese citizens imprisoned or found guilty on political grounds are freed withoutdelay, that all detainees are treated humanely and in accordance with international standards and that their trialsare conducted in line with international rules. The Resolution also calls on the Indonesian authorities tocooperate with the UN Commission on Human Rights, in particular with its thematic rapporteurs, and to invitethem (particularly the special rapporteur on torture) to visit East Timor. Lastly, the Resolution asks Indonesia toallow the creation of a post of “programme officer” for human rights at the UNDP’s representaiton in Jakarta andto ensure that he has unhindered access to East Timor.

2. The Union supports the efforts of all those who work together with the UN Secretary-General to seek a just,comprehensive and internationally acceptable solution to the problem of East Timor, which fully respects therights of the East Timorese people, in accordance with the relevant Resolutions of the General Assembly and inconformity with the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. In this context, the Council can onlyapplaud President Mandela’s initiative, which it hopes will be crowned with success.



(17 September 1997)

Subject: Ethnic minority businesses

Are there any EU networks set up to support or to share information and ideas for ethnic minority businesses soas to help them develop and flourish? If not, does the Commission have any plans to set up such a network?

Answer by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the problems facing ethnic minorities seeking to create and develop businesses.The Third Multiannual Programme for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (1) provides for support forbusinesses run by persons from disadvantaged groups by promoting the search for innovative solutions to theirspecific problems.

Although Member States have private national or regional bodies whose remit is to monitor the sector, collectinformation and assist entrepreneurs, their geographical coverage is limited. As far as the Commission is aware,these bodies do not come under any umbrella organisations.

Every Member State also has public or semi-public bodies whose object is to assist businesses in general.The problems facing ethnic minorities could provide these bodies with a major area of investigation, especiallywith a view to promoting promoting racial integration and revitalising the commercial sector in disadvantagedurban areas.

It is worth remembering that local commerce has been selected as one of the Local Employment andDevelopment Initiatives (ILDEs) in view of its capacity for creating jobs and its potential for developingdisadvantaged areas where ethnic minorities account for a large share of the population. Accordingly, theobjective of the Commission's ‘Commerce 2000’ initiative is to identify the most relevant actions anddisseminate them among local, national and Community decision-makers responsible for planning the StructuralFunds.

It is against this background that a survey of local commerce in disadvantaged areas in the 15 Member States iscurrently under way. The call for proposals (2) should make it possible to identify themes for various workingparties to examine. The commercial activities of ethnic minorities could be a particularly interesting theme,perhaps leading to the creation of a network for the exchange of good practices.


On 15 April 1997, the Commission published a call for proposals (OJ C 117) relating to assistance for craftenterprises and small enterprises. Its objectives include access to information and services through thedevelopment of computer applications.

Proposals designed to meet this objective must envisage the creation of a computer server providing information,services and advice for the heads of craft and small enterprises, via computer networks. The server must bereadily accessible by both craftsmen and the heads of businesses.

Within the framework of the various objectives, the emphasis is on actions benefiting women, young people anddisadvantaged groups, all of whom are playing an increasingly important part in the creation of new small andmicro-enterprises.

(1) OJ L 6, 10. 1.1997.(2) OJ S 192, 3.10.1997.


by Angela Sierra Gonzalez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Plan to erect a sculpture on Mount Tindaya (Canary Isles)

On the island of Fuerteventura (Canary Isles), the Canary Isles Government is planning to erect a sculpture insideMount Tindaya by hollowing out the mountain and creating an interior cube of 50 cubic metres in line with aproject by the sculptor Eduardo Chillida.

Mount Tindaya is currently a place of major cultural, ethnographical and archeological interest (in addition to itssignificance as a natural and geological site) and has been designated a ‘national monument’ by the law onprotected areas of the Canaries and an ‘important cultural asset’ by the law on Spain’s historical heritage (as thesite of very important pre-Hispanic foot-shaped engravings).

Various legal experts, environmentalists and citizens’ groups have voiced their opposition to the project, on thegrounds that it would cause irreparable damage to the mountain’s environment and the cultural values itembodies, irrespective of the artistic quality of the work of the sculptor, Eduardo Chillida.

Is the Commission aware of this project and of the public opposition to it?

In the light of the provisions contained in the EU Treaty on the protection of Europe’s cultural heritage, theconclusions of the Council, notably those of 12 November 1992, concerning guidelines for Community culturalpolicy and the various European Parliament resolutions on the conservation of the cultural assets and heritage ofthe peoples of Europe, what will the Commission do to ensure that the spirit of the provisions referred to above isrespected in the case of Mount Tindaya?

Does the Commission believe that projects of this kind run counter to the thinking behind Communityprogrammes such as Raphael, which require the Member States to encourage the conservation of the culturalheritage?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the project in question and of the opposition to it.

The Commission is certainly concerned with the preservation of Europe’s cultural heritage and this is clearlydemonstrated through its actions, which are based on the conclusions of the Council of November 1992, on thevarious resolutions of the Parliament as well as on Article 128 of the EC Treaty.


As the Honourable Member is aware, the Commission’s actions in the field of cultural heritage are nowcontained in the Raphael programme, through which − as Article 128 of the EC Treaty stipulates − theCommunity can only encourage cooperation between its Member States to implement actions in favour of thepreservation of Europe’s cultural heritage. However, the Community and the Commission in particular does nothave the competence to intervene at national or regional level and in matters where the responsibility belongsexclusively to the national or regional authorities.

In this light, any action for the protection of the cultural, ethnographical and archaeological aspects of mountTindaya belongs exclusively to the responsibility of the national or regional authorities of Spain.

In this context, the Commission does not consider that the projects of this kind run counter to the thinking of theRaphael programme, as its objective is to encourage cooperation between Member States in the field of culturalheritage conservation.


by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Anti-dumping investigation into imports of unbleached cotton fabrics from China, Egypt, India,Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey

On 11 July 1997 the Commission decided to open a new anti-dumping (AD) investigation into imports ofunbleached cotton fabrics from 7 non-EU Member States, in spite of the fact that EU cotton weavers have twicebefore failed to have definitive anti-dumping duties imposed.

Can the Commission explain why it has accepted a third complaint, so soon after the previous complaint wasrejected?

Will the Commission confirm whether it intends to impose interim duties while the third complaint is beinginvestigated? If it does impose interim duties, is not the Commission concerned that, in repeating itsinvestigations, it is encouraging serial complaints by interested parties?


(24 October 1997)

An anti-dumping investigation on imports of unbleached cotton fabrics originating in Egypt, India, Indonesia,Pakistan, China and Turkey was opened on 11 July 1997.

Although the Council did not impose definitive measures in the previous case concerning cotton fabrics, theCommission is obliged, under the Community’s anti-dumping legislation, to open an anti-dumping proceedingwhen a major proportion of Community producers lodges a complaint showing prima facie evidence of dumpingand resulting injury. This was the case here. There is no provision in this legislation that would allow theCommission to reject a sufficiently substantiated complaint on the basis that the Council had previously decidedagainst the imposition of definitive duties on imports relating to a different investigation period. In this respect,the opening of the current investigation is fully in line with the World trade organisation rules governinganti-dumping.

At this early stage in the proceeding, it is impossible for the Commission to indicate whether or not provisionalduties will be imposed. It is currently collecting the requisite information concerning the different aspects of thiscase (dumping, injury and Community interest). In any event, the Honourable Member can be assured that thisproceeding, like all others, is conducted on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory basis.



by Michael Hindley (PSE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Gulf Cooperation Council Delegation

Given the enormous importance of our trade with the GCC states, does the Commission have any intention to setup a delegation in the GCC states?


(27 ctober 1997)

The Commission keeps its network of delegations under constant review. The Commission is fully aware of thegrowing importance of the relations between the Community and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) States. Inthis context, the opening of a delegation in Riyadh remains one of the Commission’s objectives. However, nonew delegation can be opened without the necessary resources being made available, either by redeployment ofexisting resources or by budgetary reinforcement.


by Robert Sturdy (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Regulation of cormorant populations in the EU

The European Commission has removed the Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis from Annex I to Directive79/409/EEC (1). This decision has freed Member States from taking special measures to conserve its habitat.Serious damage to fish stocks from growing inland cormorant populations, highlighted in Parliament’sResolution B4-0138/96 (2), will continue. Despite a now very favourable conservation status, the necessarynational regulation of cormorant populations is still restricted by the conditions governing derogations under theBird Conservation Directive.

Mrs Bjerregaard told Mr Moscovici on 19 November 1996 that the Commission has been monitoring work,initiated in Denmark and the Netherlands under the Bonn Convention, on an international management plan forthe species Phalacrocorax carbo.

What action is foreseen to implement such a plan, and will it include measures in respect of the British subspeciesPhalacrocorax carbo carbo?

Should both types of cormorant now be added to Annex II to the Bird Conservation Directive as an urgent interimmeasure to reduce further damage to fish stocks by facilitating regulation by Member States, in the interest ofecological balance (Article 7(4) of the Directive)?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.(2) OJ C 65, 4.3.1996, p. 158.


(16 October 1997)

The international management plan for the great cormorant, being prepared at the initiative of Denmark and theNetherlands, is yet not complete. According to recommendation 5.3. adopted in the last meeting of theConference of the Parties to the Convention on migratory species (Bonn Convention) in April 1997, this workshould be finalized before the end of 1997, and should focus initially on the subspecies phalacrocorax carbosinensis. Management actions taken by the Member States should comply with the provisions of Directive79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds (1). In this context, the Commission will continue to encouragecooperation and solidarity between Member States, particularly within the framework of the ‘ORNIS’ committeeestablished under Article 16 of this Directive.


As with Directive 79/409/EEC, it is the responsability of Member States to implement measures and actionagreed in the framework of such a management plan. With regard to the Atlantic subspecies phalacrocorax carbocarbo in the United Kingdom the Commission would therefore recommend the Honourable Member to makecontact with the national conservation authorities responsible for this matter.

The Commission is not currently considering proposing the inclusion of the great cormorant phalacrocorax carboin Annex II of the Birds Directive. Such a proposal was not requested by the Member States during thediscussions leading to the recent amendment of the Directive to remove phalacrocorax carbo sinensis fromAnnex I. The Commission continues to recommend to the Member States the appropriate and full use ofderogations provided for under Article 9 of the Birds Directive.

(1) As amended, most recently by Directive 97/49/EC of 29.7.1997, OJ L 223, 13.8.1997.


by Joaquın Siso Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: COM in sugar

The Union of EC Soft Drinks Associations (Unesda) regrets the fact that the sugar sector has been largely ignoredin considerations regarding the forthcoming reform of the common agricultural policy. In view of the fact that thecommon organization of the market in sugar has not changed since 1967, Unesda believes that it needs to bereformed in such a way as to bring it gradually into line with the market and to ensure that it provides incomesupport for sugar beet producers. It also maintains that the production surpluses forecast by Commissionspecialists could be partly absorbed by the soft drinks industry if sugar prices were stabilized at a reasonablelevel.

Could the Commission say what it thinks of Unesda’s views?


(7 October 1997)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that the production and guaranteed price arrangementsin the sugar sector apply by a decision of the Council of 24 April 1995, following consultation of Parliament,until the end of the 2000/01 marketing year (1).

This is why the sector is not covered by the Agenda 2000 document (2) presented by the Commission, which seesno need for discussion of the sector at the present time given the deadline for settling its future of 1 January 2001.

Despite any claims to the contrary by Unesda, the market organisation has undergone several substantialadjustments since 1967. These have been essentially concerned with financing the disposal of exportableCommunity production through production levies paid by producers (i.e. growers and beet sugar refiners). Thisself-financing, which originally affected only B quota production over the quota application period, wasextended to A quota production and then became a full self-financing requirement for each marketing year. Thismeans that the Community's annual budget meets none of the costs of disposing of Community production in thissector, which would not be the case if aid for beet production was granted as envisaged by UNESDA. In theCommission's opinion such an approach would not at the moment be suitable for the sector.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1101/95 of 24 April 1995 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 on the common organisation of the marketin the sugar sector and Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 laying down general rules for the production refund on certain sugar products used inthe chemical industry: OJ L 110, 17.5.1995.

(2) COM(97) 2000.



by Joaquın Siso Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1997)

Subject: Health of farmers in the EU

The men and women who work in the fields of Europe are exposed to numerous diseases related to their work.One of the most widespread occupational diseases in the countryside is brucellosis (also known as undulantfever) which is transmitted by contact, via airborne bacteria or through ingestion of dairy products derived fromthe milk of infected animals.There are other diseases of infectious origin as well, such as tuberculosis(transmitted via the milk of sick cows) and carbuncles, and also ones of parasitic origin, not to mention animaland insect bites. Moreover, the use (and misuse) of everyday machinery (certain tools, engines, mowingmachines, etc.) produces vibration which, if experienced constantly and intensively, can cause significantdamage to bone and muscle. Excessive exposure to the sun and health problems caused by the handling ofchemicals are also a significant factor and can give rise to skin complaints. Lastly, high stress levels affectwomen farm workers in particular since they often work outside the farm as well as performing agriculturaltasks, running a household and bringing up children.

In view of the fact that prevention campaigns need to be significantly broadened in order to minimize (and asmuch as possible prevent) the impact which such diseases may have on farm workers, could the Commission saywhether there are any Community initiatives designed to alleviate (and ultimately resolve) this state of affairs?


(10 November 1997)

The Commission is fully aware of the occupational risks to which farm workers are exposed.

There is an extensive corpus of European legislation concerned with the safety and health of workers, includingfarm workers. Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safetyand health of workers at work (1) applies to all sectors of activity, including agriculture. Moreover, Directive90/679/EEC on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (2) (amendedsubsequently by Directive 93/88/EEC (3) and by Directive 95/30/EEC (4)) lays down measures to be applied toactivities in which workers are exposed or are liable to be exposed to biological agents such as those mentionedin the question.

Commission Recommendation No 90/326/EEC concerning the adoption of a European schedule of occupationaldiseases (5), addressed to the Member States, includes several diseases mentioned by the Honourable Member,such as brucellosis, tuberculosis and infectious or parasitic diseases transmitted to man by animals or animalremains.

Within the context of the Community programme on safety, hygiene and health at work (1996-2000), theCommission, with the aid of the information supplied by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work,will examine whether other measures need to be introduced in the future.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.(2) OJ L 374, 31.12.1990.(3) OJ L 268, 29.10.1993.(4) OJ L 155, 6.7.1995.(5) OJ L 160, 26.6.1990.



by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission

(15 September 1997)

Subject: Progress of CSF for Greece

The CSF for Greece has reached the half-way point of the period of application and is now at a critical stage. Willthe Commission give details of the amounts and percentages of the funds earmarked for the CSF so far disbursed

1. in relation to the budget for the whole period of application (1994-1999)

2. in relation to the budget from the beginning of the period up to the present time (September 1997), and

3. in relation to the budget for 1997 alone (appropriations disbursed for the first 8 months of the year comparedto the budget for the whole year),

both in global terms and with regard to the national and regional sections of the CSF and the Cohesion Fund?


(16 October 1997)

Payments from the Structural Funds for the Greek Community support framework (1994-97) until end August1997 were as follows (ECU million):

Totalpaid

1994-99%

1994-97%

1997

paid %

Regional operational programmes 1 764.8 39.1 62.4 158.9 21National operational programmes 3 121.9 33.4 56 323.7 17.2

TOTAL 4 886.7 35.3 58.2 482.6 18.3

Payments from the Cohesion Fund are made in response to applications from the national authorities as theprojects being financed progress. By mid-September 1997, the Commission had made payments to Greecetotalling ECU 257 million.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Radioactive pollution from the Sellafield nuclear complex in Britain

The New Scientist (10 May 1997) gives details of a study tracking how radioactive pollution from Britain’snuclear complex at Sellafield has spread through the Arctic Ocean into the waters of northern Canada.

The study was led by Mike Brewers of the Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Halifax, Nova Scotia. It wasprepared for a recent conference on radioactivity in the Arctic in Tromso, Norway.

One of the conference organizers, Per Strand of the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, has estimatedthat Sellafield has released 40 000 billion becquerels of caesium-137 into the environment. According to him,about 15 000 billion becquerels of that radioisotope have reached the Arctic. This would be two to three timeshigher than the contamination brought to the Arctic from Chernobyl via the Baltic and North Seas.

Has the Commission studied the data compiled on this matter? What action will it take to ensure that theradioactive pollution caused by Sellafield ceases?



(23 October 1997)

As part of its wider interests in the subject of exposure to radioactivity resulting from levels of environmentalradioactivity, the Commission considers carefully the results of studies of the type to which the HonourableMember refers. While it is true that radioactivity from Sellafield discharges can be detected in the marineenvironment far from that site, this arises from the extremely high sensitivity of the measurement techniquesavailable and does not imply any significant risk to man or the environment. On the contrary, even the mostexposed population living close to Sellafield receives doses which are small compared with both the limits laiddown in the current Community basic safety standards and the substantially reduced limits with which MemberStates will be required to comply by the year 2000.

