title: Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on 'The future of peripheral areas in the European Union'

eurovoc_concepts:
Structural Funds
development plan
peripheral region
regional aid
regional and local authorities
regional cooperation

text: 13. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 315/15 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘The future of peripheral areas in the European Union’ (98/C 315/04) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to its bureau’s decision on 11 June 1997, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to issue an opinion on ‘The future of peripheral areas in a new Europe’ and to entrust its preparation to Commission 2 for Spatial Planning, Agriculture, Hunting, Fisheries, Forestry, Marine Environment and Upland Areas; having regard to its opinions on rural development policy (CdR 389/96 fin) (1), on a policy for upland agriculture (CdR 178/97 fin) (2) and on new activities and new services in rural areas (CdR 3/97 fin) (3); having regard to the opinion (CdR 23/98 rev. ) adopted by Commission 2 on 11 June 1998 (rapporteurs: Mr Murray and Mrs Haijanen); whereas most rural communities are currently struggling to identify their changing place within a new Europe, the problems of peripherality, which affect all rural communities, are magnified in the more remote areas of the European Union, adopted the following opinion at its 24th plenary session on 15 and 16 July 1998 (meeting of 16 July). 1. Introduction 1. 1. This opinion refers to areas of the European Union which we define here as peripheral, and which include uplands areas, the offshore islands and archipel- agos and the more remote mainland areas (which could be further defined on the basis of their distance from centralized markets and transportation networks, as defined in the ‘European spatial development perspec- tive’) of the Member States. Peripheral areas are disad- vantaged in terms of their geographical location and are generally characterized by declining and ageing populations as well as other problems associated with rurality but which are more acutely manifest in these areas. These characteristics can be largely attributed to the lack of economic and social opportunity and if this is allowed to continue it will have serious consequences for the future economic and social life of these communi- ties. 1. 2. Despite a number of obvious similarities, the distinctive features of the most remote regions has led to their specific situation being dealt with under Article 299(2) of the Amsterdam Treaty, which is not the subject of this opinion. The COR reserves the right to deliver an opinion at a later date on this matter. 1. 3. Most peripheral areas have been particularly affected by the trend in declining employment in the agricultural and forestry sectors, a situation that has not been balanced by alternative employment opportunities (1) OJ C 116, 14. 5. 1997, p. 46. (2) OJ C 379, 15. 12. 1997, p. 53. (3) OJ C 215, 16. 7. 1997, p. 16. in other sectors. This has resulted in a drift from these areas of the economically active generation, and particularly women. The steady decline in population reduces the demand for goods and services of local enterprise, which further undermines economic activity in both the public and private sector. This cycle of decline weakens the economic and social base of peripheral communities and could, ultimately, lead to their desertion. Current EU developments in Agen- da 2000, CAP Reform and Enlargement will further curtail the development of these areas unless the situation is addressed. Peripheral areas do however possess an intrinsic 1. 4. value that not only supplements the values that have been lost in the more urbanized, industrial areas but also compensates for these lost values. As a consequence of their remote location many peripheral areas have preserved a way of life and an environment which has been largely lost to the more cosmopolitan areas. The diversity of language, culture and heritage which exists in peripheral areas portrays an alternative lifestyle and living experience. Combined with a clean, rural environment these factors offer development oppor- tunities that are unique to these areas. If genuine economic and social cohesion is to be 1. 5. achieved in the EU then an integrated policy for peripheral areas should be implemented and compensa- tory measures drawn up to enable them to offset the natural handicap from which they suffer. To enable peripheral areas to harness their development oppor- tunities that the EU affords to other areas and strengthen C 315/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 10. 98 their independence in relation to the latter, forms of development generated essentially at local level need to be created, not least by means of the compensation and the integrated policy the EU affords to other areas. diversity, and their high environmental standard. It is these specific features, which are the biggest tourist attractions that are in danger of being severely damaged by mass tourism. 2. Development Issues in Peripheral Areas 2. 3. Culture 2. 1. Transport 2. 1. 1. The additional cost resulting from peripherality makes itself felt very obviously as regards transport, which in terms of time and money, undermines the competitiveness of peripheral areas and deprives them of economic development opportunities. In relation to the offshore islands this involves the additional expense of VAT charged on the transport of goods to and from the islands and undermines competitiveness on mainland markets. Climatic factors cause additional costs in northern peripheral areas and upland areas. These include costs related to maintenance of roads (snow clearance, gritting, salting, etc. ) in winter and, particu- larly in archipelago regions, keeping waterways open. 2. 1. 2. Regarding future development of peripheral areas, it is important to maintain or boost transport systems. Priority must be given to promoting low-energy, environmentally-friendly transport systems. Terminals and communication arteries should not be ends in themselves designed for tourism, but should link periph- eral areas to the single European market and offer the most efficient technologies, storage facilities, and combinations so as to compare favourably with main- land terminals. Within peripheral areas the electrifi- cation of rail routes and the development of internal and external air communication should be encouraged. 2. 2. Tourism 2. 3. 1. As a result of their remote locations many peripheral areas have managed to preserve a strong cultural identity. This gives these areas a certain unique- ness and as one of the indigenous strengths of these areas it is crucial that this is preserved and utilized in a sustainable manner. A sustainable cultural identity enhances a region’s confidence and can be a means to contribute to economic development. 2. 4. Fisheries 2. 4. 1. Fisheries have traditionally played a vital role in many peripheral economies and are still a major source of domestic development and employment for many of the EU’s peripheral areas. However, in compari- son with coastal ports, island ports suffer from serious natural disadvantages as a result of their distance from the principle mainland markets and the greater difficulty in obtaining access to new technologies and sources of funding. 2. 4. 2. The fisheries are in difficulty, not least because the overcapacity of the Community fleet is severely reducing available stocks. Moreover the equipment used by fishermen in peripheral areas is out-dated and consequently fishing vessels cannot be easily used to diversify into other activities. Perhaps the greatest problem facing the fishing industry in peripheral areas is management of fishing grounds and fish stocks. Aqua-culture and the shell fish industry have consider- able development potential in peripheral areas, however, care must be taken that this development does not damage the environment. 2. 2. 1. Tourism in peripheral areas is largely seasonal in nature, resulting in a concentration of visitors at peak times of year and effective shutdown thereafter. Future development should be based on clear-cut planning aimed at diversification (traditional tourism, cultural tourism, green tourism, farm tourism, archaeological tourism, youth tourism, sports tourism, fishing, edu- cational tourism, etc. ) and securing the involvement of many local people throughout the year. With diversifi- cation tourism would continue for longer, increasing the benefits and reducing the demands on peripheral areas. 2. 2. 2. Whenever addressing itself to tourism the EU must make sure that expansion closely matches the capacity of existing facilities and services in peripheral areas. These areas have to preserve and develop their distinctive characteristics, their cultural and linguistic 2. 5. Agriculture In addition to poor fertility of the land, the 2. 5. 1. shortness of crop seasons, limited local demand, and the paucity of basic facilities, farmers, especially in the smaller island regions, who work on a small scale, incur relatively expensive overheads. This includes the high transport costs of importing the necessary goods as well as the expenditure incurred in selling their products on the principal markets. Since this expenditure reduces income, farmers cannot finance the investment required to improve production and young people are discouraged from setting up in farming, leading to the obvious results in terms of depopulation. Climatic and altitude-related conditions can also adversely affect the agricultural sector. For example, the thermal growing season in northern areas is more than 13. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 315/17 two months shorter than in central Europe, which makes farming in the north especially difficult. This should be taken into account when deciding on the future of the common agricultural policy. 2. 6. Telecommunications 2. 6. 1. The costs arising from the handicap of being a peripheral area could be greatly reduced by means of a substantial Community programme to develop telecom- munications infrastructure. Telematics in particular is one of the few existing means that could be directly employed to involve peripheral areas at first hand, via in the Community economy and global networks, market. In addition to information and tourism, fields in which they are already being used, telematics appli- cations could lend themselves to various other sectors, for example education and health. 2. 6. 2. A programme run by the Community or a series of coordinated pilot projects would help to develop the concept of telematic education, which has already proved successful in Highlands and Islands University (UHI). ‘Telemedicine’ could be another spin-off since persons living in peripheral areas that do not have specialized outpatient clinics could contact doctors in other areas and obtain ‘telediagnoses’. In short, incorporating peripheral areas into the information society will be one of the biggest challenges of the next few years and could have enormous benefits. As the Committee of the Regions has pointed out in an earlier opinion, it is important from the point of view of implementing the European Information Society that all regions are afforded real opportunities to use basic telematic services. This is particularly relevant to periph- eral areas as regional disparities are developing quickly due to the rapid progress in this field. This situation needs to be addressed at the earliest possible opportunity. 2. 6. 3. In addition to infrastructure, there is a also a need in peripheral areas for various actions to boost demand for information society services, e. g. measures raising public awareness of the opportunities offered by electronic commerce and teleworking. It is equally important to ensure that, in future, an increasingly large proportion of this demand can be met locally. 2. 7. Infrastructure and the environment 2. 7. 1. A seasonal difference in the through-flow of people to and from peripheral areas puts considerable strain on local infrastructure and environment. Water resources, waste management facilities, harbour facili- ties, roadways and paths can all suffer considerable strain. As seasonal infrastructural and environmental pressures increase, destructive pressure on the social fabric and social structure of the permanent residents also increases. Any planning decision concerning periph- eral areas, any environmental management policies, any estimates of viability and sustainability must have regard to special demographic characteristics that pertain in these areas. 2. 7. 2. The development of good infrastructure and sustainable environmental management is a critical factor in sustaining peripheral communities and catering for the maintenance and growth of tourism and other forms of local enterprise. However, due to geographical limitations and low population levels, projects in many peripheral areas find it difficult to qualify for cohesion and regional funding as they are often below the EU threshold levels. 2. 8. Healthcare 2. 8. 1. While, for financial reasons it would not be practical to have a permanent health service in areas of low population, it is important that there is reasonable access to external facilities. An important aim of Community policy must be to achieve a level of healthcare that enables all inhabitants of peripheral areas to lead full and productive lives. Primary care, such as adequate sanitation facilities and clean drinking water are fundamental to the implementation of such a policy. In this context, it should also be recognized 2. 8. 2. that the age profile of peripheral areas, which generally contain a high proportion of elderly people and school children, has implications for health service providers. 2. 9. Unit Costs of Services A feature of peripheral areas is the high unit 2. 9. 1. costs of virtually all forms of public service, for example, in education; healthcare; transport; the arts and leisure services. This feature of peripheral areas must be fully recognized in the distribution of state and EU resources if all citizens are to enjoy access to broadly comparable levels of public services. 2. 10. Environment and nature conservation 2. 10. 1. There is a strong correlation between the features of peripheral areas and sites designated as of special environmental importance under Natura 2000 and other forms of national or EU nature conservation designations. Such designations indicate the high level of landscape and environmental importance of peripheral areas for biodiversity and can be important assets as a means of promoting tourism. However, such desig- C 315/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 10. 98 nations can also make some forms of economic develop- ment more difficult to achieve in order not to compro- mise environmental quality. 2. 10. 2. The possible impediment to local economic development from nature conservation designations or the need for higher expenditure to achieve such development in ways which do not harm the environment should be recognized as should the need for additional agri-environment measures to assist the creation of local jobs in the proper maintenance and management of high-quality nature conservation sites. 3. Impact of common policies 3. 1. While there are many EU policies that aim to develop the socio-economic well-being of peripheral areas, many of these are implemented on a purely sectoral basis and can have undesirable knock-on effects. In addition, there are also common policies, which can also have a negative impact on the future development of these areas. 3. 2. Some of the EU’s peripheral regions, for example Corsica, the smaller Greek islands or the Aland islands, have a tax status constituting an exception to community law. This situation, which constitutes a crucial factor for their economic development, would change if wide- spread tax harmonization failed to allow for the need for exceptions to enable these and other peripheral areas to deal with the economic and social handicaps with which such areas have to contend. If the specific arrangements for peripheral areas 3. 3. were abandoned, including the exemption from VAT for transport to and from certain Mediterranean islands, or VAT rates below the corresponding maximum rates levied on other regions, very harmful effects would ensue. Exemption from VAT on transport should be extended to other peripheral areas, e. g. Objective 1 areas, on the margins of the EU. Value added or the profits of business would fall, the cost of living would rise, tourism would suffer as a result of these higher costs and local production would be destabilized. Specifically, if Corsica, the Balearic Islands, 3. 4. Shetland, the Orkneys, the Western Isles, or the Danish islands were to be deprived of the present exemption from VAT on outward and incoming transport, costs would increase by between 4 % and 9 %. The operation of the CAP has been challenged several times in the mainland regions of the EU. As far as peripheral areas are concerned, the repercussions of a Community policy not geared to the precarious stability of their specific situation have done greater damage still. 3. 5. The principle of some variations to national tax regimes to protect the interests of peripheral areas and help offset the high costs of fuel and transport should not be seen as running against the principle of a strong and fair EU. 4. Compensatory measures In formulating future policy for peripheral areas 4. 1. it is important that there is provision for various compensatory measures to offset the adverse reper- cussions of the present common policies and a range of tax and financial incentives to enable domestic economies to thrive. European common policies from the CAP to the concept of tax harmonization go hand in hand with the internal market, which although beneficial, is not geared in practice to peripheral areas. As far as these areas are concerned the concept of an internal market and freedom of movement are founded on an evident geographical impossibility. To restore equal competition a way must be found to eliminate the drawbacks of common policies. 4. 2. If peripheral areas were permitted to enjoy apparently favourable tax treatment such as that applied to Corsica, the only consequence is that they would have the opportunity to make up their obvious competitive backwardness thus ensuring that all peripheral areas would eventually be in a sound position to operate on the internal market which the Union is seeking to establish. 4. 3. Member States, moreover, have to follow a dual approach. On the one hand they must defend the derogations previously granted to their peripheral areas and, on the other, they must refrain from using tax harmonization as a convenient pretext for abolishing such privileges. Derogation’s should be proposed by each Member State individually, since it is impossible, except when dealing with isolated matters such as VAT on transport, to ascertain common problems and common solutions applicable to national taxation systems. 