title: Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on: - the 'Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty', and - the 'Regional and local room for manoeuvre in economic policymaking and EU state aid control'

text: C 93/64 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 4. 1999 statistics for comparing and assessing social cohesion in Europe; that local and regional authorities, as employers, 6. 3. will be given a place in European social dialogue; 6. 5. that the Commission will develop support pro- grammes for the innovative pilot projects set up by local and regional authorities in the fields of employment and social policy; 6. 4. to take part in the European consultation pro- cesses on social policy, and in particular, to help prepare any future European Social Forum, where greater consideration should be given to the role of local authorities; 6. 6. that the local and regional authorities of the Union’s future Member States will be involved in Community social policy, with regard to employment in particular, and will be able to take part in the work of the Committee of the Regions. Brussels, 14 January 1999. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on: — the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty’, and — the ‘Regional and local room for manoeuvre in economic policymaking and EU state aid control’ THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, (1999/C 93/10) having regard to the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (COM(1998) 73 final — 98/0060 CNS) (1); having regard to the COR Bureau’s decision of 13 May 1998, under the fourth paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an opinion on the subject and to instruct Commission 6 — Employment, Economic Policy, Single Market, Industry, SMEs, — to prepare the Committee’s work on the subject; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 284/98 rev. 2) adopted by Commission 6 on 30 November 1998 (rapporteurs: Mr Stoiber and Mr Sanz Alonso); whereas the Committee of the Regions has drawn attention to the conflict between regional and competition policy in its opinion on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Member States on the links between regional and competition policy: Reinforcing concentration and mutual consistency’ (CdR 236/98 fin) (2); whereas regional economic policymaking is a core responsibility of the European Union’s regions and local authorities; whereas competition policy and fair competition offer a level playing field and better opportunities for all; whereas at the same time, this by its very nature restricts the economic room for manoeuvre for national and devolved tiers of government, adopted the following opinion at its 27th plenary session of 13 and 14 January 1999 (meeting of 14 January). (1) OJ C 116, 16. 4. 1998, p. 13. (2) OJ C 51, 22. 2. 1999, p. 16. 6. 4. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 93/65 1. Introduction 1. 1. Background 1. 1. 1. In 1996 the Commission launched an initiative designed to refocus state aids on the basis of Article 94 of the EC Treaty, which states that: 1. 1. 2. ‘The Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may make any appropriate regulations for the application of Articles 92 and 93 and may in particular determine the conditions in which Article 93(3) shall apply and the categories of aid exempted from this procedure. ’ 1. 1. 3. The Council welcomed the initiative and urged the Commission to submit proposals designed to simplify control of state aids and make it more effective. 1. 1. 4. The regulation under examination seeks to enhance transparency and legal certainty, by consolidat- ing and clarifying the procedural rules for state aids. Further, it should be remembered that the Commission’s Communications on competition law and state aids, which do not have legal force, have not always helped to make European rules on this matter more intelligible to local players. 1. 1. 5. Initially the only statutory provisions on state aids were contained in Article 93. A set of rules has gradually developed, however, from working practices and Court of Justice case law, but these rules are fragmented and are not, therefore, sufficiently trans- parent. 1. 1. 6. In parallel, the Commission is advocating new rules for establishing categories of aid exempted from its control arrangements, which are fundamentally based on the requirement of prior notification and the standstill principle. The COR cannot therefore simply focus on procedural aspects, but must instead address the substantive issues directly affecting EU regions. This renewed impetus requires special attention 1. 1. 7. to be paid to directives on regional state aids. These directives will grant new exemptions from the control procedure to state aid earmarked for certain regions for the specific purposes of development. 1. 1. 8. Furthermore, Structural Fund areas in the new period covered by Agenda 2000, with an estimated population coverage of between 35 % and 40 %, should be consistent with the future regional state aid areas carved out under the new directives. Commissioner Van Miert is expected to approve a 42,7 % ceiling on population coverage. The calculation is based on Octo- ber 1997 statistics and will be reviewed in 1999. Reconciling regional policy and competition 1. 1. 9. policy is one of the objectives to be pursued, and the regions need to be alert when they are establishing the rules which will determine the legal and economic framework for domestic action to underpin their own development and industrial fabric. This is the background to the present opinion. 1. 2. Aid control — essential for regions and local authorities 1. 2. 1. Given the precarious situation on the jobs front, the challenges posed to regional competitiveness by globalization and growing intra-European compe- tition in Euroland, the regions of Europe are now under a greater obligation than ever before to improve their general economic situation. In so doing, their aim will be to create jobs, boost regional competitiveness and promote growth. 1. 2. 2. Economic policy makers at all levels — the EU, Member States, regions and local authorities — need to promote economic and social cohesion. In contrast to EU structural policy, which looks to secure cohesion at European level, national and regional economic policies seek to even out differences in development within their own territories. People living in disadvantaged areas rightly expect their regional and national governments to meet their responsibilities in terms of intra-national and intra-regional development. The Committee of the Regions backs fair 1. 2. 3. competition between regions and companies in the European single market. One essential element in achiev- ing this is efficient control of state aids. Consequently there is a ban on state subsidies which threaten to distort competition or damage trade between the Member States. The European Commission does, however, have the right to permit exemptions in accordance with the control-of-state-aid provisions of the EC Treaty. Therefore, without appropriate authorization, regional and local authorities are basically unable to provide C 93/66 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 4. 1999 companies with any kind of aid from their budget resources. Regional and local authorities often lack information concerning the compatibility of financial aid with Community law. Adequate legal certainty is not always provided by the checks carried out by the national or regional authorities responsible for deciding whether or not aid is legal under EU rules for local and regional authorities. 1. 2. 4. Those who hold political responsibility in regions and municipalities often find themselves in a difficult position here. On the one hand, they are keen to exercise their responsibility to meet grassroots expectations and support economic development with public funds. On the other, they have to take into account EU legislation and the way it is implemented. 1. 2. 5. European Commission decisions on the legality of aid have far-reaching implications for the enterprises and their employees. Sometimes they even determine the economic well-being of entire regions, areas, cities and municipalities. It is therefore only natural that the Committee of the Regions, as a representative of local and regional authorities, should attach particular importance to aid policy. The European Commission has put forward 1. 2. 6. proposals to reform the legislation on aid in three areas: — aid authorization procedure (Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty, 18 February 1998), — new regional aid arrangements (Guidelines on national regional aid, 16 December 1997), — congruence between EU areas and national areas eligible for support (Communication from the Com- mission to the Member States on the links between regional and competition policy, 16 December 1997). This revamp restructures central elements of Community legislation governing regional economic policymaking. In particular, it tightens up procedural provisions, cuts back the range of regions eligible for aid and extends aid control to EU structural policy. 2. Substantial scope for regional and local economic policymaking necessary 2. 1. The Committee of the Regions backs fair compe- tition between regions and companies in the European single market. Efficient control of state aid is necessary in order to prevent jostling for subsidies within the European Union. But at the same time, the COR underlines that there must also be adequate scope for regional economic policymaking. must be able to hold its own in global competition. An essential element here is not only the social and ecological dimension, but also regionally balanced economic devel- opment. Ordinary EU citizens are demanding from political movers in their local areas, regions, Member States and the European Union an equal share in economic prosperity. 2. 3. The European single market may be border-free, but it is not a uniform economic area. Differences in prosperity and employment are immense. In 1995, per capita gross domestic product (in purchasing power standards) in the five strongest regions lay at between 165 % and 190 % of the Community average, and at between 43 % and 50 % in the weakest regions. In 1995, the unemployment rate in the ten weakest regions was running at around 30 %, and at 4 % in the strongest regions. Even within Member States and within regions, the disparities were great. For example, in 1995, differ- ences in regional per capita gross domestic product in the large Member States ran at 100 % in France, Italy and the United Kingdom, almost 75 % in Spain and, even as much as some 200 % in Germany. 2. 4. One of the central tasks of the regions and Member States therefore remains that of channelling state resources into economic and social cohesion within the regions and Member States. To this end, adequate room for manoeuvre must be allowed under European aid control arrangements. The ultimate aim is, after all, to achieve a fair balance between competition and regional policies. 2. 5. In order to boost the competitiveness of the European economy as a whole, we must improve the environment for economic success in all regions. It is necessary not only to give priority to strengthening the most disadvantaged regions, but also to strengthen all regions even if they are more highly developed than others. For this reason, an appropriate economic policy must be pursued at regional and local level which is tailored to development conditions in the eligible areas; such a policy must be in keeping with the desired objectives and at the same time take account of where the various parties are coming from. In the economically strong EU regions, regional and local policy must seek to preserve the conditions of competitiveness; in disadvantaged regions, on the other hand, the main aim is to eliminate infrastructure and structural obstacles to development; moreover, favourable conditions must be put in place for local companies in disadvantaged regions to enable them to overcome the generally poor economic environment. 2. 2. The globalization of markets, the continued advancement of the information society and the increas- ing speed of technological change represent a tremendous challenge for Europe. The European economic model 2. 6. European aid policy must not seek solely to bring economic levels closer to the Community average, but must strive to raise standards overall. Otherwise, competitiveness on global markets will drop. 6. 4. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 93/67 2. 7. At the same time — and not least in order to bolster Europe’s global competitiveness on the world markets — European aid policy must seek to bring economic conditions in the most disadvantaged and peripheral regions closer to the Community average and to underpin the self-sustaining economic clout of the economically stronger regions. Europe’s regions and local authorities — and with them the Committee of the Regions — are aware that effective competitiveness cannot be achieved on the world markets and that the Community institutions cannot secure a solid footing if the policies pursued by the EU, the Member States and the regions as part of Europe’s economic and social dimension create an even wider gulf between developed and disadvantaged regions. The Committee of the Regions feels that it is 2. 8. important to make the point that regional aid is not designed to subsidize ailing industries or to keep unprofitable firms going. Regional aid is designed to exploit the economic potential of the regions. It is geared to sectors of the future, promoting innovation, advancing structural change and boosting international competi- tiveness. Company-related aid is also all about investing in the future. 2. 9. European structural policy naturally takes into account differences in development within the context of the European single market. National and regional support, on the other hand, is channelled towards offsetting inequalities of opportunities within Member States and regions. The Committee considers that the assisted areas should be redefined on the basis of regional inequalities within the European Union. The Commission should allow the Member States to select areas eligible for aid up to a prescribed ceiling within this reference framework. EU state aid control should recognize that national and regional aid is designed first and foremost to promote national and regional cohesion and not European cohesion, without, however, damag- ing European cohesion. 2. 10. On-site political experience shows that people living in disadvantaged areas compare themselves in the first instance with other areas in their own region or country and not with other parts of Europe. As a political body representing regional and local responsibilities, the Committee of the Regions must take steps to ensure that the situations arising as a result of aid control can be clearly explained to companies and ordinary citizens. We should therefore not lose sight of this perspective when laying down criteria for assessing national and regional aid. Overall the establishment of the single market and fair competition have led to a general increase of prosperity in the European Union. The benefits are not always visible to the citizens, and not all citizens benefit equally from the opportunities the single market offers. However, when laying down criteria for assessing national and regional aid, the overall benefit of a policy must be taken into account. 