Indeks 
 Poprzedni 
 Następny 
 Pełny tekst 
Pełne sprawozdanie z obrad
Czwartek, 12 lipca 2007 r. - StrasburgWersja poprawiona
 ZAŁĄCZNIK (Odpowiedzi pisemne)
QUESTIONS TO THE COMMISSION

QUESTIONS TO THE COMMISSION
Pregunta nº 33 formulada por Maria Badia i Cutchet (H-0488/07):
 Asunto: Propuesta de Unión Mediterránea
 

El actual Presidente de la República Francesa, Nicolas Sarkozy, dio a conocer el pasado 7 de febrero su propuesta de crear una Unión Mediterránea que comprendería los Estados del norte de África, del este del Mediterráneo y del sur de la Unión Europea. Dicha propuesta se basa en cuatro pilares: un foro intergubernamental a semejanza del Consejo de Europa, un sistema de seguridad colectiva, políticas de codesarrollo y una cooperación policial integrada aneja a un espacio policial común.

Teniendo en cuenta, por un lado, que el proyecto de Unión Mediterránea parece, a simple vista, que prime los aspectos securitarios y la preferencia por los mecanismos intergubernamentales en detrimento de los supranacionales y que, por otro lado, el desarrollo de las relaciones euromediterráneas requiere un impulso especial de los ámbitos económicos, sociales y humanos, y especialmente de fomento del diálogo intercultural, ¿cómo cree la Comisión Europea que esta propuesta pueda afectar el desarrollo del Proceso de Barcelona nacido en 1995? ¿Comparte la necesidad de seguir impulsando el Proceso de Barcelona, sin abandonar el enfoque multilateral y multisectorial derivado de los acuerdos de asociación entre la UE y los países terceros ribereños hoy vigente, y que se está acentuando con la puesta en funcionamiento de la Asamblea Parlamentaria Euromediterránea? ¿Qué consecuencias considera que podría tener la propuesta de Unión Mediterránea en el proceso de negociación con Turquía?

 
  
 

La Commission partage la conviction de l'honorable parlementaire quant à l'importance cruciale de nos relations avec les pays du sud de la Méditerranée.

Il existe un besoin de renforcement de la voix et de l’influence de l’Europe dans la région. La Commission est favorable à toute initiative qui ait pour but de développer nos relations avec les partenaires du sud. La Commission est naturellement prête à contribuer avec le Parlement, la France, et les autres Etats membres ainsi que les pays partenaires, à toute réflexion sur ce sujet.

La Commission appuie en principe toute initiative qui aurait pour but de remettre au centre des priorités européennes nos relations avec nos voisins méditerranéens, même si la Commission souligne l’importance de préserver les acquis de la coopération euro-méditerranéenne (Processus de Barcelone) et de la Politique de voisinage, qui a bâti des relations institutionnelles fortes entre l’Europe et la Méditerranée et qui aborde des enjeux essentiels comme par exemple les réformes politiques et économiques, la gestion des flux migratoires, les réseaux d’énergie, la dépollution de la Méditerranée, le commerce et les investissements comme facteur d’intégration et de développement.

Comme l'honorable parlementaire le sait, beaucoup a été fait depuis 1995 avec le Processus euro-méditerranéen "de Barcelone" et depuis 2004 dans le cadre de la Politique européenne de voisinage. Il reste cependant beaucoup à faire pour renforcer les relations de l'Union avec les pays méditerranéens et les accompagner dans leur transition politique et économique.

Grâce au Processus de Barcelone et la Politique de voisinage, l'Union européenne a en effet réussi à lancer des initiatives importantes dans tous les domaines clés :

L'immigration: coopération renforcée dans le domaine de la migration (réunions ministérielles en 2006 avec l’Afrique à Rabat et Tripoli, et bientôt, la première réunion Euro-Med en novembre 2007 au Portugal).

L'énergie : marché intégré Euro-Med énergétique (notamment réseaux de gaz).

L'investissement: mise en place d’un fonds d’investissement pour la région, dans le cadre de la Politique de voisinage (700 M€ de contribution du budget communautaire pour 2007-2013).

L'environnement: mise en place d'un programme de dépollution de la Méditerranée.

La Commission est convaincue que l’élan pris par la Politique de voisinage sous la Présidence allemande va continuer sous la Présidence portugaise avec un accent particulier sur la région méditerranéenne.

Il est important de préserver les acquis du Processus de Barcelone et de la Politique de voisinage comme cadres globaux de coopération qui offrent une grande marge de manœuvre pour développer des relations spécifiques avec nos partenaires. Par exemple, au Maghreb, dans certains domaines importants comme la lutte contre le terrorisme, l’énergie, la gestion de l’eau, je suis convaincue que les pays partenaires ont un fort intérêt à développer de nouveaux mécanismes communs.

En ce qui concerne les négociations d'adhésion avec la Turquie, l'Union européenne négocie avec la Turquie depuis le 3 octobre 2005 sur base d'un Cadre de négociations approuvé à l'unanimité, qui dit très clairement que "l'objectif des négociations est l'adhésion", même si les négociations sont un processus ouvert dont l'issue ne peut être garantie à l'avance. La Commission considère toute initiative nouvelle en faveur d'un renforcement des relations avec nos partenaires méditerranéens qui couvrirait la Turquie comme complémentaire au processus en cours des négociations d'adhésion.

Il est en dernier lieu indispensable d’impliquer l’ensemble de l’Union dans des projets qui concernent la totalité des Etats membres. Seule une participation – politique, financière, institutionnelle – de l’Union permettra d'aboutir à des résultats significatifs.

 

Question no 34 by Laima Liucija Andrikienė (H-0512/07)
 Subject: EU external assistance
 

Each year the European Union provides over € 7 billion in external financial assistance to more than 150 countries and territories in the world and implements a number of policies in this field, including European Neighbourhood Policy and the ENPI. What are the main trends in and priorities for EU external financial assistance? Are there any new priorities or changes? Where does the Commission see shortcomings in the assistance provided and does it have any strategy to overcome them? Are there any new EU external assistance instruments? What progress has been made in implementing the ENPI?

 
  
 

The European Union (Commission and Member States) can be proud to be the largest contributor of external assistance with more than 55% of the world's official development assistance. The Commission alone manages a fifth of these European funds.

External assistance is a fundamental component of EU External Actions. It is used to support a wide range of external policies. The Commission's Annual Report 2007 on development policy and the implementation of external assistance in 2006(1), which was transmitted to the Parliament mid June 2007, gives a detailed presentation of recent policy and other developments.

Active in 160 countries, the Commission's external assistance aims at fighting poverty and promoting economic development, human rights and democracy, in line with the EU consensus on development.

Thanks to the simplification of its instruments and of its procedures, the Commission keeps on improving the flexibility and the efficiency of its external assistance to deliver better and faster aid worldwide. The new external assistance instruments, finalized in 2006, provide a simplified framework for delivering assistance financed from the General Budget during the period 2007 to 2013. Nine financing instruments have replaced the previous wide range of geographical and thematic regulations. Co-operation with countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific will, however continue to be funded primarily through the European Development Fund.

2006 was another record year for the European Community's external assistance, with commitments reaching €9.8 billion. The European Community is therefore on course to meet its part of the EU commitment to double its Official Development Assistance by 2015 in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. As regards budget execution, the Commission disbursed a total sum of €8.1 billion in 2006, up from €7.5 billion in 2005.

Africa was the main recipient of the European Community's external aid with €3.3 billion of actual payments.

In 2006, the European Neighbourhood Policy was further strengthened by the conclusion of three new Action Plans with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia as well as the finalisation of the Action Plans with Egypt and Lebanon. In addition, a new European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument was adopted. Following the adoption of its programming documents (Strategy Papers) covering the period 2007-2013 by the Commission in March 2007, the preparation of the Annual Action Programmes (AAPs) is proceeding as planned. The Commission expects to adopt these programmes and to make all the necessary budgetary commitments before the end of 2007.

The Commission tries to improve the effectiveness of its aid delivery by implementing the 2005 Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness. At the same time progress has been good in implementing our commitments in policy coherence for development, in line with the decisions taken in 2005 by the Commission and Member States regarding twelve policy areas including trade, migration, fisheries, and climate change.

The Commission expects improved donor coordination, especially within the EU between Member States and the Commission, to contribute to achieving the goals. Important in this respect is the EU Code of Conduct on Complementarity and Division of Labour in Development Policy, adopted by the Council in May 2007.

The Commission has also shown again its ability to respond effectively in crisis situations. Faced with the risk of a major avian influenza pandemic, the Commission provided in 2006 year a rapid response with a pledge of €80 million for aid and the co-organisation of a meeting in Beijing with the main actors concerned. In Palestine, the Commission has put in place with the World Bank a Temporary International Mechanism (TIM) to help improve the socio-economic conditions of the most fragile parts of the population. In total, the European Community support to the Palestinian people amounted to €339 million in 2006.

The Commission was also proactive in the crucial area of Human Rights, with no fewer than 13 EU Election Observation Missions in 2006 and the preparation of a revised European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights. This reflects the EU's strong conviction that promoting respect for Human Rights is an indispensable part of our external assistance policies.

 
 

(1) Annual Report 2007 on the European Community's Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance in 2006 {SEC(2007) 840}; {COM(2007) 349 final}

 

Question no 38 by Claude Moraes (H-0482/07)
 Subject: Renewable energy target
 

In light of the recent binding targets to boost 20% of renewable fuels and to reduce 20% of carbon dioxide emissions by 2020, what support will the Commission offer Member States to reach these targets? And how does the Commission plan to oversee and enforce the implementation of each Member State's National Action Plans (NAPs)?

 
  
 

To attain the ambitious targets for greenhouse gas reduction and production of Renewable energy set by the European Council, review of Community policies are currently underway.

The central importance of EU-wide measures was explicitly acknowledged by the European Council.

The Commission is currently considering a combination of regulatory and market based incentives to increase the share of renewable energies in the European energy mix with the twin objectives of contributing to reducing greenhouse gases and improve Europe's security of energy supplies.

Two EU programmes are in place to directly support renewable energies. Firstly, the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme - 2 (IEE), within the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) includes € 316.35 Mio for the period 2007-2013 for action to promote new and renewable energy resources and their use. Secondly, the development of innovative approaches in the field of renewable energies is supported through the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7). This is the European Union’s main instrument for funding research in Europe. On top of that, Structural Funds are also directed towards investments in renewable energies. Data based on 402 Draft Operational Programmes, of which 12 are decided, indicate that about € 3.8 billion will be allocated to renewable energy projects until 2013. € 3.3 billion more will be used for energy efficiency, co-generation and energy management. These Operational Programmes have to be adopted by Member States and the Commission.

The Commission has published new draft environmental State Aid Guidelines. These should allow the Member States to support the development of Renewable energy sources in a more effective way.