5. Role of local and regional authorities 5. 1. Although there are great similarities between the causes and consequences of problems affecting peripheral areas throughout Europe, it would be wrong to assume that the same package of measures can provide a ‘blanket’ solution to all their problems. To ensure the optimum effectiveness of proposed measures there must be scope for far-reaching regional diversification within the framework of national and EU policy. A strong regional input in the formulation of regional policy is therefore indispensable and the engagement of local 13. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 315/19 communities, as successfully demonstrated by the Leader Programme, must also be closely involved as part of the bottom-up approach. 5. 2. Locally generated development is a vital factor not alone in finding the right solutions to current problems but also to ensuring their longterm sustain- ability. It is therefore recommended that this is one of the principle avenues that the Commission should explore in developing future policy for peripheral areas. A policy along these lines could be supported, both by individual national governments and the Commission, which could assign a quota of Structural Funds assistance to be used to boost small and medium sized enterprises and cottage industries that could bring economic devel- opment and employment to peripheral regions. ‘Business Development Centres’ should be set up to provide necessary information and administrative backup to revitalize activity. The Commission, in agreement with the individual Ministries for Tourism of the Member States concerned, could do much to assist in this connection by organizing an advertising campaign to promote peripheral areas and their produce (which might include tourism, agriculture and fishery products, arts and crafts, etc. ) which, although varying from place to place, are to be found in all EU peripheral areas. The advertising campaign would aim to promote a seal of quality testifying to the original local identity and increase European awareness of typical products, including those from the smallest island regions. In accordance with the final declaration of the Cork Conference a policy for all rural areas must take account of differing regional circumstances and respect the subsidiarity principle. Such a policy must, as far as possible, be decentralized and be based on the principle of partnership and cooperation between all the different levels concerned. In this context the EU should confine itself to setting out framework provisions and should give the regions sufficient scope to frame their own measures. 6. Inter-regional cooperation 6. 1. Inter-regional cooperation should be encouraged by the European institutions to further enable the Unions peripheral regions to overcome their isolation. By pooling experience and information European regional authorities could give pride of place to their successes and obtain suggestions and alternative solutions to what are often similar problems. It would also be desirable to set-up a European inter regional service network to deal with and highlight common problems such as shortages of resources and waste disposal and, via the Internet, to publicize tourism, culture and crafts, acting as a telematic chamber of commerce foreign trade institute for every peripheral area connected to the network. Expansion of this sector could generate considerable knock-on effects on employment. In addition to seeking to create conditions in peripheral areas which are comparable to those in other parts of the EU, special attention needs to be paid to the development of border areas with non-member countries so that disparities in standards of living do not widen any further, leading to increased tension in border areas. Among other things, this implies that the development of border areas in non-member countries should be incorporated as an integral part of border programmes and the development of border areas. In practice, this means establishing close links with between the Interreg, Tacis and Phare programmes so that development initiatives can be extended to border regions in non- member countries. At the same time however, it must be ensured that internal cross-border cooperation within the EU under the Interreg programme can continue without interruption. 7. Structural Fund reform and Community initiatives 7. 1. According to the new financial outlook charted in Agenda 2000 the Structural Funds are to be reviewed again and strong emphasis will be laid on simplification, revision of certain fundamental principles such as concentration, and the Community initiatives. The recipients of assistance under the ERDF are to be reduced sharply. The current Agenda 2000 proposals may result 7. 2. in a number of current peripheral Objective 1 regions losing that status. The Agenda 2000 proposals are currently under discussion and the special needs of peripheral areas as outlined in this opinion need to be carefully considered before the conclusion of debate on Agenda 2000 to ensure that criteria for Objective 1 areas fully reflect the special circumstances of peripheral areas in terms of population sparsity and all the other features highlighted in this opinion. 7. 3. Unfortunately, the areas eligible for Structural Funding are mapped out in such a way as to discriminate in some instances against peripheral areas which have been encompassed for statistical purposes within terri- torial divisions where the situation is entirely different. For example, in the case of the archipelagos, where there is a unique land/sea relationship, only land area is considered in calculating population density. C 315/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 10. 98 7. 4. The reform being proposed in Agenda 2000 would seem to run counter to the draft Amsterdam Treaty which, by rewording Article 130a of the EC Treaty, officially recognized the specific nature of peripheral island regions, their natural handicap, and hence the need to find ways of enabling these disadvan- taged regions to close the development gap separating them from the rest of Union. 7. 5. The same approach should be followed when reworking the Community Initiatives. The continuation of support for communities and community develop- ment through the capacity building, training and support services provided by Leader II and other initiatives are critical to encouraging locally generated development. 8. Key recommendation With regard to the future of peripheral areas in the European Union the Committee of the Regions wish to put forward the following key recommendations: The Committee of the Regions recommends the 8. 1. drawing-up of an integrated policy for the future development of peripheral areas within the purview of Structural Founds objectives. This policy should take account of the unique circumstances common to all of these areas, whilst also recognizing their diversity, and should aim to ensure that they share in the development opportunities of European integration. Especially in the run-up to enlargement of the European Union, it is important to avoid the adoption of an unduly restrictive definition of peripheral areas and to take account now of those regions which will in future be even more remote from the nerve centre of the European Union, which will inevitably shift. 8. 2. The Committee is of the opinion that, in line with Article 129b(2) of the Treaty, the current shortcomings in the links between the peripheral and central regions of the Community should be significantly reduced by giving the matter appropriate consideration when im- plementing the Community concept of the framework for action by the new Structural Fund. Aid systems should therefore be established to enable peripheral areas to be served by combined transport. Such a policy should also cover local transport and hence encourage small-scale private enterprise. 8. 3. The Committee of the Regions also believes that industries located in peripheral areas should be allowed to benefit from special transport tariffs for raw material imports and the export of finished products and that special pricing arrangements should be laid down for the transport of diesel oil and other forms of energy. areas, which, unless it alters or diversifies its structure, might be in danger of imploding, destroying economic spin-offs in the process. Codes of conduct and good practice guides should be drawn up for the tourism industry and quality seals awarded to industries meeting the particular environ- mental and cultural requirements of individual areas. Tourists should be encouraged to refrain from upsetting fragile ecosystems and made to pay forms of locally appropriate taxation which can help protect the local community and its environment. This revenue from tourism should be invested in environmental or cultural projects. The Committee of the Regions also recommends that steps are taken to encourage the emergence of local tour operators and to ensure that the main source of income for peripheral areas is not subject to outside control. An integrated Community policy must promote 8. 5. a series of measures and projects that will not only preserve the cultural features of peripheral areas, but will also aim to strengthen their economic potential. The Committee of the Regions believes that promotion of historical and archaeological sites, restoration of traditional settlements, qualitative enhancement of areas of outstanding natural beauty, educational programmes and programmes to promote international cultural cooperation should be facilitated and that this must be done in a manner that cultivates the unique character of each area. 8. 6. With regard to fisheries policy a more sympa- thetic attitude to stock conservation should be fostered. The Committee of the Regions believes that the inte- grated development of local fishing industries should also be pursued. It is important to follow developments in the fishing sector closely, and, where necessary, impose catch restrictions, in order to maintain stocks at healthy levels. In addition, representatives of these areas should be consulted whenever the EU adopts new legislation on fisheries. The Committee of the Regions considers that fisheries policy should make constant fundamental distinctions to meet the needs of fisherman in a more appropriate and realistic way. Given the location of the principal markets the EU should provide support and encouragement to enable outlying fish processing and distribution chains to be set up. The Committee of the Regions believes in the 8. 4. need to chart alternative courses for tourism in peripheral 8. 7. With regard to agriculture the Committee of the Regions recommends that a range of measures be drawn the CAP. up to reduce the harmful impact of 13. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 315/21 Transposition of these measures may be effected by means of appropriate regional programmes and support frameworks as part of the future EAGGF regulation on support for the development of rural areas. Special environmental programmes need to be developed for all peripheral areas in order to ensure proper management of environmental resources and facilitate sustainable economic and social development. Farming techniques should be disseminated more widely and effectively to improve products and the competi- tiveness thereof. Financial resources should accordingly be allocated to training institutes, research, and the services through which such information is channelled to farmers. Special assistance should be given to training and education programmes to promote and develop organic methods of farming. The Committee of the Regions also accepts the need to reduce or contain the numbers of livestock in areas which are environmentally sensitive. However, environmental measures must be balanced with direct assistance to ensure farmers continue to have a viable income. The Committee of the Regions also believes that the criteria for granting agricultural aid (CAP) should be amended to focus less on output, and more on the need to provide farmers with a fair standard of living, and on the impact farming has on the environment, the countryside and conservation of resources. The Community should implement an awareness raising policy to protect woodlands from fire and to fund preventive measures (open areas, fire breaks, appropriate forestry techniques, etc. ) and local intervention bodies. Sectoral planning is also needed, including the provision of ways and means of repairing the damage inflicted by indiscriminate felling and by fires over the last decade. 8. 8. An integrated Community policy should provide funds for, firstly, desalination of seawater and construc- tion of underground storage facilities and, secondly, research into rainwater storage plans. The Community should accordingly encourage water resource manage- ment, which should be linked to European ‘use optimiza- tion’ criteria, providing automatic disincentives to waste, and inter island exchanges of know-how in the field of water recycling. 8. 9. The Committee of the Regions proposes that peripheral areas should be connected to the national energy network with the support of the EU. Where appropriate, for example on some of the remote islands, Community energy policy should seek to enhance domestic energy potential, and the EU should conse- quently draw up comprehensive programmes to exploit sources that have hitherto been untapped. Solar energy, wind power, geothermal energy and biomass all provide opportunities for European islands to provide their own energy supply. 8. 10. An integrated policy for peripheral areas should aim to improve marketing, primarily by emphasizing the quality and origin of products and also by improving and developing the standing of local production, thereby bringing the market closer to island products. An integrated approach should be adopted to deal with storage, preservation, transport and distribution of foodstuffs, and the facilities, from irrigation to com- munication, designed to compensate for the remoteness of peripheral areas. 8. 11. The Committee of the Regions believes that in relation to healthcare, an integrated Community policy must aim to establish a network of regional health centres that provide primary healthcare in conjunction with a network of high standard hospitals providing secondary care and a full range of medical speciality services. Tax harmonization measures, which are a 8. 12. desirable goal for the rest of the Union, should not, in the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, be extended to peripheral areas and should not be enforced except to prevent proven cases of genuine distortion of the market and unfair competition, as under Article 99 of the Treaty. The Committee calls on the Commission to 8. 13. ensure that the forthcoming reform of the Structural Funds secures adequate support prospects for peripheral areas. 9. Conclusions Local populations, and especially visitors, must be made aware of the need to prevent, reduce, recover, and recycle waste. Even some of the less populous areas could constitute a worthwhile market for the recycling industry. Peripheral areas could become testing grounds in which to study and implement new recycling systems and introduce new waste reclamation, recovery, storage, disposal, and transport technologies. A European policy recognizing the vulnerability 9. 1. of peripheral areas and seeking to promote their locally generated development presupposes a considerable widening of the ‘de minimis’ rule for granting regional state aid and state aid in general to small and medium- sized enterprises. An extended framework such as this for aid which does not require notification and which C 315/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 10. 98 has to be compatible with the common market under Article 92(3)c of the Treaty, should be incorporated into forward by the Commission on the proposal put 18 February 1998 for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty. The Committee of the Regions feels that such a move recognizes the special status of peripheral areas and the specific problems of small and medium-sized enterprises, and is a appropriate way to offset the disadvantages caused to them by their natural surround- ings and economic structure. 9. 2. In light of the declaration concerning Article 130a on cohesion policy, annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam, implementation of a globally coordinated action which could be managed by an administratively independent, interdisciplinary team, is recommended. This team would draw on expertise from various policy areas and would coordinate EU policies and programmes impacting on peripheral areas. Possible functions of the team would be to oversee and help to devise European financial resources having direct implications or uses for peripheral areas, assess the effects of the Structural Funds, make certain that Community legislation made provision for the specific features of peripheral areas and where necessary, employ emergency measures when peripheral areas were faced with wholly exceptional economic or natural crises. Brussels, 16 July 1998. This team should also pursue a common policy, applying to all peripheral regions, in the areas of energy and water supply, transport, the environment, tourism, social services, agriculture and fisheries, and telecom- munications, laying emphasis in every instance on the value of local development potential. In addition a study should be conducted on the impact of common policies on peripheral areas in order to allow specific compensa- tory measures to be identified. It is highly recommended that a green paper is prepared on this subject. 9. 3. Another role of an interdisciplinary team should be to undertake a study of what tax and financial incentives might be granted to help peripheral areas. Financial incentives exist practically everywhere in the Member States and in most cases are administered by the Commission. An integrated policy for peripheral areas should stress not only the type of incentives, but also the geographical locations at which they are aimed. However, as regards tax incentives and exemptions the approach should aim to promote peripheral areas by means of a more flexible policy on State aid and measures to stimulate locally generated development. 9. 4. A special forum in Brussels, perhaps the CPMR (Council of Peripheral and Maritime Regions in Europe) could allow those representing European peripheral areas in the Community institutions to periodically take stock of progress in bringing European legislation in line with the particular circumstances of these areas. The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER


title: Resolution on human rights violations in Burma

eurovoc_concepts:
Burma/Myanmar
European organisation
Thailand
aid to refugees
economic sanctions
ethnic conflict
military regime
opposition

formats: html print


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ αρ θ. 2216/98 του David THOMAS Προστασία ωοτόκων ορνίθων

eurovoc_concepts:
intensive livestock farming
laying poultry
protection of animals
veterinary inspection

formats: html pdf print

text: C 320/4 Επι΄σηµη Εφηµερι΄δα των Ευρωπαι¨κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των EL 6. 11. 1999 (1999/C 320/004) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-2216/98 υποβολη΄: David Thomas (PSE) προς την Επιτροπη΄ (16 Ιουλι΄ου 1998) Θε΄µα: Προστασι΄α ωοτο΄κων ορνι΄θων Μπορει΄ να επιβεβαιω΄σει η Επιτροπη΄ αν οι διατα΄ξεις της Οδηγι΄ας 88/166/ΕΟΚ (1) ε΄χουν εφαρµοστει΄ απο΄ ο΄λα τα κρα΄τη µε΄λη; Πο΄σοι επιτο΄πιοι ε΄λεγχοι ε΄χουν πραγµατοποιηθει΄ απο΄ επιθεωρητε΄ς για να εξακριβωθει΄ η συµµο΄ρφωση µε την Οδηγι΄α; (1) ΕΕ L 74 της 19. 3. 1988, σελ. 83. Απα΄ντηση του κ. Fischler εξ ονο΄µατος της Επιτροπη΄ς (24 Σεπτεµβρι΄ου 1998) Συ΄µφωνα µε τις πληροφορι΄ες που η Επιτροπη΄ ε΄λαβε απο΄ τα κρα΄τη µε΄λη, ο΄λα τα κρα΄τη µε΄λη εφαρµο΄ζουν την οδηγι΄α 88/166/ΕΟΚ του Συµβουλι΄ου της 7ης Ιανουαρι΄ου 1998 συµµορφωµε΄να µε την απο΄φαση του ∆ικαστηρι΄ου στην υπο΄θεση 131/86 (κατα΄ργηση της οδηγι΄ας 86/113/ΕΟΚ της 25ης Ιανουαρι΄ου 1986 για τον καθορισµο΄ των ελα΄χιστων προδιαγραφω΄ν σχετικα΄ µε την προστασι΄α των ωοπαραγωγω΄ν ορνι΄θων που εκτρε΄φονται σε κλωβοστοιχι΄ες). Η Επιτροπη΄, ωστο΄σο, ε΄λαβε προ΄σφατα καταγγελι΄α απο΄ εµπορικη΄ ε΄νωση στην οποι΄α υποστηρι΄ζεται ο΄τι η οδηγι΄α δεν εφαρµο΄ζεται σωστα΄ σε µερικα΄ κρα΄τη µε΄λη. Η καταγγελι΄α αυτη΄ προς το παρο΄ν εξετα΄ζεται. Στον τοµε΄α που αφορα΄ την καλη΄ διαβι΄ωση των ζω΄ων, οι επιθεωρητε΄ς της Επιτροπη΄ς µε΄χρι στιγµη΄ς στις αποστολε΄ς τους στα κρα΄τη µε΄λη ε΄χουν επικεντρω΄σει τις προσπα΄θειε΄ς τους στην προστασι΄α των ζω΄ων κατα΄ τη µεταφορα΄ (οδηγι΄α 91/628/ΕΟΚ (1) του Συµβουλι΄ου) και τη στιγµη΄ της σφαγη΄ς (οδηγι΄α 93/119/ΕΟΚ (2) του Συµβουλι΄ου). Προ΄θεση της Επιτροπη΄ς ει΄ναι, ωστο΄σο, να επεκταθου΄ν πολυ΄ συ΄ντοµα οι επιτο΄πιοι κτηνιατρικοι΄ ε΄λεγχοι και σε α΄λλους τοµει΄ς, ο΄πως ει΄ναι η καλη΄ διαβι΄ωση των ωοπαραγωγω΄ν ορνι΄θων που εκτρε΄φονται σε κλωβοστοιχι΄ες. (1) (2) ΕΕ L 340 της 11. 12. 1991. ΕΕ L 340 της 31. 12. 1993. (1999/C 320/005) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-2241/98 υποβολη΄: Allan Macartney (ARE) προς την Επιτροπη΄ (16 Ιουλι΄ου 1998) Θε΄µα: Ανθρω΄πινα δικαιω΄µατα στην Κι΄να Επισηµαι΄νοντας τη θε΄ση που ε΄λαβε η Ευρωπαι¨κη΄ Ένωση στην ετη΄σια συνεδρι΄αση της Επιτροπη΄ς Ανθρωπι΄νων ∆ικαιωµα΄των στη Γενευ΄η κατα΄ την 50η επε΄τειο της Παγκο΄σµιας ∆ιακη΄ρυξης των ∆ικαιωµα΄των του Ανθρω΄που, θεωρει΄ η Επιτροπη΄ ο΄τι η Ευρωπαι¨κη΄ Ένωση ασκει΄ τη µε΄γιστη δυνατη΄ πι΄εση στην Κι΄να προκειµε΄νου να την υποχρεω΄σει να βελτιω΄σει τις επιδο΄σεις της ο΄σον αφορα΄ τα ανθρω΄πινα δικαιω΄µατα; Τι µε΄τρα λαµβα΄νει η Επιτροπη΄ προκειµε΄νου να εποπτευ΄σει τις παραβια΄σεις των ανθρωπι΄νων δικαιωµα΄των στην Κι΄να; Έχει η Επιτροπη΄ αναπτυ΄ξει κα΄ποια πρωτοβουλι΄α ο΄σον αφορα΄ τις σχε΄σεις µε τις κινεζικε΄ς αρχε΄ς προκειµε΄νου να προωθη΄σει την παγκοσµιο΄τητα των ανθρωπι΄νων δικαιωµα΄των; Απα΄ντηση του Sir Leon Brittan εξ ονο΄µατος της Επιτροπη΄ς (8 Σεπτεµβρι΄ου 1998) Απο΄ τον Οκτω΄βριο του 1997 η Ευρωπαι¨κη΄ Ένωση και η Κι΄να ε΄χουν αρχι΄σει µια σειρα΄ τακτικω΄ν και διεξοδικω΄ν συναντη΄σεων που καλυ΄πτουν ο΄λους τους τοµει΄ς των ανθρωπι΄νων δικαιωµα΄των στην Κι΄να. Ακο΄µα και τα πιο ευαι΄σθητα θε΄µατα ε΄χουν καλυφθει΄ απο΄ το δια΄λογο ο οποι΄ος υποστηρι΄ζεται απο΄ ορισµε΄να κοινοτικω΄ς χρηµατοδοτου΄µενα προγρα΄µµατα που αποβλε΄πουν στην παροχη΄ συνδροµη΄ς για την ενι΄σχυση του σεβασµου΄ των ανθρωπι΄νων δικαιωµα΄των στην Κι΄να. Επιπλε΄ον, η Επιτροπη΄ δρα΄ττεται κα΄θε ευκαιρι΄ας για να θι΄ξει τη δυσχερη΄ κατα΄σταση των φυλακισµε΄νων διαφωνου΄ντων στην Κι΄να