2. 11. Giving regions the chance to use their own funds to exploit development potential is not just an economic necessity. It is also essential for a region’s own image of itself, for its sense of responsibility and — depending on national circumstances — for its autonomy. 2. 12. The Committee of the Regions would stress the importance of aid authorization procedures for economic measures in the regions and local areas. The aid procedure must therefore be efficient, non-bureaucratic and structured in such a way that it can be completed in a very short time. 3. Regional and local authorities’ room for manoeuvre restricted by reform proposals 3. 1. The Committee of the Regions notes that the European Commission’s reform proposals may shift the balance away from regional policy and towards competition. The Committee considers that these pro- posals should maintain an equal balance between regional policy and competition and, in relation to they should shorten aid procedural arrangements, decision deadlines where possible. First of all, the Committee of the Regions 3. 2. welcomes the Commission’s plans to bring greater transparency and legal certainty into the procedure for applying Article 93 of the EC Treaty by framing an EC regulation as a legal base. The procedural regulation means greater clarity for all those involved in the aid process. 3. 3. However, in the interests both of curbing excess- ive standardization and of securing deregulation, the regulation should be restricted to the key issues involved. The Committee of the Regions feels that the regulation goes too far in terms of scope and detail. Enforcement should continue to come under Member States’ national law; Member States do not need EU legislation to handle administrative procedures and administrative procedural law. The two-month deadline proposed by the Com- 3. 4. mission for aid authorization decisions may lead to unjustifiable delay in certain cases where a shorter time frame has applied hitherto. The ‘tacit approval’ procedure previously in place has also been made more cumbersome. For a Commission decision based on preliminary investigations, twenty working days used for the accelerated procedure should continue to apply, instead of the two-month deadline proposed by the Commission. In order to guarantee that regional economic structures are maintained through the deadline of C 93/68 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 4. 1999 public funding in specific circumstances, and especially individual aid measures to be notified on a case by case basis, the decision must be taken and implemented speedily. If not, there is a risk of damaging the local economy or leaving investment or innovation schemes in a state of uncertainty. The COR deems inappropriate the plan to give 3. 5. the Commission powers to demand the provisional recovery of aid granted without formal authorization until its legality is conclusively clarified. The recipient can only be forced to repay the aid in cases where this aid is in fact illegal but not on the grounds of procedural irregularities. 3. 6. The Committee of the Regions opposes the proposal whereby appeals against the withdrawal of aid lodged under national law no longer have a suspensive effect. This is an area covered by national administrative procedures which should not be harmonized at European level. Removing the suspensive effect of national appeals is an intrusion into traditional Member States’ systems of legal protection and, in some Member States, is incompatible with the machinery of law. Such an arrangement is also inherently unnecessary since the mandatory interest charged on sums recovered removes any financial advantage. 3. 7. In the proposal, the Commission claims the right to enter company land and buildings to ask for on-the-spot statements and to examine business records in order to check the enforcement of aid decisions on site. National authorities may only be present at the Commission’s investigation on application but must, however, provide administrative assistance. 3. 8. The Committee of the Regions believes that it is necessary to maintain a clear distinction between the powers of the Commission, the Member State in question and the regions in respect of the European Commission’s aid control activities, and considers that the principle of subsidiarity should be upheld. The powers sought by the Commission might 3. 9. well be in contravention of sensitive basic rights protect- ed under national constitutions. It would not be accept- able, for example, for the Commission to have an independent right of visit and search when this was permitted to national authorities only on the ruling of a judge. This would be wholly incomprehensible to the ordinary individual involved. In this respect, the Commission proposal con- 3. 10. tains implicit powers for the Commission, when it could equally well rest upon the hallowed principle of cooperation with Member States. There is a need to comply with national legislation and procedures established in each Member State in relation to the inviolability of the home, a right enjoyed by legal persons. The COR considers unacceptable the require- 3. 11. ment that reports must also be drawn up on aid which does not have to be approved and calls for greater room for manoeuvre with regard both to (a) aid which, under the ‘de minimis’ rule does not require notification, and (b) to restructuring aid for companies. 3. 12. The Committee welcomes the Commission’s plan in its guidelines for regional aid to in future allow Member States to select eligible aid areas in accordance with a prescribed ceiling. This is in line with the subsidiarity principle. The Member States and the regions and local authorities themselves are best placed to judge which areas of a Member State should be granted national funds. Hence local and regional authorities granting permissible financial aid must be closely involved in the compilation of the regional aid map. 3. 13. On the other hand, the Committee of the Regions feels that it is inappropriate to reduce the geographical coverage still further. The ‘adjustment steps’ applied by the European Commission for determining regional assistance areas are not transparent and in individual cases yield results which contradict the objective data. Moreover, the Committee sees no compelling reason for a further curb on regional aid. On the contrary, the EU’s high levels of unemployment and the flagging competitiveness of the European econ- omy continue to demand a strong commitment from the Member States and regions to remedy structural deficiencies. Lastly, a cutback in regional aid conflicts with the Europe-wide objective of combating unemploy- ment. Particularly as the situation stands at present, a 3. 14. further restriction on regional room for economic manoeuvre would send out the wrong signal to the disadvantaged regions and local authorities which are sparing no effort to develop the regions’ economic potential. The Committee of the Regions considers that in future the regions must continue to be able to determine key economic priorities. 3. 15. Successive aid reductions by the European Commission do not take into account developments which will have a decisive effect on regional aid: — Cutting the geographical scope of EU support substantially diminishes support possibilities. The effort to achieve as much consistency as possible between competition policy and structural policy is welcomed. However, given the different objectives, the desired consistency may not — and cannot — be absolute. The existing differences within the EU and within the Member States require the necessary degree of flexibility. — Structural changes within the European Union have, moreover, generated new challenges for certain regions. Regions bordering future EU Member States in central and eastern Europe, for example, face countries’ tremendous challenges. On these 6. 4. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 93/69 accession, the regions concerned might be in locational competition with areas whose wage levels are just a fraction of the European Union average, and whose environmental and social standards also lag behind those of the EU. Per capita gross domestic product in the candidate countries is only around one third of the Community average. Support differentials are an additional problem since the acceding regions will without exception be Objective 1 areas. Here, but also in many other regions of the EU, there is a need for structural change supported by national and regional aid. — This also applies to national and regional aid for specific areas highly influenced by their geographical isolation, and demographic features (orography, island features), such as mountainous regions, regions, border sparsely populated regions. Such areas require particular attention which can be provided most effectively first and foremost by the authorities directly responsible, and only to a lesser degree by harmonized systems. regions or — Finally, the increase in eligible regions following the accession of the countries of central and eastern Europe will not require a cut in the number of areas receiving national aid. Improving national and regional economic and social cohesion is unconnec- ted with the need to promote such cohesion in the candidate countries also. 3. 16. For these reasons, the Committee of the Regions is opposed to reducing the geographical coverage of national aids and underlines that recent developments also indicate increasing disparities between the regions. At the same time, the Committee recognises the need for limits on national aid agreed at Community level and supports a balanced EU-level approach to the matter. 3. 17. In the opinion on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Member States on the links between regional and competition policy: Reinforcing concentration and mutual consistency’, the Committee of the Regions points out that EU support instruments sometimes have different objectives from activities pursued at national and regional level. It is therefore appropriate in some cases to put different instruments to use in different areas. 3. 18. The consistency requirement also indirectly means that national support must go to those areas which meet EU support criteria. If a Member State does not wish to forego EU funding, it is obliged to locate its national eligible areas in regions which also meet EU criteria, since the EU only provides support in areas where national aid is also granted. Thus, the EU support criteria also determine how national eligible areas are established. This is in blatant conflict with the principle of subsidiarity and the new guidelines’ commendable objective of letting Member States themselves select the eligible areas. 3. 19. At first glance, if only the figures for the EU as a whole are compared, the consistency requirement may look easy enough to meet. National aid is to be authorized in 46,7 % of areas, with Structural Fund investments in 35-40 %. From a regional perspective, however, the differences are considerable. Thus, in a whole range of regions, particularly those with large rural components, EU eligible areas are more than twice those of national eligible areas. As a result of the consistency requirement, these areas would have to be completely eliminated from EU support without a single eligibility criterion being examined. 3. 20. The Committee of the Regions therefore takes the view that a sufficiently large national eligible area is essential to achieving the consistency desired by the Commission. The 2 % margin for areas which do not meet the consistency precept must also be considerably raised. 4. Conclusions The Committee of the Regions underlines the need for an efficient state aid control regime in the single market and welcomes the Commission’s plans to bring greater transparency and legal certainty to the procedure for applying Article 93 of the EC Treaty by framing an EC regulation as a legal base. However, the Committee: 1) feels that the reform proposals for aid control may endanger the balance between regional policy and competition; the Committee believes such a balance is necessary in order to increase levels of employment and boost competitiveness; procedural arrangements need to be delivered in a straightforward, transparent and efficient manner if these goals are to be achieved. 2) feels that the proposed regulation goes too far in terms of scope and detail. In the interests of greater legal certainty, the Commission can go no further than the powers expressly conferred; 3) since sensitive basic rights are involved, opposes the Commission having a right of inspection and search which goes beyond national authorities’ powers in this regard; 4) considers, that the two-month deadline proposed by the Commission for aid authorization decisions may lead to unjustifiable delay in certain cases where a shorter time frame has applied hitherto; C 93/70 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 4. 1999 5) deems inappropriate the plan to give the Commission powers to demand the provisional recovery of aid granted without formal authorization until its legality is conclusively clarified; 6) opposes the proposal whereby appeals against the withdrawal of aid lodged under national law no longer have a suspensive effect. This is an area covered by national administrative procedures which should not be harmonized at European level; 7) feels it is necessary: — to abolish the obligation to take into consider- ation de minimus aid granted hitherto within the three-year period and raise support rates not requiring notification in line with the de minimis rule, and — to open up greater scope for securities, and rescue and restructuring aid; 8) welcomes the Commission’s intention, in its guide- lines for regional aid to allow Member States them- selves in future to select eligible aid areas up to a prescribed ceiling, but questions the need for a further cut in geographical coverage, given that, over the past few years, economic disparities in the Member States and regions have got worse rather than better; the Committee backs the possibility of using national Brussels, 14 January 1999. or regional resources to support the statistically weaker 50 % of EU regions; 9) reaffirms the need for continued scope for EU support in regions not covered by individual countries’ national aid schemes, and repeats its support for the proposal that areas currently covered by Articles 92(3)(a) and 92(3)(c) which lose their status for National Aid coverage, will be able to access ‘tran- sitional’ State Aid support; in accordance with the European Commission’s desire for cohesion, the transitional arrangements relating to the Structural Funds should match those applicable to aid. Regions which lose their status for National Aid coverage under Article 92IIIa should be added to the national population ceiling. They must under no circum- stances constitute a further burden on the ceiling for the respective Member State, which — under the European Commission’s proposals — is already to be reduced. 10) supports the Commission proposal, in keeping with subsidiarity, to avoid the contradiction whereby areas which fulfil the Structural Funds eligibility criteria are automatically excluded from national regional aid schemes; 11) stresses that, in terms of population ceiling, the 2 % margin put forward by the Commission for overlaps between EU and national eligible areas must be raised considerably. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER


title: Regolamento (CE) n. 91/1999 della Commissione del 14 gennaio 1999 relativo alle offerte comunicate nell'ambito della gara per l'esportazione di segala di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 1746/98

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
export tax
rye

formats: pdf print

text: L 9/18 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunit(cid:133) europee 15. 1. 1999 REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 91/1999 DELLA COMMISSIONE del 14 gennaio 1999 relativo alle offerte comunicate nell’ambito della gara per l’esportazione di segala di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 1746/98 LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNIT(cid:211) EUROPEE, visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunit(cid:133) europea, visto il regolamento (CEE) n. 1766/92 del Consiglio, del 30 giugno 1992, relativo all’organizzazione comune dei mercati nel settore dei cereali (1), modificato da ultimo dal regolamento (CE) n. 923/96 della Commissione (2), visto il regolamento (CE) n. 1501/95 della Commissione, del 29 giugno 1995, che stabilisce modalit(cid:133) di applica- zione del regolamento (CEE) n. 1766/92 del Consiglio, riguardo alla concessione delle restituzioni all’esporta- zione e alle misure da adottare in caso di turbative nel settore dei cereali (3), modificato da ultimo dal regola- mento (CE) n. 2513/98 (4), e in particolare l’articolo 7, considerando che una gara per la restituzione e/o la tassa all’esportazione di frumento tenero verso qualsiasi paese terzo (cid:138) stata indetta con il regolamento (CE) n. 1746/98 della Commissione (5); considerando che, conformemente all’articolo 7 del rego- lamento (CE) n. 1501/95, la Commissione pu(cid:149), in base alle offerte comunicate e secondo la procedura prevista all’articolo 23 del regolamento (CEE) n. 1766/92, decidere di non dar seguito alla gara; considerando che, tenuto conto in particolare dei criteri precisati all’articolo 1 del regolamento (CE) n. 1501/95, non (cid:138) opportuno fissare una restituzione massima o una tassa minima; considerando che le misure previste dal presente regola- mento sono conformi al parere del comitato di gestione per i cereali, HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO: Articolo 1 Non (cid:138) dato seguito alle offerte comunicate dall’8 al 14 gennaio 1999, nell’ambito della gara per la restituzione o per la tassa all’esportazione di segala di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 1746/98. Articolo 2 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il 15 gennaio 1999. Il presente regolamento (cid:138) obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri. Fatto a Bruxelles, il 14 gennaio 1999. Per la Commissione Franz FISCHLER Membro della Commissione (1) GU L 181 dell’1. 7. 1992, pag. 21. (2) GU L 126 del 24. 5. 1996, pag. 37. (3) GU L 147 del 30. 6. 1995, pag. 7. (4) GU L 313 del 21. 11. 1998, pag. 16. (5) GU L 219 del 7. 8. 1998, pag. 3


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4094/98 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS Projects in the delta of the River Nestos

eurovoc_concepts:
Greece
complaint to the Commission
electrical energy
engineering structure
environmental impact
impact study
infringement procedure (EU)
project evaluation

formats: html pdf print

text: 12. 11. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/55 For the immediate future, the Commission is not considering any particular measure associated with any one European Union town in 1999. (1999/C 325/068) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4094/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Projects in the delta of the River Nestos (14 January 1999) Further to my previous question on the construction and operation of dams on the River Nestos (E-1648/98), I should like to notify the Commission that at the beginning of October 1998 the DEI (Greek Electricity Board) stopped the flow of the river through the Platanovrysi dam; as a result part of the riverbed dried up and dead fish were washed up on the banks. This is having adverse ecological consequences for the narrows and delta of the River Nestos which are protected by national, Community and international law. This action by the DEI is also in violation of the Joint Ministerial Decision 16492/1996 under which the DEI is obliged to ensure at all times, even during the filling of the dams, a minimum flow of 6 m3/sec throughout the length of the river, as a minimum precondition for the project. Will the Commission say whether it is aware of this information and what representations it intends to make to the relevant Greek authorities so that they establish who is responsible? In its answer of 26 June 1998 to my previous question, it had stated that if violations were established, it would take the measures provided for under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. Does it consider that the above actions by the DEI could be viewed as a violation which is sufficiently serious to warrant initiating proceedings before the European Court Justice? Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1999) The Commission brought an infringement action against Greece after a complaint had been made concerning the conditions under which the four dams on the River Nestos were being constructed by the DEI (Greek Public Electricity Board). As part of the investigation of this matter the Greek authorities send a detailed report to the Commission in September 1998 on the current status as regards the work being carried out and above all on the launching of new studies in accordance with the Ministerial decision of 19 September 1996 approving the environ- mental terms (attached). The Commission would like to thank the Honourable Member for the new information provided. Indeed, the Commission will take account of those new data when deciding how to pursue the matter. (1999/C 325/069) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4105/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission (14 January 1999) Subject: Possible infringement of the rules on free competition by the law governing ‘banking foundations’ in Italy A law on the reform of ‘banking foundations’ was recently passed in Italy. It allows such foundations to maintain holdings in banking companies, which means in practice that they can exercise control over them. The fact that they combine socially useful functions with economic objectives constitutes an inappropriate overlapping of roles and allows them to extend their sphere of influence to other business activities, whilst maintaining the status of non-commercial entities, with all the tax benefits that that


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 4085/98 van Giulio FANTUZZI Invoer van rijst

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
common organisation of markets
customs duties
import
import levy
originating product
representative price
rice
third country
world market price

text: 6. 11. 1999 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 320/115 (1999/C 320/152) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-4085/98 van Giulio Fantuzzi (PSE) aan de Commissie (14 januari 1999) Betreft: Invoer van rijst Naar ik heb vernomen wil de Commissie met ingang van 1 januari 1999 een nieuwe regeling toepassen voor de invoer van rijst uit derde landen. Deze regeling zou neerkomen op een vermindering van de douanerechten met gemiddeld 25 € per ton. Kan de Commissie mededelen: 1. Welke compensatie biedt de Commissie de Europese producenten voor deze nieuwe verlaging van de douanerechten en hoe wil zij het beginsel van de communautaire preferentie eerbiedigen? 2. Hoe rechtvaardigt de Commissie de prijsverhoging met 8 % die voor de vaststelling van de douanerechten in aanmerking is genomen, gezien het feit dat de referentiekwaliteit betrekking heeft op het beste product dat op de wereldmarkt beschikbaar is? 3. Is de Commissie voornemens om op korte termijn een voorstel tot wijziging van de GMO voor rijst in te dienen om de economische situatie van de communautaire producenten te verbeteren, rekening houdend met het feit dat uiterlijk in de maand maart moet worden gezaaid? Antwoord van de heer Fischler Namens de Commissie (12 februari 1999) Het cumulatieve invorderingssysteem voor gedopte rijst (CIR) is ingevoerd bij Verordening (EG) 703/97 van de Commissie van 18 april 1997 houdende invoering, voor een proefperiode van 1 juli 1997 tot en met 30 juni 1998, van een cumulatief invorderingssysteem voor de vaststelling van bepaalde invoerrechten in de sector rijst en houdende wijziging van Verordening (EG) 1503/96 (1). Dit systeem is tot en met 31 december 1998 is toegepast, maar niet verlengd, met name wegens het complexe beheer ervan en het risico op concurrentie- verstoring. Vanaf 1 januari 1999 worden de rechten die voor ingevoerde gedopte indica-rijst moeten worden betaald, vastgesteld op basis van de representatieve prijs van gedopte indica-rijst op de markt van de Verenigde Staten, verhoogd met 8 %. Dit systeem voor het heffen van invoerrechten is een verbetering ten opzichte van het CIR en zou moeten leiden tot een juistere toepassing van de communautaire bescherming aan de grens. De verhoging van de representatieve prijzen met 8 % is gebaseerd op de resultaten van de toepassing van het CIR en op de ontwikkeling van de noteringen op de wereldmarkt, met name voor rijst van hogere kwaliteit. De Commissie evalueert momenteel verschillende mogelijke scenario’s voor de wijziging van de marktorde- ning om de structurele problemen van deze sector te kunnen oplossen. Zij zal zo spoedig mogelijk een voorstel indienen opdat de Europese rijsttelers vóór de inzaaiperiode een besluit kunnen nemen. (1) PB L 104 van 22. 4. 1997. (1999/C 320/153) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-4086/98 van Leonie van Bladel (UPE) aan de Commissie (14 januari 1999) Betreft: Fraudebestrijding Suriname als middel tegen transatlantische criminaliteit 1. Heeft de Commissie kennis genomen van de uitspraken van het hoofd van de Surinaamse douane, Arthur Trott, dat er een zodanige relatie in Suriname is ontstaan tussen fabrikanten in het buitenland en Surinaamse importeurs „dat onderfacturering de gewoonste zaak blijkt te zijn geworden”, en dat dit feit bijdraagt tot uitbreiding van de transatlantische criminaliteit? Is de Commissie niet van mening dat Suriname in aanmerking zou moeten kunnen komen om gebruik te 2. kunnen maken van de Europese „know how” op het gebied van fraudebestrijding?