The National Action Plans for renewable energy are a key feature of the new architecture for the EU's renewable energy policy, as proposed in the Renewable Energy Roadmap(1). The Commission is currently elaborating a proposal for putting this new architecture into legal practice. The Commission will ensure that the National Action Plans will be effectively monitored, implemented and enforced.

 
 

(1) COM/2006/0848 final: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Renewable energy road map - Renewable energies in the 21st century: building a more sustainable future

 

Fråga nr 39 från Carl Schlyter (H-0483/07)
 Angående: Energiklassade kylskåp
 

Den svenska energimyndigheten har testat kylskåp med energimärkningen A, A+ och A++, dvs kylskåp som köps av människor som förmodligen anser att miljön är viktig.

Endast tre av tio testade kylskåp levde upp till den energimärkning som var angiven. Två kylskåp skulle till och med behöva degraderas till B-nivån.

Visserligen testades endast ett kylskåp av varje modell, men det sammanlagda resultatet är alarmerande.

Mot denna bakgrund undrar jag följande:

Vad gör kommissionen för att förhindra att företag skaffar sig illojala konkurrensfördelar med hjälp av bluffmärkning?

 
  
 

The classes on the energy label depend on an index which takes account of both the energy consumption and the volume of the fridge and freezer compartments. The Commission has examined the detailed tests results of the Swedish Energy Agency, which the Honourable Member refers to. They show that all the appliances tested have a measured energy consumption that is within the margin of error allowed by the measurement method of the applicable Directive(1). The difference between the declared and measured volumes of two of the 10 appliances would imply the need for a second round of testing, which if it confirms the first test, would affect the energy label.

The Commission welcomes that Sweden is enforcing the Energy Labelling Directive.

The main trade association for these products, the European Committee of Manufacturers of Domestic Equipment (CECED), has expressed concern that in general the level of enforcement by the Member States is too low, and is carrying out it's own testing programme (using independent laboratories).

The Commission will launch a survey during the second half of 2007 on the practical implementation of the energy labelling Directive in the Member States, and depending on the outcome of the survey, the Commission will decide on further steps.

 
 

(1) Commission Directive 2003/66/EC of 3 July 2003 amending Directive 94/2/EC implementing Council Directive 92/75/EEC with regard to energy labelling of household electric refrigerators, freezers and their combinations, OJ L 170, 9.7.2003.

 

Vraag nr. 40 van Ivo Belet (H-0489/07)
 Betreft: Problemen met de vrijmaking van de gasmarkt in België
 

De Commissie stelt dat de vrije markt voor gas in België niet of zeer beperkt functioneert (zie SEC(2006)1709 en COM(2006)0841 def.). Dit werd recent bevestigd door de aangekondigde prijsverhoging van Electrabel voor aardgas met 13 tot 20%. Ondanks de theoretische opening van de markt is de monopoliepositie van Electrabel nog steeds een feit.

Hoe staat het met de desbetreffende inbreukprocedures tegen België en wat zijn de volgende stappen die de Commissie hierin concreet zal nemen?

Welke nationale of Europese ingrepen acht de Commissie op korte termijn haalbaar om de onverantwoorde prijsstijgingen alsnog af te wenden?

Een fusie tussen Gaz de France en Suez zou de situatie van de gasmarkt in België grondig wijzigen en een aantal problemen oplossen, aangezien de fusie zal moeten gebeuren onder voorwaarden waarover met de Commissie overeenstemming is bereikt. Wat gaat de Commissie ondernemen ten aanzien van de Belgische situatie als de fusie niet doorgaat?

 
  
 

The short term actions that the Commision can undertake are infringement procedures. There are ongoing infringement proceedings concern the application of Directives 2003/54/EC(1) and 2003/55/EC(2). The infringement procedures opened mainly concern problems related to the powers given to the federal energy regulator.

The Commission has issued a reasoned opinion and the next step foreseen is a referral to the European Court of Justice.

In general, energy pricing is a matter of Member State competence, but the Commission ensures that the level of prices does not distort competition.. In this context, the Commission may open infringement procedures and/or state aid cases, but this has so far not been the case for Belgium.

That said, it is an established fact that the Belgian market is highly concentrated and that Government measures have not yet produced all their effects.

The Commission will propose amendments to the legislative framework to facilitate the development of a genuinely competitive electricity and gas market. In parallel, the Commission will continue to ensure that the competition rules set out in Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty are respected by the operators, and in particular by the historic operators. In this context it should be noted that the Commission has an ongoing antitrust procedure concerning Distrigaz, the historic gas operator in Belgium, with a view to facilitating competition on the Belgian gas market.

The approval given by the Commission to the merger between Gaz de France and Suez is accompanied by very important remedies which will contribute to the development of a gas market in Belgium and France.

If the merger is not going ahead, any commitments entered into by the parties would no longer need to be implemented. In this case, the Commission would give careful consideration as to whether any further action would be needed for the development of the gas market.

 
 

(1) Directive 2003/54/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC
(2) Directive 2003/55/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 98/30/EC

 

Question no 41 by Gay Mitchell (H-0490/07)
 Subject: European Wind Day
 

At the launch of European Wind Day on 15 June this year, Mr Piebalgs made a clear statement of intent by saying ‘We need to make big changes’.

Will the Commission outline clearly what these changes will be and how it intends to facilitate the needed expansion of renewable energy in Europe, particularly in terms of utilising wind power?

 
  
 

The Commission presented in January 2007 a Road Map on renewable energy in electricity, heating and cooling and transport.

The European Council confirmed this path by agreeing on a binding 20% renewable energy target for the EU. This will be broken down to binding national targets for renewable energy (including a minimum 10% biofuels target). The Commission has estimated that wind energy could make up 12% of electricity consumption by 2020.

The Commission aims to remove barriers to the integration of renewable energy sources into the European energy market, including the development and liberalisation of the internal electricity market. Member States will be called upon to ensure rapid, fair and simple authorisation procedures for renewable energy sources, including pre-planning mechanisms where regions and municipalities should assign suitable locations for the deployment of wind parks, for instance. The Commission is undertaking several actions for supporting better integration of renewable energy sources into the power grid. This includes the enforcement of grid codes, projects under Intelligent Energy Europe, and participation in the Wind Platform. In this context, particular attention will be paid to special requirements related to deployment of offshore wind energy, including cross-border grid connections. It will also foster better use of the Community's financial instruments, notably the structural and cohesion funds.

The proposed project to connect offshore wind power in Northern Europe is a key priority for the EU. The projects aims to facilitate the integration of offshore wind energy produced in the Baltic and North Seas in the continental grid. The Commission is presently seeking Parliament's views on its proposed nomination for a European coordinator. In addition to his duties as project facilitator, the coordinator will also support the Commission in establishing future priorities in the framework of the TEN-E Programme with a particular emphasis to wind power connections.

The growth rate in installed wind power in the EU has been significant, reaching a total capacity of 48,000 MW by the end of 2006. The Commission will continue to encourage increased deployment of wind power through new research initiatives, such as the Strategic Energy Technology Plan, but also existing Commission financing schemes, such as the 7th Framework programme for RTD, the Trans-European Networks for Energy, and the Intelligent Energy for Europe programme.

 

Zapytanie nr 42 skierowane przez Leopold Józef Rutowicz (H-0498/07)
 Dotyczy: Programu energetycznego dla Europy
 

Ochrona środowiska, wzrost cen i trudności z pozyskiwaniem tradycyjnych surowców energetycznych tj. gaz i ropa, zmuszają do prowadzenia aktywnej polityki w tym zakresie, z podejściem horyzontalnym, uwzględniającym co najmniej 30 lat.

Czy jest opracowywany program energetyczny dla Unii Europejskiej z perspektywą co najmniej 30 lat? Jakie problemy i wnioski wynikają z prac związanych z opracowywaniem programu?

 
  
 

At the Spring 2007 European Council, agreement was reached on an energy policy for Europe.

The European Council decision followed on preparatory work initiated by the Commission, notably the March 2006 Green Paper "Secure, Competitive and Sustainable Energy for Europe",. The Parliament adopted its Resolution on 14 December 2006, and provided valuable basis for the further work, as did the broad public. In January 2007 the Commission presented the package on "Energy for a Changing World" including a Communication "An Energy Policy for Europe"(1).

The European Council conclusions recognise that the global energy world requires a European approach to ensure sustainable, secure and completive energy. The Action Plan endorsed by the European Council outlines a European approach: a well-functioning internal energy market; arrangements for solidarity in crises; clear goals and commitments on efficiency and renewables; frameworks for investment in technologies especially carbon capture and storage and nuclear energy; and finally focused external energy relations pursued with a strong, single voice.

The time horizon used in the preparatory work is 2030 and beyond. The modelling and scenarios analysis work of the Commission is available on the Commission's website. It provided a basis for assessing alternative options for the Action Plan.

The European Council endorsed a clear, justified Action Plan, which was drawn up after broad consultation. This provides us with a good basis for the next priority – implementation.

 
 

(1) COM(2007) 1

 

Zapytanie nr 43 skierowane przez Ryszard Czarnecki (H-0511/07)
 Dotyczy: Wspólnej polityki energetycznej
 

Czy fakt braku wyraźnego odniesienia do wspólnej unijnej polityki energetycznej w dokumencie końcowym ostatniego szczytu w Brukseli oznacza faktyczne spowolnienie wypracowania takiej - przecież niezbędnej - polityki?

 
  
 

The further development and implementation of an Energy Policy for Europe has certainly not been placed on the back burner. The Commission is currently working according to the very comprehensive mandate given by the European Council in March 2007.

The main topic for the European Council in June 2007 was the mandate for the Reform Treaty. This mandate includes the introduction of an Article specifically on Energy. This goes further than the draft energy text from the 2004 draft Constitution. It adds the promotion of interconnection of networks as an aim of the common energy policy and a reference to the spirit of solidarity. A similar reference to solidarity should be made in the existing Article 100 on security of supply, quoting the particular case of energy.

The conclusions of the June 2007 European Council underlined the importance of the Energy Policy, and gave further guidance for the future. This includes a paragraph (40) on the European Union's integrated climate and energy policy. The European Council recalls its conclusions of March 2007 and stresses the importance of implementing effectively and speedily all aspects of the comprehensive energy Action Plan with a view to taking forward the Energy Policy for Europe. In the chapter on EU-Africa relations, paragraph 50 welcomes the intention to establish an Africa-EU energy partnership.

It is for the European Council in spring 2008 to review the progress made by the Commission, Parliament and Council in the implementation of the Energy Policy for Europe.