The Community basic safety standards require that all exposures, including those arising from the operation ofinstallations such as Sellafield, result in doses which are not only within the statutory limits but which are ‘as lowas reasonably achievable’ (ALARA) below these limits. This requirement is known as the ALARA principle.Enforcement of this principle has led to the continuing development and refinement of technology, and hasresulted in as much as a 99% reduction in radioactivity discharged from Sellafield to the marine environmentsince the peak discharges in the 1970s. The activity now detectable in distant Canadian waters results from thepeak discharge period. The success of the application of the ALARA principle is evident when it is consideredthat this major reduction in discharges took place over a period when the quantity of irradiated fuel beingreprocessed was increased significantly.


by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

(15 September 1997)

Subject: Human rights violations in Iran

A number of Iranian newspapers have carried reports in recent months of strikes in Iranian industrial concerns inthe course of which strikers have been arrested by the secret service. There are also reports that inmates of theShiraz, Tabriz and Esfahan prisons have been going on hunger strike since June 1997 and have been tortured andplaced in solitary confinement as a result.

1. Is the Commission aware of these events? What recent instances of repression in Iranian jails are known tothe Commission? How has it responded? What further action is it planning?

2. What information does the Commission have about the start and the nature of the trial of the author, FaradjSarkuhi, who has disappeared?

3. What action will the Commission be taking in the light of these human rights violations in Iran as regardsthe resumption of diplomatic relations with that country?

4. Does the Commission concur with the British author, Salman Rushdie, that the EU Member States shouldnot return their ambassadors to Iran until the Iranian Government has given a formal, written guarantee of itsrenouncement of the fatwa?


(1 October 1997)

The Commission has no diplomatic representation in Iran and therefore no first-hand knowledge of the wave ofstrikes in Iranian industrial factories reported in the press.

The Commission’s view is that the European Union should seek a constructive approach with Iran but thatprogress can be made only if Iran respects the norms of international law and refrains from acts of terrorism. Thisis consistent with the Union’s decision to suspend the critical dialogue with Iran after the April 1997 finding ofthe Berlin court on the Mykonos case.


The Union has unequivocally condemned the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie. This issue, as well as the trial ofFaradj Sarkouhi and the return of the Member States’ ambassadors to Tehran, are currently being discussed in theframework of the common foreign and security policy.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Ecological disaster in the Mediterranean caused by mutated seaweed

In recent years there has been rampant growth in the Mediterranean of a species of mutated tropical seaweed,‘Caulerpa Taxifolia’, which was brought to Europe to decorate the aquarium of a zoo in Germany. The seaweedunderwent a mutation, resulting in the creation of a new species which is spreading very rapidly and resisting allattempts to destroy it.

Wherever the weed appears, coral, sponges, crabs and any other forms of marine flora and fauna are no longer tobe found, and even fish are now disappearing. This new species of seaweed is spreading at a rapid rate, and amassive ecological disaster is in the making in the sensitive region of the Mediterranean basin.

What action does the Commission intend to take and what measures are needed to avert the disaster which isinevitably facing the Mediterranean?


(30 October 1997)

By using the LIFE financial instrument the Commission jointly financed an international project between 1992and 1995 that was intended to study the problem caused by the expansion of caulerpa taxifolia seaweed in theMediterranean and to anticipate the subsequent developments in that area. The project was carried out by French,Spanish and Italian teams.

In view of the outcome of that project and the uninterrupted expansion of the seaweed the Commission decidedin 1995 to grant a second instalment of LIFE funding to a project intended to involve experiments on seaweederadication techniques and to draw up a strategy for controlling its expansion. The project is being coordinatedby the Posidonie Scientific Interest Grouping (SIG) in Marseilles, from whom the Honourable Member will beable to obtain more detailed information.

More particularly the Posidonie SIG held an international symposium on 19-20 September 1997 on controllingthe expansion of caulerpa taxifolia, the documentation on which is due to appear shortly.

It should be noted that although the Commission is involved in identifying this problem and in the experimentalresolution stages via the LIFE financial instrument, any structural action to be taken is the responsibility of theMember States concerned.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: The Commission’s report on European ports

During the European Parliament’s consultations with the Commission and the Council on the trans-Europeantransport networks, the Commission gave a positive undertaking to draw up and forward to Parliament in early1997 a report on measures to develop European ports.

Has the Commission drawn up such a document and when will it be made available to the European Parliament?



(4 November 1997)

During the adoption of the Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network,the Commission agreed to submit in 1997 a report and, if appropriate, a proposal for port projects using anapproach similar to that followed for airports.

The Commission is currently preparing this report which it hopes to submit to the Parliament and the Councilbefore the end of 1997.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Arbitrary measures by Turkey in the Bosphorus

According to statements by Turkish officials, Turkey has started taking unilateral measures to monitor shippingin the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, which has caused an outcry even among Turkish shipping agents, who arein favour of an international solution to this issue.

The IMO, moreover, has already expressed disapproval of the Turkish Government’s actions which willinevitably lead to a major crisis in the region.

Another indication of the destabilizing tactics of the Turkish authorities is the introduction of checks on shipsgoing through the Bosphorus to determine whether they are carrying the Russian S-300 defence system orderedby the Republic of Cyprus, which is to be installed on the island to protect it from Turkey’s insatiable greed.

What are the Commission’s views on Turkey’s arbitrary actions, which are aimed at changing the status quo inthe Bosphorus, and what steps does it intend to take should Turkey actually go ahead with such an unlawfulmeasure?


(24 October 1997)

According to the Commission's information, the Turkish authorities have no plans to change the control ofnavigation in the Bosporus and the Dardanelles.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Turkey and freedom of expression

Given the most recent communication from the Commission (COM(97) 394) which urges the broadest possiblecooperation with European and, more importantly, Turkish NGOs working for improvements in human rightsand so forth, is the Commission aware of the Turkish Interior Ministry document (number B05HID0000073/472)dated January 1997 which sets forth a programme impeding the activities of NGOs reporting on human rights?

What assurances can the Commission give that this is no longer the policy of the Turkish government?



(24 October 1997)

The Commission has no knowledge of the document to which the Honourable Member is referring.

As for the new Turkish government’s stance on human rights and democratisation, the Prime Minister has on anumber of occasions publicly acknowledged the ground his country still has to cover in this field.

The programme proposed in the Commission’s communication of 15 July on the future of relations with Turkeyspecifically involves cooperating closely with the government on human rights and thereby fostering the smoothdevelopment of civil society in the country.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Italian Government decree allowing local authorities to set up their own taxi services

In the last week of July 1997 the Italian Government issued a decree enabling local authorities to set up their ownpublic taxi services, as an alternative to existing taxi services. This provision has given rise to a number ofcomplaints by taxi-drivers, who consider that their livelihood is being jeopardized by the introduction ofmechanisms which threaten to undermine free competition in the taxi sector.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether it is aware of this matter;

2. whether there is any European legislation on taxi services;

3. whether it considers the fears expressed by Italian taxi drivers concerning possible distortions of competitioncaused by the decree to be justified;

4. if so, whether it considers it should use its influence with the Italian authorities on the subject?


(6 November 1997)

1. The Commission is not aware of the measures cited by the Honourable Member

2. No.

3. and 4. The organisation and control of national, regional or local taxi markets including the licensingsystem is mainly an area of competence of national authorities. They are in a better position to deal with thesematters.


by Giuseppe Rauti (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Granting PDO to Terra di Bari oil

Will the Commission say why it called off the meeting at which Terra di Bari extra virgin olive oil was to havebeen granted protected designation of origin (PDO)? This meeting, and the award of PDO, had been fullyexpected by the Italian Farmers’ Confederation whose provincial president, Antonio Barile, had even arranged aspecial meeting with traders and the press in Bari in July 1997 to announce the good news.


The author not only appeals for this recognition to be granted but points out that the entire ‘operation’ has nowbeen ready and adequately documented for three years; that Bari’s ‘green gold’ is of prime quality and is alreadyprized on international markets; and finally that any further delay would amount to sabotaging a sectoremploying 60 000 firms in the Bari region, which produce some 80 m kilos, create a turnover of LT 500 billionand account for virtually 20% of Italy’s olive production and 50% of the olive production in Apulia.


(14 October 1997)

The Commission is pleased to be able to inform the Honourable Member that the designation ‘Terra di Bari’,referring to an extra virgin olive oil, has already been included on the list which it has proposed registering asprotected designations of origin (PDO) under Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 (1).

The draft Commission Regulation containing the ‘fifth list’ of protected designations of origin and protectedgeographical indications was tabled for discussion at the meeting of the appropriate regulatory committee heldon 17 September 1997. The Commission currently plans to propose its approval at the next meeting of thiscommittee. A favourable committee opinion on the ‘fifth list’ will permit the Commission to decide to registerthe designation ‘Terra di Bari’ as a PDO and publish it in the Official Journal as part of that list as soon aspossible.

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Italian projects for the Urban programme

The deadline for submitting urban development projects for the Urban programme for 1997-1999 expired on10 January 1997.

How many of the projects put forward originated in Italy?

How many and which ones concern municipalities in cities in the north-west of Italy, in particular Milan, Turinand Genoa?



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Italian projects for the Urban programme

The deadline for submitting urban development projects under the Urban Programme for the period 1997-1999expired on 10 January 1997.

What is the level of funding allocated by the Commission to Italian projects covered by this programme? Whatproportion is going to projects from the north-west region of Italy?



given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 1997)

On 8 May 1996 the Commission announced its decision on how the financial reserve for the CommunityInitiatives was to be allocated.

The reference allocation for the Urban Initiative in Italy for 1997-99 is ECU 11.81 million for Objective 1 areasand ECU 6.40 million for other areas (1995 indexed prices).

In point 20 of its communication to the Member States (1) the Commission invited them to present operationalprogrammes for financing under Urban. No allocations were made to specific areas of any Member State otherthan to split the amount allocated to each between Objective 1 and other areas.

The Italian authorities have sent a proposal for programmes in the cities of Trieste, Lecce and Catanzaro.

(1) OJ C 200, 10.7.1996



(1 October 1997)

Subject: ERDF projects

On 30 November 1995 the Commission published itsthe invitation to tender urban pilot projects under ERDFArticle 10 on innovatory measures.

Will the Commission state how many projects were submitted by Italy?

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

(23 October 1997)

Following the call for proposals (1) under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund Regulation (2)the Commission received 503 projects of which 119 were from Italy. The final choice was the result ofapplication of a rigorous selection procedure to the large number of proposals submitted. Using the criteria setthe Commission selected a total of 26 projects, 4 of which are in Italy, in Brindisi, Milan, Naples and Turin.

(1) OJ C 319, 30.11.1995.(2) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Illustrative nuclear programme for the European Union

With reference to the Commission’s Communication on the nuclear industries in the European Union (anillustrative nuclear programm according to Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty) (COM(96) 339 final − CES 470/97)and given the potential hazards associated with nuclear power stations in the CEECs and the CIS, shouldconcerns not be voiced regarding the extremely damaging impact which another large-scale nuclear accidentwould have on public opinion? The PHARE and TACIS programmes have proved valuable but are now the targetof mounting criticism. Given that these programmes deal with nuclear safety, will the Commission review themurgently and then publish their findings?



(20 October 1997)

The Commission is well aware of the danger of nuclear incidents in the Central and eastern European countries(CEEC) and the New independent states (NIS). Accordingly, some MECU 700 have been committed(1990-1997) to the Phare and Tacis nuclear safety programmes.

An interim evaluation of the Phare and Tacis programmes by independent interim consultants has recently beencompleted and transmitted to the Parliament in June, 1997. This evaluation indicates that despite undeniableimplementation difficulties, a majority of nuclear safety projects are achieving their objectives.

The Commission is presently engaged in an examination of the changes that might be brought to the policyorientations and the implementation mechanisms in the nuclear safety sector, in order to improve theeffectiveness of the programmes. Initial discussions have also taken place with Member States, in the PHAREand TACIS committees, and with relevant committees of the Parliament (committee on the environment, publichealth and consumer protection, committee on research, technological development and energy, committee onbudgetary control). The Commission is finalizing its position on this matter on the basis of the reactions it hasreceived. The results will be fed into the new programming cycle 1998 which will start shortly.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Improving the production and marketing of honey

Will the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rules for the application of measures toimprove the production and marketing of honey (COM(96) 596 final − 96/0282 CNS) (1) make vocationaltraining programmes for young farmers one of its priority aims?

(1) OJ C 378, 13.12.1996, p. 20.



(1 October 1997)


Will the Commission include measures to combat all diseases afflicting bees, which should not be restrictedsolely to fighting varroa-mite disease, in the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rulesfor the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey (COM(96) 596 final −96/0282 CNS) (1)?

(1) OJ C 378, 13.12.1996, p. 20.



(1 October 1997)


The Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rules for the application of measures to improvethe production and marketing of honey (COM(96) 596 final − 96/0282 CNS) (1) follows up a consultation paperon European apiculture issued in 1994. Its main aim is to use ECU 15 million a year in Community


funds to promote national programmes for technical assistance, laboratory analyses and other measures to fightdiseases which afflict bees, along with studies, conducted at national level, on the production and marketingstructures in the sector.

Will the Commission insert in its proposal measures regarding the circulation of honey on the internal market,including curbs on the vast imports of honey from third countries and quality standards for honey produced in theEuropean Union?

(1) OJ C 378, 13.12.1996, p. 20.



(1 October 1997)


Insufficient funds are allocated to the honey sector in the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying downgeneral rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey (COM(96) 596final − 96/0282 CNS) (1).

Will the Commission include in the proposal a symbolic level of support to provide both professional andamateur beekeepers with beehives?

(1) OJ C 378, 13.12.1996, p. 20.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3019/97, E-3020/97, E-3021/97 and E-3022/97

given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1997)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that Council Regulation (EC) No 1221/97 layingdown general rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey (1) wasadopted on 25 June.

One of the specific priorities of the Regulation is technical assistance to beekeepers. This includes training ofyoung farmers interested in apiculture. The Regulation's aim is improvement of the production and marketing ofhoney, i.e. it is not a disease eradication programme. It provides for Community part-financing of nationalprogrammes and is intended to cover all beekeepers without distinction.

On imports and on quality standards for honey marketed within the Community, Council Directive 74/409/EECon the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to honey (2) applies. A proposal for amendmentof it is at present before Parliament and the Council.

Under Council Directive 89/397/EEC on the official control of foodstuffs (3) honey from third countries issubject to the same control rules as that produced in the Community. It is up to the national authorities to take allnecessary action to effect control in conformity with that Directive.

(1) OJ L 173, 1.7.1997.(2) OJ L 221, 12.8.1974.(3) OJ L 186, 30.6.1989.




(1 October 1997)

Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)

The Commission’s proposal to draw up a framework directive on measuring and assessing exposure to noise, setout in its green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final), is welcome; however, its announcement that itwill establish the target values and measures to enforce them ‘for a later stage’ is disappointing.

On the basis of the principle of prevention, these target values are needed for the priority area of noise abatementand the Commission is therefore asked not to delay in defining them.



(1 October 1997)


Given the scale of the problem of noise pollution in the Community and the fact that noise abatement has not sofar been given a high priority under European environmental policy, the plans to draw up a wide-rangingprogramme to tackle the problem, set out in the Commission’s green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540final), are very important.

The contents of the green paper are welcome in principle and the Commission is asked to lose no time in drawingup the action programme.



(1 October 1997)


With reference to the Commission’s green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final),will it make noiseabatement one of the priority areas of Community research and development and will it take steps to improve thecoordination and increase the concentration of its R&D?



(1 October 1997)


The Economic and Social Committee accepts the Commission’s proposal to use economic instruments, putforward in its green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final), but opposes the introduction of fiscalmeasures to ‘punish’ those responsible for noise pollution or provide a source of revenue for the government.

Will the Commission ensure that the use of economic instruments is not a substitute for setting limit values fornoise emissions?




(1 October 1997)


The Economic and Social Committee believes that the Commission’s proposal, contained in its green paper onfuture noise policy (COM(96) 540 final), to restrict the establishment of limit values for noise caused bymachines used in the open air to sectors which are already regulated will cause problems because the existingmeasures were not adopted systematically or in line with practically-based priorities, but more or lesshaphazardly.

Will the Commission therefore adopt a comprehensive programme to reduce noise pollution of this type? Will italso provide further incentives (possibly through fiscal measures) for the early introduction of low-noisemachinery?



(1 October 1997)


The Economic and Social Committee endorses the priority attached in the Commission’s green paper on futurenoise policy (COM(96) 540 final) to measures to assess and reduce rail-traffic noise but believes that the noisereduction measures proposed in the Green Paper can be improved, for example by using low-noise trains.

Will the Commission evaluate and avoid using variable rates for the use of individual railway lines? Theresulting additional charge would prompt a shift to other, generally less environmentally-friendly, modes oftransport.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3023/97, E-3024/97, E-3025/97, E-3026/97, E-3027/97 and E-3028/97

given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 1997)

The Commission has become highly aware of the various topics mentioned by the Honourable Member.