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 4113/98 do Deputado Richard CORBETT Livsmedelshygien: Tillämpning av direktiv 93/43/EEG

eurovoc_concepts:
aircraft
food hygiene
food industry
food inspection
foodstuff
foodstuffs legislation
health control
vessel

formats: html print


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL nr. 4075/98 af Werner LANGEN Støtte fra Den Europæiske Union til delstaten Rheinland- Pfalz i perioden 1994 til 1998 (SUPPLERENDE SVAR)

eurovoc_concepts:
European Union
Rhineland-Palatinate
aid recipient
exchange of information
financial aid
job creation

text: 29. 11. 1999 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende C 341/35 Endvidere fastslås det i Telefónicas referencetilbud på samtratik, som de spanske myndigheder for nylig godkendte, at der gælder de samme termineringstakster for opkald for operatører af faste net som for mobiloperatører, hvilket skulle nedbringe taksterne for mobiloperatørerne betydeligt. Kommissionen kan dog ikke forudse, i hvilken udstrækning eller hvornår disse nedsættelser af priserne for slutbrugerne vil finde sted, da det afhænger af det konkurrrencemæssige pres på markedet og afgøres af de selskaber, der udbyder tjenesterne. (1999/C 341/051) SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-4075/98 af Werner Langen (PPE) til Kommissionen (14. januar 1999) Om: Støtte fra Den Europæiske Union til delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz i perioden 1994 til 1998 Kan Kommissionen oplyse, hvilken støtte der i perioden 1994 til 1998 via Den Europæiske Union er ydet til delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz, hvem der var modtagere, og hvor mange personer der er kommet i arbejde på hvilke områder som følge af denne støtte? Hvilke beløb er der udbetalt, navnlig 4 over KONVER-programmerne 4 på landbrugsområdet, 4 på området EUGFL, 4 på området uddannelse, 4 på området ungdom, 4 på området kultur, 4 på området forskning og teknologi, 4 på området højere læreanstalter, 4 på området økonomi, 4 på området regionaludvikling/strukturfonde og 4 på det sociale område? Supplerende svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Jacques Santer (16. april 1999) Da svaret er meget omfattende, fremsendes det direkte til det ærede medlem og til Parlamentets generalse- kretariat. (1999/C 341/052) SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-4098/98 af John McCartin (PPE) til Kommissionen (14. januar 1999) Om: Nationale skattefordele Eftersom de regionale økonomiske skævheder i de fleste medlemsstater findes i forholdet 2:1, kan Kommis- sionen da bekræfte, at nationale skattefordele, der ydes som et regionalpolitisk incitament, stadig er accepteret inden for det indre marked?


title: Fourth framework programme : Strategic transport: Infostat: Information systems.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU statistics
common transport policy
data collection
information system
international transport


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ αρ θ. 4072/98 του Ralf WALTER PΗΑRΕ- ΔΙΑΣΥΝΟΡΙΑΚΗ ΣΥΝΕΡΓΑΣΙΑ/ΙΝΤΕRRΕG

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern European Countries
EU aid
EU financing
EU programme
accession to the European Union
cross-border cooperation
joint committee (EU)
regional cooperation


title: Legislative Entschließung mit der Stellungnahme des Europäischen Parlaments zu dem Vorschlag für eine Verordnung des Rates über Kontrollmaßnahmen sowie Maßnahmen im Rahmen des Erstattungssystems und der Verwaltungszusammenarbeit zur Durchführung der Richtlinie 98/.../EG (KOM(98)0377 C4-0475/98 98/0210(CNS))(Verfahren der Konsultation)

eurovoc_concepts:
catalogue
free movement of goods
new economic order
nut
single market
tax system

text: C 104/126 DE Amtsblatt der Europa¤ischen Gemeinschaften 14. 4. 1999 Donnerstag, 14. Januar 1999 Vorschlag fu¤r eine Verordnung des Rates u¤ber Kontrollma(cid:223)nahmen sowie Ma(cid:223)nahmen im Rahmen des Erstattungssystems und der Verwaltungszusammenarbeit zur Durchfu¤ hrung der Richtlinie 98/. /EG (KOM(98)0377 › C4-0475/98 › 98/0210(CNS)) II. Der Vorschlag wird mit folgenden A¤ nderungen gebilligt: VORSCHLAG DER KOMMISSION (*) A¤ NDERUNGEN DES PARLAMENTS (A¤ nderung 11) Artikel 3 Absatz 1a (neu) (1a) Kann der gescha¤ftliche Charakter der Ausgaben nicht bestimmt werden, und holen die Steuerbeho¤rden deswegen vom Steuerpflichtigen die U¤ bersetzung der auf der Rechnung ausgewiesenen Angaben ein, so sind die Kosten fu¤ r externe U¤ bersetzungen von der Beho¤rde zu tragen. (A¤ nderung 12) Artikel 6 Absatz 4a (neu) (4a) Der Mitgliedstaat des Vorsteuerabzugs teilt der Kommission und den anderen Mitgliedstaaten rechtzeitig alle A¤ nderungen der innerstaatlichen Rechtsvorschriften u¤ ber die Mehrwertsteuerregelung mit, durch die es dem Mitgliedstaat des Vorsteuerabzugs ermo¤glicht wird, wirk- samer gegen mo¤gliche Versuche der Steuerumgehung oder des Steuerbetrugs vorzugehen. (*) ABl. C 219 vom 15. 7. 1998, S. 20 Legislative Entschlie(cid:223)ung mit der Stellungnahme des Europa¤ischen Parlaments zu dem Vorschlag fu¤r eine Verordnung des Rates u¤ ber Kontrollma(cid:223)nahmen sowie Ma(cid:223)nahmen im Rahmen des Erstattungssystems und der Verwaltungszusammenarbeit zur Durchfu¤ hrung der Richtlinie 98/. /EG (KOM(98)0377 › C4-0475/98 › 98/0210(CNS)) (Verfahren der Konsultation) Das Europa¤ische Parlament, › in Kenntnis des Vorschlags der Kommission an den Rat KOM(98)0377 › 98/0210(CNS) (1), › vom Rat gema¤(cid:223) Artikel 99 des EG-Vertrags konsultiert (C4-0475/98), › gestu¤tzt auf Artikel 58 seiner Gescha¤ftsordnung, › in Kenntnis des Berichts des Ausschusses fu¤r Wirtschaft, Wa¤hrung und Industriepolitik (A4-0490/98), 1. billigt den Vorschlag der Kommission vorbehaltlich der von ihm vorgenommenen A¤ nderungen; fordert die Kommission auf, ihren Vorschlag gema¤(cid:223) Artikel 189 a Absatz 2 des EG-Vertrags 2. entsprechend zu a¤ndern; fordert den Rat auf, es zu unterrichten, falls er beabsichtigt, von dem vom Parlament gebilligten Text 3. abzuweichen; (1) ABl. C 219 vom 15. 7. 1998, S. 20


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4104/98 by Laura GONZÁLEZ ÁLVAREZ Environmental deterioration in Agüera-San Cucao de Llanera, in Asturias (Spain)

eurovoc_concepts:
EC Directive
Principality of Asturias
degradation of the environment
domestic waste
environmental impact
industrial pollution
national implementing measure
public health
waste incineration


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 4076/98 degli onn. Nana MOUSKOURI , Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS Finanziamento di programmi di "sostegno didattico supplementare" a titolo degli stanziamenti del Quadro comunitario di sostegno per la Grecia da destinare all'istruzione

eurovoc_concepts:
Community support framework
European Social Fund
Greece
backwardness at school
co-financing
educational reform
organisation of teaching
secondary education
teacher training
teaching curriculum

text: C 320/114 Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee IT 6. 11. 1999 (1999/C 320/151) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-4076/98 di Nana Mouskouri (PPE) e Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) alla Commissione (14 gennaio 1999) Oggetto: Finanziamento di programmi di «sostegno didattico supplementare» a titolo degli stanziamenti del Quadro comunitario di sostegno per la Grecia da destinare all’istruzione La riforma del sistema di insegnamento annunciata dal ministero dell’Istruzione greco include, tra l’altro, anche l’istituzione dei cosiddetti programmi «di sostegno didattico supplementare», in particolare nel quadro del Liceo unico. Scopo delle lezioni è di aiutare in primo luogo gli alunni più deboli a raggiungere il livello richiesto dal Liceo unico, fornendo loro, in questa fase di transizione, un aiuto in più. Tuttavia, l’elevato numero di corsi e di ore di lezione impartite secondo lo stesso sistema di insegnamento suscita alcune riserve. Non si crea forse in questo modo una seconda scuola? Inoltre, anche la messa in atto del nuovo sistema fa sorgere alcuni interrogativi. I criteri che sono stati stabiliti per selezionare gli insegnanti che tengono queste lezioni sono nella realtà pratica facilmente elusi, sia per motivi oggettivi (ad esempio, nelle piccole città soprattutto di provincia non vi sono insegnanti così qualificati) che per motivi soggettivi (ci si limita a scegliere alcuni membri del personale insegnante di ciascuna scuola, senza fare lo sforzo di cercarne altri), con il risultato che, nella maggior parte dei casi, le stesse persone che insegnano la mattina devono insegnare anche il pomeriggio. È logico quindi chiedersi in che modo gli insegnanti riusciranno a fare il pomeriggio ciò che secondo lo stesso ministero non riescono a fare la mattina, pur beneficiando di 25 miliardi di dracme provenienti dalle risorse comunitarie. Non sarebbe forse preferibile fissare criteri da rispettare rigorosamente, che consentano di selezionare insegnanti altamente qualificati e che non siano di ruolo, cosa che contribuirebbe anche a combattere la disoccupazione? Infine, esistono dati ufficiali riguardo al tasso di partecipazione degli studenti ai corsi di sostegno didattico supplementare, che permettano di valutare, in ultima analisi, l’efficacia di tale sistema? Risposta del sig. Flynn a nome della Commissione (24 febbraio 1999) Il Ministero greco della Pubblica Istruzione organizza programmi di sostegno didattico supplementare per gli studenti del liceo unico, elemento fondamentale dell’attuale riforma nel settore dell’istruzione. Quest’azione è stata inserita nel programma operativo (Istruzione e Formazione Iniziale del quadro comunitario di sostegno per la Grecia) ed è cofinanziato dal Fondo Sociale Europeo (FSE). La fase pilota è stata realizzata nel corso degli ultimi mesi dell’anno scolastico 1997-1998 e il comitato di sorveglianza del programma ha deciso recentemente di estenderlo agli anni scolastici 1998-1999 e 1999-2000. Il Ministero della pubblica istruzione ha emanato istruzioni dettagliate sull’organizzazione e sulla gestione di questi corsi di sostegno didattico supplementare, sui settori d’interesse, sulle ore destinate settimanalmente a ogni argomento, sui metodi d’insegnamento, gli obiettivi, la selezione degli studenti e il numero di studenti per ciascun corso, nonché le qualifiche, la selezione e la retribuzione degli insegnanti. Inoltre ha organizzato corsi di formazione per gli insegnanti e per il personale che partecipa all’attuazione. Il Ministero della pubblica istruzione ritiene che i corsi in questione non debbano essere una ripetizione dei normali corsi d’insegnamento, ma che rappresentino una formazione supplementare degli studenti, relativa a nuove capacità, nell’ambito del liceo unico. Secondo le autorità greche, le conclusioni tratte dalla fase pilota dell’anno scorso sono molto incoraggianti, sia per quanto riguarda l’interesse, che per la partecipazione degli studenti e l’aspetto organizzativo. Il comitato di sorveglianza del programma ha convenuto che i corsi supplementari e la loro efficacia saranno oggetto di una valutazione alla fine del periodo di programmazione in corso. L’on. parlamentare potrà ottenere ulteriori informazioni rivolgendosi al Ministero della pubblica istruzione greco