 

Pregunta nº 44 formulada por Manuel Medina Ortega (H-0449/07):
 Asunto: Carretera de La Aldea-Agaete (Gran Canaria, España)
 

¿Es consciente la Comisión de la importancia que reviste para los habitantes de la muy aislada Aldea de San Nicolás, en la Isla de Gran Canaria, la construcción de la nueva carretera con la Villa de Agaete, y está dispuesta la Comisión a ayudar a superar las dificultades que pueden derivar para su construcción de la necesidad de efectuar compensaciones que eviten el deterioro ambiental?

 
  
 

The Commission can confirm that pursuant to Written Questions P-0490/05 and E-1928/06 and to a complaint lodged on the same subject, the Commission made representations to the Spanish authorities in order to further investigate the compliance of the road project in question with applicable Community environmental law.

This file was discussed at the infringement meeting with the Spanish authorities held in Madrid on 26 April 2007. Further to the commitments made at this meeting, the competent authorities have provided the Commission with additional information on the procedures undertaken and on the measures foreseen in order to ensure full compliance with Community law in relation to this project. In particular, the Spanish authorities have indicated the importance of the project for the inhabitants of the municipality of La Aldea de San Nicolas. The competent authorities have also provided the Commission with information on measures foreseen to ensure that likely impacts of the project on areas protected remain compatible with Directive 92/43/CEE on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(1).

The assessment of the Spanish answer is currently under way. The Commission will inform the Honourable Member of its conclusions.

 
 

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992

 

Ερώτηση αρ. 45 του κ. Μανώλη Μαυρομμάτη (H-0450/07)
 Θέμα: Αρχαιοκαπηλία
 

Σύμφωνα με δημοσίευμα της ελληνικής εφημερίδας Ελευθεροτυπία, στο Μουσείο Κάρλος της Ατλάντα, στις Η.Π.Α., υπάρχουν κλεμμένες τρεις ελληνικές αρχαιότητες, όλες προϊόντα λαθρανασκαφής. Οι έρευνες έχουν αποκαλύψει ότι οι παράνομες συναλλαγές έγιναν το 2002 και το 2003 σε διαφορετικά κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ Δηλαδή, παρόλο που οι λαθρανασκαφές πραγματοποιηθήκαν στην Ελλάδα, οι τρεις ελληνικές αρχαιότητες έφτασαν στις Η.Π.Α. περνώντας και από άλλα κράτη μέλη, όπως την Ιταλία, αλλά και κράτη του ενιαίου ευρωπαϊκού χώρου, όπως η Ελβετία. Βάσει του Κανονισμού (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 3911/92(1), σχετικά με την εξαγωγή πολιτιστικών αγαθών και της οδηγίας 93/7/ΕΟΚ(2), σχετικά με την επιστροφή πολιτιστικών αγαθών που έχουν παράνομα απομακρυνθεί από το έδαφος κράτους μέλους, η Κοινότητα αποβλέπει στο να προστατέψει τους εθνικούς θησαυρούς σε κοινοτικό επίπεδο.

Δεδομένου ότι οι προληπτικοί έλεγχοι στα εξωτερικά σύνορα της Ένωσης δεν ήταν αποτελεσματικοί, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή ποια επιπλέον μέτρα προτίθεται να πάρει ώστε να ενισχυθεί η προστασία των εξωτερικών συνόρων των κρατών μελών; Προτίθεται η Επιτροπή να προτείνει στα κράτη μέλη νέους πιο αποτελεσματικούς τρόπους διοικητικής συνεργασίας μεταξύ τους, ώστε να αποτρέπονται παράνομες εξαγωγές εθνικών θησαυρών προς τρίτες χώρες και ποια ανάλογα μέτρα υπάρχουν στο πλαίσιο του ενιαίου ευρωπαϊκού χώρου;

 
  
 

The goods referred to in the Honourable Member's question have been obtained from illegal excavation in a Member State. One of the most effective measures to address such illegal activities is to tackle the problem at its source by enforcement of the relevant national legislation.

As regards the authorisation of export of cultural goods from the Community, Council Regulation No 3911/92(3) and Commission Regulation nNo 752/1993(4) establish a control system which is based on licences issued by the competent authorities and checked by the customs administrations of the Member States. It can, however, not be totally excluded that the established export control system is circumvented by criminal activities, particularly when goods are smuggled out of the Community. Preventing circumventions of this system is heavily dependent on the control measures taken by Member States.

To provide the necessary tools to improve general enforcement of prohibitions and restrictions on the import and export of goods, the following initiatives, proposed by the Commission, have recently been developed:

The recent amendments to the Community Customs Code(5) and its Implementing Provisions(6), have introduced a Common Risk Management Framework at Community level. New systems will be used to exchange risk-related information between Member States' customs authorities and with the Commission to further improve the targeting of customs controls.

The recent amendments to the Community customs legislation also foresee export declarations to be lodged in due time prior to departure. This will give the customs authorities of Member States the necessary time to carry out risk analysis and to select suspicious consignments for physical checks.

The Commission proposal for amendment to Regulation nNo 515/97(7) is at present subject to the legislative procedure in the Parliament and the Council. The amendment will improve the Customs Information System, allow this system to be used for analytical purposes, allow for an automatic data exchange between Member States and for exchange of information with third countries and ensure the control of personal data. It is also suggested in this amendment to create a Customs Files Identification Database (FIDE) the aim of which shall be to enable the Commission and Member States' customs investigations services to identify the competent services of the other Member States which are investigating or have investigated on one or more persons or undertakings, for the purpose of assisting the prevention, the investigation and the prosecution of operations which are or have been in breach of community customs legislation, including Community legislation related to the export of cultural goods from the EU.

The "Convention on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations" (Naples II Convention(8)), whose scope includes the prevention and detection of infringements to national customs provisions as well as to prosecute and punish infringements of Community and national provisions, provides an instrument for cooperation in the third pillar which is also applicable to Cultural Goods.

1. Regarding operational cooperation between the Member States' law enforcement agencies it is worth to note that the mandate of Europol also includes trafficking in cultural goods.

2. Council Directive 93/7/EEC (9)on the return of cultural goods provides for cooperation mechanisms and a procedure for returning national treasures when the cultural objects have left the territory of a Member State unlawfully and are in the territory of another Member State.

As regards cooperation mechanisms, the advisory Committee established under Article 8 of Council Regulation nNo 3911/92 and Article 17 of Council Directive 93/7/EEC adopted in 2001 guidelines for improving and strengthening administrative cooperation between the competent national authorities through the creation of a network of contacts and the exchange of information. They provide the institutions and persons concerned with useful information regarding the existence of Community instruments regulating the export of cultural objects to non-member countries and the return of objects which were unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State.

The second report on the application of Directive 93/7/EEC(10) concludes that there is a need for improvement in the cooperation and exchange of information between Member States. The Commission will examine how the guidelines on administrative cooperation can be improved.

 
 

(1) ΕΕ L 395 της 31.12.1992, σελ. 1.
(2) ΕΕ L 74 της 27.3.1993, σελ. 74.
(3) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3911/92 of 9 December 1992 on the export of cultural goods (OJ L 395, 31.12.1992) as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 of 14 April 2003 adapting to Decision 1999/468/EC the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council instruments adopted in accordance with the consultation procedure (qualified majority) (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003,)
(4) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 752/93 of 30 March 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3911/92 on the export of cultural goods (OJ L 77, 31.3.1993) as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 656/2004 of 7 April 2004 amending Regulation (EEC) No 752/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3911/92 on the export of cultural goods (OJ L 104, 8.4.2004)
(5) Regulation (EC) No 648/2005 of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 April 2005 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 117, 4.5.2005, p. 13–19)
(6) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2006 of 18 December 2006 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 360, 19.12.2006)
(7) COM(2006) 866 final
(8) Council Act of 18 December 1997 drawing up, on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, the Convention on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations (OJ C 24, 24/01/1998).
(9) Council Directive 93/7/EEC of 15 March 1993 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State (OJ L 74, 27.3.1993) as last amended by Directive 2001/38/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2001 amending Council Directive 93/7/EEC on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State (OJ L 187, 10.7.2001)
(10) COM (2005) 675 final

 

Question no 46 by Sarah Ludford (H-0455/07)
 Subject: EU-Russia visa facilitation agreement
 

Can the Commission explain why the EU consulates in Russia were unprepared for the entry into force on 1 June of the EU-Russia visa facilitation agreement, having apparently not by then received administrative instructions on its detailed implementation? Will the Commission ensure that Member States are better prepared for other visa facilitation agreements with Balkan and neighbourhood countries in future, given the importance of this matter for the EU's coherence, image and reputation as well as trade and people-to-people contacts?

 
  
 

The Agreement between the European Community and the Russian Federation on the facilitation of the issuance of visas to the citizens of the European Union and the Russian Federation(1) must be implemented as from its date of entry into force, i.e. 1 June 2007.

It is not excluded that some problems may occurred during the first days of the implementation of the Agreement. However, the Commission is not aware that EU consulates in the Russian Federation were unprepared for the implementation of the Agreement at the date of its entry into force, as suggested by the Honourable Member.

The Commission has drafted administrative guidelines, in collaboration with the Member States and the Russian authorities, addressed to the Member States' and Russian consulates and aimed at ensuring a harmonised implementation of the provisions of the Agreement. These draft guidelines will be submitted to the Joint Committee tasked to monitor the implementation of the Agreement to be set up in the near future with a view to their adoption and implementation by both Parties.

In any case, the Commission will raise the issue in the competent Council bodies in order to remind Member States of their obligations regarding the implementation of the Agreement and to collect information on possible difficulties in this implementation.

 
 

(1) J L129 of 17.5.2007

 

Question no 47 by Glenis Willmott (H-0457/07)
 Subject: Reducing food miles
 

The Commission recognises that the EU's current energy and transport policies are not sustainable. The EU is committed to reducing greenhouse emissions, yet current energy and transport policies would mean EU CO2 emissions would increase by around 5% by 2030. Part of the challenge involves addressing the increase in road transport, especially the increase in the area of freight transport, and I am aware that the Commission is looking at various measures aimed at reducing our dependence on heavily-polluting fossil fuels and enhancing our energy efficiency. With food travelling ever greater distances to reach us and in light of the environmental impact of the use of fossil fuel in delivery from overseas, as compared to local delivery, what role does the Commission see for relocalising food supply as part of the solution, reducing food miles and thereby helping to tackle climate change?

 
  
 

La Commission souhaite d'abord rappeler que la libre circulation des marchandises est une composante essentielle du marché unique, et comme telle, contribue de manière importante à la compétitivité et à la prospérité. De plus, la politique commune des transports doit éviter toute distorsion quant aux caractéristiques et itinéraires des produits transportés, ce qui relève de la liberté du commerce mais aussi dans ce cas de la politique agricole commune.