On the basis of several opinions delivered after publication of the Green Paper on noise and in particular on theResolution adopted by Parliament, the Commission is currently putting the final touches to the future activitiesconcerned in the fight against noise. It is intended that these activities will form part of a consistent, realisticprogramme. One of the key aspects of this programme will of course be coordination and consultation of thevarious operators involved in the problems arising from noise. The Commission does not plan to give preferenceto any particular measure. Balanced utilisation of the various instruments available is planned. The Commissiondoes not intend to replace the setting of emission standards by economic incentives. In addition the Commissionwill also take care to avoid any options which would cause a shift in traffic towards transport modes which mighthave a greater impact on the environment.

Finally, the setting of targets is an essential prerequisite for action against noise. The Commission is currentlyanalysing the various possible options as regards the definition and setting of those targets.




(1 October 1997)

Subject: Charging of heavy goods vehicles

With reference to the Proposal for a Council directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use ofcertain infrastructures (COM(96) 331 final − 96/0182 SYN) (1), whilst road tolls reflect the application of theprinciple of territoriality, combining them with vehicle taxes and excise duties results in dual taxation.

Will the Commission therefore bring about the abolition of these tolls in the long term? New technology,particularly electronic pricing, should make it possible to avoid dual taxation while at the same time improvingthe flow of traffic.

(1) OJ C 59, 26.2.1997, p. 9.


(7 November 1997)

The Commission considers the nature and objectives of fuel excise duties and vehicle taxes and of road tolls to bedifferent. For this reason it does not accept the assertion that their simultaneous application constitutes doubletaxation.

Moreover, the Commission believes that road tolls, being directly linked to the costs caused by the vehicles whenand where they are actually driven, are an appropriate charging instrument to use in pursuit of an efficienttransport system. The application of advanced road using technology which allows payment without vehicleshaving to slow down or stop, and permits differentiation of rates that is related to underlying costs is expected tocontribute further to the improvement of the transport system as a whole.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Heightism

It is absurd that, as Europe approaches the year 2000 and after 50 years of efforts by the European Community toeradicate discrimination on grounds of sex, race, ethnic and social origin, disability, sexual preference, religiousbelief, etc., cases of discrimination on grounds of height are occurring.

In Italy, a new graduate in medicine made a standard application to perform his military service at the Scuoladegli Allievi Ufficiali di Complemento (AUC) [School of Official Reserve Cadets].

However he was rejected because, at 1m 63 cm, he was not tall enough to meet the arbitrary height requirementof 1m 65 cm. As proof of the new recruit’s aptitude, he was enlisted as a private soldier in the parachute corps.

Will the Commission approach the Member States to ensure that serious cases of this nature, in which the equalrights of citizens are denied, never occur again? (The doctor in question is Dr. Andrea Pomesano of Bergamo).


(10 November 1997)

The Commission does not have the authority to deal with the matter raised by the Honourable Member.

As Community law stands, the Member States bear sole responsibility for all matters relating to military service.




(1 October 1997)

Subject: Age discrimination

The IGC should have acted to eliminate discrimination on grounds of age by inserting an article (6a) in the newTreaty. Documents in my possession indicate that this was not the case. Nonetheless, this is a genuine problemand we are faced with cases of discrimination in our daily lives. What is more, this problem is occurring as theaverage age of Europe’s citizens continues to rise almost exponentially.

Will the Commission tackle the problem, particularly as regards harmonizing the rules on notices of competitionand their enforcement?


(24 November 1997)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the Amsterdam Treaty has introduced a newlegal basis for the adoption of Community measures to combat, inter alia, discrimination based on age (newArticle 6a of the EC Treaty).

The Commission will consider any measures which might be appropriate in this field once the Amsterdam Treatyhas been ratified.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Failure to act by the Commission − Phare programme

The EU Court of Auditors has drawn up a Special Report on the functioning of the decentralized system for theimplementation of the Phare programme (1990-1995) for the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe(CEECs) (1). We know that the Commission created decentralised implementation systems (DIS) to streamlinethe programmes and speed up the mobilization of financial resources. The programme management units(PMUs) responsible within the national administrations of the beneficiary countries for administering the Pharefunds lack staff and training.

The Commission contributed to funding the staffing and operating costs of the PMUs but did not define theprinciples governing the funding, accounting procedures and monitoring. The Court of Auditors also confirmsthat the intensive use of technical assistance providing administrative and operational support for the PMUs iscostly, particularly because of the ‘restricted competition’ in awarding contracts (where transparency is alwayslacking). Some consultancies were awarded a disproportionate number of contracts. The Commission alsodelayed setting up a system to monitor the PMUs’ expenditure and did not ensure an adequate evaluation of theprogrammes carried out.

What is the Commission’s answer to this very serious charge?

(1) OJ C 175, 9.6.1997, p. 4.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: Phare programme

The Court of Auditors has levelled serious criticism at the manner in which the Commission applied the rules onawarding contracts. Some 80% of the Phare funds managed on a decentralized basis are spent on contracts


for services (technical assistance), supplies or works. The awarding of service contracts is governed byArticle 188 of the Financial Regulation and Article 7 of the Phare Regulation. The Financial Regulationstipulates that these contracts are to be awarded ‘after restricted invitations to tender’. Article 7 of the PhareRegulation stipulates that in the case of assistance exceeding ECU 50 000 participation in invitations to tenderand contracts shall be open ‘on equal terms’ to all natural and legal persons of the Member States.

Is it true that the Commission has decided that service contracts exceeding ECU 50 000 should be subject torestricted invitations to tender with the result that access ‘on equal terms’ for each one has not always beenguaranteed?



(1 October 1997)

Subject: PHARE programme

In its report on the implementation of the Phare programme, the Court of Auditors examines the lists ofcompanies providing services in 1993 and 1994 and reveals that companies from certain PHARE countries werechosen from the lists more often than companies from other countries. In some PHARE countries therequirement for ‘reasonable geographical balance’ is particularly notable, the Court states. For example,companies with offices in Poland and Hungary are by far the most frequently consulted. The frequency withwhich companies are chosen from the restricted lists also indicates imbalances: a small group of 24 companies(representing approximately 3% of the total number of companies consulted) were selected between 10 and 31times more often than the others.

Will the Commission explain the reasons for this lack of transparency and say what action it intends to take?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3039/97, E-3040/97 and E-3041/97given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 1997)

In his questions the Honourable Member picks up some of the statements and criticisms made by the Court ofAuditors in its special report on the Decentralised Implementation System (DIS) for the PHARE programme, inparticular the working of programme management units (PMUs), the procedure for placing service contracts andbalance in the selection of tenderers.

The Commission repeats: in connection with that report it gave a full answer to the Court's remarks and did so inmore detail than is possible in connection with these questions. The Commission wishes to point out again that itobserved the relevant procedures and rules in a context in which it had at once to seek as far as possible to attainthe objectives (which are sometimes hard to reconcile) of effectiveness, giving responsibility to the partnercountry, competition and openness in the placing of contracts. Here it must be borne in mind that the servicecontracts examined by the Court of Auditors (a 1993-94 sample) were predominantly in the field of technicalassistance for a unique process of transition to a democratic and market-economy model.

As the programme has advanced beyond the stage of early emergencies, and with growing experience in thepartner countries' official departments and the Commission, the fields identified as unsatisfactory by the reporthave been, or are on the point of being, addressed by the Commission. The chief decisions reached andcorrections initiated relate to the following:

− measures to implement Article 118 (revised) of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977, applicable tothe general budget of the European Communities; (1) in addition to publication in the Official Journal asrequired, PHARE service contracts are also advertised on the Internet and all expressions of interest are nowsubject to prequalification (the procedure was introduced in mid-1996);


− adoption of a change to restricted invitations to tender for PHARE (and TACIS) service contracts: the rulesgoverning invitations to tender have been improved, with better information for tenderers and, in particular,disclosure of the composition of evaluation committees, and the promotion of greater diversity ofcontractors;

− the new guidelines for PHARE prepared by the Commission in March, continuing with the improvedintegration of implementation structures for this programme into the partner countries' ‘normal’ structures,more unbundling and decentralisation towards those countries and Commission delegations, whose staffingwould be increased, the tapping of new sources of expertise alongside consultancies, such as twinnings ofinstitutions and administrations;

− updating of the DIS Manual and its planned introduction before the end of this year, so as to combine the newprovisions on transparency of contracts in a single document which also lays down in detail the proceduresfor (decreasing) aid for the operating costs of PMUs and provides a model for the transfer of know-how inprogramme management, with the aim of an effective reduction in dependence on technical assistance in thisarea.

The Commission expects that as a whole these steps will remedy the chief shortcomings identified in the sectionof the report by the Court of Auditors to which the Honourable Member refers.

(1) OJ L 356, 31.12.1977.



(1 October 1997)

Subject: White Paper on railways

The Economic and Social Committee has issued an opinion on the White Paper: a strategy for revitalizing theCommunity’s railways (COM(96) 421 final) (1). It is essential to sift through the directives and regulations andstudy their transposition into national laws. The actual implementation and achievements of these provisionsused in the railways sector could thus be analysed so that Member States can learn from each other’s experienceand future fields of application can be examined.

Will the Commission examine in particular whether implementation in the individual Member States isconverging or drawing further apart?

(1) OJ C 206, 7.7.1997, p. 23.


(3 November 1997)

The principal piece of Community legislation on the development of the railways is Directive 91/440/EEC on thedevelopment of the Community’s railways (1), which has had a considerable impact on the reorganisation of therailways in recent years and is the foundation of the Commission’s strategy to revitalise the Community’srailways set out in its white paper of 1996. However, the Commission fully accepts the importance of studying ineach Member State exactly how the Directive has been implemented and what results it has given. It hastherefore launched a wide-ranging study on the implementation and results of the Directive and intends topresent a report to the Council and the Parliament early next year. As for the implementation of the Directive innational law, the Commission has found that three Member States have not yet implemented the article on accessrights and has opened proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty against them.

(1) OJ L 237, 24.8.1991.



by Honorio Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 September 1997)

Subject: Arrest of Portuguese vessels in Moroccan waters

As the public and the Commission are undoubtedly aware, the Moroccan maritime authorities have recentlyarrested two Portuguese vessels fishing in Moroccan waters under the terms of the fisheries Agreement betweenMorocco and the EU.

The second arrest took place only days ago, namely that of the small fishing boat ‘Graça Viana’ registered inPortugal, whose crew come from Vila do Conde.

The Moroccan authorities have sought to justify the arrest of the vessels and the imposition of fines with claimsof illegal practice on the part of the Portuguese vessels. These accusations have been publicly, resoundingly andrepeatedly denied by the shipowners concerned.

Under the provisions of the EU-Morocco Fisheries Agreement, the Commission must be fully informed of thecircumstances under which these arrests took place, and will undoubtedly have stepped in to resolve theproblems and clarify the actual facts of the matter. This being so:

what provisions in the Morocco Fisheries Agreement are the Moroccan authorities invoking as justification forhaving arrested the two Portuguese vessels and imposed fines? What steps has the Commission taken to carry outrigorous and impartial checks as to the veracity of the accusations made by the Moroccan authorities, namely byinterviewing the skippers and owners of the arrested Portuguese vessels, directly and in person?


(13 October 1997)

Annex II Chapter VIII of the Agreement on sea fisheries between the Community and Morocco specifies theprocedure to be followed in the event of a boarding.

Point 1 of Chapter VIII states that the Moroccan Sea Fisheries and Merchant Navy Ministry will inform theCommission's Delegation in Morocco within 48 hours of any boarding of a Community fishing vessel operatingin Morocco's zone and provide a brief report of the circumstances of the arrest.

The Delegation (at Rabat) is to be kept informed of the progress of procedures and of any penalties imposed.

Under point 3 of Chapter VIII the measure falls to be dealt with exclusively by the vessel owner. He may chooseto settle the infringement administratively by paying a fine the amount of which will fall within a range laid downby Moroccan legislation, or may contest it in proceedings before a judicial body.

In the case of the ‘Graça Viana’ mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Moroccan authorities stated in a faxof 4 September that the vessel had been stopped for using prohibited gear.

On the same day the Commission asked the Ministry for further information, in particular a copy of the reportnormally made out when a boarding occurs.

While awaiting the Ministry's response it was informed that the owner had settled the matter by theadministrative procedure.




(2 October 1997)

Subject: Amendment of the Socrates Programme

With regard to the document ‘Socrates: the Community action programme in the field of education − report onthe results achieved in 1995 and 1996 (doc. COM(97) 99 fin. − 97/0103 COD) (1), (doc. CES 593/97 − 97/0103COD), it is clear that, by extending the application of the programme to the education sector as a whole, it hasbeen possible to promote a spirit of integration and European cooperation.

It is of the utmost importance gradually to extend the ties of cooperation between educational establishments. Itis also vital to include open and distance learning.

Although the increase in budget appropriations provided for in the proposal is to be welcomed, it has to be saidthat the allocation is inadequate given the ambition and scale of the list of objectives and actions.

Nevertheless, the amendment is welcome and the utmost transparency is needed in allocating the Communityaid.

Will the Commission and the Member States therefore introduce the mechanisms needed to ensure that allcitizens who are interested in the programme and wish to take part in it have equal opportunities for access, so asto ensure that the Socrates Programme reaches as many students, teachers and establishments as possible, whilepreventing the aid from being monopolized by individuals or institutions?

(1) OJ C 113, 11.4.1997, p. 14.


(11 November 1997)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concern to ensure the widest possible dissemination ofinformation on the Socrates programme, to make it accessible to as many participants as possible, and to ensuremaximum transparency in the awarding of grants under the programme. With this in mind, it has adopted a seriesof measures designed to offer all Community citizens the chance to benefit from the activities supported bySocrates.

Each year, the Commission publishes in the Official Journal a call for proposals, from which potential applicantscan obtain basic information on the various aspects of the programme. The ‘guide for applicants’ provides fullinformation in detail, including all the relevant information on the substance of the various measures, the types ofactivity supported, eligibility conditions, selection criteria, priorities, and the procedures for submittingapplications. The guide is available in the 11 official Community languages, in both printed form and on theInternet. The Commission also supports information activities relating to the programmes established by thenational agencies in each participating Member State, so that all potentially interested establishments, includingthose in the most deprived and most remote regions, are informed about the possibilities offered to them by theprogramme.

In the case of the actions for which Decision 819/95/EC establishing the Community action programme‘Socrates’ (1) makes provision for decentralised management, Community funds are distributed to the nationalagencies of the participating Member States. These agencies award grants to beneficiaries in accordance with thearrangements agreed with the Commission. These arrangements ensure transparency and optimum spread in thedistribution of Community assistance.


In the case of centrally managed actions, decisions on grant awards are taken by the Commission on the basis ofan analysis carried out by the national agencies, independent experts and evaluators from the technical assistanceoffice. Before being adopted, the list of grants is submitted to the Commission for consultation, and thecommittee referred to in the Decision is asked for its opinion.

(1) OJ L 87, 20.4.1995.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Green paper on commerce

The debate prompted by the Green Paper on commerce (COM(96) 530 final) should make it possible to identifythe measures that can be taken by companies and by the public authorities in the Member States or the EU toenable the sector to meet the challenge of maintaining competitiveness and contributing to employment andsocial cohesion.

With this in view, will the Commission set up a European body with the participation of senior officials from theCommission and the national governments to examine the factors holding back the development of an integratedsingle market for commercial activities in the European Union?


(10 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the need to hold regular meetings with representatives of the public authorities inthe Member States in order to examine questions relating specifically to commercial activities. This is why abody known as the ‘Internal Trade Group’ was set up at the same time as the Community itself. This group ismade up of officials from the national authorities responsible for commerce: the directors-general of nationalministries of trade, and government experts from these same ministries who have particular responsibility forEuropean affairs.

The members of this group meet regularly. In addition, the directors-general are generally asked to take part inthe annual plenary meetings of the Committee on Commerce and Distribution (CCD), which are attended by theMember of the Commission responsible for the trade and distribution sector.

The Internal Trade Group allows the Commission to inform and consult the Member States on projectsconcerning internal trade, and to find out their position on such projects. It also provides an opportunity forvaluable exchanges of experience and good practice between Member States, an action which features in theintegrated programme in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the craft sector.

This group fulfils the request made by the Council in its Resolution of 14 November 1989 to strengthen‘cooperation between the Commission and the Member States through meetings between officials responsiblefor internal trade’. It cooperated, for example, with the Commission in implementing the communication‘Towards a single market in distribution’ (1), tackling the issue of obstacles to cross-border development and thuscontributing to the Council’s conclusions on this matter.

Its most recent meetings have been devoted to the specific topic of drafting, disseminating and following up theGreen Paper on Commerce. The follow-up activities on the Green Paper will include further meetings to allowthe Committee members to continue their deliberations on what actions could be taken to enable the sector tomeet the challenges facing it.





(2 October 1997)

Subject: Green Paper on commerce

With reference to the Green Paper on commerce (COM(96) 530 final) and given the importance of promotinglong-term initiatives on an equal basis for all Member States, will the Commission examine the possibility of:

1. setting-up technical schools of commerce with a core curriculum common to all Member States for theeducation, training and retraining of employees and managers of commercial enterprises?