eurovoc_concepts:
Community certification
contract
data processing
electronic mail
electronic money
electronics industry

text: 6. 4. 1999 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende C 93/33 Regionsudvalgets udtalelse om »Kommissionens forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om en fælles ramme for elektroniske signaturer« (1999/C 93/06) REGIONSUDVALGET har — under henvisning til Kommissionens forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om en fælles ramme for elektroniske signaturer [KOM(1998) 297 endelig udg. — 98/0191 (COD)] (1), under henvisning til Rådets beslutning af 30. juli 1998 om i henhold til artikel 198 C, stk. 1, i traktaten om oprettelse af Det Europæiske Fællesskab at anmode om Regionsudvalgets udtalelse, under henvisning til sin beslutning af 16. september 1998 om at henvise det forberedende arbejde til Underudvalg 3 »Europæiske Net, Transport, Informationssamfundet«, under henvisning til sin udtalelse (CdR 350/97 fin) (2) om »Meddelelse fra Kommissionen til Rådet, Europa-Parlamentet, Det Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalg og Regionsudvalget — Et europæisk initiativ inden for elektronisk handel« (KOM(97) 157 endelig udg. ), under henvisning til Underudvalg 3’s forslag til Regionsudvalgets udtalelse (CdR 332/98 rev. ), som blev vedtaget den 27. november 1998 med Risto Koivisto som ordfører — på den 27. plenarforsamling den 13. -14. januar 1999 (mødet den 14. januar) vedtaget følgende udtalelse. 1. Resumé Regionsudvalget ser med tilfredshed på Kommis- 1. 1. sionens direktivforslag og konstaterer, at de overordnede principper er i overensstemmelse med Regionsudvalgets udtalelse om »Et europæisk initiativ inden for elektronisk handel«. 1. 2. Regionsudvalget tillægger det indre marked stor betydning, men finder det samtidig vigtigt for regionerne, at man på globalt plan prøver at finde en så ensartet tilgang som muligt. 1. 3. Regionsudvalget er enig med Kommissionen i, at akkreditering ikke bør være et krav i forbindelse med udbydelse af certificeringstjenesteydelser. 1. 4. Regionsudvalget peger især på, at lovgivningen vedrørende den offentlige forvaltnings tjenesteydelser må udformes på en måde, så elektroniske signaturer anerkendes på linje med håndskrevne underskrifter. Regionsudvalget mener ligesom Kommissionen, 1. 5. at det er vigtigt, at den regulatoriske ramme er uafhængig af den anvendte teknologi. Regionsudvalget konstaterer, at man i forslagets 1. 6. begrundelse ensidigt har betonet fordelene for den (1) EFT C 325 af 23. 10. 1998, s. 5. (2) EFT C 180 af 11. 6. 1998, s. 19. elektroniske handel, selvom der også er et stort behov for elektroniske signaturer og certificeringstjenesteydelser i forbindelse med den lokale og regionale forvaltnings udvikling af nye tjenesteydelser. 1. 7. Regionsudvalget mener dog, at certificeringstje- nesteydelsernes uafhængighed og muligheden for at anvende teknologien i lukkede systemer i øjeblikket også sikrer udviklingen af de tjenesteydelser i den lokale og regionale forvaltning, der kræver elektroniske signa- turer. 1. 8. For at fremme udviklingen af den offentlige forvaltnings tjenesteydelser finder Regionsudvalget det nødvendigt, at man yderligere tydeliggør dels forholdet mellem direktivets overordnede anvendelsesområde og de i forslaget nævnte lukkede systemer, dels direktivets definitioner. 1. 9. Regionsudvalget håber, at Kommissionen vil træffe forholdsregler, hvis det skulle vise sig, at anvendel- sen af elektroniske signaturer hos den offentlige forvalt- ning i Europa spredes i en form, der hæmmer borgernes frie bevægelighed. 1. 10. Regionsudvalget går ud fra, at Kommissionen følger udviklingen og iværksætter de nødvendige foran- staltninger, hvis den lettere adgang til brug af elektroni- ske signaturer medfører, at kravet om nøjagtig identifice- ring i såvel den private sektor som i den offentlige forvaltning griber om sig og kommer til at omfatte overførsler og tjenesteydelser, hvor en sådan identifice- ring ikke er strengt nødvendig. C 93/34 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende 6. 4. 1999 1. 11. For at sikre en tilstrækkelig hurtig ibrugtagning af elektroniske signaturer er det efter Regionsudvalgets opfattelse meget vigtigt, at Kommissionens ressourcer bruges målrettet til at skabe bevidsthed om de elektroni- ske signaturers muligheder og til at skabe de praktiske rammer for de hertil knyttede applikationer og tjeneste- ydelser. 2. Direktivforslagets mål og anvendelsesområde 2. 1. Det foreslåede direktiv skal sikre, at det indre marked for så vidt angår elektroniske signaturer kan fungere korrekt, idet der skabes en harmoniseret og hensigtsmæssig retlig ramme for brugen af elektroniske signaturer i Det Europæiske Fællesskab og opstilles en række kriterier som grundlag for retlig anerkendelse af elektroniske signaturer. 2. 2. Global elektronisk kommunikation og handel er ifølge forslaget afhængige af løbende tilpasning af nationale og internationale love til en teknologisk infrastruktur i hastig udvikling. Skønt analogier til eksisterende regler i mange situationer kunne give tilfredsstillende resultater, kan tilpasninger af disse eksisterende love i lyset af ny teknologi være påkrævet for at undgå uhensigtsmæssige og uønskede virkninger. Skønt elektroniske signaturer, der genereres under an- vendelse af krypteringsteknikker, ifølge Kommissionen på nuværende tidspunkt anses for at være en vigtig type elektronisk signatur, må en europæisk regulatorisk ramme være fleksibel nok til at omfatte andre teknikker, som måtte blive anvendt til autentifikation. Der er anvendelsesmuligheder for den elektroni- 2. 3. ske signaturteknologi i lukkede miljøer, f. eks. en virk- somheds lokalnet eller et banksystem. Certifikater og elektroniske signaturer anvendes også til bemyndigelses- formål, f. eks. adgang til private konti. Inden for den nationale lovs begrænsninger giver princippet om aftale- frihed kontraherende parter mulighed for indbyrdes at aftale deres forretningsvilkår, f. eks. accept af elektronisk signatur. På disse områder er der ikke behov for regulering. 2. 4. I betragtning af antallet af forskellige tjeneste- ydelser og anvendelsesmuligheder bør certificeringstje- nesteudbydere ifølge Kommissionen kunne udbyde deres tjenester uden krav om forudgående autorisation. Det kunne imidlertid tænkes, at tjenesteudbydere gerne ville nyde godt af de dertil knyttede elektroniske signaturers retsgyldighed gennem en frivillig autorisationsordning i forbindelse med fælles krav. Akkreditering skal ifølge direktivforslaget ses som en offentlig tjenesteydelse til certificeringstjenesteudbydere, som ønsker at udbyde avancerede tjenesteydelser. Dette indebærer på ingen måde, at ikke-akkrediterede tjenester automatisk er mindre sikre. 2. 5. En certificeringstjenesteudbyder kan tilbyde en bred vifte af tjenesteydelser. Direktivet fokuserer navnlig på certificeringstjenester i forbindelse med elektroniske signaturer. Certifikater kan have en lang række funktio- ner og indeholde forskellige informationer. Det kan f. eks. være almindelige identifikatorer som navn, adresse, registreringsnummer eller personnummer, moms- eller skatteregistreringsnummer, eller særlige forhold i forbin- delse med underskriveren, f. eks. dennes prokura, kredit- værdighed, eventuelle betalingsgarantier eller besiddelse af bestemte tilladelser og bemyndigelser. Derfor kan der forudses en række forskellige certifikater til en bred vifte af anvendelser. Der er imidlertid i første række behov for en retlig ramme for certifikater, for at en underskrivers elektroniske signatur skal kunne autenticificeres. 2. 6. Elektroniske signaturers retsvirkninger er en nøglefaktor i et åbent, men tillidsvækkende system for elektroniske signaturer. Ifølge Kommissionen skal anvendelsen af direktivet også bidrage til en harmonise- ret retlig ramme i Fællesskabet ved at sikre, at en elektronisk signatur ikke nægtes retsgyldighed, -virk- ninger eller eksekutionskraft udelukkende med den begrundelse, at den foreligger i form af elektroniske data, ikke er baseret på et autoriseret certifikat eller på et certifikat udstedt af en akkrediteret tjenesteudbyder, samt at elektroniske signaturer anerkendes retligt på linje med håndskrevne underskrifter. Endvidere bør de nationale bevisregler åbnes for anerkendelse af brugen af elektroniske signaturer. gennemsigtige, Retlig anerkendelse af elektroniske signaturer 2. 7. bør baseres på objektive, ikke- diskriminerende og rimelige kriterier og ikke på nogen måde være knyttet til den pågældende tjenesteudbyders eventuelle akkreditering. Fælles krav til certificeringstje- nesteudbydere ville være et godt bidrag til anerkendelse på tværs af grænserne af signaturer og certifikater i Det Europæiske Fællesskab. Listen over krav skal ifølge forslaget finde anvendelse på certificeringstjenesteydel- ser uafhængigt af den enkelte medlemsstats akkredite- ringsmodel. Da den fremtidige teknologi- og markedsud- vikling kan kræve tilpasninger, kan der være behov for at revidere kravene fra tid til anden. Kommissionen kan derfor tænkes at foreslå ændrede krav i fremtiden på grundlag af modtagne råd. Fælles regler for erstatningsansvar ville bidrage 2. 