Cela étant, il est vital que cette politique soit soutenue par une mobilité durable comme le propose la Commission dans la révision à mi-parcours du Livre blanc de 2001 sur le transport et dans les stratégies apparentées de l'UE concernant le changement climatique et l'énergie. Il faut ainsi promouvoir un transport de marchandises plus propre moyennant des innovations technologiques et organisationnelles, notamment pour aboutir à une propulsion "verte", à l'application de systèmes intelligents de transport et à la promotion d'une logistique efficace. Il faut également poursuivre une politique adéquate d'investissements et d'accès aux marchés pour favoriser l'utilisation optimale de tous les modes de transport isolément ou en combinaison (co-modalité). Et il faut surtout veiller à ce que les coûts du transport reflètent les coûts réellement occasionnés, y inclus les effets négatifs sur l'environnement. La Commission travaille à l'élaboration d'une méthodologie pour l'internalisation des coûts externes dans l'Union Européenne qui sera prête en 2008.

Enfin, dans le cas présent, la Commission souligne que la plupart des exportations et des importations agricoles et alimentaires sont véhiculées par le transport maritime dont l’impact sur l’environnement est généralement inférieur aux autres modes de transports. Finalement, pour des pays en voie de développement, qui ne portent que peu de responsabilité pour le changement climatique mais qui en subissent les conséquences, la possibilité d'exporter leurs produits vers l'Europe reste d'une importance capitale, ce qui fait que la question de la provenance de nos denrées alimentaires ne peut pas se résumer en un programme de simple "relocalisation".

 

Zapytanie nr 48 skierowane przez Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (H-0458/07)
 Dotyczy: Polityka regionalna - nowe wskaźniki pozwalające mierzyć rozwój regionów UE
 

Produkt Krajowy Brutto (PKB) dobrze odzwierciedla rozwój gospodarczy i konwergencję gospodarczą regionów UE i jest stosunkowo łatwo wyliczalny, nie wystarcza on jednak do zmierzenia stopnia spójności społecznej czy terytorialnej.

Czy oprócz PKB i bezrobocia, Komisja Europejska mogłaby zaproponować inne wskaźniki, w tym wskaźniki jakościowe porównywalne na skalę europejską, do mierzenia i porównywania rozwoju poszczególnych regionów UE (np. ukazujące stan rozwoju zasobów ludzkich, dostępność infrastruktury itp.)?

 
  
 

Although Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will remain a very important indicator for the measurement of economic performance and cohesion amongst the regions, the Commission agrees that GDP alone is not able to tackle all the aspects of economic, social and territorial diversity. Therefore, the fourth cohesion report(1) uses a wide variety of indicators to describe economic, social and territorial cohesion. For example, employment and unemployment, research and development related indicators, the presence of highway infrastructure, the education level of the population, access to flights, hospitals and universities were all measured; although not all could be included in the final version of the report.

In 2008, the Commission will present a Communication on territorial cohesion which will further explore how this concept can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively.

 
 

(1) Growing regions, growing Europe. 4th report on economic and social cohesion. May 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.htm

 

Question n° 49 de Jacky Henin (H-0461/07)
 Objet: Sécurisation des parcs de stationnement pour les véhicules transportant des marchandises dangereuses
 

Comme toute marchandise, les marchandises dangereuses sont de plus en plus sur les routes de l'Union et de moins en moins dans les entrepôts ou les usines. Or la législation de l'Union sur le transport par route des marchandises dangereuses a un point faible inquiétant: les parcs de stationnement.

Ces parcs, au gré des marchandises qui y stationnent, peuvent constituer de fait des sites SEVESO. Rares sont les parkings publics gardiennés pour les véhicules transportant des matières dangereuses. D'une manière générale, le nombre de parkings existants est soit insuffisant, soit de capacité trop limitée pour permettre un stationnement réellement sécurisé. En cas d'accident sur ces parcs, les plans d'interventions sont fort lacunaires en raison de déficits d'informations sur la nature des matières dangereuses qui y stationnent et sur leurs éventuelles interactions.

Comment la Commission compte-t-elle renforcer et faire réellement appliquer la législation communautaire sur le stationnement de véhicules routiers transportant des marchandises dangereuses?

 
  
 

The transport of dangerous goods by road is covered in EU legislation by the Framework Directive 94/55/EC(1). In its annexes there are requirements for the use of secure parking spaces for certain substances and for all high consequence dangerous goods, namely those dangerous goods which are considered to be most attractive to terrorists. The annexes to the Directive are updated every two years and as part of that process the provisions on secure parking are continuously reviewed.

The provisions for the transport of dangerous goods are enforced under Directive 95/50/EC(2). In amendments made to this Directive at the end of 2005 a new system of risk categories was introduced, this system identifies the infringement of the secure parking rules as a risk "category II infringement", an infringement which creates a risk of personal injury or damage to the environment. The allocation of the infringements to risk categories is also under review.

From a more general point of view, the Commission is aware of the need of adequate parking facilities for road transport. In this context, it launched on 12 June 2007 a Pilot Project to encourage investments in secure parking areas along the trans-European network to protect hauliers against freight crime and improve their working conditions. The project will develop and test standards on five sites and comprises the construction of a new secure parking area near Valenciennes which includes a separated zone equipped for lorries with dangerous goods.

 
 

(1) OJ L 319 of 12.12.1994
OJ L 275 of 28.10.1996
(2) OJ L 249 of 17.10.1995
OJ L 087 of 08.04.2000

 

Question no 50 by James Nicholson (H-0463/07)
 Subject: Brazilian beef farms
 

Is the Commission aware of recent revelations of substantial abuse of regulations in Brazil in the area of beef farms, which appeared in the Irish Farmers’ Journal of 26 May 2007?

 
  
 

The Commission is aware of the articles that have been published on the Irish Farmers Journal.

The information provided by the articles does not, however, correspond to the findings of the Commission's Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) inspections carried out in Brazil.

The FVO inspections revealed certain shortcomings, but these did not justify, at this stage, a change of policy vis-à-vis Brazil, as far as beef imports are concerned.

The Commission remains vigilant on the matter and closely follows measures taken in Brazil to address the shortcomings identified by the FVO.

 

Question no 51 by Marian Harkin (H-0516/07)
 Subject: Residue testing of Brazilian beef
 

What residue testing is carried out on Brazilian beef imports into the EU, firstly by the Brazilian authorities in Brazil, and secondly by the EU Commission services in Brazil and at the point of entry into the EU? What are the results of these tests by both the Brazilian and EU authorities and, in the interests of consumer safety and consumer confidence, could the Commission provide detailed results of these tests for the last three years?

 
  
 

Food of animal origin may only be imported into the EU from a third country on condition that the country has submitted an annual plan setting out the guarantees which it offers as regards the monitoring of the groups of residues and substances referred to in Annex I to Council Directive 96/23/EC. The guarantees must have an effect at least equivalent to those provided for in that Directive. If the plans are judged to offer equivalent guarantees, a recommendation is made to retain that country on the list of third countries with approved residues monitoring plans. The list of approved third countries is published by means of a Commission Decision which is voted on by Member State representatives through the comitology procedure.

In respect of beef and several other commodities, the Brazilian residue plan is approved and Brazil is listed in the above Decision. The entire Brazilian residues plan is much improved relative to that seen in either the 2003 or 2005 Food and Veterinary Office inspection missions on residues. For those commodities where the plan was not judged to offer equivalent guarantees, delisting was carried out by the Commission (e.g. honey, farmed game).

When consignments of food of animal origin are imported into the EU through Border Inspection Posts, EU Member States decide, on the basis of risk assessment whether the consignments are to be tested for residues of any pharmacologically active substance or environmental contaminant.

The Brazilian residues plan for cattle has been approved by the Commission and, in respect of growth promoting compounds such as hormones and beta agonists, covers all of the substance groups listed in Council Directive 96/23/EC. Like Member States, Brazil publishes its results annually. Over the last three years there have been no residues of beta-agonists detected. Residues of zeranol – a hormone-like substance have been detected in approximately 0.1% of the cattle sampled in 2006 and 2005. Other than deliberate (illegal) use, residues of this substance can also occur due to contamination of animal feeding stuffs and this phenomenon has been reported world-wide, including in the Member States.

Member States report the results of residues testing of imported food of animal origin to the Commission services. In the event of a non-compliant result, the Member State would be obliged to notify the Commission and the other Member States via the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF).

In respect of Brazilian beef, the last RASFF notification for residues of either hormones or beta-agonists was in the year 2001, when the beta-agonist clembuterol was detected in a consignment of corned beef exported to the United Kingdom.

From 1 January 2006 to 25 June 2007, 274 consignments of Brazilian beef have been sampled by the Member States and tested for a variety of residues of veterinary medicines and contaminants including 57 for residues of hormonal substances. Member States have not reported any non-compliant results through the RASFF notification system.

In summary, the Commission can assure the Honourable Member that from a medicines and residues perspective, the importation of Brazilian beef does not breach the high sanitary standards that the European consumer is entitled to.

 

Question no 52 by Mairead McGuinness (H-0465/07)
 Subject: Standards applicable to the manufacture of children's car seats
 

Is the Commission aware that recent research conducted by a British consumer rights organisation(1) highlighted significant weaknesses in the standards that apply to the manufacture and testing of children's car seats?

In particular, the report concludes that the current minimum standard (ECE R44.03) that applies to the manufacture of such car seats is not high enough to adequately protect children in the event of a side-impact collision.

Does the Commission intend to examine this issue to ensure that effective and sufficiently stringent standards would apply to the manufacture and marketing of all child seats?

 
  
 

Since May 2006, all children have to be transported in seats adapted to their morphology and their age. This results from the provisions of Directive 2003/20/EC making the use of safety belts (2) obligatory and requiring minimum technical criteria with which the child seats have to comply.

The criteria are those of Regulation 44 of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in Geneva, which have been recently strengthened as regards the control of conformity of production. The European Community acceded to this regulation in 1997.

The Commission is aware of the recent test campaign on child seats, the results of which have been published on 5 June 2007 by the British consumer rights organization referred to by the Honorable Member. It points indeed to weaknesses in the current technical provisions applicable to the manufacture and testing of children's car seats.

The Commission is actively engaged in analyzing the test results and available research work with a view to determining how the relevant provisions can be improved.

 
 

(1) The research was conducted by Which? and full details are available at: https://www.which.co.uk/reports_and_campaigns/cars/reports/safety_and_security/car_safety/Child%20seats/Child_seats_esential_guide_574_74191_8.jsp
(2) Directive 2003/20/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 8 April 2003 amending Council
Directive 91/671/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to compulsory
use of safety belt in the vehicles of less than 3,5 tonnes – OJ L115, 9.5.2003.

 

Question no 53 by Liam Aylward (H-0469/07)
 Subject: Labelling of lamb products for sale in the EU
 

Can the European Commission make a statement as to what labelling and traceability measures it is seeking to implement, so as to ensure that EU consumers are fully aware into the future that they are buying in supermarkets or eating in restaurants EU-approved lamb products, lamb products from a particular EU Member State or lamb products imported from a third country into the EU?