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2247/98 by Allan MACARTNEY to the Commission. Cat welfare

eurovoc_concepts:
animal breeding
animal experimentation
animal health
animal nutrition
animal welfare
domestic animal
protection of animals

text: C 118/48 Euroopan yhteis(cid:246)jen virallinen lehti FI 29. 4. 1999 (1999/C 118/056) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-2247/98 esitt(cid:228)j(cid:228)(t): Allan Macartney (ARE) komissiolle (16. hein(cid:228)kuuta 1998) Aihe: Kissojen hyvinvointi Onko olemassa el(cid:228)inten hyvinvointia koskevaa EY:n lains(cid:228)(cid:228)d(cid:228)nt(cid:246)(cid:228), jossa k(cid:228)sitelt(cid:228)isiin laboratoriotarkoi- tuksiin kasvatettavien kissojen lis(cid:228)(cid:228)ntymissykli(cid:228)? Millaisia (cid:148)lepoaikoja(cid:148) ja elinoloja m(cid:228)(cid:228)r(cid:228)yksiss(cid:228) edellytet(cid:228)(cid:228)n kyseisten el(cid:228)inten hyvinvoinnin turvaamiseksi? Komission j(cid:228)senen Ritt Bjerregaardin komission puolesta antama vastaus (1. lokakuuta 1998) Kokeisiin ja muihin tieteellisiin tarkoituksiin k(cid:228)ytett(cid:228)vien el(cid:228)inten suojelua koskevien j(cid:228)senvaltioiden lakien, asetusten ja hallinnollisten m(cid:228)(cid:228)r(cid:228)ysten l(cid:228)hent(cid:228)misest(cid:228) annetussa direktiiviss(cid:228) 86/609/ETY (1) s(cid:228)(cid:228)det(cid:228)(cid:228)n el(cid:228)inten s(cid:228)ilytyksess(cid:228) ja hoidossa noudatettavisa v(cid:228)himm(cid:228)isstandardeista. Mainitun direktiivin 5 artiklassa s(cid:228)(cid:228)det(cid:228)(cid:228)n, ett(cid:228) (cid:148)kaikilla koe-el(cid:228)imill(cid:228) on s(cid:228)ilytyspaikka, niiden terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin edellytt(cid:228)m(cid:228) ymp(cid:228)rist(cid:246), ainakin jonkin verran liikkumatilaa, ruokaa, vett(cid:228) ja hoitoa(cid:148). Lis(cid:228)ksi 5 artiklassa s(cid:228)(cid:228)det(cid:228)(cid:228)n, ett(cid:228) (cid:148)j(cid:228)senvaltioiden on otettava huomioon liitteess(cid:228) II olevat ohjeet a ja b kohdan s(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)ksen t(cid:228)yt(cid:228)nt(cid:246)(cid:246)npanossa(cid:148). Direktiivin liitteess(cid:228) II annetaan el(cid:228)inten s(cid:228)ilytyst(cid:228) ja hoitoa koskevia ohjeita, joihin kuuluvat my(cid:246)s ohjeet h(cid:228)kin korkeudesta ja pohjapinta-alasta sek(cid:228) s(cid:228)ilystystilojen l(cid:228)mp(cid:246)tilasta. Ohjeet on annettu el(cid:228)inlajeittain, ja yksi mainituista el(cid:228)inlajeista on kissa. Lis(cid:228)ksi liitteess(cid:228) on yleisi(cid:228) ohjeita fyysisist(cid:228) tiloista, s(cid:228)ilytysti- lojen ilmastosta ja sen s(cid:228)(cid:228)telyst(cid:228) sek(cid:228) el(cid:228)inten hoidosta mukaan luettuina el(cid:228)inten terveys, ruokinta, juomavesi, kuivikkeet, liikunta, k(cid:228)sittely, puhtaanapito ja kivuton lopettaminen. Direktiiviss(cid:228) ei ole lis(cid:228)(cid:228)ntymissykli(cid:228) koskevia s(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)ksi(cid:228). Kuitenkin sen 15 artiklassa s(cid:228)(cid:228)det(cid:228)(cid:228)n, ett(cid:228) (cid:148)el(cid:228)imi(cid:228) kasvattavien ja toimittavien laitosten on oltava viranomaisen hyv(cid:228)ksymi(cid:228) tai rekister(cid:246)imi(cid:228), ja niiden on t(cid:228)ytett(cid:228)v(cid:228) 5 ja 14 artiklan vaatimukset,. (cid:148). Kyseisen s(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)ksen mukaisesti kansalliset viranomaiset ovat vastuussa niiden edellytysten m(cid:228)(cid:228)ritt(cid:228)misest(cid:228), jotka el(cid:228)imi(cid:228) kasvattavien laitosten on t(cid:228)ytett(cid:228)v(cid:228), jotta ne voidaan hyv(cid:228)ksy(cid:228) tai rekister(cid:246)id(cid:228). (1) EYVL L 358, 18. 12. 1986. (1999/C 118/057) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-2270/98 esitt(cid:228)j(cid:228)(t): Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) komissiolle (22. hein(cid:228)kuuta 1998) Aihe: Ennenkuulumattomia menettelyj(cid:228) Ateenan p(cid:246)rssiss(cid:228) Ateenan arvopaperip(cid:246)rssin kreikkalaiset sijoittajat, jotka ostivat Ellinika Petrelea -yhti(cid:246)n osakkeita sen osakkeiden ensimm(cid:228)isen kaupank(cid:228)yntip(cid:228)iv(cid:228)n aikana joutuivat ennenkuulumattoman menettelyn eteen: suuri osa piensijoittajista ei saanut k(cid:228)siins(cid:228) itse osakekirjoja. Se, ettei varsinaisia osaketodistuksia luovutettu ajoissa kaikille sijoittajille, johti markkinoiden v(cid:228)(cid:228)risty- miseen osakkeiden ensimm(cid:228)isen(cid:228) kaupank(cid:228)yntip(cid:228)iv(cid:228)n(cid:228) (30. 6. 1998). T(cid:228)m(cid:228)n tuloksena monet saivat suunnattomia voittoja. Kun otetaan huomioon, ett(cid:228) siit(cid:228) l(cid:228)htien, kun Ellinika Petrelea -yhti(cid:246)n p(cid:246)rssiin listautumisesta oli ilmoitettu, oli voimassa sitoumus, ett(cid:228) osakkeet tuotaisiin kaupattavaksi Ateenan arvopaperip(cid:246)rssiin vasta merkint(cid:228)ajan p(cid:228)(cid:228)tytty(cid:228) ja kaikkien osakkeiden tultua luovutetuiksi niihin oikeutetuille, niin viiv(cid:228)styksen aiheuttajat ovat syyllistyneet vakavaan rikkeeseen: kaikkia terveen kilpailun perusperiaatteita on rikottu ja tuhansia piensijoittajia petetty. Komissiolta kysyt(cid:228)(cid:228)n: Kuinka se aikoo toimia, jotta tuhansien sijoittajien k(cid:228)rsim(cid:228) vahinko korvattaisiin ja t(cid:228)m(cid:228)n ennenkuulumattoman tapauksen aiheuttajat saataisiin vastuuseen teostaan?


title: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1536/98 of 16 July 1998 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products