8. til skabelsen af tillid både hos forbrugere, virksomheder, der forlader sig på certifikaterne, og hos tjenesteudbyder- ne, og ville dermed fremme en bred accept af elektroniske signaturer. 2. 9. Samarbejdsordninger med tredjelande til støtte for anerkendelse af signaturer og certifikater på tværs af grænserne er vigtige for udviklingen af den internationale 6. 4. 1999 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende C 93/35 elektroniske handel. Navnlig hvis tjenesteudbydere i Det Europæiske Fællesskab blev sat i stand til at stå inde for tredjelandscertifikater i samme udstrækning som for deres egne, kunne det lette udvekslingen af tjenesteydel- ser på tværs af grænserne på en enkel, men effektiv måde. 3. Specifikke bemærkninger Regionsudvalget gør opmærksom på, at det bl. a. 3. 1. i sin udtalelse om et europæisk initiativ inden for elektronisk handel har betonet vigtigheden af en ensartet regulatorisk ramme ikke blot på europæisk, men på globalt plan, hvis den elektroniske handel skal vinde udbredelse. Regionsudvalget finder således Kommissio- nens forslag hensigtsmæssigt og håber på en hurtig behandling og en snarlig ikrafttræden, så man kan komme national lovgivning og nationale procedurer i såvel den private som den offentlige sektor i forkøbet. 3. 2. Regionsudvalget tager for givet, at Kommissio- nen gør en aktiv indsats for at sikre den foreslåede regulatoriske ramme for elektroniske signaturer global anerkendelse, og at Kommissionen -hvis dette ikke lykkes — vil tilpasse det foreslåede direktiv til de mest overordnede løsninger. I modsat fald vil udviklingen gøre det svært for navnlig små og mellemstore virksom- heder at etablere forretningsforbindelser uden for det indre marked. Dette hensyn skal naturligvis afstemmes efter behovet for en tilstrækkelig hurtig ibrugtagning af elektroniske signaturer i EU. 3. 3. Regionsudvalget peger på betydningen af, at den regulatoriske ramme for elektroniske signaturer er anerkendt også uden for EU, hvis man vil gøre tilpasningsperioden for regioner i ansøgerlandene korte- re og sætte fart på disse regioners infrastrukturudvikling. Regionsudvalget er enig med Kommissionen i, 3. 4. at der af de i direktivforslaget anførte grunde ikke skal indføres tvungen autorisation for udbydelse af certificeringstjenesteydelser, eller sker en sammenkæd- ning af sådanne tjenesteydelser og obligatoriske akkredi- teringsordninger. 3. 5. Regionsudvalget er også enig med Kommissionen i, at elektroniske signaturer i retlig henseende bør opnå anerkendelse på linje med håndskrevne underskrifter, og betoner navnlig den offentlige forvaltnings gunstige udgangspunkt med hensyn til at justere reglerne for sin egen praksis. 3. 7. Regionsudvalget konstaterer, at Kommissionen i sin begrundelse til direktivforslaget fokuserer på forudsætninger for den nok så vigtige elektroniske handel. Rundt om i EU’s regioner er der dog iværksat en række projekter vedrørende udvikling af den lokale og regionale forvaltnings tjenesteydelser, hvor elektronisk identificering af parterne spiller en vigtig rolle. Regions- udvalget finder det beklageligt, at der ikke tages særligt hensyn til denne udvikling i direktivforslagets begrundel- se, da den er nødvendig for borgerne. 3. 8. På kort sigt sikrer certificeringstjenesteydelsernes uafhængighed og muligheden for at anvende teknologien i lukkede systemer dog også, at lokal- og regionalfor- valtningens udviklingsprojekter gennemføres i overens- stemmelse med behovene på det pågældende forvaltning- sniveau. Regionsudvalget håber dog, at Kommissionen vil følge med i, hvordan anvendelsen af elektroniske signaturer udvikler sig inden for de offentlige tjeneste- ydelser i Europa, og træffer de nødvendige forholdsreg- ler, hvis en eventuel diversificering af procedurerne for alvor skaber problemer for virkeliggørelsen af princippet om borgernes frie bevægelighed. 3. 9. Regionsudvalget henleder Kommissionens op- mærksomhed på, at det ikke klart fremgår af direktivfor- slaget, hvori den afgørende forskel mellem direktivets generelle anvendelsesområde og de nævnte lukkede systemer består. Som eksempel på et anvendelsesområde, der ikke umiddelbart kan defineres som det ene eller det andet, vil Regionsudvalget nævne de tjenester, en kommune tilbyder sine egne borgere, og som forudsætter anvendelse af håndskrevne eller elektroniske signaturer. Regionsudvalget er enig med Kommissionen i, 3. 10. at man bør sikre et højt databeskyttelsesniveau, ikke mindst inden for certificeringstjenesteydelser. Regions- udvalget forudsætter, at Kommissionen — navnlig Elektronisk Signatur-Udvalget, der omtales i direktivfor- slaget -for at beskytte oplysninger af privat karakter lægger et højt databeskyttelsesniveau, så man undgår, at en teknisk set enkel anvendelse af elektroniske signaturer medfører, at identifikation også bruges i tilfælde, hvor det er overflødigt. En sådan udvikling kan f. eks. bringe »åbenhed i forvaltningen« i fare ved at indebære et krav om identifikation i situationer, hvor anonymitet er helt berettiget. Også i forbindelse med elektronisk handel er det som regel nok, at betaling sker til det rigtige modtager, og at det efterfølgende kan konstateres, at betalingen har fundet sted. 3. 6. Regionsudvalget mener, at den igangværende udvikling af nye tjenesteydelser inden for såvel den regionale og lokale forvaltning som i privat regi kræver, at den anvendte form for elektronisk signatur er så uafhængig som muligt af den anvendte teknologi. 3. 11. Regionsudvalget finder det vigtigt, at anvendel- sen af elektroniske signaturer hurtigt vinder udbredelse. En tilstrækkelig stort antal transaktioner er af afgørende betydning for såvel de kommercielle certificeringstje- nesteydelser som for udbredelsen af elektronisk handel. Samtidig vil ibrugtagningen af elektroniske signaturer C 93/36 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende 6. 4. 1999 sænke omkostningerne for de tjenester, den offentlige forvaltning yder. Ikke mindst for regionerne er det vigtigt, at det femte rammeprogram, og hvad Kommis- sionen i øvrigt har af muligheder, bruges til at fremme bevidstheden om de elektroniske signaturers anvendel- sesmuligheder og skabelsen af praktiske rammer for de europæiske applikationer og tjenesteydelser, der kan øge anvendelsen af de elektroniske signaturer. Bruxelles, den 14. januar 1999. Manfred DAMMEYER Formand for Regionsudvalget Regionsudvalgets udtalelse om »Det Europæiske Fysiske og Funktionelle Udviklingsperspektiv« (1999/C 93/07) REGIONSUDVALGET har — under henvisning til »Det Europæiske Fysiske og Funktionelle Udviklingsperspektiv« (EFFU), under henvisning til Kommissionens beslutning af 8. juni 1998 om i overensstemmelse med EF-traktatens artikel 198 C, stk. 1, at høre Regionsudvalget om dette emne, under henvisning til beslutning truffet af præsidiet den 15. juli 1998 om at henvise forberedelsen af denne udtalelse til Underudvalg 4 »Fysisk Planlægning, Bypolitik, Energi, Miljø«, under henvisning til forslag til udtalelse (CdR 266/98 rev. 2) vedtaget af Underudvalg 4 den 11. december 1998 (ordfører: Claude du Granrut, medordfører: Anders Knape) — på den 27. plenarforsamling af 13. -14. januar 1999 (mødet den 14. januar) med et flertal af stemmer for vedtaget følgende udtalelse. 1. Generelle bemærkninger 1. 1. EFFU’s målsætninger og tilgang 1. 1. 1. Udarbejdelsen af EFFU er udtryk for Den Europæiske Unions vilje til at tage globale økonomiske udfordringer op. Det sker i en situation kendetegnet ved forstærket økonomisk integration i Europa, voksende regional og lokal indflydelse på den fysiske planlægning og forberedelse af udvidelsen mod øst. Der blev på det uformelle rådsmøde (fysisk planlægning) i Leipzig opstillet tre fundamentale mål for EFFU: økonomisk og social sammenhængskraft, bæredygtig udvikling og en afbalanceret konkurrenceevne funderet på solidaritet. I dette perspektiv lægger EFFU op til et koncept for fysisk og funktionel udvikling, som er integreret og relevant med hensyn til anvendelsesområde, og som gør det muligt at sikre en mere afbalanceret, mere effektiv og ansvarlig anvendelse af det europæiske rum og en bedre forvaltning af de naturlige, menneskelige og tekniske ressourcer. fysisk- For at tage højde for de store forskelle i funktionelle forhold og de meget sammensatte økonomi- ske og sociale problemstillinger lægger konceptet op til en beslutningsproces, der inddrager de forskellige ansvarsniveauer og fremmer sammenhængen og komple- mentariteten i medlemsstaternes fysiske planlægnings- og udviklingsindsats. 1. 1. 2. EFFU lægger ligeledes op til en effektiv helheds- tilgang til de forskellige EU-politikområders påvirkning af de fysisk-funktionelle forhold og bliver dermed en