 
  
 

The labelling of lamb products sold to the final consumer is ruled by the general food labelling Directive 2000/13/EC. According to those rules, the origin of the lamb has to be labelled only where failure to give such indication might mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product.

Therefore, according to EU rules, origin labelling is not compulsory for lamb products, as long as the labelling or presentation of the lamb product do not contain information that could mislead consumer, such as a picture or a flag suggesting a wrong idea on the true origin.

The very same food hygiene rules apply regardless of the origin of the lamb placed on the market within the EU. Also for food safety reasons, the traceability required by the General Food Law guarantees that the origin of the lamb is known throughout the whole food chain.

While the information on foodstuffs sold to the final consumer and to restaurants is regulated by European legislation, notably by Directive 2000/13/EC, the information provided to customers in restaurants is not.

However, the restaurant owner and personnel have all the information at their disposal and can share it with their customers upon request. Bearing also in mind that restaurants buy the raw material often on a day by day basis, strict regulatory requirements in that context do not seem appropriate.

The question of further rules on origin labelling of foodstuffs is part of the consultation and reflection process in the framework of the revision of the labelling Directive scheduled for the end of 2007.

 

Question no 54 by Eoin Ryan (H-0471/07)
 Subject: Combating doping in sport
 

Can the European Commission make a statement as to what up-to-date measures it is pursuing to combat doping in sport?

 
  
 

Due to the lack of an explicit EU competence for sport in the Treaties, the Commission's role in the fight against doping has so far remained limited.

However, at the Commission’s request, an opinion on doping in sport was issued on 11 November 1999 by the European Group on Ethics. Shortly afterwards, on 1 December 1999, a Community support plan, which was given a favourable reception by Parliament, was adopted. This plan made it possible, among other things, to co-finance 16 pilot projects in 2000-2001 and 16 more in 2001-2002. The total amount of funding was € 7 360 212. Of the more important projects, mention should be made of the first transnational study devoted to doping practices in body-building premises in Europe, whose publication struck a cord in many quarters. An external evaluation of the first 16 pilot projects has been carried out and sent to Parliament. In addition, in 2004, a project aiming at harmonizing international knowledge of biomedical side effects of doping and supplementing and disseminating developed materials about health side effects of doping and drug abuse with regard to different age-groups, the addictive potential and gender specific differences, has been co-funded in the framework of the Public Health Programme 2003-2008. It is lasting for 36 months.

The Commission has also taken an active part in the establishment of the new World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

Recently, Member State Sport Ministers, meeting in Stuttgart in March 2007, decided to launch a network of national anti-doping organisations of Member States. While respecting the intergovernmental nature of this work and the role played by the Member States, the Commission has assisted the German Presidency in setting up this network, including a kick-off meeting in Brussels on 25 June 2007. The network will focus its work on cooperation and exchange of information in areas such as law, medicine, testing procedures, research, education and prevention.

Generaly speaking, the Commission recognises that doping poses a threat to sport worldwide, including European sports, undermining the principle of open and fair competition. It also poses a serious threat to individual health, and there is a need to link law-enforcement and health prevention efforts.

These ideas will be reflected in the planned White Paper on Sport.

 

Question no 55 by Seán Ó Neachtain (H-0473/07)
 Subject: EU tariffs on the importation of cooked whelk meats from South Korea
 

The European Union applies a 20% tariff on the importation of cooked whelk meats from South Korea into the EU. The tariff code for these importations is 1605-90-30.

Does the European Union have any intention to reduce or eliminate this tariff arrangement in the near future?

 
  
 

As the Honourable Member rightly points out, the tariff for imports From South Korea into the European Union of cooked whelk meats is a duty of 20%.

As the Honourable Member is certainly aware, negotiations have recently begun with the aim of concluding a Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and South Korea. These are wide ranging and important negotiations.

The tariff regime for fishery products will be considered during those negotiations, but it is too early to make any judgement as to possible modifications to the tariffs applied to the imports of this particular product.

 

Question no 56 by Chris Davies (H-0476/07)
 Subject: Implementation of EU legislation by Member States
 

Will the Commission state on how many occasions in the past 12 months it has requested that the issue of inadequate implementation of EU legislation by Member States be placed on the agenda of the various meetings of the Council of Ministers?

 
  
 

Suivant une vérification initiale effectuée, il ne semble pas y avoir eu de cas où, au cours des 12 derniers mois, l'un ou l'autre dossier d'infraction au droit communautaire aurait fait l'objet d'une demande formelle de mise à l'ordre du jour d'une session du Conseil des Ministres.

Cela dit, il est vrai en revanche qu'un débat général peut survenir au sein du Conseil à l'une ou l'autre occasion; par exemple, lors de la présentation du rapport annuel sur la mise en œuvre de tel programme ou plan d'action. Au cours des douze derniers mois, il en fut ainsi notamment dans les cas suivants:

- at several meetings of the Competitiveness Council in 2006- 2007, Member States have been encouraged to cooperate with the Commission to make efforts on their side to ensure that the aims on the Better Regulation agenda, which include correct application of community law, are achieved;

- implementation is sometimes presented in the Council of Ministers as a topic for information or discussion in connection with the Internal Market Scoreboard, i.e. twice a year. During the competitiveness Council of February 2007, the Council decided to lower the target transposition deficit on the basis of the good results achieved by Member States in December 2006 from 1,5% to 1% by 2009.

A titre indicatif, un autre exemple imminent peut être cité dans ce contexte:

- the Commission adopted a Report on the implementation of the Hague Programme for 2006 on the 3rd July 2007(1), which is a response to the Council's call on the Commission to submit an annual report on implementation of the Hague Programme and Action Plan ('scoreboard'). In addition to monitoring of the adoption process, its purpose is also to examine national implementation of Justice, Freedom and Security policies. This includes both instruments under the EC Treaty and instruments adopted under Title VI of the EU Treaty in that field.

-

 
 

(1) COM (2007) 373 final

 

Question no 57 by Robert Evans (H-0478/07)
 Subject: Somali communities
 

In the UK alone there are 400 000 Somali speaking people, and up to a million in the EU. Has the Commission considered any support structures for the Somali communities in Europe?

 
  
 

The question of the Honourable Member raises the issue of initiatives undertaken by the Commission to support immigrant communities, namely Somali ones, in the EU. The initiatives of the Commission do not focus on specific communities. However, all immigrant communities can benefit, and are encouraged to do so, from policy and financial support in the area of integration of third-country nationals.

Any policy efforts, in order to be successful, must be underpinned by adequate financial resources. Since 2003, the Commission has been co-financing trans-national integration projects which promote cooperation between Member States, regional/local authorities and other stakeholders under INTI(1) Preparatory Actions. In the framework program Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows (2007-2013), the European Fund for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals will support the integration challenges that Europe is facing. The Fund aims at creating a new form of solidarity in order to support the efforts of Member States in enabling third-country nationals of different cultural, religious, linguistic and ethnic backgrounds to settle and take actively part in all aspects of European societies. The Fund will support the development of national integration strategies and action plans which take into account the CBPs(2), the coordination of national integration policies and the promotion of structural exchange of experiences, best practices and information on integration (€ 825 million for 2007-2013).

Regarding in particular the integration of those third-country nationals who have been recognized by Member States as in need of international protection and who have been subsequently granted a protection status (refugee or subsidiary protection status), there are specific EU instruments which regulate and promote it, including through financial support. More specifically, Council Directive 2004/83/EC on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals and stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection (the "Qualification Directive") imposes specific obligations on Member States to make provisions for appropriate integration programs and to create pre-conditions which guarantee the access to such programs for these categories of third-country nationals. Moreover, the European Refugee Fund, which is in place since 2000, has been providing comprehensive and well-targeted financial support to the efforts by Member States to establish and operate integration programs for these groups, as well as to the efforts by all other stakeholders to carry out relevant transnational actions or other integration actions of interest to the Community as a whole.

 
 

(1) Integration of Third Country Nationals
(2) Common Basic Principles

 

Ερώτηση αρ. 58 της κ. Κατερίνας Μπατζελή (H-0484/07)
 Θέμα: Καθορισμός των πόλεων ως "πόλων έλξης/ανάπτυξης" στα πλαίσια του ΕΣΠΑ 2007-2013 (Ελλάδα) για ενίσχυση της απασχόλησης
 

Απώτερος στόχος των κοινοτικών διαρθρωτικών πολιτικών είναι η αντιμετώπιση της διαρθρωτικής ανεργίας με μέτρα αύξησης της απασχόλησης, της ανάπτυξης και της κοινωνικής συνοχής. Οι κοινοτικές διαρθρωτικές πολιτικές θα πρέπει να συμβάλλουν προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή με τα προγράμματά τους.

Ποια είναι τα κριτήρια για τον ορισμό των πόλεων ως «πόλων έλξης/ανάπτυξης» από τα κράτη μέλη;

Υπάρχει περιορισμός στον καθορισμό του αριθμού τους στο ΕΣΠΑ 2007-2013 ανά κράτος μέλος;

Ποιος θα πρέπει να είναι ο ρόλος τους και ο τρόπος λειτουργίας τους ώστε να ενισχύσουν και την αναπτυξιακή πολιτική των άλλων περιοχών/πόλεων που όμως δεν έχουν ορισθεί ως πόλεις «πόλοι έλξης/ανάπτυξης»;

Σε ποιο στάδιο βρίσκονται οι συζητήσεις της Επιτροπής με τα κράτη μέλη για τον τελικό καθορισμό των πόλεων ως «πόλων έλξης/ανάπτυξης» καθώς και για την έγκριση των προγραμμάτων τους;

Υπάρχει δυνατότητα διεύρυνσης του αριθμού των πόλεων ως «πόλων έλξης/ανάπτυξης» στην Ελλάδα, πέραν των μέχρι σήμερα προτεινόμενων από το ΕΣΠΑ, στα πλαίσια των ΠΕΠ, με την προσθήκη π.χ. της Λαμίας (έδρας της Περιφέρειας Στερεάς Ελλάδας στο 3ο ΚΠΣ), μιάς περιοχής η οποία έχει σημαντικά προβλήματα αποβιομηχάνισης και αυξανόμενης ανεργίας;

 
  
 

The Community Strategic Guidelines on Cohesion (CSG) adopted by the Council on 6 October 2006(1), underline the importance of urban centres as contributors to growth and more and better jobs. In this respect they call, among other things, for actions to promote a more balanced, polycentric development, by developing the urban network at national and Community level, and for making strategic choices in identifying and strengthening growth poles and their contribution to the promotion of the Lisbon Strategy. The CSG refer in this context to urban areas with over 50,000 inhabitants and to their potential in terms of entrepreneurship, innovation, research and technological development, and employability, fields that are in full agreement with the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Employment and constitute the corner stone of the revised Lisbon Strategy. From this it follows that, even if the CSG do not refer to specific numbers of growth poles, the areas that should qualify as such, are necessarily limited because of the development potential they have to demonstrate.