eurovoc_concepts:
export refund
milk
milk product

formats: pdf print

text: L 201/72 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 7. 98 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1536/98 of 16 July 1998 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, (d) free-at-Community-frontier offer prices; Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), as last amended by Regula- tion (EC) No 1587/96 (2), and in particular Article 17 (3) thereof, Whereas Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 provides that the difference between prices in inter- national trade for the products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation and prices for those products within the Community may be covered by an export refund within the limits resulting from agreements concluded in ac- cordance with Article 228 of the Treaty; Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 provides that when the refunds on the products listed in Article 1 of the abovementioned Regulation, exported in the natural state, are being fixed account must be taken of: (cid:190) the existing situation and the future trend with regard to prices and availabilities of milk and milk products on the Community market and prices for milk and milk products in international trade, (cid:190) marketing costs and the most favourable transport charges from Community markets to ports or other points of export in the Community, as well as costs incurred in placing the goods on the market of the country of destination, (cid:190) the aims of the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products which are to ensure equilib- rium and the natural development of prices and trade on this market, (cid:190) the limits resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 228 of the Treaty, and (cid:190) the need to avoid disturbances on the Community market, and (cid:190) the economic aspect of the proposed exports; Whereas Article 17 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 provides that when prices within the Community are being determined account should be taken of the ruling prices which are most favourable for exportation, and that when prices in international trade are being determined particular account should be taken of: (a) prices ruling on third country markets; (b) the most favourable prices in third countries of des- tination for third country imports; (c) producer prices recorded in exporting third countries, account being taken, where appropriate, of subsidies granted by those countries; and (1) OJ L 148, 28. 6. 1968, p. 13. (2) OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 21. Whereas Article 17 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 provides that the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund on the products listed in Article 1 of the abovementioned Regulation according to destination; Whereas Article 17 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 provides that the list of products on which export refunds are granted and the amount of such refunds should be fixed at least once every four weeks; whereas the amount of the refund may, however, remain at the same level for more than four weeks; Whereas, in accordance with Article 12 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1466/95 of 27 June 1995 on specific detailed rules for the application of export refunds on milk and milk products (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 897/98 (4), the refund granted for milk products containing added sugar is equal to the sum of the two components; whereas one is intended to take account of the quantity of milk products and is calculated by multi- plying the basic amount by the milk products content in the product concerned; whereas the other is intended to take account of the quantity of added sucrose and is calculated by multiplying the sucrose content of the entire product by the basic amount of the refund valid on the day of exportation for the products listed in Article 1(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30 June 1981 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1599/96 (6); whereas, however, this second component is applied only if the added sucrose has been produced using sugar beet or cane harvested in the Community; Whereas the level of refund for cheeses is calculated for products intended for direct consumption; whereas the cheese rinds and cheese wastes are not products intended for this purpose; whereas, to avoid any confusion in inter- pretation, it should be specified that there will be no refund for cheeses of a free-at-frontier value less than ECU 230,00 per 100 kilograms; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 896/84 (7), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 222/88 (8), laid down additional provisions concerning the granting of refunds on the change from one milk year to another; whereas those provisions provide for the possibility of varying refunds according to the date of manufacture of the products; (3) OJ L 144, 28. 6. 1995, p. 22. (4) OJ L 126, 29. 4. 1998, p. 22. (5) OJ L 177, 1. 7. 1981, p. 4. (6) OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 43. (7) OJ L 91, 1. 4. 1984, p. 71. (8) OJ L 28, 1. 2. 1988, p. 1. 17. 7. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 201/73 Whereas for the calculation of the refund for processed cheese provision must be made where casein or caseinates are added for that quantity not to be taken into account; HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Whereas it follows from applying the rules set out above to the present situation on the market in milk and in particular to quotations or prices for milk products within the Community and on the world market that the refund should be as set out in the Annex to this Regulation; 1. The export refunds referred to in Article 17 of Regu- lation (EEC) No 804/68 on products exported in the natural state shall be as set out in the Annex. 2. There shall be no refunds for exports to destination No 400 for products falling within CN codes 0401, 0402, 0403, 0404, 0405 and 2309. 3. There shall be no refunds for exports to destinations No 022, 024, 028, 043, 044, 045, 046, 052, 404, 600, 800 and 804 for products falling within CN code 0406. Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 July 1998. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998. For the Commission Franz FISCHLER Member of the Commission L 201/74 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 7. 98 ANNEX to the Commission Regulation of 16 July 1998 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products (in ECU/100 kg net weight unless otherwise indicated) Product code Destination (*) 0401 10 10 9000 0401 10 90 9000 0401 20 11 9100 0401 20 11 9500 0401 20 19 9100 0401 20 19 9500 0401 20 91 9100 0401 20 91 9500 0401 20 99 9100 0401 20 99 9500 0401 30 11 9100 0401 30 11 9400 0401 30 11 9700 0401 30 19 9100 0401 30 19 9400 0401 30 19 9700 0401 30 31 9100 0401 30 31 9400 0401 30 31 9700 0401 30 39 9100 0401 30 39 9400 0401 30 39 9700 0401 30 91 9100 0401 30 91 9400 0401 30 91 9700 0401 30 99 9100 0401 30 99 9400 0401 30 99 9700 0402 10 11 9000 0402 10 19 9000 0402 10 91 9000 0402 10 99 9000 0402 21 11 9200 0402 21 11 9300 0402 21 11 9500 0402 21 11 9900 0402 21 17 9000 0402 21 19 9300 0402 21 19 9500 0402 21 19 9900 0402 21 91 9100 0402 21 91 9200 0402 21 91 9300 0402 21 91 9400 0402 21 91 9500 0402 21 91 9600 0402 21 91 9700 970 * * * 970 * * * 970 * * * 970 * * * 970 * * * 970 * * * 970 * * * + 970 * * * + + 970 * * * 970 * * * + + 970 * * * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Amount of refund 2,327 (cid:190) 2,327 (cid:190) 2,327 (cid:190) 3,597 (cid:190) 2,327 (cid:190) 3,597 (cid:190) 4,551 (cid:190) (cid:190) 4,551 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 10,50 (cid:190) 15,77 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 15,77 (cid:190) 38,32 59,85 66,00 38,32 59,85 66,00 75,22 110,55 129,01 75,22 110,55 129,01 74,00 74,00 0,7400 0,7400 74,00 90,54 95,38 102,60 74,00 90,54 95,38 102,60 103,34 104,05 105,34 112,58 115,09 124,73 130,38 Product code Destination (*) 0402 21 91 9900 0402 21 99 9100 0402 21 99 9200 0402 21 99 9300 0402 21 99 9400 0402 21 99 9500 0402 21 99 9600 0402 21 99 9700 0402 21 99 9900 0402 29 15 9200 0402 29 15 9300 0402 29 15 9500 0402 29 15 9900 0402 29 19 9200 0402 29 19 9300 0402 29 19 9500 0402 29 19 9900 0402 29 91 9100 0402 29 91 9500 0402 29 99 9100 0402 29 99 9500 0402 91 11 9110 0402 91 11 9120 0402 91 11 9310 0402 91 11 9350 0402 91 11 9370 0402 91 19 9110 0402 91 19 9120 0402 91 19 9310 0402 91 19 9350 0402 91 19 9370 0402 91 31 9100 0402 91 31 9300 0402 91 39 9100 0402 91 39 9300 0402 91 51 9000 0402 91 59 9000 0402 91 91 9000 0402 91 99 9000 0402 99 11 9110 0402 99 11 9130 0402 99 11 9150 0402 99 11 9310 0402 99 11 9330 0402 99 11 9350 0402 99 19 9110 0402 99 19 9130 0402 99 19 9150 0402 99 19 9310 0402 99 19 9330 0402 99 19 9350 0402 99 31 9110 0402 99 31 9150 0402 99 31 9300 0402 99 31 9500 0402 99 39 9110 0402 99 39 9150 0402 99 39 9300 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Amount of refund 136,76 103,34 104,05 105,34 112,58 115,09 124,73 130,38 136,76 0,7400 0,9054 0,9538 1,0262 0,7400 0,9054 0,9538 1,0262 1,0334 1,1258 1,0334 1,1258 (cid:190) (cid:190) 11,31 13,85 16,84 (cid:190) (cid:190) 11,31 13,85 16,84 (cid:190) 19,91 (cid:190) 19,91 (cid:190) (cid:190) 63,94 63,94 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 0,2555 0,3067 0,4077 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 0,2555 0,3067 0,4077 (cid:190) 0,4245 0,3832 0,6600 (cid:190) 0,4245 0,3832 17. 7. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 201/75 Product code Destination (*) 0402 99 39 9500 0402 99 91 9000 0402 99 99 9000 0403 10 11 9400 0403 10 11 9800 0403 10 13 9800 0403 10 19 9800 0403 10 31 9400 0403 10 31 9800 0403 10 33 9800 0403 10 39 9800 0403 90 11 9000 0403 90 13 9200 0403 90 13 9300 0403 90 13 9500 0403 90 13 9900 0403 90 19 9000 0403 90 31 9000 0403 90 33 9200 0403 90 33 9300 0403 90 33 9500 0403 90 33 9900 0403 90 39 9000 0403 90 51 9100 0403 90 51 9300 0403 90 53 9000 0403 90 59 9110 0403 90 59 9140 0403 90 59 9170 0403 90 59 9310 0403 90 59 9340 0403 90 59 9370 0403 90 59 9510 0403 90 59 9540 0403 90 59 9570 0403 90 61 9100 0403 90 61 9300 0403 90 63 9000 0403 90 69 9000 0404 90 21 9100 0404 90 21 9910 0404 90 21 9950 0404 90 23 9120 0404 90 23 9130 0404 90 23 9140 0404 90 23 9150 0404 90 23 9911 0404 90 23 9913 0404 90 23 9915 0404 90 23 9917 0404 90 23 9919 0404 90 23 9931 0404 90 23 9933 0404 90 23 9935 0404 90 23 9937 0404 90 23 9939 0404 90 29 9110 0404 90 29 9115 0404 90 29 9120 0404 90 29 9130 0404 90 29 9135 0404 90 29 9150 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 970 * * * + + + + 970 * * * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Amount of refund 0,6600 0,7522 0,7522 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 72,75 72,75 89,73 94,53 101,68 102,44 0,7275 0,7275 0,8973 0,9453 1,0168 1,0244 2,327 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 15,77 (cid:190) 38,32 59,85 66,00 75,22 110,55 129,01 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 74,00 (cid:190) 11,31 74,00 90,54 95,38 102,60 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 11,31 13,85 16,84 19,91 20,81 103,34 104,05 105,34 112,58 115,09 124,73 Product code Destination (*) 0404 90 29 9160 0404 90 29 9180 0404 90 81 9100 0404 90 81 9910 0404 90 81 9950 0404 90 83 9110 0404 90 83 9130 0404 90 83 9150 0404 90 83 9170 0404 90 83 9911 0404 90 83 9913 0404 90 83 9915 0404 90 83 9917 0404 90 83 9919 0404 90 83 9931 0404 90 83 9933 0404 90 83 9935 0404 90 83 9937 0404 90 89 9130 0404 90 89 9150 0404 90 89 9930 0404 90 89 9950 0404 90 89 9990 0405 10 11 9500 0405 10 11 9700 0405 10 19 9500 0405 10 19 9700 0405 10 30 9100 0405 10 30 9300 0405 10 30 9500 0405 10 30 9700 0405 10 50 9100 0405 10 50 9300 0405 10 50 9500 0405 10 50 9700 0405 10 90 9000 0405 20 90 9500 0405 20 90 9700 0405 90 10 9000 0405 90 90 9000 0406 10 20 9100 0406 10 20 9230 0406 10 20 9290 0406 10 20 9300 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * Amount of refund 130,38 136,76 0,7400 (cid:190) 0,2555 0,7400 0,9054 0,9538 1,0262 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 0,2555 0,3067 0,4077 0,4245 1,0334 1,1258 0,4601 0,6600 0,7522 165,85 170,00 165,85 170,00 165,85 170,00 165,85 170,00 165,85 170,00 165,85 170,00 176,22 155,49 161,71 216,00 170,00 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 22,83 22,83 37,68 (cid:190) (cid:190) 21,24 15,29 35,05 (cid:190) (cid:190) 9,329 7,834 15,39 L 201/76 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 7. 98 Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund Product code Destination (*) 0406 10 20 9610 0406 10 20 9620 0406 10 20 9630 0406 10 20 9640 0406 10 20 9650 0406 10 20 9660 0406 10 20 9830 0406 10 20 9850 0406 10 20 9870 0406 10 20 9900 0406 20 90 9100 0406 20 90 9913 0406 20 90 9915 0406 20 90 9917 0406 20 90 9919 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + + + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * (cid:190) (cid:190) 30,98 30,98 51,11 (cid:190) (cid:190) 31,42 31,42 51,83 (cid:190) (cid:190) 35,06 35,06 57,86 (cid:190) (cid:190) 51,54 48,35 85,03 (cid:190) (cid:190) 42,95 25,44 70,86 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 15,93 13,38 26,28 (cid:190) (cid:190) 19,31 16,22 31,87 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 35,62 31,59 58,77 (cid:190) (cid:190) 47,01 42,12 77,56 (cid:190) (cid:190) 49,94 44,75 82,41 (cid:190) (cid:190) 55,82 50,02 92,10 0406 20 90 9990 0406 30 31 9710 0406 30 31 9730 0406 30 31 9910 0406 30 31 9930 0406 30 31 9950 0406 30 39 9500 0406 30 39 9700 0406 30 39 9930 0406 30 39 9950 0406 30 90 9000 0406 40 50 9000 + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * Amount of refund (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 9,536 8,346 17,88 (cid:190) (cid:190) 13,99 12,25 26,24 (cid:190) (cid:190) 9,536 8,346 17,88 (cid:190) (cid:190) 13,99 12,25 26,24 (cid:190) (cid:190) 20,36 17,81 38,17 (cid:190) (cid:190) 13,99 12,25 26,24 (cid:190) (cid:190) 20,36 17,81 38,17 (cid:190) (cid:190) 20,36 17,81 38,17 (cid:190) (cid:190) 23,02 21,14 43,16 (cid:190) (cid:190) 24,15 21,14 45,28 (cid:190) (cid:190) 54,55 32,98 90,00 17. 7. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 201/77 Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund 0406 40 90 9000 0406 90 13 9000 0406 90 15 9100 0406 90 17 9100 0406 90 21 9900 0406 90 23 9900 0406 90 25 9900 0406 90 27 9900 0406 90 31 9119 0406 90 33 9119 0406 90 33 9919 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * (cid:190) (cid:190) 56,01 32,98 92,42 (cid:190) (cid:190) 60,16 60,16 99,26 (cid:190) (cid:190) 62,17 62,17 102,58 (cid:190) (cid:190) 62,17 62,17 102,58 (cid:190) (cid:190) 61,63 44,53 101,68 (cid:190) (cid:190) 36,51 18,57 75,31 (cid:190) (cid:190) 36,98 21,16 76,25 (cid:190) (cid:190) 33,48 18,57 69,06 (cid:190) (cid:190) 38,17 25,56 62,99 (cid:190) (cid:190) 38,17 25,56 62,99 (cid:190) (cid:190) 34,36 20,33 56,69 0406 90 33 9951 0406 90 35 9190 0406 90 35 9990 0406 90 37 9000 0406 90 61 9000 0406 90 63 9100 0406 90 63 9900 0406 90 69 9100 0406 90 69 9910 0406 90 73 9900 0406 90 75 9900 0406 90 76 9300 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * (cid:190) (cid:190) 36,20 20,01 59,72 28,95 28,95 61,40 61,40 101,30 (cid:190) (cid:190) 54,68 40,19 90,22 (cid:190) (cid:190) 60,16 60,16 99,26 40,61 40,61 65,82 57,27 108,59 37,12 37,12 63,89 63,89 105,42 29,52 29,52 48,93 48,93 80,75 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 48,93 48,93 80,75 (cid:190) (cid:190) 52,63 52,63 86,83 (cid:190) (cid:190) 51,97 22,27 85,75 (cid:190) (cid:190) 34,88 20,12 71,94 L 201/78 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 7. 98 Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund 0406 90 76 9400 0406 90 76 9500 0406 90 78 9100 0406 90 78 9300 0406 90 78 9500 0406 90 79 9900 0406 90 81 9900 0406 90 85 9910 0406 90 85 9991 0406 90 85 9995 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * (cid:190) (cid:190) 40,07 23,22 82,65 (cid:190) (cid:190) 38,60 23,22 79,62 (cid:190) (cid:190) 32,73 18,14 67,50 (cid:190) (cid:190) 40,07 20,12 82,65 (cid:190) (cid:190) 40,07 23,22 82,65 (cid:190) (cid:190) 30,31 19,23 62,51 (cid:190) (cid:190) 53,71 47,61 88,63 28,95 28,95 59,27 59,27 97,79 (cid:190) (cid:190) 54,68 40,19 90,22 (cid:190) (cid:190) 51,97 21,16 85,75 0406 90 85 9999 0406 90 86 9100 0406 90 86 9200 0406 90 86 9300 0406 90 86 9400 0406 90 86 9900 0406 90 87 9100 0406 90 87 9200 0406 90 87 9300 0406 90 87 9400 0406 90 87 9951 0406 90 87 9971 0406 90 87 9972 + + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 099 400 * * * (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 29,74 27,65 61,34 (cid:190) (cid:190) 30,78 30,30 63,48 (cid:190) (cid:190) 34,58 34,28 71,32 (cid:190) (cid:190) 43,80 40,24 90,34 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 24,78 24,78 51,11 (cid:190) (cid:190) 28,27 28,02 58,31 (cid:190) (cid:190) 30,66 30,66 63,25 (cid:190) (cid:190) 42,19 42,19 87,04 (cid:190) (cid:190) 42,07 34,41 86,78 16,03 13,67 33,07 17. 7. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 201/79 Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund Product code Destination (*) Amount of refund 0406 90 87 9973 0406 90 87 9974 0406 90 87 9979 0406 90 88 9100 0406 90 88 9105 0406 90 88 9300 2309 10 15 9010 2309 10 15 9100 2309 10 15 9200 2309 10 15 9300 2309 10 15 9400 2309 10 15 9500 2309 10 15 9700 2309 10 19 9010 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + 037 039 099 400 * * * 037 039 099 400 * * * + + + + + + + + (cid:190) (cid:190) 37,66 24,08 77,68 (cid:190) (cid:190) 42,07 24,08 86,78 (cid:190) (cid:190) 36,51 24,08 75,31 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 52,46 30,30 86,56 (cid:190) (cid:190) 31,84 30,30 52,55 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 2309 10 19 9100 2309 10 19 9200 2309 10 19 9300 2309 10 19 9400 2309 10 19 9500 2309 10 19 9600 2309 10 19 9700 2309 10 19 9800 2309 10 70 9010 2309 10 70 9100 2309 10 70 9200 2309 10 70 9300 2309 10 70 9500 2309 10 70 9600 2309 10 70 9700 2309 10 70 9800 2309 90 35 9010 2309 90 35 9100 2309 90 35 9200 2309 90 35 9300 2309 90 35 9400 2309 90 35 9500 2309 90 35 9700 2309 90 39 9010 2309 90 39 9100 2309 90 39 9200 2309 90 39 9300 2309 90 39 9400 2309 90 39 9500 2309 90 39 9600 2309 90 39 9700 2309 90 39 9800 2309 90 70 9010 2309 90 70 9100 2309 90 70 9200 2309 90 70 9300 2309 90 70 9500 2309 90 70 9600 2309 90 70 9700 2309 90 70 9800 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 13,85 18,47 23,09 27,70 32,32 36,94 40,63 (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) (cid:190) 13,85 18,47 23,09 27,70 32,32 36,94 40,63 (*) The code numbers for the destinations are those set out in the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2317/97 (OJ L 321, 22. 11. 1997, p. 19). However: (cid:190) ‘099' covers all destination codes from 053 to 096 inclusive, (cid:190) ‘970' covers the exports referred to in Articles 34(1)(a) and (c) and 42(1)(a) and (b) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 (OJ L 351, 14. 12. 1987, p. 1). For destinations other than those indicated for each ‘product code', the amount of the refund applying is indicated by ***. Where no destination (‘+') is indicated, the amount of the refund is applicable for exports to any destination other than those referred to in Article 1(2) and (3). NB: The product codes and the footnotes are defined in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (OJ L 366, 24. 12. 1987, p. 1), as amended