2. funding special training programmes for employers in the commercial sector?

3. allowing commercial sector representatives to take part in vocational training committees?

4. introducing cross-border education and training for employers and employees in the commercial sector, as apossible way of encouraging new initiatives, employment activities and companies?


(13 November 1997)

The aim of European action in this area is to promote cooperation between Member States, while also providingthem with support and assistance in their activities, in particular through the Socrates and Leonardo da Vinciprogrammes. Overall responsibility for defining the contents of education and training programmes lies with theMember States. It is for this reason that we cannot, at European level, set up technical schools specifically for thecommercial sector which offer one single curriculum for education or training. However, what we can certainlydo is foster cooperation between existing schools, in order, for example, to add a European dimension to theinitial vocational training programmes that they offer. Many examples of this can be found among the pilotprojects or placement and exchange programmes that were selected following the 1995 and 1996 calls forproposals under the Leonardo da Vinci programme.

What is more, the Leonardo da Vinci programme means that we can fund special training programmes foremployers in the commercial sector, providing these schemes fulfil two main conditions, i.e. they must beinnovative (Leonardo da Vinci is intended to be a European laboratory of innovation in vocational training) andthey must be transnational (in most cases they must involve at least three Member States). There are manyexamples of projects from the first two Leonardo da Vinci selection procedures which set out, in particular, todevelop training schemes encouraging enterprise, whether this meant starting up small or medium-sizedenterprises (SMEs) in the commercial or crafts sectors, or taking over going concerns.

As to the question of allowing commercial sector representatives to take part in vocational training committees,the consultative committee on vocational training brings together people from different professions whorepresent the Member States and the social partners. Any specific representation of the commercial sector wouldtherefore not be possible.

In addition, a committee with the task of submitting opinions assists the Commission in the implementation ofthe Leonardo da Vinci programme. Representatives of the social partners attend the committee meetings asobservers. In this way, commercial sector organisations are represented, e.g. the Union of Industrial andEmployers' Confederations of Europe (UNICE), the European Union of Crafts and Small and Medium-SizedEnterprises (UEAPME), and the Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation (ECPE).




(2 October 1997)

Subject: Numbering policy for telecommunications services

With regard to the Green Paper on a numbering policy for telecommunications services in Europe (COM(96) 590final), consideration should be given to the harmonization and synchronization of the process of introducingselection and pre-selection. Support should be given for the introduction of number portability as soon aspossible with effect from 1 January 1998, as regards the portability of the installation (local area), the service andthe service provider (including number portability for special services), if technically feasible. The Europeannumbering area also needs to be established as soon as possible, while constantly reviewing the economic andsocial benefits to be derived from its implementation.

With this in view, what role is to be played by the new European authority that is to be set up and how will itoperate?


(23 October 1997)

In the numbering green paper of November 1996, the Commission submitted to public consultation variouspolicy options concerning numbering issues. Among these options was the creation of a new structure forregulation and administration of numbers in Europe. This structure would have an important role in one of themore ambitious scenarios proposed, namely the harmonisation of national numbering schemes. However, on thebasis of the results of the consultation, the Commission concluded in its communication of May 1997 (1) that, atpresent, there was insufficient support for a more far reaching harmonisation of national numbering schemes.This assessment may change in the light of new market demands after full liberalisation and a further cost-benefitanalysis should therefore be conducted in a few years from now.

In the short term, the only new task for numbering management at the European level would follow from thecreation of a European telephony numbering space (ETNS) on the basis of the 388 country code, as proposed inthe Commission communication of May. However, the scale of this ETNS would not justify the creation of aEuropean numbering authority and the Commission has proposed to charge the existing European telecommu-nications office (ETO) with the management of the ETNS, in any case in the early stages.

By the end of 1999, the Commission will conduct a review of the Community’s telecommunications regulatoryframework in the light of the requirements of the liberalised telecommunications markets. The need for aEuropean regulatory authority for telecommunications will be reconsidered as part of that review.

(1) COM(97) 203 final.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Reform of the COM in olive oil

The Commission has submitted a note to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament on the olive andolive oil sector (including economic, cultural, regional, social and environmental aspects), the current commonmarket organization, the need for a reform and the alternatives envisaged (COM(97) 57 final).

From the political point of view, the Commission proposal fails to promote the development of the Community’straditional olive-growing regions.


From the economic point of view, it fails to encourage the competitiveness of the European olive-growing sector.In fact, the proposal to introduce aid per tree means it will be impossible to maintain sustainable olive groves infuture, which is vital for safeguarding Europe’s leading position.

From the environmental point of view, the introduction of aid per tree will prompt growers to stop cultivation,increasing the risk of environmental deterioration.

From the social point of view, production aid protects current levels of employment and prevents depopulation inrural areas. Introducing aid per tree would in practice lead to the disappearance of the various systems ofexploiting the production of olive groves, some of which are of vital importance for small producers and theiremployees.

Will the Commission review the question of providing aid on the basis of the number of trees? In this connection,it should be stressed that growers could leave olives on the trees, collect the aid and save the labour costsconcerned, or could plant olive trees solely for the purpose of securing aid.


(20 October 1997)

First and foremost, it should be made clear that the note on the olive oil sector referred to by the HonourableMember sets out various alternatives for reforming the current common organisation of the market in olive oil,one being the grant of aid per tree.

The Commission does not believe that this particular alternative will have the negative consequences outlined bythe Honourable Member (like the abandonment of cultivation, environmental deterioration and the problem ofunemployed labour), provided that the aid per tree is granted subject to certain conditions, including theobligation to pick the olives.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Reform of the COM in olive oil

The Commission has submitted a note to the Council of Ministers and to the European Parliament on the oliveand olive oil sector (including economic, cultural, regional, social and environmental aspects), the currentcommon market organization, the need for a reform and the alternatives envisaged (COM(97) 57 final).

From the point of view of quality, the Commission should take the initiative and submit to the Council a proposalon standards to ensure that olive oil is genuine. Will the Commission introduce a labelling system to informconsumers and avoid any possible confusion caused by blends? In addition, in order to prevent fraud, will itprovide the current COM with mechanisms to enable more effective checks to be made?


(20 October 1997)

In addition to an analysis of its impact on the olive oil market, the vexed issue of blends of olive oil and seed oil(covered by the note referred to by the Honourable Member) requires that solutions also be found to the problemsarising in connection with the free movement of goods, controls and the labelling of such blends.

As part of its work to reform the common organisation of the market in olive oil, the Commission will analyse thevarious facets of the issue of blends and will carefully weigh up the ideas put forward by the HonourableMember.




(2 October 1997)

Subject: Tobacco reform

The Commission’s report to the Council on the common organization of the market in raw tobacco(COM(96) 554 final) analyses two basic options for the future of the Community tobacco sector, before going onto conclude that aid for tobacco growing should not be abolished in the medium term but should be generallyoverhauled. The proposed reforms provide for a variable premium to encourage the production of better qualitytobacco (with lower tar content) and the introduction of a scheme for buying back quotas which will enabletobacco growers to cease production, thereby reducing the size of the overall Community quota.

While recognising the obvious contradiction between pursuing a Community policy to reduce tobaccoconsumption and at the same time supporting the production of raw tobacco, the report points out that theabolition of aid for tobacco growers would result in an end to raw tobacco production in the European Union withserious consequences for the 200 000 jobs in the production and processing sectors (170 000 and 30 000 jobsrespectively). In addition, the Community finances 80% of the income of European tobacco growers, of whomthere are 70 000 in Greece (52%) and almost 40 000 in Italy.

Will the Commission ensure that any measures to end tobacco growing are accompanied by precise details ofwhat other crops could be grown in tobacco- growing areas, or will it create the conditions necessary fornon-agricultural activities to flourish as part of a balanced and gradual development of rural areas?


(21 October 1997)

With regard to the Honourable Member’s question on the alternatives open to producers who give up growingtobacco, the Commission wishes to point out that it is only putting forward proposals for those who decidevoluntarily to leave the sector because of the difficulties they encounter in following market trends. Hence, sinceit is not compulsory to leave the tobacco sector, it is not for the Commission to say exactly what choicesindividual producers should make.

However, to support those who voluntarily decided to abandon tobacco growing the Commission put forwardproposals for accompanying measures in its report.

The accompanying measures should concentrate on the promotion of strategic plans for local development,directing producers to other activities. The plans should be drawn up at the closest possible level to the areasconcerned. They should involve closely those directly concerned, in the first instance, the tobacco producergroups. The approach should be one of integrated development, as is currently the case under the developmentprogrammes financed by the Structural Funds for the benefit of Objective 1 and Objective 5(b) regions.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: COM in hops

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC)No 1696/71 on the common organization of the market in hops (COM(97) 98 final − 97/0066 CNS) (1).


The proposal to amend the regulation on the common organization of the market in hops is to be welcomed, sinceit complies with the current basic principles for market organization and is designed to achieve income andmarket stability.

Will the Commission provide for a temporary set-aside of hop growing areas, since this would make a decisivecontribution to helping the sector adjust more flexibly to changing market conditions and guarantee marketshares for European producers?

(1) OJ C 127, 24.4.1997, p. 11.


(20 October 1997)

Temporary set-aside of some of the area under hops would result in permanent loss of market share to the UnitedStates, where production continues to increase.

Since the market in hops is a free one with unrestricted play of supply and demand, the market organization hasnever sought to impose strong constraints on the sector. What is important is to be alert to signals from themarket. Varietal conversion is in fact the best way of responding to its requirements.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Emissions of organic compounds

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council directive on limitations of emissions of volatile organiccompounds due to the use of organic solvents in certain industrial activities (COM(96) 538 final −96/0276 SYN) (1).

Concern over tropospheric ozone pollution has given rise to a number of initiatives designed to reduce emissionsof precursors which cause the formation of ozone. The proposed directive, the legal base for which is Article130s of the Treaty, forms part of the fifth action programme and is one of a series of measures designed toachieve an overall reduction in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the Union, with the aim ofachieving a 30% reduction in emissions for the period 1990 − 1999 in line with the commitment given by theCommission under the UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution.

Will the Commission undertake an assessment of the combined effects of all actions concerning environmentalair quality in the various regions of the European Union, with reference to precursors which cause the formationof tropospheric ozone, so as to avoid drawing up proposals which are unwarranted in terms of cost-effectivenessand the need to propose measures additional to those currently planned?

(1) OJ C 99, 26.3.1997, p. 32.


(31 October 1997)

The modelling carried out under the Auto-Oil (1) programme concluded that there was a need to reduce emissionsof both nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) by at least 70% as compared with 1990levels in order to meet the air quality standards set by Directive 92/72/EEC on air pollution by ozone (2). It alsoidentified a need to at the same time reduce emissions due to mobile and static sources. Finally, this modellingenabled the environmental impact in the various regions of Europe to be illustrated on the basis of variousreduction scenarios.


The proposal for a Directive referred to by the Honourable Member concerning the reduction of emissions ofvolatile organic compounds caused by the use of organic solvents in certain industrial activities is intended toreduce the VOC emissions that can be attributed to the industrial use of organic solvents by 57%. The cost of theproposal is roughly ECU 10 per person per year in Europe, or in other words an average reduction cost of roughlyECU 2 000 per tonne of VOC. The wide diversity of the industrial sectors concerned, and in particular the largenumber of small and medium-sized businesses targeted justifies this average cost, which is lower than that of theaction being taken under the Auto-Oil programme (roughly ECU 3 000 per tonne).

Any additional action which should be taken in order to meet the air quality targets will be identified when aglobal strategy on tropospheric ozone is defined, a strategy which will soon be described in a communicationfrom the Commission.

The Commission would also like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that at this stage theCommunity has not ratified the VOC Protocol to the United Nations' Economic Commission for Europe'sConvention on Long-Range Air Pollution.

(1) COM(96) 248.(2) OJ L 297, 13.10.1992.



(2 October 1997)


The proposal for a Council directive on limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds due to the use oforganic solvents in certain industrial activities (COM(96) 538 final − 96/0276 SYN) (1) fully respects theprinciple of subsidiarity and sets the objective of reducing VOC emissions to levels that are technically andeconomically feasible in each sector.

Will the Commission ensure that the directive is correctly transposed into the laws of all the Member States andwill it simplify the criteria for monitoring compliance with the directive given its highly technical nature andcomplexity?

(1) OJ C 99, 26.3.1997, p. 32.


(31 October 1997)

The provisions of the proposal for a Directive mentioned by the Honourable Member on the reduction ofemissions of volatile organic compounds caused by the use of organic solvents in certain industrial activities isfully covered by the principle of subsidiarity. More particularly Member States have the option of meeting therequirements of the Directive either by applying the emission limit values provided for each sector of industrycovered by the Directive or by preparing and implementing a national reduction programme enabling the sameresults to be achieved by other means. The flexibility offered by these national plans enables the necessaryemission reductions to be tailored to the industrial profile of each Member State and thus to optimise thecost-effectiveness of the legislation. Conversely, if the content and the means of applying such plans are left tothe judgment of each Member State, the final aim of reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)is binding. Failure to comply would be equivalent to an infringement on the same basis as failure to implementany other provision of any other Community Regulation.


As required by the EC Treaty the Commission will ensure that the provisions of this Regulation are properlytransposed into the national law of each Member State. The Commission would also like to draw the HonourableMember's attention to the legal basis for the proposal (Article 130 s of the EC Treaty) which enables the MemberStates to adopt enhanced protective measures that are more stringent than those provided for in the Directive.

When the proposal for a Directive referred to above was being written the Commission, which was well aware ofthe relatively technical nature of its wording, had already taken steps to simplify this in order to make it easier toread and understand.



(2 October 1997)


The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council directive on limitation of emissions of volatile organiccompounds due to the use of organic solvents in certain industrial activities (COM(96) 538 final −96/0276 SYN) (1).

At European Union level, measures have already been introduced to reduce emissions of organic compoundssuch as the Auto-Oil programme and other legislative measures relating to emissions caused by traffic and thepetrol distribution system. Emissions from stationary sources of solvents therefore need to be reduced, althoughspecific conditions need to be laid down for the three main sub-sectors of application, given the considerablenumber of such sources.

Will the Commission introduce a methodology for securing equal reductions in each sector, given the largenumber of industrial sectors and undertakings involved, and set balanced reduction targets for each sector interms of cost-effectiveness?

(1) OJ C 99, 26.3.1997, p. 32.


(5 November 1997)

When preparing its proposal for a directive limiting emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) arisingfrom the use of organic solvents in certain industrial activities, the Commission took the greatest of care indefining the requirements concerning VOC emissions by the various sectors of industry falling within its scope.Various sector-specific analyses have enabled the potential for reducing VOC emissions to be pinpointed foreach of the sectors on the basis of the best available technologies. The emission limits and the solvent-consumption thresholds on the basis of which a facility is covered by the directive took the greatest account ofthese technical/economic factors at their definition stage.

The Commission has, in particular, taken steps to ensure that there is a certain consistency among the varioussectors in terms of the average cost per tonne of VOC and of the marginal costs.

Conversely the Commission has not gone ahead with developing a uniform methodology for each sectorconcerned in cost/benefit terms. An exercise of this type would, indeed, have been extremely complex toconclude successfully, bearing in mind the large number and diversity of the branches of industry and companiesinvolved. In addition, imposing a standards set of reduction charges throughout industry would potentiallypenalise small and medium-sized businesses.




(2 October 1997)

Subject: Marking of packaging

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive on marking ofpackaging and on the establishment of a conformity assessment procedure for packaging (COM(96) 191 final −96/0123 COD) (1).

A European mark indicating whether a product can be reused or recycled should:

− be based on existing and widely recognized marks;

− enjoy international recognition;

even if this involves a certain delay in introducing such a mark. It is more important for the Member States tointroduce adequate mechanisms for re-use, recycling and, where appropriate, recovery, together with consumerinformation campaigns.

Will the Commission take steps to accelerate the drawing up of European standards for the marking of packagingand speed up the conformity assessment procedure?

(1) OJ C 382, 18.12.1996, p. 10.


(6 November 1997)

The Commission proposal on marking of packaging was adopted on 25 November 1996. This proposalcompletes the Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste (1) by introducing the marking symbolswhich should be used, and the assessment procedure for the compliance of the packaging with the essentialrequirements of the Directive.

As the Honourable Member underlines, the development of international standards in the area of marking ofpackaging is important. Therefore, the Commission proposal provides that such international developments,once adopted, shall be examined in view of a possible future adaptation of the future Community directive.

There are at present discussions at international level (International organisation for standardisation) concerningsymbols for recyclable packaging. The final outcome of these discussions is not yet known.

The Commission has given a mandate to the European centre for standardisation to develop harmonisedstandards on packaging to ensure compliance with the essential requirements of the packaging directive. Asregards the marking of packaging the Commission has not foreseen to initiate specific European standards.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Environmental agreements

The main objective of the Commission’s communication on environmental agreements (COM(96) 561 final) isto promote and facilitate the use of effective and acceptable environmental agreements. These agreements areinstruments for the integration or implementation of environment law in the Community. The communicationshould be seen in the light of the strategy outlined in the fifth action programme to extend the range ofenvironment policy instruments and put into practice the concept of ‘shared responsibility’.