The National Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes of almost all Member States consider it important to ensure the development of strong urban centres in order to spread growth and employment to a larger area as well as to the rural hinterland. Urban areas and regional centres are considered as conveyors of the regions' knowledge and skills excellence, promoters of competitiveness, development drivers and growth engines for the entire region in which the urban centre is located. The submitted programmes stress the importance of the links between such growth centres and their hinterland and surrounding rural areas. A substantial part of the planned Structural Funds' expenditure will be dedicated to improving competitiveness through promotion of innovation, and most of these investments will be realised in urban development centres.

The Greek National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) foresees that all main urban centres of Greece can function as development poles. In line with the priorities of the above mentioned Community Strategic Guidelines and in the framework of the application of the Lisbon Strategy, it provides a set of criteria for identifying such poles. As mentioned in the text of the Greek NSRF, the categorization which follows from the application of these criteria can be subject to review, depending on the future development of the areas concerned and their contribution to the promotion of the Lisbon Strategy. In any case, the Commission will strongly encourage that plans for development poles are the subject of a call for proposals, to be opened in the first half of 2008. Actors from all important urban centres in Greece can participate in this call.

While other areas may apply for assistance in favour of similar activities, the development pole concept is an instrument to promote, in a specific geographical area with the required characteristics, concentrated and coordinated interventions in particular in favour of innovation, research and technological development, knowledge transfer, information and communication technologies, and centres of excellence for education and training.

 
 

(1) OJ L291, 21 October 2006

 

Klausimas Nr. 60, pateikė Danutė Budreikaitė (H-0492/07)
 Tema: Dėl regioninės politikos
 

ES regioninė politika, kurios įgyvendinimui panaudojamas vienas iš struktūrinių fondų – Regioninės plėtros fondas, – skirta išsivystymo lygio skirtumams tarp regionų pašalinti.

Lietuva nurodyta kaip vienas iš regionų ir paramą gauna kaip vienas vientisas regionas. Tačiau Lietuvą geografiškai ir kultūros tradicijų požiūriu sudaro keturi regionai, kurie žymiai skiriasi savo išsivystymo lygiu. Skirtingas ekonominis išsivystymo lygis, užimtumas, socialinės problemos.

Norėčiau paklausti Komisijos, kokios galimos regioninės politikos lankstesnio įgyvendinimo galimybės? Ar Lietuva negalėtų Regioninės plėtros fondo panaudoti decentralizuotai, paskirstydama jį savo regionams pagal jų išsivystymo lygį ir poreikį suvienodinti išsivystymo lygį šalies viduje? Kokių veiksmų Lietuva galėtų imtis, siekdama įgyvendinti tokį lankstesnį požiūrį?

 
  
 

It is the responsibility of Member States to decide on the structures for implementing European regional policy. The Commission ensures that these structures are consistent with the provisions of the regulatory framework. This is the case for Lithuania which, compared to the 2004-2006 period, has taken a number of steps to improve the regional allocation of funding.

In particular, the NSRF for 2007-2013 provides targeted support to n regional economic growth centres and problem territories by assisting in the economic, social and cultural development of these selected geographical areas.

Lithuania has also identified regional development as one of the four horizontal themes of the NSRF to ensure a comprehensive approach throughout the strategy, and has set as an objective that the gap between the level of development of the poorest regions and the Lithuanian average will not have increased by 2013.

The Commission encourages Members States to adhere to the partnership and the subsidiarity principles to ensure that the needs of regions and local territories are properly taken into account and that local authorities, as participants in the decision process, own the projects that are identified in the context of the development of these regional policies. These principles have been taken fully into account in the 2007-2013 NSRF and the respective Operational Programmes. Lithuania has improved substantially - with the creation of 11 working groups with 376 members - the participation of partners, regional and local authorities among others, in the NSRF preparation compared to the 2004-2006 programme. These authorities will be represented in the monitoring committees for the programmes allowing them to have full information on the progress and achievements of the relevant programmes.

The NSRF 2007-2013 foresees one Operational Programme specifically to deal with promoting cohesion. It aims to promote economic and social cohesion ensuring a similar living environment irrespective of the living place. The first priority targets the creation of the necessary preconditions for strengthening the potential of local development; the second priority aims to ensure accessible and high quality essential public services provided by healthcare, education and state employment promotion policy institutions; and the third priority aims to achieve better quality of environment with a focus on improving energy efficiency.

In addition, the NSRF foresees greater involvement of the Regional Councils in the administration of the issues that fall under the competence of local authorities, issues that in the 2004-2006 Programme were managed at central administration level. Regional Councils will pre-select the investment projects and local authorities will be responsible for their implementation.

 

Vraag nr. 61 van Johan Van Hecke (H-0495/07)
 Betreft: Discriminatie inzake hypothecair krediet
 

België en Nederland hebben verschillende wetgeving voor de fiscale aftrek van hypotheeklasten: voor een Belg is een hypothecaire lening slechts beperkt aftrekbaar is (zowel op vlak van hoogte als de periode) terwijl voor Nederlanders de intresten onbeperkt aftrekbaar zijn. Nederlandse banken bieden aan Nederlandse hypotheeknemers (ook bij aanschaf van onroerend goed in België) formules die in België niet kunnen zoals aflossingsvrije hypotheken. Aangezien de prijzen van vastgoed in Nederland veel hoger zijn dan in België, zijn Nederlanders graag bereid om meer dan de marktwaarde te betalen voor vastgoed in de grensstreek, wat voor Belgen met een zelfde inkomen dikwijls onmogelijk is, gezien de verschillen in fiscale systemen. Vastgoed in de grensstreek wordt zo hoger gewaardeerd dan de werkelijke prijs.

Meent de Commissie dat het hier om discriminatie gaat waarbij de Belgische gediscrimineerd wordt tegenover de Nederlandse belastingplichtige. Kunnen banken op basis van de verschillende wetgeving andere vormen van hypothecair krediet aanbieden aan Nederlanders dan aan Belgen en behelst dit geen inbreuk op artikel 49 van het EG-Verdrag?

 
  
 

The Commission is aware of the existence of practices whereby private banks treat non-residents differently from residents.

These practices may be the consequence of differences in tax rules or may be based on purely commercial considerations.

In the absence of harmonisation of tax rules, the tax treatment of mortgage loans is a matter for each Member State. The resulting differences in tax burdens are not forbidden discrimination in the meaning of the EC Treaty.

In cases where differences are based on a bank's commercial considerations, the Commission is usually not in a position to take any action.

 

Vraag nr. 62 van Mia De Vits (H-0499/07)
 Betreft: Herziening richtlijn Europese Ondernemingsraad (94/45/EG)
 

In haar schriftelijke antwoord van 19.6.2007 op mijn vraag over de sluiting van Nexans in Huizingen (België) (H-0421/07) stelt de Commissie dat zij diverse opties bestudeert om te bereiken dat de Europese Ondernemingsraden ten volle hun recht op informatie en raadpleging kunnen uitoefenen.

Kan de Commissie mij meedelen welke opties er op tafel liggen? Zal zij een verbetering van de richtlijn voorstellen en wat is het tijdspad? Informatie en raadpleging komt in minstens 3 verschillende richtlijnen aan bod (94/45/EG(1), 2001/23/EG(2), 2005/56/EG(3)). Heeft het zin aan 3 richtlijnen tegelijk te sleutelen, terwijl ze allemaal min of meer dezelfde problematiek (informatie en raadpleging van werknemers bij grensoverschrijdende herstructureringen) regelen? Zou het niet doeltreffender zijn één globale regeling uit te werken? In hetzelfde antwoord zegt de Commissie dat Nexans Harnesses geen Europese steun heeft gekregen in Slowakije. Kan de Commissie mij meedelen of er in andere Lidstaten Europese steun aan het bedrijf werd toegekend?

 
  
 

La directive 2002/14/CE établissant un cadre général pour l’information et la consultation des travailleurs(4) est le principal instrument législatif communautaire régissant l'information et la consultation des travailleurs au niveau national. La directive 98/59/CE(5) et la directive 2001/23/CE(6) prévoient une information et une consultation nationales, ainsi que d'autres dispositions, dans les circonstances particulières de licenciements collectifs et de transferts d’entreprise. Au niveau transnational, l'information et la consultation des travailleurs sont régies de manière générale par la directive 94/45/CE sur les comités d’entreprise européens(7). Les directives 2001/86/CE(8), 2003/72/CE(9) et 2005/56/CE(10) sont applicables dans les cas particuliers de constitution de sociétés européennes ou sociétés coopératives européennes ainsi que de fusions transfrontalières de sociétés et ne régissent pas seulement l'information et la consultation des travailleurs, mais aussi d'autres modalités de leur implication ainsi que des questions relatives au droit des sociétés.

La Commission entend renforcer la cohérence entre ces instruments législatifs communautaires. Par ailleurs, elle examine les voies permettant de résoudre les problèmes constatés dans l'application pratique de la directive sur les comités d'entreprise européens et d'assurer l'effectivité des droits d'information et consultation des travailleurs. Elle examine cette question notamment dans le cadre de la préparation du rapport sur l'application de la directive 2002/14/CE. Pour ce qui est des possibilités de révision de la législation, la Commission renvoie à la réponse qu'elle a apportée à la question H-0421/07.

En ce qui concerne un éventuel soutien apporté à Nexans Harnesses par d'autres Etats membres, étant donné les délais extrêmement courts, nous ne sommes malheureusement pas en mesure d'apporter une réponse complète.

A ce jour, nous pouvons confirmer les données suivantes:

- Aucune subvention à Nexans Harnesses du FSE au Danemark pour la période 2000-07.

- Aucune subvention à Nexans Harnesses du FSE en Allemagne.

- Aucune subvention à Nexans Harnesses en Estonie, Suède, Lituanie, Finlande, Belgique.

- According to the information provided by the managing authorities in Poland, Cyprus and Greece, Nexans Harnesses has not received any European Social Fund support.

En ce qui concerne l'Italie, la Commission n'a pas été informée d'éventuelles contributions octroyées à l'entreprise en question. Nous nous réservons le droit de contacter, si nécessaire, les autorités de gestion concernées afin d'obtenir des renseignements plus concrets en la matière.

- la Commission a pris contact avec les autorités espagnoles mais leur réponse ne nous est pas encore parvenue. Nous ne manquerons pas d'informer l'honorable parlementaire dès que possible.

La Commission attend des informations de la part des autres Etats membres.