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA n. 2219/98 de los diputados Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO , Juan COLINO SALAMANCA a la Comisión. Aceite de oliva y mezclas

eurovoc_concepts:
common organisation of markets
designation of origin
location of production
olive oil
product quality
quality control of industrial products
quality standard
vegetable oil

text: C 135/34 Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas ES 14. 5. 1999 El método de cálculo de estos importes a tanto alzado, que se aplica en toda la Comunidad, se establece en el Reglamento (CEE) 1643/89 de la Comisión, de 12 de junio de 1989, por el que se definen los importes a tanto alzado que sirven para financiar las operaciones materiales que resultan del almacenamiento público de los productos agrícolas (3) y se basa en la media ponderada de los costes reales comunicados por los cuatro Estados miembros que tengan los costes reales más bajos, siempre que esos Estados miembros reúnan al menos el 33 % del total de las cantidades almacenadas del producto de que se trate. La Comisión no tiene por costumbre publicar los importes reales que se le comunican para efectuar estos cálculos. Puesto que la Comisión paga un importe uniforme en toda la Comunidad, la afirmación según la cual la existencia de distintos pagos por almacenamiento en la Comunidad distorsiona la competencia no resulta pertinente. Aunque los costes reales aplicables pueden variar de un Estado miembro a otro, esta situación refleja las condiciones de mercado en cada Estado miembro. (1) Si no se producen traslados físicos del producto, el importe a tanto alzado se reduce 0,72 ecus por tonelada. (2) Artículo 4 del Reglamento (CEE) 3597/90 de la Comisión, de 12 de diciembre de 1990, relativo a las normas de contabilización de las medidas de intervención que supongan la compra, el almacenamiento y la venta de productos agrícolas por parte de los organismos de intervención, DO L 350 de 14. 12. 1990. (3) DO L 162 de 13. 6. 1989. (1999/C 135/037) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-2219/98 de Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) y Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) a la Comisión (16 de julio de 1998) Asunto: Aceite de oliva y mezclas ¿Por qué razones no han quedado prohibidas las mezclas en la última reforma de la OCM del aceite de oliva aprobada por el Consejo, cuando el uso de mezclas va en detrimento de la calidad o de las denominaciones de origen del aceite de oliva y era, además, una de las recomendaciones apoyadas por el Pleno del Parlamento Europeo? Respuesta del Sr. Fischler en nombre de la Comisión (28 de septiembre de 1998) Las mezclas de aceite de oliva y de otros aceites vegetales no están autorizadas en el ámbito de las denominaciones de origen protegidas, o de las indicaciones geográficas protegidas. Por otra parte, al margen del compromiso del 25 de junio de 1998, el Consejo y la Comisión acordaron conceder una prioridad especial, durante el periodo anterior a la propuesta de la reforma definitiva de la organización común de mercados (OCM) del aceite de oliva, al examen en profundidad de los aspectos relativos a la estrategia de la calidad. Entre estos aspectos figura el tema de las mezclas de aceite de oliva y de aceites de semillas. Efectivamente, este asunto requiere un análisis de las diferentes opciones posibles, defendidas por los Estados miembros con argumentos contradictorios, y debe ser estudiado en relación con los aspectos referidos a los análisis y a los controles de calidad. (1999/C 135/038) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-2220/98 de Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) y Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) a la Comisión (16 de julio de 1998) Asunto: Cabezas de vacuno con derecho a prima en España En las previsiones de la Agenda 2000 y en los proyectos de reglamentos para la reforma de la PAC, la Comisión reconocía 649. 896 cabezas de vacuno con derecho a prima para España


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA n. 2245/98 del Allan MACARTNEY a la Comisión. Atención médica a los caballos

eurovoc_concepts:
animal welfare
equidae
foodstuffs legislation
horsemeat
leisure
sport
veterinary drug
veterinary legislation
veterinary medicinal product
waste

text: C 31/136 Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas ES 5. 2. 1999 (1999/C 31/188) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-2245/98 de Allan Macartney (ARE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (16 de julio de 1998) Asunto: Atenci(cid:243)n mØdica a los caballos ¿EstÆ al corriente la Comisi(cid:243)n de que, en virtud de la legislaci(cid:243)n que proh(cid:237)be la administraci(cid:243)n de determinados medicamentos de uso muy extendido en el tratamiento de los caballos, que entrarÆ en vigor en enero del 2000, los caballos destinados œnicamente a prÆcticas deportivas y a actividades de ocio estarÆn sujetos exactamente a las mismas normas que los caballos destinados al consumo humano? ¿Ha tenido en cuenta la Comisi(cid:243)n que no existen medicamentos alternativos para determinadas enfermedades comunes a los caballos utilizados en el deporte y en el ocio, y que la aplicaci(cid:243)n de la nueva legislaci(cid:243)n podr(cid:237)a suponer una amenaza importante para el bienestar de estos animales? Respuesta del Sr. Bangemann en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (25 de agosto de 1998) Se ruega a Su Seæor(cid:237)a se refiera a la respuesta de la Comisi(cid:243)n a la pregunta escrita E-1495/98 del Sr. Kindermann (1). (1) Ver pÆgina 42. (1999/C 31/189) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-2273/98 de Richard Corbett (PSE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (22 de julio de 1998) Asunto: Presidencia de la Uni(cid:243)n El nœmero de 25 de junio de la publicaci(cid:243)n titulada «The Week in Europe», de la Oficina de la Comisi(cid:243)n en Londres, dice que Austria asumirÆ la «Presidencia de la UE». ¿Puede explicar la Comisi(cid:243)n esta nueva posici(cid:243)n? ¿Desde cuÆndo tiene la UE un Presidente? ¿En quØ art(cid:237)culo del Tratado estÆ previsto? ¿QuØ ha pasado con el viejo sistema, por el que cada Instituci(cid:243)n ten(cid:237)a su propio Presidente (Presidencia del Consejo, Presidente de la Comisi(cid:243)n, Presidente del Parlamento, etc. )? ¿O se trata simplemente de una indicaci(cid:243)n de que los servicios de la Comisi(cid:243)n saben tan poco como la prensa acerca de la estructura de la Uni(cid:243)n Europea y atribuyen a la Presidencia del Consejo unas responsabilidades mÆs amplias de las que le corresponden? Respuesta del Sr. Oreja en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (14 de septiembre de 1998) «The week in Europe» pretende ser una publicaci(cid:243)n extraoficial que informa de manera resumida sobre los acontecimientos mÆs importantes que se han producido en la Comunidad a lo largo de la semana anterior. En este contexto, se utilizan a menudo versiones abreviadas de tØrminos y t(cid:237)tulos, ante todo porque los lectores ya estÆn familiarizados con ellas. Los propios Gobiernos de los Estados miembros utilizan tØrminos similares: en el Reino Unido, el Gobierno se refer(cid:237)a a la «Presidencia britÆnica de la Uni(cid:243)n Europea» en muchos documentos. Durante la Presidencia austr(cid:237)aca, el manual oficial destinado a los medios de comunicaci(cid:243)n elaborado por la Canciller(cid:237)a federal y el Ministerio federal de Asuntos Exteriores, se refiere en la portada a la «Presidencia austr(cid:237)aca de la UE»