title: Proposta de Regulamento (CE) do Conselho relativo a acções de informação e promoção a favor dos produtos agrícolas nos países terceiros

eurovoc_concepts:
agricultural product
public awareness campaign
sales promotion
third country

text: C 32/12 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 6. 2. 1999 Proposta de regulamento (CE) do Conselho relativo a ac(cid:136)øes de informa(cid:136)}o e promo(cid:136)}o a favor dos produtos agr(cid:242)colas nos pa(cid:242)ses terceiros (1999/C 32/13) COM(1998) 683 final - 98/0330(CNS) (Apresentada pela Comiss}o em 14 de Janeiro de 1999) O CONSELHO DA UNI]O EUROPEIA, Tendo em conta o Tratado que institui a Comunidade Europeia e, nomeadamente, o seu artigo 43. o, Tendo em conta a proposta da Comiss}o, Tendo em conta o parecer do Parlamento Europeu, Tendo em conta o parecer do Comit~ Econ(cid:246)mico e So(cid:220) cial, Considerando que, em virtude da regulamenta(cid:136)}o em vi(cid:220) gor, a Comunidade pode realizar ac(cid:136)øes de promo(cid:136)}o de um nœmero limitado de produtos agr(cid:242)colas em pa(cid:242)ses ter(cid:220) ceiros; que os resultados obtidos at~ ao presente s}o muito encorajadores; Considerando que, em fun(cid:136)}o da experi(cid:240)ncia adquirida, das perspectivas de evolu(cid:136)}o dos mercados, tanto no in(cid:220) terior como no exterior da Comunidade, e do novo con(cid:220) texto das trocas internacionais, ~ indicado desenvolver uma pol(cid:242)tica global e coerente de informa(cid:136)}o e promo(cid:220) (cid:136)}o em rela(cid:136)}o aos mercados dos pa(cid:242)ses terceiros; Considerando que esta pol(cid:242)tica pode ser œtil para com(cid:220) pletar e refor(cid:136)ar as ac(cid:136)øes realizadas pelos Estados(cid:220) (cid:220)membros, promovendo nomeadamente a imagem dos produtos comunit‘rios nos mercados internacionais, em especial no que respeita { qualidade e seguran(cid:136)a dos g~(cid:220) neros aliment(cid:242)cios; que, ao contribuir para a abertura de novos mercados comerciais, essa actividade pode tamb~m ter um efeito multiplicador em rela(cid:136)}o {s iniciativas na(cid:220) cionais ou privadas; Considerando que conv~m definir os crit~rios de selec(cid:220) (cid:136)}o dos produtos em causa e dos mercados; Considerando que ~ oportuno que, por regra, a Comuni(cid:220) dade apenas tome a seu cargo uma parte do financia(cid:220) mento das ac(cid:136)øes, a fim de responsabilizar tanto as orga(cid:220) niza(cid:136)øes que as propøem como os Estados(cid:220)membros in(cid:220) teressados; que, no entanto, em casos excepcionais, pode revelar(cid:220)se oportuno n}o se exigir a participa(cid:136)}o finan(cid:220) ceira do Estado(cid:220)membro em causa; Considerando que, em mat~ria de gest}o e execu(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes, conv~m prever que a Comiss}o as confie, me(cid:220) diante procedimentos apropriados, a organismos que dis(cid:220) ponham das estruturas e compet(cid:240)ncias necess‘rias; Considerando que, devido { experi(cid:240)ncia adquirida e aos resultados obtidos pelo Conselho Ole(cid:242)cola Internacional na sua actividade promocional, ~, no entanto, oportuno prever que a Comunidade possa continuar a confiar(cid:220)lhe a realiza(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes no |mbito da sua compet(cid:240)ncia; que ~ igualmente conveniente poder recorrer { assist(cid:240)n(cid:220) cia de organiza(cid:136)øes internacionais semelhantes em rela(cid:220) (cid:136)}o a outros produtos; Considerando que, a fim de controlar a boa execu(cid:136)}o dos programas, bem como o impacto das ac(cid:136)øes, conv~m prever um acompanhamento eficaz por parte da Comis(cid:220) s}o e dos Estados(cid:220)membros, assim como a avalia(cid:136)}o dos resultados por um organismo independente, ADOPTOU O PRESENTE REGULAMENTO: Artigo 1. o 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)A Comunidade pode financiar, total ou parcial(cid:220) mente, ac(cid:136)øes de informa(cid:136)}o e de promo(cid:136)}o de produtos agr(cid:242)colas nos pa(cid:242)ses terceiros. 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)As ac(cid:136)øes referidas no n. o 1 n}o devem ser orienta(cid:220) das em fun(cid:136)}o de marcas comerciais nem favorecer pro(cid:220) dutos provenientes de um determinado Estado(cid:220)membro. Artigo 2. o As ac(cid:136)øes referidas no artigo 1 s}o as seguintes: a)(cid:217)ac(cid:136)øes de rela(cid:136)øes pœblicas, promo(cid:136)}o e publicidade, em especial com o fim de real(cid:136)ar as vantagens dos produtos comunit‘rios, sobretudo em termos de qua(cid:220) lidade, higiene, seguran(cid:136)a alimentar, aspectos nutri(cid:220) cionais, rotulagem, bem(cid:220)estar dos animais e respeito do ambiente; b) participa(cid:136)}o em manifesta(cid:136)øes, feiras e exposi(cid:136)øes de import|ncia internacional, nomeadamente atrav~s da realiza(cid:136)}o de (cid:133)stands(cid:176) da Comunidade Europeia; c) ac(cid:136)øes de informa(cid:136)}o, designadamente sobre o sis(cid:220) tema comunit‘rio de DOP/IGP e ETG e a produ(cid:136)}o biol(cid:246)gica; 6. 2. 1999 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 32/13 d) ac(cid:136)øes de informa(cid:136)}o sobre o sistema comunit‘rio dos VQPRD, dos vinhos de mesa e das bebidas espi(cid:220) tuosas com indica(cid:136)}o geogr‘fica; e) estudos de mercado destinados a aumentar as sa(cid:242)das comerciais; f) missøes de representantes da Comunidade ao mais alto n(cid:242)vel; g) estudos de avalia(cid:136)}o dos resultados das ac(cid:136)øes de promo(cid:136)}o e informa(cid:136)}o. Artigo 3. o Os produtos que podem ser objecto das ac(cid:136)øes referidas no artigo 1. o s}o, nomeadamente, os seguintes: a)(cid:217)Produtos destinados ao consumo directo ou { trans(cid:220) forma(cid:136)}o para os quais existam oportunidades de ex(cid:220) porta(cid:136)}o ou possibilidades de novos mercados nos pa(cid:242)ses terceiros, em especial sem a concess}o de resti(cid:220) tui(cid:136)øes; Artigo 7. o 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)Para a realiza(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes referidas nas al(cid:242)neas a), b) e d) do artigo 2. o, e sob reserva do artigo 6. o, as organiza(cid:136)øes profissionais ou interprofissionais represen(cid:220) tativas do ou dos sectores interessados estabelecer}o pro(cid:220) gramas de promo(cid:136)}o e informa(cid:136)}o, com uma dura(cid:136)}o m‘xima de tr(cid:240)s anos. Ap(cid:246)s acordo dos Estados(cid:220)membros interessados que, sem preju(cid:242)zo do n. o 3, segundo par‘grafo, do artigo 9. o, se comprometem a participar no seu financiamento, os pro(cid:220) gramas referidos no par‘grafo anterior ser}o apresenta(cid:220) dos { Comiss}o. Esta aprovar‘ os programas, ap(cid:246)s infor(cid:220) ma(cid:136)}o dos comit~s de gest}o dos sectores em causa, dando prefer(cid:240)ncia aos provenientes de organiza(cid:136)øes que abranjam v‘rios Estados(cid:220)membros. Antes da aprova(cid:136)}o dos programas, a Comiss}o pode consultar o grupo permanente (cid:133)Promo(cid:136)}o dos Produtos Agr(cid:242)colas (cid:176) do comit~ consultivo (cid:133)Qualidade e Sanidade da Produ(cid:136)}o Agr(cid:242)cola(cid:176). 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)As ac(cid:136)øes b) Produtos t(cid:242)picos ou de qualidade com um forte valor acrescentado. a)(cid:217)referidas nas al(cid:242)neas c), e) e f) do artigo 2. o ou Artigo 4. o b) realizadas atrav~s de uma organiza(cid:136)}o internacional referida no artigo 6. o Na escolha dos pa(cid:242)ses terceiros onde ser}o realizadas as ac(cid:136)øes referidas no artigo 1. o, ter(cid:220)se(cid:220)}o em conta os mercados dos pa(cid:242)ses com uma importante procura real ou potencial. Artigo 5. o ser}o decididas pela Comiss}o ap(cid:246)s informa(cid:136)}o do co(cid:220) mit~ de gest}o dos sectores em causa ou, se for caso disso, do comit~ de regulamenta(cid:136)}o referido, respectiva(cid:220) mente, nos Regulamentos (CEE) n. o 2092/91(cid:216)(˛), (CEE) n. o 2081/92(cid:216)(ˇ) e (CEE) n. o 2082/92(cid:216)(—). 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)De dois em dois anos, a Comiss}o determinar‘, de acordo com o processo previsto no artigo 11. o, a lista dos produtos e dos mercados referidos, respectivamente, nos artigos 3. o e 4. o. Antes de adoptar a decis}o, a Comiss}o pode consultar o grupo permanente (cid:133)Promo(cid:136)}o dos Produtos Agr(cid:242)colas(cid:176) referido no n. o 1. Contudo, em caso de necessidade, esta lista pode ser al(cid:220) terada no decurso de cada per(cid:242)odo de dois anos. 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)Antes de estabelecer a lista referida no n. o 1, a Co(cid:220) miss}o pode consultar o grupo permanente (cid:133)Promo(cid:136)}o dos Produtos Agr(cid:242)colas(cid:176) do comit~ consultivo (cid:133)Quali(cid:220) dade e Sanidade da Produ(cid:136)}o Agr(cid:242)cola(cid:176). Artigo 6. o Caso sejam decididas ac(cid:136)øes no sector do azeite e das azeitonas de mesa, a Comunidade pode realiz‘(cid:220)las por interm~dio do Conselho Ole(cid:242)cola Internacional. Em rela(cid:220) (cid:136)}o a outros sectores, a Comunidade pode recorrer { as(cid:220) sist(cid:240)ncia de organiza(cid:136)øes internacionais que ofere(cid:136)am garantias an‘logas. Artigo 8. o 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)Sob reserva do artigo 6. o, a Comiss}o escolher‘, por concurso pœblico ou limitado, o ou os organismos encarregados da gest}o e da execu(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes, assim como o organismo encarregado da avalia(cid:136)}o dos resulta(cid:220) dos. O, ou os organismo(s) encarregado(s) da execu(cid:136)}o deve(m) ter uma compet(cid:240)ncia de especialidade relativa(cid:220) mente aos produtos em causa e aos mercados de destino e dispor dos meios necess‘rios para garantir a execu(cid:136)}o mais eficaz das ac(cid:136)øes, tendo em conta a dimens}o euro(cid:220) peia dos programas em causa. (˛)(cid:217)JO L 198 de 22. 7. 1991, p. 1. (ˇ)(cid:217)JO L 208 de 24. 7. 1992, p. 1. (—)(cid:217)JO L 208 de 24. 7. 1992, p. 9. C 32/14 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 6. 2. 1999 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)A vigil|ncia da boa execu(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes ser‘ asse(cid:220) gurada por um comit~ de acompanhamento, composto por representantes da Comiss}o, dos Estados(cid:220)membros interessados e das organiza(cid:136)øes proponentes. 3. (cid:218)(cid:217)Os Estados(cid:220)membros interessados ser}o respons‘(cid:220) veis pelo controlo e pagamentos das ac(cid:136)øes referidas nas al(cid:242)neas a), b) e d) do artigo 2. o. Artigo 9. o 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)Sem preju(cid:242)zo do n. o 4, a Comunidade financiar‘: a)(cid:217)integralmente as ac(cid:136)øes referidas nas al(cid:242)neas c), f) e g) do artigo 2. o, b) parcialmente as outras ac(cid:136)øes de promo(cid:136)}o e de in(cid:220) forma(cid:136)}o referidas no artigo 2. o. Contudo, em casos especiais, a Comunidade pode finan(cid:220) ciar integralmente as ac(cid:136)øes referidas nas al(cid:242)neas b) e e) do artigo 2. o. 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)A participa(cid:136)}o financeira da Comunidade nas ac(cid:220) (cid:136)øes anuais referidas na al(cid:242)nea b) do n. o 1 n}o pode ul(cid:220) trapassar 50(cid:216)% do custo real das ac(cid:136)øes. Para as ac(cid:136)øes de promo(cid:136)}o com uma dura(cid:136)}o de pelo menos dois anos, a participa(cid:136)}o financeira ser‘ degressiva e estar‘ compreendida entre 60 e 40(cid:216)% do custo real das ac(cid:136)øes. 3. (cid:218)(cid:217)Os Estados(cid:220)membros interessados participar}o no financiamento das ac(cid:136)øes referidas no n. o 2 at~ 20(cid:216)% do seu custo real, ficando o restante a cargo das organiza(cid:220) (cid:136)øes proponentes. Contudo, em casos devidamente justificados e desde que o programa em causa apresente um interesse comunit‘rio manifesto, poder‘ ser decidido, de acordo com o proce(cid:220) dimento previsto no artigo 11. o, que a organiza(cid:136)}o pro(cid:220) ponente tome a seu cargo toda a parte do financimento n}o assumida pela Comunidade. Artigo 10. o As despesas decorrentes do financiamento comunit‘rio das ac(cid:136)øes referidas no artigo 1. o s}o consideradas inter(cid:220) ven(cid:136)øes, na acep(cid:136)}o do artigo 3. o do Regulamento (CEE) n. o 729/70(cid:216)(˛) do Conselho. Artigo 11. o As normas de execu(cid:136)}o do presente regulamento ser}o adoptadas de acordo com o processo previsto a)(cid:217)no artigo 38. o do Regulamento n. o 136/66/CEE do Conselho que estabelece uma organiza(cid:136)}o comum de mercado no sector das mat~rias gordas(cid:216)(ˇ), ou, con(cid:220) soante o caso, b) no artigo correspondente dos outros regulamentos que estabelecem organiza(cid:136)øes comuns dos mercados agr(cid:242)colas. Artigo 12. o De dois em dois anos, a Comiss}o apresentar‘ ao Con(cid:220) selho e ao Parlamento Europeu um relat(cid:246)rio sobre a aplica(cid:136)}o do presente regulamento. O primeiro relat(cid:246)rio ser‘ apresentado ap(cid:246)s o segundo ano de aplica(cid:136)}o das ac(cid:136)øes previstas no presente regulamento. Artigo 13. o 1. (cid:218)(cid:217)No n. o 1 do artigo 11. o do Regulamento n. o 136/66/CEE, s}o suprimidos os termos (cid:133)ou em pa(cid:242)ses terceiros(cid:176). 2. (cid:218)(cid:217)No n. o 2, primeiro travess}o, do artigo 2. o do Re(cid:220) gulamento (CEE) n. o 1308/70(cid:216)(—), s}o suprimidos os ter(cid:220) mos (cid:133)e fora(cid:176). 3. (cid:218)(cid:217)No n. o 1 do artigo 2. o do Regulamento (CE) n. o 2275/96(cid:216)((cid:209)), s}o suprimidos os termos (cid:133)e fora(cid:176). Artigo 14. o O presente regulamento entra em vigor em 1 de Maio de 1999. O presente regulamento ~ obrigat(cid:246)rio em todos os seus elementos e directamente aplic‘vel em todos os Estados(cid:220) (cid:220)membros. 4. (cid:218)(cid:217)Em caso de aplica(cid:136)}o do artigo 6. o, a Comunidade, ap(cid:246)s aprova(cid:136)}o do programa, conceder‘ uma contribui(cid:220) (cid:136)}o adequada { organiza(cid:136)}o internacional em causa. (˛)(cid:217)JO L 94 de 28. 4. 1970, p. 13. (ˇ)(cid:217)JO 172 de 30. 9. 1966, p. 3025/66. (—)(cid:217)JO L 146 de 4. 7. 1970, p. 1. ((cid:209))(cid:217)JO L 308 de 29. 11. 1996, p. 7