 
 

(1) PB L 254 van 30.9.1994, blz. 64.
(2) PB L 82 van 22.3.2001, blz. 16.
(3) PB L 310 van 25.11.2005, blz. 1.
(4) Directive 2002/14/CE du Parlement et du Conseil du 11 mars 2002 établissant un cadre général relatif à l’information et la consultation des travailleurs dans la Communauté européenne - JO L80 du 23 mars 2002
(5) Directive 98/59/CE du Conseil du 20 juillet 1998 concernant le rapprochement des législations des Etats membres relatives aux licenciements collectifs- JO L225 du 12.08.98
(6) Directive 2001/23/CE du Conseil du 12 mars 2001 concernant le rapprochement des législations des Etats membres relatives maintien des droits des travailleurs en cas de transferts d'entreprises, d'établissements ou de parties d'établissements- JO L82 du 22.03.2001
(7) Directive 94/45/CE du Conseil du 22 septembre 1994 concernant l’institution d’un comité d’entreprise européen ou d’une procédure dans les entreprises de dimension communautaire et les groupes d’entreprises de dimension communautaire en vue d’informer et de consulter les travailleurs, JO L254 du 30.09.1994
(8) Directive 2001/86/CE du Conseil du 8 octobre 2001 complétant le statut de la Société européenne pour ce qui concerne l'implication des travailleurs,  JO L 294 du 10.11.2001
(9) Directive 2003/72/CE du Conseil du 22 juillet 2003 complétant le statut de la société coopérative européenne pour ce qui concerne l'implication des travailleurs, JO L 207 du 18.8.2003
(10) Directive 2005/56/CE du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 26 octobre 2005 sur les fusions transfrontalières de capitaux,  JO L 310 du 25.11.2005

 

Zapytanie nr 63 skierowane przez Zbigniew Krzysztof Kuźmiuk (H-0501/07)
 Dotyczy: Relacji Unia Europejska - Rosja
 

Jesienią tego roku miną dwa lata od momentu, kiedy Rosja wprowadziła embargo na dostawę produktów żywnościowych, w tym mięsa, z Polski na swój rynek. Mimo stanowiska Komisji Europejskiej, że rosyjskie embargo powinno być zniesione bez zbędnej zwłoki, oraz upływu kolejnych miesięcy, problem nie jest w dalszym ciągu rozwiązany. Jednocześnie finalizowane są działania zmierzające do przyjęcia Rosji do Światowej Organizacji Handlu.

Czy Unia Europejska zamierza brak postępu w sprawie embarga wykorzystać na tym forum i zobowiązać Rosję do rozwiązania tej sprawy przed jej przyjęciem do WTO?

 
  
 

The Commission is aware of the situation concerning the Russian ban on Polish exports of meat and attaches great importance to finding a solution to this issue, which has lasted for too long already. The Commission's position is that the Russian ban on Polish meat exports are disproportionate and therefore need to be lifted without any further delay.

The Commission's efforts both on the technical level as well as at the political level are continuing, in close coordination with Poland and the EU Presidency. It is the Commission's view that a solution to the problem should primarily be sought through continued work between the relevant experts, but from a systemic point of view the issue is also part of the sanitary and phytosanitary discussions within Russia's World Trade Organisation (WTO) accession negotiations. Clearly such issues are relevant to Russia's WTO accession.

 

Spørgsmål nr. 64 af Anne E. Jensen (H-0502/07)
 Om: Globaliseringsfonden
 

Der har på det seneste været forlydender i pressen om, at der kun har været meget begrænset interesse for at søge globaliseringsfondens midler. Siden fonden blev etableret i 2006, har kun ganske få søgt om andel i fondens 500 millioner euro.

Vil Kommissionen gøre rede for, hvad status er for globaliseringsfonden? Hvor mange har søgt globaliseringsfonden om midler? Hvilke begivenheder udløser en ansøgning til globaliseringsfonden?

 
  
 

1. The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) came into force at the beginning of 2007, with the objective of supporting workers made redundant due to changes in world trade patterns. An amount of up to € 500 million can be made available each year. This amount is entered in a reserve in the budget and is mobilised following request by the Commission to the budgetary authority.

To date, the Commission has received three formal applications for an EGF contribution, two from France and one from Germany:

- An application submitted on 9 March 2007 and completed on 11 May 2007, concerning over 1000 redundancies in subcontractors of Peugeot-Citroën (PSA). France has requested a contribution of €2.558.250 in order to assist 267 workers made redundant as a result of bankruptcy of their employer, a parts supplier to PSA.

- An application submitted on 27 March 2007 and completed on 11 May 2007, concerning over 1000 redundancies in subcontractors of Renault (RSA). France has requested a contribution of €1.258.030 in order to assist 628 workers made redundant as a result of the bankruptcy of their employer, a parts supplier to RSA.

- An application submitted on 27 June 2007, concerning redundancies in the German plants of the Taiwanese mobile phone manufacturer BenQ. Germany has requested a contribution of €14.266.155 in order to assist 3300 workers made redundant when Ben-Q stopped all financial support to its subsidiary companies in Germany.

The Commission has approved the first two proposals for submission to the budgetary authority on 25 June 2007. The third proposal is currently being analysed by the Commission.

2. The EGF intervenes when there have been over 1000 redundancies in an enterprise and its suppliers, or amongst several enterprises in a single industrial sector in one, or two, contiguous regions. Exceptions can be made for small labour markets or in exceptional circumstances, both of which must be justified by the applicant Member State. In order for the EGF to be mobilised, the Member State concerned must present an application, which inter alia clearly proves the link between the redundancies and the changes in world trade patterns.

 

Question no 65 by Feleknas Uca (H-0503/07)
 Subject: Dismissal of Mayor Demirbas and dissolution of the Sur Municipal Council in response to the municipal council's decision to provide multilingual municipal services for local people
 

On 5 January 2007 the Turkish Ministry of the Interior called on the State Council to dismiss Mayor Demirbas and dissolve the Sur Municipal Council in response to the municipal council’s decision to provide multilingual municipal services for local people. The State Council has since voted in favour of the dismissal of Mr Demirbas.

How does the Commission assess the local legal and administrative context in which the Ministry of Interior’s action to dismiss the mayor and dissolve the council was taken?

What impact does the Commission think the action taken by the Turkish Ministry of the Interior will have on local efforts to promote democracy and cultural freedoms in the region and in Turkey?

To what extent, in the Commission's view, does the situation reflect disregard for the principles of democratisation and respect for human rights and cultural freedoms that are not only promoted by the Council of Europe, but also officially endorsed by the Turkish Government through European documents such as the Charter of Local Self-Government?

What action does the Commission plan to take in response to the legal, administrative and psychological pressure currently being exerted on mayors from the Democratic Turkey Party (DTP) and the rising political tension in the region?

 
  
 

The Commission is aware of the decision of the Turkish Council of State to dismiss from office the Mayor of the Sur Municipality Mr. Abdullah Demirbaş and to dissolve the Sur Municipal Council.

It is our understanding that the Court's decision was taken on the grounds that providing multilingual municipal services to the general public is not in line with the Turkish constitutional principles, that the language of the State is Turkish and that no language other than Turkish shall be taught as a mother tongue (Articles 3 and 42 of the Constitution respectively).

As spelled out in the 2006 Accession Partnership, Turkey needs to ensure cultural diversity and promote respect for and protection of minorities in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights and the principles laid down in the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, and in line with best practice in Member States. In this respect, the first instance decision of the Council of State is of concern.

An appeal procedure is ongoing. The Commission will continue to follow up on further developments of this case, and take it up with the Turkish authorities as necessary and appropriate. The Commission will further report on it in its progress report, to be published in autumn 2007.

 

Spørgsmål nr. 66 af Karin Riis-Jørgensen (H-0504/07)
 Om: Aktieklasser
 

I maj 2007 blev ISS-undersøgelsen om proportionalitet mellem kapital og kontrol i børsnoterede selskaber offentliggjort. Samtlige 16 adspurgte lande viste sig at have forskellige aktieklasser. Undersøgelsen indeholdt ikke noget entydigt bevis for, at forskellige aktieklasser hindrer investeringer eller skader konkurrenceevnen.

Opdelingen i aktieklasser ser ej heller ud til at hæmme antallet af virksomhedsovertagelser, og en opdeling af aktier som f.eks. i Danmark lægger ingen hindringer i vejen for gennemsigtighed i selskaber.

Kan Kommissionen derfor svare på, om ikke selskaber selv er bedst til at vurdere, hvorledes deres virksomhed skal skrues sammen? Da Kommissionen tidligere har udtalt, at man ikke ønsker at kigge på overtagelsesdirektivet, før det skal revideres i 2009, bør man så ikke også set i lyset af dagsordenen med bedre lovgivning helt afholde sig fra at tage eventuelle skridt - som for eksempel en henstilling - inden da?

 
  
 

As the question of the Honourable Member mentions, an external study in relation to proportionality between capital and control has recently been conducted for the Commission. The final report was published on the internet on 4 June 2007.(1)The study provides a useful factual background to the issue of proportionality between capital and control in listed companies. The scope of the study was broad, in order to take account of concerns expressed inter alia by the Nordic countries. Shares with multiple voting rights, but also other mechanisms such as voting caps, non-voting preferential shares, company pyramids, etc. were examined in the study.

The Commission is currently analysing the conclusions of the study. It appears that, on the basis of the academic research available, there is no conclusive evidence of a causal link between deviations from the proportionality principle between capital and control and either (1) the economic performance of listed companies or (2) their governance. However, some evidence suggests that investors perceive these mechanisms negatively and consider that more transparency would be helpful in making investment decisions.

This study is only one step in the process. It will provide input for an impact assessment that the Commission is currently carrying out. It is envisaged that this impact assessment will be published in autumn 2007. The impact assessment will fully take into account such key issues as contractual freedom in the context of special voting arrangements.

The Commission's research on the issue of proportionality between capital and control is still at the exploratory stage. Until the publication of the study mentioned above, the Commission didn't have a clear picture of how this issue affected European listed companies and whether it had an impact on their economic performance. Now that these facts are on the table, the Commission will examine, with an open mind and on the basis of all available information, whether there is a need for Commission action in this field and will decide how to proceed further. No decision on this issue has been taken yet and the possibility of not taking any action is also being considered.