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 2236/98 do Deputado Hans LINDQVIST à Comissão. Arenque fermentado

eurovoc_concepts:
Baltic Sea
customs and traditions
food hygiene
food inspection
food standard
foodstuffs legislation
health control
sea fish

text: 29. 4. 1999 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 118/47 (1999/C 118/055) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-2236/98 apresentada por Hans Lindqvist (ELDR) (cid:224) Comissªo (16 de Julho de 1998) Objecto: Arenque fermentado A partir de 1 de Julho de 1998, o arenque fermentado estÆ sujeito (cid:224)s mesmas regras que outros produtos pisc(cid:237)colas na UE. Significa isto que, para poder ser vendido em lojas de alimenta(cid:231)ªo, o arenque fermentado nªo pode ser acondicionado nas velhas barricas de madeira usadas desde o sØculo XVI nem tratado em instala(cid:231)ıes com chªo de madeira, como Ø o caso das velhas casas de madeira utilizadas. Esta medida vem afectar uma tradi(cid:231)ªo alimentar milenÆria na SuØcia. Os pequenos produtores locais sªo os mais duramente atingidos. A UE fala em subsidiariedade e em nªo interferir em questıes de pormenor, mas faz o contrÆrio. Considera a Comissªo que esta regulamenta(cid:231)ªo pormenorizada Ø compat(cid:237)vel com a subsidiariedade? Se nªo, tenciona a Comissªo suspender a directiva relativa ao arenque fermentado? Resposta comum (cid:224)s perguntas escritas E-2234/98 e E-2236/98 dada pelo ComissÆrio Franz Fischler em nome da Comissªo (21 de Setembro de 1998) A Directiva 91/493/CEE do Conselho, de 22 de Julho de 1991, que adopta as normas sanitÆrias relativas (cid:224) produ(cid:231)ªo e (cid:224) coloca(cid:231)ªo no mercado dos produtos da pesca (1) nªo inclui nenhuma disposi(cid:231)ªo espec(cid:237)fica relativa a um chªo de cimento. Cabe (cid:224)s autoridades nacionais determinar se um determinado pavimento satisfaz ou nªo os objectivos em matØria de higiene da directiva. A directiva nªo prevŒ, tªo-pouco, a obriga(cid:231)ªo expl(cid:237)cita de utilizar barricas de plÆstico. O Cap(cid:237)tulo III do anexo, que estabelece as condi(cid:231)ıes gerais aplicÆveis aos estabelecimentos em terra, prevŒ, na al(cid:237)nea a) do ponto 2, que os estabelecimentos em causa devem dispor de, «nas instala(cid:231)ıes em que se procede (cid:224) manipula(cid:231)ªo, prepara(cid:231)ªo e transforma(cid:231)ªo dos produtos referidos: a) um chªo em materiais impermeÆveis, fÆcil de limpar e desinfectar e disposto de modo a permitir um escoamento fÆcil da Ægua ou equipado com um dispositivo destinado a evacuar a Ægua». O ponto 6, al(cid:237)nea c), do Cap(cid:237)tulo IV e ponto 2 do Cap(cid:237)tulo VI do referido anexo estabelecem, respectivamente, que: Salga c) As cubas de salmoura devem ser constru(cid:237)das de modo a evitar qualquer fonte de 6. polui(cid:231)ªo durante o processo de salmoura. Os materiais de embalagem e os produtos suscept(cid:237)veis de entrar em contacto com os produtos da 2. pesca devem obedecer a todas as normas de higiene, nomeadamente: › nªo devem poder alterar as caracter(cid:237)sticas organolØpticas das prepara(cid:231)ıes e dos produtos da pesca, › nªo devem poder transmitir aos produtos da pesca subst(cid:226)ncias nocivas para a saœde humana, › devem ser de uma solidez suficiente para assegurar uma protec(cid:231)ªo eficaz dos produtos da pesca. A regulamenta(cid:231)ªo comunitÆria nesta matØria nªo pretende comprometer a produ(cid:231)ªo de uma iguaria tradicional sueca, desde que sejam cumpridas as normas de higiene alimentar. AlØm disso, as disposi(cid:231)ıes supra deixam (cid:224)s autoridades suecas uma margem suficiente de interpreta(cid:231)ªo no que se refere (cid:224) sua aplica(cid:231)ªo, pelo que a Comissªo considera que o princ(cid:237)pio de subsidiariedade foi respeitado. (1) JO L 268 de 24. 9. 1991


title: Resolution on fires in Greece

eurovoc_concepts: Greece fire forest


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2216/98 by David THOMAS Welfare of laying hens

text: C 320/4 Euroopan yhteisöjen virallinen lehti FI 6. 11. 1999 (1999/C 320/004) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-2216/98 esittäjä(t): David Thomas (PSE) komissiolle (16. heinäkuuta 1998) Aihe: Munivien kanojen hyvinvointi Voiko komissio vahvistaa, onko direktiivin 88/166/ETY (1) säännökset pantu täytäntöön kaikissa jäsenvalti- oissa? Kuinka monta paikan päällä tapahtuvaa tarkastusta komission tarkastajat ovat suorittaneet selvittääk- seen, noudatetaanko direktiiviä? (1) EYVL L 74, 19. 3. 1988, s. 83. Komission jäsenen Franz Fischlerin komission puolesta antama vastaus (24. syyskuuta 1998) täytäntöön Jäsenvaltioiden komissiolle toimittamien tietojen mukaan kaikki 7 päivänä maaliskuuta 1988 annetun neuvoston direktiivin 88/166/ETY, joka on yhteisöjen tuomioistuimen asiassa 131/86 antaman tuomion mukainen (häkeissä pidettävien munivien kanojen suojelun vähimmäisvaa- timuksista 25 päivänä maaliskuuta 1986 annetun neuvoston direktiivin 86/113/ETY julistaminen mitättö- jonka mukaan mäksi). Komissio on kuitenkin äsken vastaanottanut erään kauppajärjestön valituksen, direktiiviä ei ole saatettu asianmukaisesti osaksi kansallista lainsäädäntöä joissakin jäsenvaltioissa. Valitusta tutkitaan parhaillaan. jäsenvaltiot ovat panneet Eläinten hyvinvoinnin varmistamiseksi komission eläinlääkintätarkastajat ovat keskittyneet tähän mennessä tarkastuskäynneillään jäsenvaltioissa eläinten suojelemiseen kuljetuksen aikana (neuvoston direktiivi 91/628/ ETY (1)) ja eläinten suojeluun teurastus- tai lopetushetkellä (neuvoston direktiivi 93/119/ETY (2)). Eläinlääkinnällisiä paikalla tehtäviä tarkastuksia on lähiaikoina kuitenkin tarkoitus laajentaa muille aloille, joista voidaan mainita häkeissä pidettävien munivien kanojen hyvinvointi. (1) (2) EYVL L 340, 11. 12. 1991. EYVL L 340, 31. 12. 1993. (1999/C 320/005) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-2241/98 esittäjä(t): Allan Macartney (ARE) komissiolle (16. heinäkuuta 1998) Aihe: Kiinan ihmisoikeudet Kun otetaan huomioon Euroopan unionin omaksuma kanta yleisen ihmisoikeuksien julistuksen 50-vuotis- juhlan yhteydessä Genevessä pidetyssä YK:n ihmisoikeuskomission vuosikokouksessa, onko komissio sitä mieltä, että Euroopan unionin painostus Kiinan ihmisoikeustilanteen parantamiseksi on riittävää? Mihin toimiin komissio on ryhtynyt tarkkaillakseen Kiinassa tapahtuvia ihmisoikeuksien loukkaamisia, ja onko komissio pyrkinyt toimillaan vaikuttamaan Kiinan viranomaisiin ihmisoikeuksien yleismaailmallisuuden edistämiseksi? Komission jäsenen Sir Leon Brittanin komission puolesta antama vastaus (8. syyskuuta 1998) Vuoden 1997 lokakuusta lähtien Euroopan unioni ja Kiina ovat säännöllisesti pitäneet lukuisia yksityiskohtia käsitteleviä kokouksia, joissa on käsitelty kaikkia ihmisoikeuksiin liittyviä asioita Kiinassa. Vuoropuhelussa on otettu esille jopa kaikkein arkaluontoisimmat asiat, ja sitä tuetaan monilla yhteisön rahoittamilla hankkeilla, jotka on tarkoitettu vahvistamaan ihmisoikeuksien kunnioittamista Kiinassa. Lisäksi kaikissa mahdollisissa tilanteissa on otettu esiin Kiinassa vangittuna olevien yksittäisten toisinajattelijoiden ahdinko


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 2231/98 dell'on. Magda AELVOET alla Commissione. Cotone ecologico

eurovoc_concepts:
clean technology
cotton
eco-label
ecology
environmental protection
environmental research
organic farming
pesticide
tariff preference
textile product


title: Parere del Comitato delle regioni in merito alla «Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma quadro pluriennale di azioni nel settore dell'energia (1998-2002) e misure connesse [Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma quadro pluriennale di azioni nel settore dell'energia (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale di promozione delle fonti energetiche rinnovabili nella Comunità (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale per la promozione dell'efficienza energetica (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale di azioni tecnologiche per la promozione dell'utilizzazione pulita ed efficiente dei combustibili solidi (1998-2002)]»

eurovoc_concepts:
EU programme
clean technology
energy policy
fuel
renewable energy