The communication also seeks to clarify certain aspects of how environmental agreements can be used toimplement certain provisions of Community directives in the Member States and how environmental agreementscan be used at Community level.

Does the Commission recommendation on environmental agreements refer only to their transposal into nationallaw or does it also cover the application of the provisions once transposed?


(31 October 1997)

The Commission Recommendation concerning environmental agreements implementing Community direc-tives (1) not only concerns the transposition of certain provisions of directives into national law but also theimplementation of the transposed law. The word ‘implementation’ includes both the transposition into nationallaw and the application of the transposed provisions. Clearly, where national legislation is in place to ensurecompliance with a directive, the form of implementing these rules is less important. Nevertheless, theCommission considers the legal status of agreements as an important element of their success and thereforerecommends that they be concluded in a legally-binding form.

(1) OJ L 333, 21.12.1996.


by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 September 1997)

Subject: The freight transit negotiations between the EU and Switzerland

In the ongoing negotiations Switzerland has agreed to give up the 28-ton weight limit for lorries, in exchange fora transit fee for lorries. The Commission has in earlier negotiations rejected the possibility of imposing a specialfee for lorries passing through the ecologically sensitive Alps. Furthermore, the Commission has proposed theconstruction of two new rail tunnels through the Alps, mainly to transfer the freight traffic from the roads to therailways.

How does the Commission reconcile its standpoint in the negotiations with the principles set out in thegreenpaper ‘Towards Fair and Efficient Pricing in Transport’? Will the Commission also say what are theenvironmental arguments in favour of a ‘lorries-on-train’ as opposed to a pure ‘freight-on-train’ strategy(containers and other forms of combined transport)?

Has there been any analysis of how a pure ‘freight-on-train strategy would shift the mode of transport of freightin the rest of Europe towards a more environmentally sound transport of freight?


(14 October 1997)

One of the main objectives of the Community in the negotiations with Switzerland is to create a stable, efficientand sustainable policy regime for transport across the entire Alpine region.

The Commission agrees with the Swiss government that the elimination of the 28 ton limit should be followed bythe introduction of a new charging system for road haulage which will be dependent on the actual use of the roadinfrastructure by each vehicle.


Moreover, the Commission does not oppose an additional charge levied for the four main alpine passes of thenetwork if it is justified in economic and environmental terms. The Commission is therefore negotiating in fullaccordance with the principles of the green paper ‘Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport’ (1). However,the charging should not be at levels which would maintain the existing volume of traffic diversion and neithershould they be at levels which effectively prohibit road transport across Switzerland.

The Commission considers that, in appropriate circumstances, rolling road strategies (‘lorries on train’) are auseful means of freight movement. It is however actively promoting other forms of combined transport,including those in which containers on railway wagons are used for the main rail leg and road transport is usedfor the initial and/or final transport leg.

The rolling road strategy relates to a specific market and is particularly suitable for small road haulagecompanies, new entrants and for crossing geographical barriers. The present and possible future agreements withSwitzerland refer to combined transport in the widest sense. In the short and medium term, however, ‘rollingroad’ will be a necessary complement to a ‘freight on train’ system.

No specific analysis has been undertaken of the ways in which a ‘pure freight on train strategy’ would producemodal shift in freight since such a singular approach to achieving greater transport sustainability is not envisagedby anyone.



by Jesus Cabezon Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 1997)

Subject: Dialogue with Cuba

With regard to the political and economic situation in Cuba, does the Commission feel it can now propose thatthe dialogue with the Cuban authorities be stepped up with a view to gaining a mandate to explore thepossibilities of concluding an EU-Cuba cooperation agreement?


(22 October 1997)

The Union's Common Prositon on Cuba adopted by the Council on 2 December 1996 (1) and renewed on26 June 1997, and the Presidency report on the implementation of the Position approved at the same time,expressly provide for dialogue with the Cuban authorities and all sections of Cuban society to be stepped up, andfor the continuation of humanitarian aid and economic cooperation intended to support the reforms.

Both texts, however, make the granting of ‘full’ cooperation − of the same order as is accorded to other LatinAmerican countries under cooperation agreements − contingent on real progress with respect for human rightsand fundamental freedoms.

The fact is that no such progress has been observed in recent months: we are actually seeing a hardening ofCuban policy, notably in the attitude towards dissidents, and a slow-down in the reform process.

In view of these developments it does not seem that the conditions for requesting a mandate to conclude apossible cooperation agreement between the Union and Cuba are fulfilled at present.

(1) OJ L 322, 12.12.1996.



by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 October 1997)

Subject: Drugs

1. Does the Commission agree that the use of drugs in frontier regions is an ever greater problem?

2. Is it currently supporting projects to care for drug addicts in the frontier regions and if so, which projects areinvolved?

3. Does the Interreg programme offer possibilities for financing projects to care for drug addicts? If not, whichother funds could be considered in this context?


(6 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the growing problem of drug consumption in cross-border areas, a phenomenonalso called ‘narco-tourism’. Member States have placed the fight against this phenomenon amongst theirpriorities and have undertaken to tackle it through co-operation between their law enforcement agencies, asprovided in the Council Resolution of 29 November 1996 on measures to fight this problem within the EuropeanUnion and in the joint action of 17 December 1996 concerning approximation of the laws and practices of theMember States of the European Union (1) to combat drug addiction and to prevent and combat illegal drugtrafficking (2). Europol will soon provide information on the size of this problem in its forthcoming generalsituation report.

In parallel with this, the preventive and health aspects relating to drug tourism are among the priorities laid downfor the programme of Community action on prevention of drug dependence in 1998. The aim is to encouragecoherence and effectiveness in the health and social measures to be applied to users, particularly by developingcooperation in the border areas concerned. A call for proposals for projects to be implemented under the actionprogramme was published recently (3). An example of the projects supported by the action programme that dealdirectly with the problem mentioned by the Honourable Member is the exploratory study by a partnership ofBelgian, German, French and Dutch bodies on cross-border flows, aimed at diagnosing and analysingprofessional practices and identifying new work avenues.

The guidelines for the Interreg II operational programmes (4) mention, among the actions eligible for financingunder strand A (‘Cross-border cooperation’), measures to promote cooperation in health. Such measures havebeen incorporated in 12 of the 59 operational programmes for the period 1994-1999. These programmes arecurrently being implemented by the Member States.

(1) OJ C 375, 12.12.1996.(2) OJ L 342, 31.12.1996.(3) OJ C 226, 25.7.1997.(4) OJ C 180, 1.7.1994.



(19 September 1997)

Subject: VAT and record sales

Given the European Union’s position on anti personnel mines, will the Commission emulate the BritishGovernment and ensure all the revenue it receives from VAT on sales from the sale of the record Candle in theWind will go to the appropriate charities?



(7 November 1997)

The decision of the United Kingdom government concerning VAT receipts from the sale of the recording ofCandle in the Wind is praiseworthy. It is not possible under Community VAT legislation to exempt arbitrarilyany goods from VAT. The Commission understands that a grant of corresponding value will be made to charity,so formally it will be a donation from the government.

The Commission is very active in the political campaign for a total ban on anti-personnel landmines and isamong the world's leading sponsors of mine clearance and related work, including assistance to mine victims. Inthe past five years over MECU 100 of Community funds have been devoted to this cause. However as theHonourable Member will be aware, Community VAT legislation does not allow the Commission simply to payVAT revenue over to charities. In any event the Community budget receives only a part of the VAT revenuescollected in a Member State (about 1/17th in the case in the United Kingdom).


by Antonio Tajani (UPE) to the Commission

(19 September 1997)

Subject: Seizure of Italian fishing boats by Tunisia

At the end of July and in August 1997 three Italian fishing boats operating in international waters in the SicilianChannel were involved in serious acts of armed intimidation and seized by the Tunisian coastguard. Suchincidents, which unfortunately occur with alarming frequency, again raise the question of the need to guaranteefreedom of navigation and fishing rights in international waters in the area and to protect Italian fishermen whoare legitimately carrying our their activities but whose personal safety is periodically seriously endangered.

What will the Commission do to ensure that Community fishermen are safe and international law complied within the Sicilian Channel as soon as possible?

What stage has been reached in the negotiations for the accession of the European Union to the General Councilfor fishing in the Mediterranean, a body which could guarantee adoption of and compliance with common rulesto protect fishing activities in the Mediterranean?


(29 October 1997)

The Commission has not been notified by Italy of the events to which the Honourable Member refers but hasalways firmly demanded respect by all countries for the international law of the sea and condemns all acts ofviolence imperilling vessel safety.

Against this background the Commission would remind the Honourable Member that there is no fisheriesagreement between the Community and Tunisia and that the incidents apparently occurred in internationalwaters.

At its 22nd plenary session, held from 13 to 16 October 1997 in Rome, the General Fisheries Council for theMediterranean adopted amendments to its constituting Agreement that permit the Community's admission as afull member. With a view to its adoption at the earliest date the Commission is closely monitoring progress in theCouncil of the proposed Regulation on Community membership.




(2 October 1997)

Subject: Olympic Games and the Second CSF

Will the Commission confirm that the decision to hold the Olympic Games in Athens will not result in thediversion of funds provided for under the Second CSF or the following CSF away from projects beingundertaken in the Greek provinces?


(28 October 1997)

Under the rules of the Structural Funds, a mid-course review of the Community Support Frameworks (CSFs) is tobe carried out on the basis of the outcome of monitoring and evaluation and of any new relevant information.

The review procedure for the CSF for Greece for the 1994-99 period is in progress. There is no reason, in theCommission's view, for the fundamental objectives of the CSF to be called into question as a result of thisreview.

As for the period after the year 2000, it is clear that Community structural policies, by their very nature, willcontinue to support the development of less-favoured regions like the outlying Greek provinces.



(2 October 1997)

Subject: Olympic Games and Directive 85/337

Will the Commission say whether it is aware of the contents of the package for the Olympic Games submitted byGreece and the projects included therein? Have any environmental impact studies (Directive 85/337/EEC (1))been submitted, and can it guarantee that it will continue the relevant investments and ensure that Communitylegislation is complied with well before work on the projects commences?

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


(3 November 1997)

There is no Community competence over the Olympic games so the Greek authorities have not submitted a file tothe Commission. With respect to Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public andprivate projects on the environment, there is always an obligation for its correct implementation by MemberStates irrespective of the context in which projects are carried out. The Commission will therefore continue toensure the respect of the provisions of this Directive in case it would be applicable to Olympic games projects.



(13 October 1997)

Subject: VAT levied on women’s sanitary protection products

Concern has been expressed that VAT should be levied on such items which are essential for millions of womenin the EU. Does the Commission consider that there is an overwhelming case for these products to be zero rated?



(10 November 1997)

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission’s answers to Written Questions E-2434/97 fromMr Wynn (1) and E-2624/97 from Mrs Oddy (2).

(1) OJ C 82, 17.3.1998, p. 76.(2) See page 31.



(13 October 1997)

Subject: Contract for the construction of the new ring road to the east of Rome

Despite the fact that the Commission opposed the commune of Rome’s decision to award the contract for theconstruction of the new eastern ring road to the Ferrovie dello Stato spa (national rail company), last August thecommune approved a new decision whereby the design of the project was entrusted to Sta spa, a companybelonging to the commune, while the construction project was awarded to Ferrovie dello Stato.

This openly disregards the Commission’s opinion, and presents the same difficulties as before. Moreover,making Sta spa responsible for the design of the project raises many questions, given that although, under theterms of its statute, it is a public transport undertaking, in the new decision adopted by the Rome municipalcouncil it is described as an engineering company. The council decision also makes provision for Sta to involveoutside consultants in its work, without properly specifying the procedure for and limits of any sucharrangement.

In view of the foregoing,

1. Is the Commission aware of the Commune of Rome’s new decision?

2. Did that decision take full account of comments previously made by the Commission?

3. Was the recent award of contracts conducted in accordance with Directive 92/50/EEC (1) on the award ofpublic service contracts?

4. If it transpires that the rules have been broken, does the Commission intend to take action against theCommune of Rome?

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.


(19 November 1997)

The Italian authorities have not yet officially informed the Commission of the decision referred to by theHonourable Member. It cannot, therefore, give an opinion at this stage as to whether the decision complies withDirective 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 on the award of public service contracts. If a breach of legislation wereidentified, the Commission could bring proceedings against Italy under Article 169 of the EC Treaty, but it couldnot under any circumstances take action against the municipality of Rome.




(13 October 1997)

Subject: Ban on Cypriot vessels calling at Turkish ports

The Turkish Government has announced a ban henceforth on vessels flying the Cypriot flag from calling atTurkish ports. As you will be aware, Cyprus is a country associated with the EU and already preparing formembership.

What are the Commission’s views on this situation and how will it respond to this unprecedented act by Turkey,which is obstructing international trade and provoking a country in the process of becoming a member of the EU?


(7 November 1997)

The Commission was recently informed of the situation described by the Honourable Member.

As sea transport is not covered by the bilateral agreements between the Community and Turkey the Commissionis currently studying Turkey's multilateral obligations in this sphere.

In a resolution of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 6 March 1995 the two parties agreed to start cooperatingon transport, notably sea transport. It has not been possible to implement cooperation between the Communityand Turkey in that field owing to the situation as regards financial cooperation.


by Gerardo Fernandez-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Action by the European Union to dispose of ‘space waste’

The thousands of objects of all kinds which are floating around in space as a result of the break-up of satellitesand other artefacts which no longer serve any useful purpose have become a major problem which requiresurgent action to be taken on a collective basis if such objects are to be prevented from accumulating in evengreater numbers.

A lack of foresight and a complete absence of coordination are the common features of the activities which, overthe years, have turned space into a huge dustbin of mainly metal objects which are discarded as useless andwhich eventually damage our environment as they gradually deteriorate from their original state.

What has the European Union’s policy been as regards the disposal of the ‘space waste’ in orbit around our planetand what proposals has the Commission put forward (or is it intending to put forward)as a contribution to solvingthis problem at international level?


(3 November 1997)

Space debris and its possible consequences for space activities has been an issue on the international level forseveral years.

With respect to Europe, already in 1986 the council of the European space agency (ESA) established a workinggroup of experts on space debris. Following the report of this group the ESA Member States adopted a resolutionon the agency's policy vis-a-vis the space debris issue. ESA's current debris-related activities aim to minimise thecreation of space debris, to reduce the risk on the ground due to the re-entry of space objects, to acquire all thenecessary data on space debris to assess the extent of the problem and its consequences and to study the legalaspects of space debris.


In 1993 ESA founded the Inter-agency space debris coordination committee (IADC) together with the American,Russian, and Japanese space agencies. The French, German, British and Indian space agencies joined theinter-agency committee later. The IADC brings together the worldwide available technical expertise andknow-how on space debris.

Since 1994 space debris is on the agenda at the sessions of the scientific and technical subcommittee of theUnited Nations' committee of the peaceful uses of outer space (Copuos).

The Commission is following and will continue to follow the international activities to agree on rules andguidelines for conducting space operations.


by Rijk van Dam (I-EDN) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Freedom of religion in Morocco

In its answer to Written Question E-1759/96 by Leen van der Waal on the violation of the rights of religiousminorities in Morocco, the Commission stated that it would pass on its misgivings to the Moroccan authoritiesconcerning respect for human rights in Morocco. I should therefore like to draw your attention to the following:

Two Christians, one American (Timothy Lamb) and one South Korean (Joohyun Ahn) were recently arrested inFez, Morocco, and expelled from the country after a few days’ detention on the grounds of proselytizing. This isin spite of the fact that no enticements were used to make any Muslim renounce his religion. When their housewas searched all that was found was a number of video cassettes and tapes with Christian messages and a fewArabic Bibles. According to reports, a judge in Fez gave Lamb the option of embracing Islam, in which case hewould be acquitted. Lamb was also given no opportunity to consult his embassy or instruct a lawyer.

1. Can the Commission confirm these reports, and does it agree that this action by the courts and judicialauthorities in Morocco violates the right to religious freedom and the right to a fair trial?

2. Is the Commission prepared to inform the Moroccan authorities that this incident is in conflict with theassociation agreement between the EU and Morocco and that it is concerned about the situation of the Christianminority in Morocco?


(3 November 1997)

1. The Commission cannot confirm the information contained in the Honourable Member's question.

2. As for the questions of substance raised by the Honourable Member, he is referred to the Commission'sanswer to written question E-1759/96 by Mr Van der Waal (1).

(1) OJ C 345, 15.11.1996.


by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission

(30 September 1997)

Subject: Subsidies for brown coal in Brandenbourg

1. Did the Commission give notice of the subsidy for the new power station in Frankfurt an der Oder?


2. If so, did the notification application make a specific reference to the use of brown coal in this new powerstation?


(5 November 1997)

1. The Commission heard through unofficial channels that investment aid had been granted to a power stationin Frankfurt an der Oder that used brown coal. On 10 September 1997 it called on the German authorities toprovide information and clarify their position on the matter. In their reply the German authorities confirmed thatthe issue had already given rise to an exchange of letters between the Federal Government and the Commissionin 1995.