 
 

(1) See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/shareholders/indexb_en.htm

 

Ερώτηση αρ. 67 της κ. Διαμάντως Μανωλάκου (H-0505/07)
 Θέμα: Παρακολούθηση των εργαζομένων στους χώρους δουλειάς
 

Το τελευταίο διάστημα επεκτείνεται και γενικεύεται η εγκατάσταση ηλεκτρονικών συστημάτων παρακολούθησης των εργαζόμενων μέσα στους χώρους δουλειάς (κάμερες παρακολούθησης, ηλεκτρονικές κάρτες πρόσβασης, μηχανισμοί συλλογής βιομετρικών στοιχείων όπως δακτυλικά αποτυπώματα κλπ.). Οι λόγοι ασφαλείας που επικαλούνται οι εργοδότες είναι εντελώς αστήρικτοι, καθώς παρόμοιοι λόγοι υπήρχαν και προηγούμενα και υπάρχουν πολλά τεχνικά μέσα για την προστασία και την ασφάλεια των επιχειρήσεων, χωρίς να απαιτείται η παρακολούθηση των εργαζομένων. Σκοπός των επιχειρήσεων είναι να παγιώσουν κλίμα τρομοκρατίας ανάμεσα στους εργαζόμενους, ελέγχοντας και εντατικοποιώντας την εργασία, παρακολουθώντας την κοινωνική συμπεριφορά και τη συνδικαλιστική δράση των εργαζομένων. Κανείς δεν γνωρίζει ποια είναι η χρήση των ηλεκτρονικών αρχείων που τηρούνται στο πλαίσιο της παρακολούθησης από πλευράς των εργοδοτών.

Με βάση το γεγονός ότι η παρακολούθηση είναι παράνομη και πλήττει βασικά δημοκρατικά δικαιώματα και προσωπικά δεδομένα των εργαζομένων, καταδικάζει η Επιτροπή τις ενέργειες αυτές των επιχειρήσεων; Προτίθεται να λάβει μέτρα για την αφαίρεση των συστημάτων παρακολούθησης και τη διασφάλιση της ελευθερίας της συνδικαλιστικής δράσης στους χώρους δουλειάς;

 
  
 

Directive 95/46/EC(1) provides for the legal framework for the processing of personal data in the EU and lays down specific rules in order to protect the individuals' rights. This framework, as well as the national data protection laws implementing the Directive, fully applies to employees' personal data. This Directive is of a general nature and does not, in principle, contain employment sector specific provisions. Its provisions though are fully applicable to any type of automated or non-automated processing of personal data, among which is video-surveillance practices, e-access cards or processing of the employees' biometric data.

Any employer, in his/her capacity of data controller of his/her employees' personal data is subject to the provisions of Directive 95/46/EC and has specific obligations accordingly, in particular the obligation to inform in an appropriate manner the data subjects, to notify the national supervisory authority of any processing of personal data and to act in compliance with the data protection principles provided in the Directive.

According to the above principles, personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, collected for specific, explicit and legitimate purposes, must be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and must be accurate and kept up to date (Article 6 of the Directive).

The Article 29 Data Protection Working Party(2) has issued a number of opinions and working documents concerning the application of the Community provisions to the processing of workers' personal data. The main document is the Opinion 8/2001 on the Processing of Personal Data in the Employment Context that deals exactly with the matter and in which one can find the main guidelines for the interpretation of the relevant general provisions of the Directive. Another relevant document is the Working Document on the Surveillance of Electronic Communications in the Workplace (WP 55) of 29 May 2002. In addition other documents of the WP29 concerning the protection of personal data in the sector of telecommunications, electronic communications and video surveillance provide guidelines that also apply to the processing of personal data in employment context.(3)

Directive 95/46/EC on data protection has been implemented in all national jurisdictions of the 27 Member States. In some Member States, there are specific employment-related legal provisions(4) and/or opinions or codes of conduct adopted by Data Protection Supervisory Authorities(5) which address the issue of electronic monitoring of workers at the workplace. Workers' personal data processing is also regulated, in some Member States(6), in accordance to their particular national traditions and practices, by collective agreements.

The respective national data protection authorities are competent to assess the lawfulness of the processing of employees' personal data referred to in the question of the Honourable Member, according to the relevant rules established by the Directive and the national data protection legislation.

 
 

(1) Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 281, 23/11/1995.
(2) This Working Party, created on the basis of Article 29 of Directive 95/46/EC, has adopted a number of important opinions dealing with the processing of personal data in the employment context, which can be found in the internet in the following address:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/dataprot/wpdocs/index.htm.
(3) Recommendation 2/99, Opinion 2/200 and Opinion 7/2000 of WP29) as well as the processing of personal data by means of video-surveillance (see Working document WP 67 of 25 November 2002 and Opinion 4/2004 of WP29)
(4) Cf., for example, article 11 of Luxembourg's law of 2 August 2002 on protection of persons with regard to the processing of their personal data and the Finnish Act No. 759/2004 on protection of privacy in working life.
(5) Cf., e.g., Belgium, France, Greece, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Portugal.
(6) Cf., e.g., Belgium. Denmark.

 

Ερώτηση αρ. 68 του κ. Γεωργίου Τούσσα (H-0509/07)
 Θέμα: Περιβαλλοντική καταστροφή στη Σαντορίνη από το ναυάγιο του "Sea Diamond"
 

Ενώ από τις 5.4.2007, που βυθίστηκε στις ακτές της Σαντορίνης, το κρουαζιερόπλοιο «Sea Diamond» συνεχίζει να προκαλεί καταστροφές στο θαλάσσιο περιβάλλον της περιοχής, η πλοιοκτήτρια εταιρία «Hellenic Louis Cruises» με την κάλυψη του Υπουργείου Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας, αρνείται να προβεί στην απάντληση των πετρελαίων «aude oil» - «Diesel», των λιπαντικών, καθώς και άλλων τοξικών υγρών που διαρρέουν από τις δεξαμενές του πλοίου στο θαλάσσιο περιβάλλον. Οι ενέργειες του αρμόδιου Υπουργείου Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας που συνεχίζει να επιβάλλει πρόστιμα στην πλοιοκτήτρια εταιρία είναι αναποτελεσματικές, γιατί συνεχίζεται η καταστροφή του θαλάσσιου περιβάλλοντος του νησιού. Η σκόπιμη αυτή κωλυσιεργία – συμπαιγνία της εταιρείας «Hellenic Louis Cruises» και του Υπουργείου Εμπορικής Ναυτιλίας – έχει προκαλέσει την αγανάκτηση των κατοίκων της Σαντορίνης, για την περιβαλλοντολογική καταστροφή της περιοχής.

Πώς σκοπεύει να συμβάλει η Επιτροπή στην υλοποίηση των προτάσεων των μαζικών φορέων της Σαντορίνης και της ευρύτερης περιοχής για την άμεση απάντληση από τις δεξαμενές του πλοίου των πετρελαίων, των λιπαντικών και των τοξικών υγρών, για την ανέλκυση του κρουαζιερόπλοιου «Sea Diamond», καθώς και για την αποκατάσταση του θαλάσσιου περιβάλλοντος του νησιού;

 
  
 

Le mécanisme communautaire de protection civile a été établi par la décision 2001/792/CE, Euratom. Dans le cas où un Etat membre ne dispose pas de capacités suffisantes pour répondre à un désastre, il peut solliciter l’aide du mécanisme pour obtenir de l’expertise ou des moyens supplémentaires provenant des Etats participants au mécanisme.

Le centre de suivi et d’information de la Commission (MIC) a été en contact avec les autorités grecques et l’Agence européenne de sécurité maritime (EMSA) afin d’évaluer les conséquences – notamment environnementales – de la catastrophe causée par le naufrage du « Sea Diamond ».

De plus, la Communauté européenne peut mettre à disposition des Etats membres une assistance opérationnelle en matière de lutte contre la pollution causée par les navires à travers les activitités de l'Agence européenne de sécurité maritime (EMSA), qui est active depuis 2004 et qui a notamment des navires anti-pollution à sa disposition. Il incombe à l'Etat membre concerné et responsable de la protection de l'environment de faire appel – si besoin est – via le mécanisme communautaire de protection civile – aux capacités opérationelles de l'EMSA.

Dans le cas d'espèce, la Grèce n'a pas sollicité l’assistance du mécanisme.

En vertu du principe de subsidiarité, la Commission ne peut pas se prononcer sur les discussions entre autorités nationales, régionales et locales en Grèce sur le traitement de l’épave.

 

Întrebarea nr. 69 a doamnei Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (H-0513/07)
 Subiect: Extinderea listei de 30 de proiecte prioritare ce fac parte din Reţeaua Europeană de Transport
 

Aderarea României şi a Bulgariei conferă Uniunii Europene vecinătatea cu Marea Neagră şi aproape întreg cursul Dunării este cale navigabilă internă. Comisia Europeană a aprobat în 2004 o listă de 30 de proiecte prioritare pentru Reţeaua Europeană de Transport în care şi noile state membre sunt incluse.

Ca parte a Politicii de vecinătate a Uniunii Europene, Comisia Europeană şi-a propus să extindă principalele axe de transport european şi către ţările vecine. Având în vedere cele 5 axe transnaţionale identificate în 2005 de Grupul de Nivel Înalt precum şi propunerea de revizuire în 2008 a proiectelor de transport european, aş dori să întreb Comisia Europeană care sunt noile proiecte de transport şi fondurile aferente prin care Uniunea Europeană îşi va fructifica ieşirea la Marea Neagră şi care sunt noile proiecte prioritare de transport european dedicate vecinătăţii cu Moldova şi Ucraina?

 
  
 

The trans-European transport networks (TEN-T), as revised by the Decision 2004/884, amended the list of priority projects with the particular aim of integrating the networks of the 12 new Member states. This list comprises 30 priority axes among which four ensure access to the Black Sea through road, rail, inlandwaterways and maritime connections.

The four priority projects are:

­ no 7 Motorway axis Igoumenitsa/Patras-Athens-Sofia-Budapest which includes a branch to Constanta,

­ no 18 Rhine/Meuse-Main-Danube inland waterway axis,

­ no 21 Motorways of the Sea of south-west Europe where a connection between the Black and Mediterranean Seas could be envisaged, and

­ no 22 Railway axis Athens-Sofia-Budapest-Vienna-Prague-Nurnberg/Dresden which includes a branch to Costanta.

Projects on these four axes are eligible for co-financing from the TEN-T budget and in the case of Romania in particular from the Cohesion Fund.

Regarding connections between the EU and the neighbrouring countries, the Commission(1) has endorsed the 5 trans-national axes proposed by the High Level Group. These 5fiveaxes are the most important for international trade at the Union level and carry already today considerable amounts of traffic.

Bilateral connections such as between Romania and Moldova were not part of this exercise but are covered under regional cooperation frameworks. The Community may contribute to support such co-operation frameworks using the approporiate financial mechanisms such as the Cohesion Fund and the European Regional Development Fund for investments inside the EU and the Neighbourhood Investment Fund for investments inside countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy. To the Commission's knowledge, road rehabilitation works are already under way on the Moldovan side aiming at improving the connections with the TENs in Romania, with the support of the EBRD(2).

 
 

(1) Communication COM (2007) 32 of 31/1/2007.
(2) European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

 
Informacja prawna - Polityka ochrony prywatności