text: 13. 10. 98 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 315/1 II (Atti preparatori) COMITATO DELLE REGIONI Parere del Comitato delle regioni in merito alla «Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma quadro pluriennale di azioni nel settore dell’energia (1998-2002) e misure connesse [Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma quadro pluriennale di azioni nel settore dell’energia (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale di promozione delle fonti energetiche rinnovabili nella Comunità (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale per la promozione dell’efficienza energetica (1998-2002), Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma pluriennale di azioni tecnologiche per la promozione dell’utilizzazione pulita ed efficiente dei combustibili solidi (1998-2002)]» (98/C 315/01) IL COMITATO DELLE REGIONI, vista la «Proposta di decisione del Consiglio che adotta un programma quadro pluriennale di azioni nel settore dell’energia (1998-2002) e misure connesse» (1); vista la decisione del Consiglio in data 4 febbraio 1998, di consultare, a titolo facoltativo, il Comitato delle regioni su tale argomento, conformemente al disposto dell’articolo 198 C, primo comma, del Trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea; vista la decisione dell’Ufficio di presidenza del 12 marzo 1998, di assegnare la preparazione del parere alla Commissione 4 «Assetto territoriale, questioni urbane, energia ambiente»; visto il progetto di parere adottato all’unanimità dalla Commissione 4 secondo la procedura d’urgenza il 22 aprile 1998 (CdR 56/98 riv. ) (relatore: Mernizka), ha adottato a maggioranza il 16 luglio 1998, nel corso della 24a sessione plenaria, il seguente parere. (1) COM(97) 550 def. C 315/2 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 13. 10. 98 1. Introduzione Il Consiglio ha incaricato la Commissione (1) di 1. 1. elaborare uno studio sul coordinamento di i programmi relativi al settore dell’energia prima della fine del 1997, e di presentare una comunicazione su tutti i programmi comunitari inerenti alla politica energetica entro la fine del 1997. tutti — Analisi e controllo dei mercati dell’energia — Cooperazione (Synergy) energetica internazionale — Promozione delle fonti energetiche rinnovabili (Altener II) Milioni di ECU 7,8 36,4 81,1 Il Consiglio ha inoltre invitato la Commissione 1. 2. a presentare proposte per migliorare la trasparenza ed il coordinamento in materia, nonché un programma quadro in materia di politica energetica. 1. 3. La Comunicazione della Commissione «Panora- mica della politica e delle azioni energetiche» (2) costitui- sce il primo passo verso l’analisi completa dei programmi inerenti all’energia richiesta dal Consiglio. 1. 4. La Commissione ha adottato l’attuale program- ma quadro pluriennale nel novembre 1997, e l’ha presentato al Consiglio «Energia» l’8 dicembre 1997. I ministri competenti in materia di energia hanno preso atto del programma e l’hanno trasmesso agli organi del Consiglio, che procederanno ad un ulteriore esame. 2. Contenuto del programma quadro pluriennale — Promozione dell’efficienza energetica (SAVE II) 68,4 — Penetrazione sul mercato di tecnologie pulite per i combustibili solidi (Carnot) — Sicurezza nucleare 4,1 2,6 Totale 200,4 Detti importi rappresentano gli importi massimi per il periodo del programma quadro, e coprono il finanzia- mento degli interventi veri e propri nonché i costi del personale ed i costi amministrativi. 2. 3. L’introduzione del programma deve tra l’altro agevolare la gestione delle risorse, nonché il loro uso trasparente ed economico, e quindi consentire un uso più efficiente dei mezzi disponibili. 2. 4. Nella gestione del programma quadro la Com- missione deve essere coadiuvata da un comitato unico, composto dai rappresentanti degli Stati membri e presie- duto da un rappresentante della Commissione. L’opinio- ne del comitato deve quanto più possibile essere tenuta in considerazione dalla Commissione. 2. 1. La Commissione propone di elaborare un pro- gramma quadro per gli interventi comunitari nel settore dell’energia per il periodo 1998-2002. Tale programma quadro dovrà contribuire in particolare alla realizza- zione dei seguenti obiettivi prioritari: — garantire un approvvigionamento energetico sicuro; 2. 5. La Commissione dovrà verificare annualmente lo stato di avanzamento del programma quadro e dei programmi specifici collegati, nonché l’attuazione, l’efficacia generale e il contributo agli obiettivi di politica comunitaria, le priorità e l’adeguatezza dei finanziamenti, e presentare eventuali proposte di adegua- mento. — assicurare la competitività; — promuovere la compatibilità tra lo sviluppo del mercato dell’energia e la protezione dell’ambiente. 2. 2. Il programma quadro dovrà essere articolato su 6 azioni orizzontali o programmi tematici specifici, finanziati come segue: 2. 6. Nel terzo anno della durata del programma la Commissione dovrà affidare ad esperti esterni indipen- il compito di procedere ad una valutazione denti completa dell’azione comunitaria svolta nell’ambito del programma quadro. I risultati dovranno essere comunicati al Consiglio, al Comitato economico e sociale ed al Comitato delle regioni. 3. Analisi generale del programma quadro pluriennale (1) Risoluzione del Consiglio dell’8 luglio 1996 sul Libro bianco «Una politica energetica per l’Unione europea» (GU C 224 del 1. 8. 1996) e Regolamento (CE) n. 701/97 del Consiglio recante adozione del programma Synergy (GU L 104 del 22. 4. 1997). (2) COM(97) 167 def. del 23. 4. 1997. 3. 1. Il Comitato approva l’introduzione di un pro- gramma quadro di azioni nel settore dell’energia. Prevede che un approccio più integrato, più trasparente e più efficiente consentirà di razionalizzare sensibilmente tutte le attività e i programmi, di semplificare le procedure e di utilizzare le sinergie. 13. 10. 98 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 315/3 3. 2. Il Comitato concorda sul fatto che una politica energetica efficiente richieda di raggruppare le azioni, concentrandole sugli obiettivi dell’approvvigionamento energetico sicuro, della competitività e della protezione dell’ambiente. Ricorda tuttavia espressamente che i Trattati europei non prevedono che la Commissione abbia competenze in materia di politica energetica. Tutti interventi devono quindi essere in linea con il gli principio della sussidiarietà. 3. 3. Il Comitato condivide l’obiettivo della massima coerenza possibile, che presuppone una grande efficienza dei processi decisionali. Accoglie quindi con favore il progetto di istituire un comitato unico, che appoggerà l’attuazione del programma quadro. Il Comitato ravvisa tuttavia la necessità di conferire a questo comitato anche una funzione decisionale, e di coadiuvarlo con comitati tecnici (gruppi di esperti) per i singoli programmi con una chiara definizione delle competenze. Il Comitato è favorevole alla partecipazione degli enti locali e regionali a questo processo decisionale. 3. 4. Il Comitato appoggia in linea di principio un incremento della dotazione finanziaria, affinché le prio- rità politiche possano essere attuate anche nel settore dell’energia. Considera prioritario il finanziamento dei costi legati alla promozione delle fonti rinnovabili (Altener) e dell’efficienza energetica (SAVE), perché in questo modo si puo` liberare un enorme potenziale per la creazione di posti di lavoro e per la protezione dell’ambiente. 3. 5. Il Comitato accoglie con favore l’idea di assegna- re ad esperti indipendenti il compito di svolgere una verifica regolare (annua) delle attività ed una valutazione globale della realizzazione delle azioni comunitarie che rientrano nel programma quadro. Cio` consentirà un rapido adeguamento ai nuovi sviluppi. l’efficienza del lavoro e per evitare di duplicare gli sforzi, tuttavia, il Comitato ricorda in particolare la necessità di una stretta cooperazione con gli Stati membri e della presa in considerazione dei molti dati già disponibili. 4. 2. Programma pluriennale per promuovere la coope- razione internazionale nel settore dell’energia — Synergy 4. 2. 1. Il programma mira a contribuire all’elaborazio- ne, alla formulazione ed all’attuazione della politica energetica dei paesi terzi, alla promozione della coopera- zione industriale tra la Comunità ed i paesi terzi ed al miglioramento del coordinamento degli interventi esterni della Comunità in materia di energia. 4. 2. 2. Si tratta di un programma già avviato, per il quale la Commissione, nel contesto dell’attuale program- ma quadro, ha chiesto una proroga fino al 31. 12. 1998. I ministri dell’Energia hanno aderito a questa proposta della Commissione, e si sono accordati su una dotazione finanziaria di 5 milioni di ECU per il 1998. Il programma quadro pluriennale prevede per il 1998 un contributo di 7 milioni di ECU, che sarà portato a 7,57 milioni di ECU nel 2002. 4. 2. 3. Il Comitato accoglie con favore l’obiettivo del programma Synergy e la proroga della durata del programma fino al 31. 12. 2002. Ritiene tuttavia che la dotazione finanziaria di 5 milioni di ECU per il 1998, accompagnata da piccoli incrementi per gli anni 1999- 2002, sia sufficiente. 4. 3. Programma pluriennale per la promozione delle fonti energetiche rinnovabili nella Comunità — Altener II Il Comitato approva l’istituzione di una «Rete 3. 6. dei Direttori generali interessati». In questo modo si creerà anche un collegamento con i programmi di altre Direzioni generali, insieme alle quali vengono finanziate altre attività nel campo dell’energia, sviluppando cosı` ulteriormente la concertazione e la trasparenza (cfr. anche 4. 4. 4). Il programma Altener mira a promuovere un 4. 3. 1. impiego più intenso delle fonti energetiche ecologiche. Altener II, oltre all’ampliamento delle azioni di Altener I, prevede anche nuove azioni intese ad agevolare la penetrazione di mercato nonché l’attuazione, l’accompa- gnamento ed il monitoraggio della strategia comunitaria per le energie rinnovabili. 4. Contenuto ed analisi delle singole componenti del programma quadro pluriennale 4. 3. 2. Il Comitato ritiene che questo programma rappresenti una pietra miliare fondamentale per il futuro del programma quadro pluriennale. 4. 1. Azione pluriennale di studi, analisi, previsioni e altri lavori connessi nel settore dell’energia 4. 1. 1. In cooperazione con gli Stati membri è prevista l’elaborazione di un programma di controllo regolare dell’evoluzione dei mercati e dei trend nel settore dell’energia, in modo che le decisioni di politica energeti- ca possano essere prese sulla base di un’analisi condivisa. 4. 1. 2. Il Comitato riconosce l’importanza di dati attendibili come base per tali decisioni. Appoggia pertan- to in linea di principio queste iniziative. Per accrescere 4. 3. 3. 18 settembre 1997 (1). Per i dettagli il Comitato rimanda al parere del 4. 4. Programma pluriennale per la promozione dell’ef- ficienza energetica — SAVE II 4. 4. 1. Il programma SAVE II è stato accettato dal Consiglio europeo nel dicembre 1996 come uno dei tre (1) GU C 379 del 15. 12. 1997, pag. 63. C 315/4 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 13. 10. 98 programmi principali a livello UE per la promozione dell’efficienza energetica. È l’unico programma comuni- tario dedicato esclusivamente al potenziamento dell’effi- cienza energetica. Oltre agli studi, alle azioni per il rafforzamento dello scambio di esperienze ed alle azioni specifiche per il miglioramento della gestione dell’energia, occorre promuovere anche azioni pilota settoriali intese a dare impulso agli investimenti in materia di efficienza energe- tica. 4. 4. 2. Il Comitato accoglie con favore la proposta di proseguire il programma SAVE II fino al 2002, trattando- si di uno degli strumenti comunitari più importanti che possono contribuire in maniera sostanziale a ridurre le emissioni di CO2. Il Comitato è dell’avviso che il programma 4. 4. 3. SAVE II, insieme ad Altener II, debba costituire un punto centrale del programma quadro sull’energia. Cio`, secondo il Comitato, giustifica anche il forte incremento della dotazione finanziaria. 4. 4. 4. Il Comitato giudica assolutamente necessaria una stretta cooperazione con altri programmi comunitari che mirano a promuovere il miglioramento dell’efficien- in za energetica (in particolare Joule e Thermie): questo modo si eviteranno sovrapposizioni e si potranno sfruttare le sinergie (v. anche punto 3. 6). 4. 5. Programma pluriennale di azioni tecnologiche per la promozione dell’utilizzazione pulita ed efficiente dei combustibili solidi — Carnot 4. 5. 1. Questo programma mira a promuovere le misure intese ad istituire una rete di informazione ed a creare una cooperazione industriale strategica. Non prevede alcuna azione specifica di RST. Bruxelles, 16 luglio 1998. 4. 5. 2. I combustibili solidi, essendo ancora disponibili a lungo termine, contribuiranno in maniera sostanziale anche in futuro a soddisfare il fabbisogno energetico nella Comunità e al di fuori di essa. La riduzione delle emissioni nocive da essi provocate, che si cerca di conseguire a livello mondiale, dipende in misura determi- nante dall’efficienza delle tecniche di conversione dell’e- nergia utilizzate. 4. 5. 3. Il Comitato ritiene particolarmente importante la promozione di tecnologie più pulite e più efficienti. Ravvisa inoltre un’urgente necessità di compiere ulteriori sforzi per affinare le tecniche, ma anche per potenziare la cooperazione e migliorare le informazioni relative al mercato ed alle tecnologie. Accoglie quindi con favore il programma pluriennale e la sua inclusione nel pro- gramma quadro sull’energia. 4. 6. Azioni pluriennali nel settore della sicurezza nucleare e del trasporto di materie radioattive 4. 6. 1. Il programma mira ad appoggiare la coopera- zione industriale in materia nucleare e nel trasporto di materie radioattive, nonché la formazione di esperti dei paesi dell’Europa centrale e orientale e dei nuovi Stati indipendenti in materia di controllo della sicurezza. 4. 6. 2. Rispetto all’uso dell’energia nucleare le regioni dell’Unione hanno posizioni diverse, talvolta contrap- poste. Esiste tuttavia consenso sul fatto che, data la dimensione globale di quest’area critica, occorrono standard di sicurezza molto elevati a livello mondiale. Il Comitato giudica quindi in maniera positiva l’inclusione delle attività in corso in un programma pluriennale, che a sua volta diventerà parte del programma quadro sull’energia. Il Presidente del Comitato delle regioni Manfred DAMMEYER