2. In its letter the Federal Government described the situation in Frankfurt an der Oder at the time with regardto the production of electricity and explained that plans had been made to replace the old power station by oneburning brown coal and gas. Economic considerations were the main reason for this choice. The FederalGovernment stressed that this dual solution was the best one given the particular needs of Frankfurt an der Oder.The fact that both brown coal and gas could be used showed that the plan was not solely in the interests of thebrown coal industry, which had not, therefore, benefited from arbitrary preferential treatment.


by Carmen Dıez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission

(30 September 1997)

Subject: Blue flag award and the marking of beaches

During the summer season the physical safety of bathers is seriously threatened by the careless way in whichspeedboats and other vessels are operated in bathing areas.

Does the Commission not therefore think that the awarding of a blue flag should also include the requirement forthe beaches on which such a distinction is bestowed to be marked by buoys?


(20 October 1997)

The blue flag campaign is administered by a non-governmental organisation called Foundation for environmen-tal education in Europe (FEEE) located in Copenhagen. Associated organisations in the Member States assess thebeaches which are candidate for a blue flag. This assessment is made for four major issues, for which bothimperative and guideline criteria are established: environmental education and information, environmentalmanagement, water quality and safety and services. The Commission is only connected to the blue flag becausethe water quality criteria for a blue flag are based on the guideline values of the Directive 76/160/EEC concerningbathing water quality (1).

One of the major attractions of beaches in general is the combination of different recreational activities such aswater-sports, beach volleyball, horse riding. It is in this sense that one of the imperative criteria on the issue ofsafety and services is that: ‘recreational activities in the beach area must not endanger any beach user’. If there istherefore reason to believe that at certain blue flag beaches the landing of motorboats near or on the beachendangers bathers, then this should be reported to local authorities and the national operators of the blue flag. Ifthere should be no satisfactory solution from these parties, then the FEEE in Denmark should be contacted. Butin general, a solution is found at the local or the national blue flag level.

It is also interesting to know that the FEEE in co-operation with the International life saving federation Europe, isabout to present its safety guidelines for blue flag beaches, in which the issue of the risks of combinedrecreational use of beaches is tackled.


Further information on the blue flag campaign may be obtained from the FEEE.

Foundation for environmental education in EuropeFriluftsrådetScandiagade 13DK-2450 Copenhagentel +45-33-79 00 79fax +45-33-79 01 79e-mail: [email protected]

(1) OJ L 31, 5.2.1976.



(13 October 1997)

Subject: Independence of the Commission

How can the duty of Members of the Commission to be independent be compatible with the appearance ofCommissioner Franz Fischler on an advertising postcard issued by the US ‘Imadec International BusinessSchool’, against the background of an official EU flag, proclaiming ‘custom made for the European topmanagement’?

Did Mr Fischler receive any fee for this appearance?

Do Commissioner Fischler and the Commission believe that this US one-year course is an indispensablepreparation for performing the duties of a Member of the Commission?

If so, when will the present Commissioners be attending this course?

Will this course be a future requirement for appointment as a Commissioner?


(11 November 1997)

The postcard issued by the Imadec International Business School − which Mr Fischler had not seen, but hassince obtained on request − is based on photographs taken during an MBA diploma awarding ceremony for3 000 students from California’s universities assembled in Hayward University in June 1997. These universitiestook advantage of the occasion to bestow on Mr Fischler an honorary doctorate for his life’s activities in theagricultural area.

The Commission and its members have always attached great importance to educational activities and willcontinue to do their utmost to support them.

Mr Fischler has never received fees for his appearances.

The Commission would invite the Honourable Member to transmit any documentation that could allow theCommission to evaluate to what extent the postcard involves unacceptable advertising using a picture withoutauthorisation, or simply positive information on the merits of a training programme.

Incidentally, the Honourable Member would be well advised to give a closer look to the flag that appeared on thepostcard. If he did so, he might notice that the flag is not the European flag, but that of the Imadec.




(13 October 1997)

Subject: Recall of the head of delegation in Bratislava

Why was the head of the Commission delegation in Bratislava, Mr Georgios Zavvos, recently recalled?

Can the Commission confirm Slovak reports that its head of delegation was involved in or covered up financialirregularities in the PHARE programmes in Slovakia?

Which programmes, which beneficiaries and what appropriations were involved?

Does the Commission intend to get to the bottom of these cases and report to Parliament on them?

If so, when and how will Parliament be informed?

How long has the Commission known about the irregularities in Bratislava?

What action has it already taken and what action does it intend to take?

What disciplinary action does the Commission intend to take against those involved?


(13 November 1997)

Mr Georgios Zavvos was nominated head of the Commission’s delegation in Slovakia in December 1994.He took over new functions as political adviser on enlargement issues in Brussels on 1 October 1997. Thistransfer was decided in the interest of the service.

The Commission is currently conducting an investigation concerning the matters to which the HonourableMember refers and therefore cannot make any definite comments at this time.

When the investigation is concluded, the Commission will ensure that the Parliament is informed.


by Esko Seppanen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Finland and limits to the cadmium content of fertilizers

Finnish soil has a different acidity level from the calcaneous soils of Central Europe. For this reason cadmiumand other heavy metals have a more destructive effect on our ground water.

Is the Commission aware of this problem, and what is it doing to ensure that the limits currently applicable inFinland to the cadmium content in fertilizers are upheld?


(7 November 1997)

The Commission is reviewing the Community legislation on fertilizers, in so far as it concerns cadmium, in theframework of the Accession treaties of Finland, Sweden and Austria. In carrying out this review the Commissionhas agreed to look very closely at the situation in these three Member States.

A special study has been launched on the regional problems posed by the use of fertilizers containing cadmium inparticular Member States, notably in Finland. The objective of the study is to determine whether there are specialconditions in these Member States such as high cadmium deposition through acid rain, high cadmium content ofsoils, high availability of cadmium in soils, evidence of high content of cadmium in crops, evidence of damage tothe aquatic environment, or evidence of damage to health, especially among vulnerable groups.


The Finnish authorities have already provided the Commission and its consultant with detailed reports on localcircumstances and on the risks to health and the environment from the cadmium content of fertilizers in Finland.This information is being taken into account in the study. The Commission will discuss the results of this studywith all Member States before the end of this year.


by Concepcio Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Eurathlon programme

Last April the Commission announced that ECU 1.7 million would be made available for 174 projects under theEurathlon sports programme. The projects selected involve an extremely wide range of activities from fencing toparachuting, although the most common activity of all is football.

In view of the fact that one of the aims of the Eurathlon sports programme is to promote exchanges between EUcitizens and thus encourage the European spirit, could the Commission say how many of the projects adopted areintended to promote sport amongst persons with some kind of disability?

Could the Commission also say how many of the total number of projects submitted (657) were intended topromote sport amongst the disabled?


(6 November 1997)

Part of the Commission's sports budget is set aside for the Eurathlon programme while another part financessports for the disabled.

As part of this specific sports programme for the disabled, in 1997, the Commission received 126 applications forgrants, 72 of which will receive Commission aid from a provision totalling ECU 1 million.



(13 October 1997)

Subject: Restart of the Magnox nuclear processing plant in Sellafield, UK

The UK’s Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) has recently approved plans to restart the Magnox nuclearprocessing plant in Sellafield, UK, after an eight-month shutdown to carry out refurbishment work.

Has the Commission sought details from the NII on what basis its decision to approve the restart was made? If so,can the Commission outline what details it sought and what reply/replies it received?

Is the Commission satisfied with the refurbishment work carried out at the plant? Will it seek an independentassessment of that work to establish if the plant’s operations are likely to meet EU and international safetystandards for nuclear installations?


(7 November 1997)

Under the terms of the Community basic safety standards for the health protection of the general public andworkers against the dangers of ionizing radiation (Council Directive 80/836/Euratom as amended by


Directive 84/467/Euratom (1)), it is the responsibility of the Member States to issue the authorizations inquestion. The Commission would be required to intervene only if it had received information indicating that aMember State was failing to respect the requirements set out in these standards. This position will not changewith the implementation of the new basic safety standards Directive 96/29/Euratom (2), which Member Stateswill require to ensure by May 2000.

Therefore no information has been requested or received from the British authorities on this matter. Equally, theCommission has no basis for seeking to set up an independent assessment.

(1) OJ L 265, 5.10.1984.(2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996.


by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission

(9 October 1997)

Subject: Definition of liquid waste in context of proposed Landfill Directive

In the context of the Commission’s proposal for a Landfill Directive (COM(97) 105), can the Commission statehow it defines the term ‘liquid waste’? How does the Commission propose to distinguish between ‘liquid waste’and ‘sludge’?


(29 October 1997)

Article 2 of the Commission proposal for a Council directive on the landfill of waste states that ‘liquid waste shallmean any waste in liquid form including waste waters but excluding sludge’.

The Commission has not included a specific definition of sludge in the landfill proposal as sludge is defined inDirective 86/278/EEC of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, whensewage sludge is used in agriculture (1) which states that ‘sludge’ means:

− residual sludge from sewage plants treating domestic or urban waste waters and from other sewage plantstreating waste waters of a composition similar to domestic and urban waste waters;

− residual sludge from septic tanks and other similar installations for the treatment of sewage;

− residual sludge from sewage plants other than those referred to above.

At present, the Commission therefore proposes to distinguish between liquid waste and sludge according to theabove mentioned definitions.

(1) OJ L 181, 4.7.1986.


by Friedhelm Frischenschlager (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Equal opportunities for women and men in the EU

What means will the Commission be using in future to put an end to violence against women, particularly sexualexploitation in the form of pornography and prostitution?


Will the Commission be involving NGOs in its work in future?

What initiatives will the Commission be taking to achieve a balance between men and women recruited to postsin the European institutions?

How many women of Austrian nationality are currently employed in these institutions (Council, Commissionand Parliament)? How well is Austria doing in comparison with the figures for Finland and Sweden, which alsojoined the EU in 1995?


(20 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the seriousness of the patterns of violence against women, and in particular sexualexploitation, about which the Honourable Member is concerned. As part of the Daphne initiative, it has allocatedECU 3 million from the 1997 budget to support a series of measures to combat violence against women,adolescents and children. A call for projects might be renewed in 1998 depending on the 1998 budget and thepriorities set out in it.

The Commission is particularly interested in encouraging cooperation between non-governmental organisationsand the relevant authorities, in particular with a view to establishing or strengthening networks to support andcoordinate European-level information and projects with a bearing on measures to prevent violence and protectwomen.

The imbalance in the breakdown of posts to which the Honourable Member refers is reflected in the Commissionin the under-representation of women in Category A posts and men in Category C posts, although the overallfigure evens out (46% women). It is linked to the number of applications from women and the number ofsuccessful candidates on the reserve lists from general competitions. In 1995 the Commission sought to reducethis structural imbalance by adopting annual targets for recruitment of women to category A and for theappointment of women to management and senior management posts. The strategy consists in recruiting an equalnumber of men and women at the starting grade in Category A on the basis of the number of successfulcandidates in the reserve lists. With regard to the readjustment of the balance between men and women inCategory C, the Commission will give fuller descriptions of the various tasks carried out by officials in thatCategory, with special emphasis on the new technologies in office automation, in order to attract moreapplications from men.

The general total of Austrian officials recruited by the Commission up to September 1997 (excluding thelanguage service) is 223, including 119 women, i.e. 53%. During the same period the number of Finnish womenofficials recruited by the Commission (still excluding the language service) represented 61% of the total(161 women and 105 men) and the number of Swedish women officials represented 64% of the total (190 womenand 105 men).



(13 October 1997)

Subject: ECHO’s involvement in Burma

The European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO) has received some criticism from human rights groupsbecause of its involvement in a HIV/AIDS project in Burma.


The project has involved liaison with the health ministry run by the Burmese State Law and Order RestorationCouncil (SLORC), which has been responsible for mass repression of pro-democracy activists in the country.

Has the Commission carried out any assessment on the impact of the project? Does the Commission believe thatthe project has brought any tangible benefits to the people of Burma? Has it succeeded in ensuring that the projecthas not been controlled by SLORC. If so, how has it done this?

The Commission has also been reported to have supported a UN drug control programme in Burma. How muchfunding has it allocated to this programme. Similarly, can it outline any benefits which it believes the project hasbrought to the people of Burma?


(10 November 1997)

The project cited by the Honourable Member is not financed through the humanitarian aid budget line, but underthe HIV (human immunodeficiency virus)/AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) budget line(HIV/AIDS prevention and care in Tachilek and Kyainge Tong, World Vision United Kingdom. The baselineassessment and the development of the operational plan have been suspended for the time being because ofheavy monsoon rain in the region. The project has therefore not produced any result yet.

The activities the Commission is supporting, however, will really benefit the populations in need without givingany recognition to the State law and order restoration council (SLORC). On the other hand, in a country likeBurma, it is almost impossible for any non governmental organisation (NGO) to work without any link toexisting structures, because only in an extremely limited number of cases can an NGO build up its own structuressufficiently to have any impact on the humanitarian situation of the least favoured parts of the population. This isparticularly true in the health sector where dissemination through (and training of) the Burmese staff who will be,apart from the limited number of NGO staff, in charge of dealing with the problems, inevitably leads to workingrelations with governmental structures or individuals linked to them, such as the Myanmar mother and childwelfare association or the Myanmar medical association.

The Commission is aware that this is not an ideal situation, but it has to accept it if it wants to improve thehumanitarian situation inside Burma. This does, however, in no way mean that NGOs working with thesestructures, or individuals linked to them, are supporting the junta or fail to respect humanitarian principles. TheCommission continuously monitors the situation of all Community financed projects very closely, together withthe Member States in Burma, in order to make sure that this is the case.

Regarding co-operation with the United Nations drug control programme (UNDCP), the Commission iscontributing ECU 806 000 to an UNDCP-run three-year precursor control project in East Asia, covering Burma,China, Laos and Vietnam. The project aims at increasing the countries’capability to implement adequate nationaland subregional measures for regulating precursors and to suppress their diversion and trafficking. Benefits tothe people of Burma will be indirect.



(9 October 1997)

Subject: Funding the new airport of Spata in Attica

The new airport of Spata is a key project for the development of Attica and Greece as a whole, especially nowthat Athens has been awarded the 2004 Olympic Games.


The main airline using the airport will of course be Olympic Airways, and its needs should therefore be taken intoaccount in constructing this project. However, Olympic Airways has not yet forwarded its proposals with adescription of its needs, and as a result implementation of the project is being delayed.

Will the Commission say whether Olympic Airways has been requested to send a list of its needs regarding thenew airport of Spata − and, if so, when−, and what action it intends to take to unblock the whole affair so thatprogress can be made without further delay?


(28 October 1997)

According to the information obtained by the Commission from the Cohesion Fund monitoring committee, theproject for the new Athens international airport at Spata is proceeding as planned.

The same sources also indicate that the Greek authorities are currently examining the list of needs submitted byOlympic Airways.

The Commission will monitor the progress of work on this project closely.



(16 October 1997)

Subject: Harmonization of film classification

Does the Commission have any plans to harmonize film classification across the Union given that certaincompanies on internal EU flights and ferries ignore film classification?


(11 November 1997)

Film classifications are first and foremost a matter for the Member States. Classification may vary according tothe medium (cinema release, television films, videos, etc.). In the absence of specific instances which mightconstitute serious barriers to trade, no detailed examination is being carried out at European level at present intopossible problems posed by such differences in classification.

However, in connection with the work being carried out into the protection of minors, especially in connectionwith the Green Paper on the protection of minors and human dignity in audiovisual and information services (1),a study has been conducted into the protection of minors in all audiovisual and information services. As afollow-up to the Green Paper, and after consulting Parliament, the Commission is preparing a communicationaccompanied by a proposal for a recommendation aimed at strengthening cooperation between those concerned.

The question of the classification of content forms part of the overall problem of ‘labelling of contents’ and willbe one of the areas in which cooperation will be developed. Future work is planned on the relationship betweenexisting film classifications (for the cinema, television and video) and the labelling of content in the case ofon-line services in the context of the protection of minors in audiovisual services in general. This work will leadto an examination of the question of classification at European level.

(1) COM(96) 483 final.




(16 October 1997)

Subject: Abuses of a dominant position by UEFA

Can the Commission confirm that it is studying carefully a complaint from the Football League that the decisionby UEFA to deny the winners of the Coca-Cola Cup entry into European cup competitions amounts to an ‘abuseof a dominant position’ under Articles 85 and 86?

Is the Commission aware that should UEFA be allowed to pursue this course of action the knock-on effect forsmaller football clubs could be disastrous, as sponsorship and television backing desert the competition?


(31 October 1997)

Yes, the Commission is investigating a complaint lodged by the football league against the Union of europeanfootball associations (UEFA) in order to assess the compatibility of UEFA’s actions with the Communitycompetition rules. The Commission has already informed the football league accordingly.

This assessment must be made in full knowledge of the facts, including those alleged in the second part of theHonourable Member’s question, in their correct economic context and taking into account the specific nature ofthe sector concerned. The investigation of complaints must be undertaken under the established procedures −in this case Council Regulation (EEC) No 17/62 implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty (1).

(1) OJ 13, 21.2.1962.


by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1997)

Subject: Rehabilitation aid for torture victims

1. Can the Commission confirm that there have been delays in the payment of rehabilitation aid for torturevictims despite the fact that the European Parliament created a special budget line, B7-7070, in l997 makingECU 6 million available for precisely that purpose?

2. How many of those eligible for such aid actually received it in 1997, and why have some of them not yet doneso?

3. Is the Commission aware that the average time for processing applications increased from 3 months in 1994 to8 months in 1996 and could well be as much as 10 months this year?

4. What does the Commission intend to do to resolve these problems and how will it prevent any recurrence in1998?


(17 November 1997)

1. The Commission can confirm that, in order to provide, in line with the wishes of the Parliament, greatertransparency in the administration of its grants programmes, there have been delays in the payment of grants toorganisations working to rehabilitate torture victims.


2. In 1997, 33 contracts have been issued and in most cases the first payment has been made or has beenordered. It is intended to issue a further 20 contracts before the end of 1997. The delays are a result of thereorganisation mentioned above.

3. The Commission is aware that the average time taken to process applications has increased significantlysince 1994.

4. The Commission has initiated a far-reaching review of the support of organisations through subsidies. Untilnow, support of organisations which help victims of torture has been treated as project support and subject tocontrol in line with SEM 2000. As soon as revised guidelines for subsidies are adopted, it is hoped that it will bepossible to manage torture victim support under those guidelines which will provide for more rapid andappropriate assistance than is now possible.

As a general rule, the Commission has set a target that its operations of payment should be completed within60 days (1). To deal with cases where, despite those precautions, payment has not been made within the period of60 days, the Commission decided in June 1997 to change its policy on contracts to introduce from the 1 October1997 creditors right to interest when payments are made late (2). This decision on payment of interest appliesneither to officials nor to public authorities nor does it apply to straightforward subsidies. It covers howevergrants and financial contributions when there is a specific obligation laid down on the beneficiary, e.g. theobligation of submitting a report to show that the funds were spent in accordance with the objectives specified.For the longer term, the Commission is examining the possibility of extending the application of interestpayment to other sectors by a modification of the Financial Regulation.

(1) SEC(91) 1172, SEC(95) 1122, SEC(96) 564.(2) SEC(97) 1205.



(16 October 1997)

Subject: Monaco’s status in European Union

What official relationship does Monaco have with the European Union?

Is it the Commission’s view that the Bosman ruling should not apply to the transfer of John Collins from Monacoto Celtic?


(6 November 1997)

Monaco is an independent third country which is not part of the Community. However, given its specialrelationship with one Member State, Monaco is part of the European customs union.

As regards the second part of the question, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer towritten question E-1920/97 (1).

(1) OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 121.


by Antonio Graziani (PPE) to the Commission

(9 October 1997)

Subject: Earthquake in Central Italy

On 26 and 27 September an earthquake devastated Central Italy, in particular the regions of Umbria and theMarches, killing around ten people and causing serious damage not only to houses but also to buildings


of architectural, historic and religious significance. The town of Assisi, with its churches dedicated to St Francis,which contain priceless frescoes by Giotto and Cimabue, amongst other things, was seriously damaged.

Thousands of people are homeless and an initial estimate indicates that the damage is difficult to calculate, inparticular because of the serious damage done to priceless works of art.

What does the Commission intend to do to meet the needs of the population and to restore the damaged works ofart, which are not only part of Italy’s heritage but belong to the whole of mankind?



(13 October 1997)

Subject: Request for special aid measures following the earthquake in Umbria and the Marches

In the last week of September a severe earthquake caused substantial damage in Italy, particularly in the regionsof Umbria and the Marches.

Above all, it made built-up areas unusable, thereby seriously inconveniencing the inhabitants and it alsoseriously damaged the artistic heritage, in particular the town of Assisi.

Is the Commission able to allocate special financial aid for:

1. the sections of the population affected;

2. rebuilding town centres;

3. restoring works of art?

Joint answerto Written Questions P-3220/97 and P-3286/97

given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 1997)

The Commission wishes to express its fullest sympathy for the victims of the earthquakes that have beendevastating the Italian regions of Umbria and the Marches since the end of September. It is aware of theexceptional scale of the damage inflicted on Europe's citizens living in these regions and of the destructionsuffered by its incomparable cultural heritage.

Regarding Community emergency aid for disaster victims, the Commission would remind the HonourableMember that in the 1997 budget the relevant item (B4-3400) contains no appropriations that could be used forimmediate measures of solidarity with the citizens who have sustained losses.

Regarding structural aids, the earthquakes have affected highly rural areas to which Commission attaches greatimportance; they are virtually all objective 5b areas.

The Presidents of the two regions concerned have asked the Commission to adjust the objective 5b programmingto take account of new priorities and needs generated by the earthquakes.

The Commission confirms that its is fully ready to launch the procedures, the partnership context, for boostingthe objective 5b single programming documents by adding specific reconstruction measures. This would providean opportunity to consider the value of action to support the artistic and architectural heritage, productionpotential and the reconstruction of rural villages.

Regarding restoration of the cultural heritage, the Commission announced on 1 October 1997 it would grantemergency aid of ECU 100 000 from the funds allocated for the preservation of cultural heritage. This emergencyaid is intended to cover some of the costs of restoration of the church of St Francis of Assisi, and in particular forthe restoration of the frescos damaged during the recent catastrophic earthquake.



by Clive Needle (PSE) to the Commission

(9 October 1997)

Subject: Re-commissioning of rigs

In light of the conference of oil companies and others held in Brussels on 29 September 1997 relating todecommissioning of rigs, a consortium based in Great Yarmouth in my constituency of Norfolk in the UnitedKingdom is pursuing the possibility of re-commissioning oil rigs with the help of a company specializing in newlifting systems, researchers from a local university and other local partners to look at both the economic andenvironmental impact of this project.

Is the Commission aware of work being done in Great Yarmouth? If so, what plans does the Commission have toanalyze the usefulness of the project and communicate its lessons?


(6 November 1997)

The question raised by the Honourable Member concerns a matter which is of considerable interest to theCommission.

The Commission has recently received the results of a major study on the subject of decommissioning offshoreoil and gas installations which concluded that it is technically feasible to remove all but a few of the existing steelinstallations. It is therefore particularly interesting to see how industry is constantly developing new and moreefficient technologies in this field.

The Commission is aware of the ‘Great Yarmouth solution’ project and is keen to explore all opportunities for thereuse of these installations. The Commission is active within the Oslo-Paris (OSPAR) Convention, which isseeking to agree a policy on the whole subject of decommissioning and disposal of offshore installations, and isclosely monitoring developments across Europe in the whole field which includes recommissioning or reuse offacilities. In this respect the Great Yarmouth project is important as it involves a new method of heavy lifting andthe results are of interest in these ongoing discussions in OSPAR.



(9 October 1997)

Subject: Modification of second CSF for Greece

According to Greek press reports the Ministry of National Economy is supporting a proposal that DR 700 billionfrom CSF appropriations allocated to Greece be redistributed among the structural funds and programmes inorder that they do not remain unassigned, since it will not be possible to utilize them by the year 2000 for theobjectives for which they were earmarked. As a result of this redeployment of funds the appropriationsearmarked for the ‘Ignatia’ road and the National Land Register, which are of the utmost importance for thedevelopment of Greece, will be halved.

According to the same reports, the Ministry of National Economy maintains that ‘the proposal does not meanabandoning programmes or cancelling projects but merely transferring appropriations to speed up work on majorpublic projects co-funded by the Community without affecting the future of individual programmes orpreparations for the ‘Santer Package’.


This reduction of funds for accounting purposes does not absolve the Greek Government of its responsibility forfailure to resolve the problems affecting these projects and their completion within the framework of thepriorities established under the second CSF is by no means guaranteed.

1. Is it true that reductions in the appropriations earmarked for these major projects have been proposed?

2. What is the truth of the assertion that the Commission can, as of now, undertake to provide the necessaryfunds from the Santer package, independently of the priorities emerging when the substance of the packageis agreed?

3. How does the Commission believe that acceptance of these proposals will affect the extent to which theobjectives of the second CSF can be achieved?

4. Have any other countries proposed modifications on such a scale for purely accounting purposes?


(31 October 1997)

1. The Greek Ministry of National Economy did put forward proposals for far-reaching modifications of theCommunity Support Framework (CSF) II under which, among other things, the appropriations envisaged for the‘Via Egnatia’ and the National Land Register would be reduced by DR 100 000 million (about ECU 330 million)(–40%) and DR 30 000 million (about ECU 99 million) (–57%) respectively.

2. The Commission cannot as of now undertake to allocate appropriations under CSF III, the so-called ‘Santerpackage’.

3. The extent to which the objectives of CSF II can be achieved as a result of the proposals put forward mustbe carefully looked at on a case-by-case basis, the underlying principle being that the objectives must as far aspossible be attained under CSF II.

4. The scale in budget terms of the proposals submitted (ECU 2 400 million in public expenditure andECU 1 600 million in contributions from the Structural Funds) and their practical implications outstrip those ofproposed modifications so far received by the Commission from other Member States.


by Clive Needle (PSE) to the Commission

(20 October 1997)

Subject: Fridge/Freezer Safety

Combined fridge/freezers operated by a single control are only designed to operate in ambient temperatures ofabove 10°C.

The British Standards Institute, the UK Consumers’ Association and the Consumers in Europe Group are allconcerned about this and feel that consumers are not made sufficiently aware of its implications when choosingan appliance.

If a fridge/freezer automatically switches off while the owner is absent, during the winter, for example, whentemperatures often fall below 10°C, and then switches back on when the temperature rises, the food within itcould thaw and then refreeze without the owner being aware of it. In addition, the owner would not ben entitled topayment by their insurers as the appliance would not be deemed faulty. This has been proven in a UK case.

Is the Commission aware of this problem? What does the Commission consider are the food safety implications?What requests has it made to Cenelec to consider this issue?



(25 November 1997)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member andwill inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.


by Marıa Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission

(20 October 1997)

Subject: Processing of used oil at cement works

Is it permitted to burn waste oil at cement works, as if it were just a fuel, when the owners of the works do nothave a licence to process such oil?

Answer given by Mrs. Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1997)

Cement works cannot dispose of waste oils without obtaining a permit to this effect. According to Article 6 ofDirective 75/439/EEC of 16 June 1975 as amended by Directive 87/101/EEC of 22 December 1986 on thedisposal of waste oils (1), any undertaking which disposes of waste oils must obtain a permit. Where necessary,this permit shall be granted after examination of the installations. Member States were required to ensure that themeasures adopted pursuant to the Directive were applied to the undertakings existing at the time of notification ofDirective 87/101/EEC within seven years of the said notification, i.e. 13 January 1994. Regarding newundertakings, the measures must be applied from their establishment.

(1) OJ L 42, 12.2.1987.


by Marjo Matikainen-Kallstrom (PPE) to the Commission

(20 October 1997)

Subject: Consequences of abolishing tax-free shopping

Why does the Commission oppose the carrying out of an independent study on the effects of the abolition oftax-free shopping on, for example, employment?

Since the Commission does not consider there to be any justification for carrying out this study, does it then baseits own view of the consequences of ending tax-free shopping simply on a gut feeling?


(17 November 1997)

The Honourable Member is referred to the answers given by the Commission to Written Question E-2777/97 byMr Ilaskivi (1) and to Oral Questions H-552/97 by Mr Andersson and H-0409/97 by Mrs Banotti at question timein the June 1997 and July 1997 (2) session of Parliament.

(1) See page 65.(2) Debates of the European Parliament (June and July 1997).



by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Transfrontier transmission of hard-core pornographic material across the European Union

In his response to my Written Question P-2792/96 (1), the Commissioner stated that the Commission will beasking the United Kingdom to confirm the basis on which it considers that the ‘Adult Channel’, ‘FantasyChannel’ and ‘Playboy Channel’, (which have been qualified by the UK authorities as ‘soft pornography’) do notinfringe Article 22 of Directive 89/552/EEC (2).

Has the Commission had any response from the UK, and if so, is it satisfied with the basis they put forward forclaiming compliance by the aforementioned channels to Article 22?

(1) OJ C 83, 14.3.1997, p. 68.(2) OJ L 298, 17.10.1989, p. 23.


(6 November 1997)

The Commission did indeed contact the United Kingdom authorities on the matter raised by the HonourableMember. They explained that, unlike the non-British licensed channels (such as TV Erotica, Rendez-vous)against which proscription orders were made in accordance with the procedures set out in Article 2(2) ofDirective 89/552/EEC, the programme content of the three British licensed channels mentioned is consideredacceptable. Article 22 of the Directive bans the transmission of programmes ‘likely to impair the physical, mentalor moral development of minors’, except where it is ensured, ‘by selecting the time of the broadcast or by anytechnical measure, that minors in the area of transmission will not normally hear or see such broadcasts’. Allthree British channels are subscription channels, encrypted and broadcast late at night. They rarely containexplicit sexual or gratuitously violent material, and in respect of sexual acts in particular depict them quitedifferently from the treatment given to them in hard-core films shown on the proscribed channels.

Nevertheless the British authorities have assured the Commission that the Independent television commission issensitive to the problematic nature of these channels, and regularly monitors them to ensure compliance with itsprogramme code, conformity with which is a licence condition. The British authorities informed the Commissionthat there were only 11 complaints from viewers over the previous 12 months, usually when a cable company hadexperienced technical problems and one of these channels had broadcast accidentally ‘in the clear’. All suchcomplaints were immediately dealt with, and the technical fault rectified.

The Commission is therefore satisfied that the British licensed channels are carefully monitored, that theircontent does not include material which might ‘seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development ofminors’, which is not permitted under the Directive, and that the technical measures and broadcast time aresufficient to ensure their general unavailability to minors.



(20 October 1997)

Subject: Need for a European School in The Hague

Is the Commission aware that staff of the European Patents Office in Rijswijk have no access to a EuropeanSchool facility, whereas the Patents Head Office in Munich does?


Does the Commission consider it important for the children of staff of the European Patents Office in Rijswijk, ofthe European Space Organization in Noordwijk and of Europol to have their own European School in (or near)The Hague?

If so does the Commission intend to approach the national authorities that should be responsible for providingsuch a facility?

If not, why not?

Can the Commission also state whether other European cities (in particular Dublin, Alicante and Copenhagen), towhich agencies were allocated in 1992, can expect to be provided with their own European Schools?


(17 November 1997)

Under the Protocol on the Setting-up of European Schools, signed on 13 April 1962, establishments bearing thename ‘European School’ may be set up on the territory of the Contracting Parties for the education andinstruction together of children of the staff of the European Communities.

A supplementary Protocol was signed on 15 September 1975 providing that a European School can be set up inMunich for the children of staff of the European Patent Office to be educated together. This school was set up in1977. The Protocol made no provision for setting up a European School in Rijswijk.

The Commission considers that it is not its business to take an initiative regarding the establishment of newEuropean Schools to meet the needs of non-Community bodies. On the other hand, in the case of thedecentralised Community agencies, such as those in Dublin, Alicante and Copenhagen referred to by theHonourable Member in the written question, the Commission could support the request for setting up a EuropeanSchool if it were shown that it was necessary for the proper operation of the agencies, and if the relevant criteria(potential school population, provision of premises by the host Member State, budget situation) were met.

In any event, the decision to establish a new European School must be taken unanimously by the Board ofGovernors, an intergovernmental body consisting of the Ministers of each contracting party whose responsibil-ities include national education and/or external cultural relations. The Commission is a member of the Board.


by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(15 October 1997)

Subject: Internal market and registration of imported vehicles

With the entry into force of the single market, the abolition of checks at internal borders and barriers to trade is anessential condition for the free movement of goods. The Commission’s explanatory communication on theregistration procedures for EU vehicles is an important contribution in familiarizing consumers with Communitylaw, of which the vast majority are still unaware, including the provincial offices of the national administrationswhich should be implementing it.

1. Is the Commission aware that the registration of vehicles imported into Italy is still governed by the rules setout in circular No 133/85 issued by the head office of the Italian civil traffic authority on 28 August 1985?

2. Has it checked whether this circular complies with its explanatory communication of 15 May 1996, issuedeleven years later?


3. Is it aware that a provincial office of the civil traffic authority is refusing to register Fiat tractors importedfrom the UK on the sole grounds that the supplementary specifications are signed by the London dealer, whois authorized by Fiat’s legal representative in the UK to sign the documentation (with the signatureauthenticated by the British Chamber of Commerce and the Italian Consulate in London), instead of Fiat’slegal technical representative in Italy whose signature is deposited with the head office of the Ministry ofTransport’s civil traffic authority?

4. Is the Commission aware that to obtain the signature of Fiat’s technical officer for type approval in Italy,consumers have to pay the manufacturer LIT 200 000 to LIT 300 000 per vehicle?

5. What is the Commission’s view of the trade barriers created by bureaucracy of this nature which underminesfreedom of movement and the economic interests of consumers which have been compromised sinceFebruary because of this glaring ignorance of the content of the Commission communication?


(20 November 1997)

The Commission is making every effort to ensure that its interpretative communication on procedures for thetype-approval and registration of vehicles previously registered in another Member State (1) is distributed aswidely as possible. As part of this policy, it intends to publish the text on the Community's Internet site.

The Commission has also had occasion to examine circular No 133/85 following two complaints received frommembers of the public who encountered difficulties in registering in Italy vehicles previously registered inanother Member State.

On the specific points raised in the question, the Commission shares the Honourable Member's view that theItalian authorities' refusal to accept the type-approval certificate issued by the manufacturer's agent in thevehicle's Member State of origin, for the purposes of importation and registration in Italy (in accordance with thefourth sentence of point 3.5 of the above circular), appears to be in breach of Community law, as interpreted inparticular by the Court of Justice in its judgment in the ‘Gofette and Gilliard’ case (2).

The payment of well over ECU 100 (about ITL 192 393) demanded by the manufacturer's agent in Italy in orderto issue the type-approval certificate necessary for registration, which is required only in the absence of thecertificate issued in the Member State of origin, appears to be in breach of point III.1.1.2.(b) of the Commission'scommunication.

The Commission will contact the Italian authorities as soon as possible to draw their attention to the need toamend Italian law to comply with the principles laid down in its communication, and in particular to the need toremove the obstacle pointed out by the Honourable Member.

To enable it to make representations to the Italian authorities in order to solve the particular problem which gaverise to the question, the Commission would ask the Honourable Member to inform the complainant that he maycontact the Commission and send it the necessary information directly.

(1) OJ C 143, 15.5.1996.(2) Case 406/85 [1987] ECR 2525.



(15 October 1997)

Subject: Position of Turkey on illegal immigrants

On 15 September 1997 three illegal Kurdish immigrants were killed in a minefield on the border between Greeceand Turkey. There have unfortunately been many such incidents recently. The Turkish Government is neithertaking practical measures to stem the flow of refugees towards the border − who often meet a tragic end − nor isit engaging in talks with Greece in order at least to address the problem in a humane manner.


However, the European Union is also guilty of inertia. In its answer to a question I asked on this subject in 1992(H-1179/92) (1) the Council replied: ‘once the Treaty on Union has entered into force, the provisions of Title VIon cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs, which concern in particular immigration policy andpolicy regarding the nationals of third countries, will also apply.’

However, no practical measures have been taken vis-a-vis Turkey, even after the conclusion of the MaastrichtTreaty.

What initiatives does the Commission intend to take in respect of Turkey in order to ensure that it respects itsinternational commitments, given that this country has signed a Customs Union agreement with the EuropeanUnion?

(1) Debates of European Parliament, No 3-425 (December 1992).


(7 November 1997)

In a resolution of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 6 March 1995 the two parties agreed the institutionalframework for cooperation on justice and home affairs.

It has not been possible to implement this cooperation owing to the political situation.

In its communication on the future of relations with Turkey adopted on 15 July (1), the Commission reiterated theimportance it attaches to cooperation in this field, particularly on immigration.

Implementation of practical schemes will also depend on the situation as regards financial cooperation withTurkey.

(1) Doc. COM(97) 394.


by Antoni Gutierrez Dıaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(15 October 1997)

Subject: Mental illnesses

10 October 1996 was World Mental Health Day. Taking the view that mental illnesses deserved to be consideredby the Commission, Josu Jon Imaz San Miguel MEP tabled a question on the subject, to which the Commissionreplied on 21 May 1996.

In its reply the Commission confirms that it is considering mental illnesses, including suicide, and looking intothe possibility of preventing suicides as part of a possible programme.

However, this type of suicide (in the area of mental illness) is logically a consequence of mental illness.

1. Has the Commission developed, or considered developing, any programme for the prevention of mentalillness? If so, with what budget?

2. In line B3-4300 of the 1996 budget, with ECU 5 million, what amount was allocated to Alzheimer’s disease,and what amount to ‘other mental illnesses’? Which ones, and what amount for each?

3. Are there Community provisions or recommendations for the administrative authorities on the industrialrehabilitation of mental patients (as distinct from the disabled)? Is compliance with such provisions orrecommendations by the Member States, and specifically by Spain, monitored at Community level in anyway?


4. Are there recommendations for offering part-time contracts to such groups of mental patients, since theseenable them to develop their skills and so prevent a further increase in their anxiety?

5. Is the Commission aware that when people sign an employment contract they lose the non-contributorypension in many instances, which means that, in view of the uncertainty of finding stable employment, theirwish to return to work is undermined by the fear of losing this pension?


(6 November 1997)

In 1996 a budget of MECU 5 was allocated for transnational activities geared to improving the quality of life ofpeople suffering from neurodegenerative diseases, more particularly Alzheimer type (DAT) and relateddisorders, and their carers. Following a call for proposals, 26 projects on Alzheimer’s disease were selected forfunding covering a variety of themes.

There is no Community public health programme for the prevention of mental illness. However in theprogramme of Community action on health promotion, information, education and training within theframework for action in the field of public health (1), mental health promotion has been given priority. It is one ofeight health issues on which this programme focuses.

In the communication from the Commission (2) proposing a Community action programme on injury preventionin the context of the framework for action in the field of public health, suicide is foreseen as one of five maintopics.

There are no Community provisions or recommendations on the industrial rehabilitation of psychologicallyimpaired people. However, in a forthcoming communication on employment of people with disabilities, the issueof the transition to employment, including the question of the effect of receiving a non-contributory pension andstable employment in the open labour market, will be analysed.

A budget of MECU 11.8 has been allocated in 1997 for preparatory measures for cooperation to foster equalopportunities for people with disabilities, in particular to support activities of non governmental organisationsand associations formed by people with disabilities. A call for proposals was launched in April 1997.128 proposals have now been pre-selected for funding, including 13 projects devoted to psychologicallyimpaired people.

(1) Decision No 645/96/EC, OJ L 95, 16.4.1996.(2) COM(97) 178 final.



(15 October 1997)

Subject: Financial aid for the victims of torture

The Commission has approved the funding of 27 projects and programmes intended to help rehabilitate thevictims of torture throughout the world, as part of a Community strategy aimed at promoting human rights anddemocracy.

Will the Commission say whether any of these programmes is intended to help the victims of torture in EastTimor?


(31 October 1997)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that there are no projects for East Timor among the27 approved by the Commission on 11 June as part of support for rehabilitation centres for torture victims(budget heading B7-7070).



by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) to the Commission

(15 October 1997)

Subject: Greek Community Support Framework: the Egnatia Road and Thessaloniki Underground projects

Among the projects included in the Second Community Support Framework (CSF) for Greece (1994-1999) arethe construction of the Egnatia Road, a project of key strategic importance for the development oftrans-European networks in Greece and the European Union, and the Thessaloniki Underground, a major projectintended to alleviate the serious traffic and environmental problems facing this city of over a million people. Inview of the delay in the take-up by Greece of CSF funds in respect of many development projects andprogrammes, the Greek Government has put forward proposals for the transfer of appropriations from someprogrammes to others. Inter alia, it has proposed transferring over Drs. 100 billion from the Egnatia Road projectand Drs. 27 billion from the Thessaloniki Underground project.

Does the Commission intend to transfer funds earmarked for the important projects in question, and if so, onwhat grounds?

Given Greece’s bitter experience that a project which is delayed is never implemented, how does theCommission view the Greek Government’s intention to transfer funds which will essentially mean an end to theThessaloniki Underground project?

Given that the Egnatia Road project has already begun and is currently under way, how does the Commissionview the request for a transfer of appropriations which will delay its implementation?

Does it not agree that the proposal for the transfer of appropriations will essentially cancel out the strategic andeconomic benefit which would have resulted from the completion of the Egnatia Road during the five-yearperiod 1994-1999, which will thus be put off indefinitely?


(7 November 1997)

The Commission can confirm that it has received from the Greek authorities proposals which include the transferto other projects of DRA 100 billion (approximately ECU 330 million) allocated under the second Communitysupport framework (CSF) for the Egnatia main road and DRA 27 billion (approximately ECU 90 million)earmarked for the Thessaloniki underground railway. These proposals are currently being considered by theCommission and will then be discussed at the next meeting of the Monitoring Committee for the CSF.

The Commission set out its position on this transfer of appropriations from the Thessaloniki undergroundrailway project in its reply to Oral Question H-741/97 during the Question Time of Parliament's part-session inOctober 1997 (1).

With regard to the reduction in appropriations proposed for Egnatia, the Commission has already notified theGreek authorities of its serious reservations. The information available to the Commission suggests that thisproject could be completed under the current CSF and absorb the appropriations allocated to it.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (October 1997).


by Jessica Larive (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 October 1997)

Subject: Plutonium on board the US space probe Cassini − danger to public health

According to the Algemeen Dagblad of 27 September 1997, the US space probe Cassini is to be launched on13 October 1997 with 34 kg of plutonium on board. The Netherlands association for public health and peaceissues, along with a number of American associations, has warned that the risks of this enterprise areunacceptably high.


If the probe were to be involved in an accident, as happened with the Challenger in 1996, the amount ofplutonium released into the atmosphere would, according to the worst prognosis, contaminate five times theworld’s total population. Inhaling 0.1 microgram is enough to cause lung cancer. Doctors indicate that the deadlysubstance would act as a killer for decades.

Is the Commission aware of the launching of this US space probe and of the unacceptable health risks to theworld’s population in the event of an accident occurring with the plutonium on board.

If so, does the Commission not consider that any public health risk must be ruled out before the launch?

Is the Commission therefore prepared to ask the US Government to cancel the launch?


(5 November 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to Oral questions H-0628/97 byMr Bowe, H-0631/97 by Mrs Ahern, H-0634/97 by Mr Crampton, H-0659/97 by Mr Lannoye, H-0661/97 byMr Pimenta during question time at Parliament’s September 1997 part-session (1) and to written questionE-2757/97 by Mr Schmidt (2).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (September 1997).(2) See page 59.


by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission

(22 October 1997)

Subject: Salary costs of officials

At the meeting of Finance Ministers in Mondorf on 13/14 September, the Netherlands requested a reduction in itscontribution to the Union, claiming, on the basis of its own table of figures, that it was the biggest net contributorto the Union. The Belgian minister, Mr Maystadt, replied that this was difficult to determine, citing the exampleof the salaries of European officials which are regarded as expenditure for the benefit of Belgium, despite the factthat many officials undoubtedly spend or save part of their salaries in their own countries.

We know that the Commission refuses to consider the total contribution of Member States to the Union as anamount which should be received back in more or less the same proportions.

Can the Commission nonetheless indicate the total salary costs (regarded as expenditure to the benefit ofBelgium) of the officials employed in Brussels? How many officials are there and what are their nationalities?Can the Commission give exact figures for the years 1995, 1996 and 1997?

Can the Commission release the table cited by the Netherlands? Does the Commission itself have concrete dataand calculations?


(18 November 1997)

Total expenditure by the Commission on salary costs of officials and temporary staff in Belgium under theoperating budget is given below.

1995 1996 1997

860 (million ecus) 917 (million ecus) 966 (million ecus)


The Commission cannot estimate what proportion of remuneration is actually spent in Belgium. It only hasknowledge of the part of remuneration it transfers to other Member States at the request of the officials andtemporary staff concerned. In 1997, the average for such transfers stood at about 7% of total remuneration.

The breakdown by nationality of officials and temporary staff in Brussels is given below.

Nationality 1995 1996 1997

Belgium 3608 3696 3732Denmark 412 417 410Germany 1260 1275 1277Greece 657 676 684Spain 1085 1119 1142France 1309 1369 1374Ireland 409 427 412Italy 1682 1709 1719Luxembourg 88 84 79Netherlands 561 564 562Austria 29 145 198Portugal 534 541 541Finland 77 192 332Sweden 74 243 351United Kingdom 1077 1094 1088Other 29 29 28

Total 12891 13580 13929

The Commission has no knowledge of the table referred to by the Netherlands.


by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission

(22 October 1997)

Subject: Office costs of Commission officials

When the Berlaymont building in Brussels had to be evacuated because of the asbestos discovery, the BelgianGovernment arranged for alternative office accommodation for the Commission’s officials.

Can the Commission state what was the total rent paid by the Belgian Government for this alternativeaccommodation for the years 1995, 1996 and 1997?


(27 November 1997)

Since the rents for the alternative office accommodation to replace the Berlaymont are paid by the Regie desBatiments (Public Property Administration) of the Belgian State, the Commission is unable to supply theinformation requested by the Honourable Member.

Only the Regie des Batiments (Directorate for Brussels-Capital, Section III) can supply the information.




(22 October 1997)

Subject: Combating fraud

Will the Commission say which Member States of the European Union have already ratified the Convention onthe Protection of the Financial Interests of the EU?


(20 November 1997)

Up to now, none of the Member States have ratified the Convention on the protection of the financial interests ofthe Community.

The Commission would point out that the target date of mid- 1998 was introduced for the ratification of thisConvention in the action plan to combat organized crime (1) adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council on28 April 1997. This action plan was subsequently approved by the European Council of Amsterdam.

Moreover, the Commission would observe that it is of the utmost importance to recommend Member States notonly to ratify the Convention (as well as the protocols to this Convention and the Convention on the fight againstcorruption involving officials of the Community or officials of Member States) but also to take the necessarymeasures for their transposition into national law.

(1) OJ C 251, 15.8.1997.


by Giacomo Santini (UPE) to the Commission

(22 October 1997)

Subject: European Community Sports Club − Euroski

The European Community Sports Club − Euroski organizes skiing weeks for EU officials three times a year inBormio, Courmayeur and San Domenico.

What is planned as a programme for the 1997/1998 season is actually a repeat of previous such holidays, sincethe Sports Club has been taking EU officials to the same resorts for around ten years.

When I proposed a change of venue to allow equal opportunities for all European tourist resorts, I was politelytold that they were grateful for my suggestion but could not change the venue as this would be unfair to theirfriends in Bormio, Courmayeur and San Domenico.

Will the Commission investigate this matter to guarantee transparency and ensure that there are no privateinterests behind the choice of a venue?


(17 November 1997)

Under the staff welfare policy, 50 sports and cultural clubs meeting certain criteria are recognised by theCommission. The Euroski club is not one of these and therefore cannot be regarded as a Commission sports club.

Members of this group are acting in a purely private capacity, and there is absolutely no ground for theCommission to make an inquiry nor intervene in their activities.



by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 October 1997)

Subject: Visit by the President of the Commission to Portugal

The President of the Commission travelled to Portugal on 7 October 1997 to take part in a seminar, organized bythe Jacques Delors Information Centre, on ‘Europe’s future − a model for the 21st century’.

As was widely reported in the media, meetings took place with the Portuguese Prime Minister (who is alsoSecretary-General of the Socialist Party) and the chairman of the Social-Democratic Party.

Does the Commission not consider that it would have been a basic courtesy to arrange for its President to meet allthe Portuguese political parties represented in the European Parliament?


(13 November 1997)

The President of the Commission takes pleasure in meeting a wide range of people, including members of theParliament, but is not able to meet all political parties on the occasion of all his journeys.


by Olivier Dupuis (ARE) to the Commission

(21 October 1997)

Subject: Nepal

As part of the 1997 budgetary procedure, Parliament inserted remarks under Budgetary Lines B7-300 ‘Financialand technical cooperation with Asian developing countries’ and B7-301 ‘Economic cooperation with Asiandeveloping countries’ which stipulate that the appropriations earmarked for Nepal must be subject to guaranteesfrom the Nepalese authorities not to expel Tibetan refugees. What action has the Commission taken in respect ofthese remarks?

Has the Commission initiated discussions with the Nepalese Government? Has it obtained the guaranteesdemanded by the European Parliament? If not, what initiatives does it intend to take to obtain these guarantees?Does it have specific information about the situation of Tibetan refugees in Nepal, on fresh influxes of refugeesand on the manner in which they are treated by the Nepalese authorities?


(4 November 1997)

The problem of refugees in general was examined with the Nepalese Government at the first EC-Nepal JointCommittee meeting in November as part of the discussions on human rights. On that occasion the NepaleseGovernment gave precise assurances about its commitment to upholding human rights. Since then theCommission has continued its dialogue with the Government on this matter via its delegation in Nepal and iskeeping a weather eye on developments.

There seem to be a decline in the influx of refugees and indications are that the situation has not deteriorated,either in the form of fresh expulsions or in the Nepalese authorities' handling of Tibetan refugees. It goes withoutsaying that should any deterioration occur the Commission will draw this to the attention of the NepaleseGovernment and take the appropriate steps.

Last year the Commission helped improve the situation for Tibetan refugees coming through Nepal by funding aproject to expand and restructure the reception centres in the Kathmandu valley and at Pokhara.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - EUR-Lex

Documents

Transcript of EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - EUR-Lex