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4095/98 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS Hemp products in Europe

eurovoc_concepts:
EU production
Greece
complaint to the Commission
drug addiction
exchange of information
hemp
import restriction
manufactured goods
trade restriction

text: C 325/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 12. 11. 1999 The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies, which was given the task under Article 7 of Directive 98/44/EC of evaluating all the ethical aspects of biotechnology, issued Opinion No 12 on 23 November 1998 concerning the ethical aspects of research involving the use of human embryos in the context of the fifth research framework programme. Basically the Group stressed that respect of the pluralism of cultures and ethical approaches in Europe, which had led to an extreme diversity of national regulations, meant that the granting of EU financial aid for embryo research in countries where it was allowed could not be totally ruled out. However, the Group said that observance of pluralism did not mean there should be no restrictions. It was therefore important to make the financing of such research subject to the observance of strict legal and ethical conditions, particularly regarding the prior agreement of any ethical committees and observance of the fundamental ethical principles common throughout Europe, such as the respect of human life from its beginnings and the need to obtain the consent of the women or couples who produced the embryos that might be used for research. Finally, the Commission wishes to stress that if the patent system comes up against a difficult question concerning the patentability of human embryo tissue or the methods concerning it, the Commission will report on it in the annual reports on the development and implications of patent law which it has to submit to the Parliament and the Council as of 30 July 2000. (1) OJ L 213, 30. 7. 1998. (1999/C 325/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3679/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Hemp textile products in Europe (7 December 1998) The Greek police has recently begun to take action against many business selling clothing and other products made from hemp (cannabis sativa), which are generally imported from other EU Member States where trade in these products is legal and not subject to sanctions. Can the Commission answer the following: 1. Are there any grounds for suspecting that these products could in any way lead to increased drugs use or drugs dependence in the EU? 2. 3. If so, what steps will the Commission take to prohibit trade in these products in Germany, Denmark, the UK and other EU Member States? If not, what steps will it take to remove obstacles to trade in this these products in Greece? Could it provide aid for hemp textile production in Greece? (1999/C 325/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4095/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (14 January 1999) Subject: Hemp products in Europe The Greek police recently prosecuted a large number of shops selling clothes and other products manufactured using hemp (Cannabis sativa) as the raw material. These products were mostly imported from other EU countries where they are marketed legally and not subject to prosecution. Will the Commission say: 1. Does the EU have any information to support the suspicion that these products could in any way lead to an increase in the consumption of, or addiction to, drugs?


title: Règlement (CE) n° 88/1999 de la Commission du 14 janvier 1999 fixant les restitutions applicables à l'exportation des céréales, des farines et des gruaux et semoules de froment ou de seigle

eurovoc_concepts:
cereal flour
cereals
export refund
groat
meal

text: L 9/14 FR Journal officiel des Communaut(cid:130)s europ(cid:130)ennes 15. 1. 1999 R(cid:221)GLEMENT (CE) No 88/1999 DE LA COMMISSION du 14 janvier 1999 fixant les restitutions applicables (cid:133) l’exportation des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales, des farines et des gruaux et semoules de froment ou de seigle LA COMMISSION DES COMMUNAUT(cid:144)S EUROP(cid:144)ENNES, vu le trait(cid:130) instituant la Communaut(cid:130) europ(cid:130)enne, vu le r(cid:138)glement (CEE) no 1766/92 du Conseil, du 30 juin 1992, portant organisation commune des march(cid:130)s dans le secteur des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales (1), modifi(cid:130) en dernier lieu par le r(cid:138)glement (CE) no 923/96 de la Commission (2), et notam- ment son article 13 paragraphe 2, consid(cid:130)rant que, aux termes de l’article 13 du r(cid:138)glement (CEE) no 1766/92, la diff(cid:130)rence entre les cours ou les prix des produits vis(cid:130)s (cid:133) l’article 1er dudit r(cid:138)glement et les prix de ces produits dans la Communaut(cid:130) peut (cid:136)tre couverte par une restitution (cid:133) l’exportation; consid(cid:130)rant que les restitutions doivent (cid:136)tre fix(cid:130)es en prenant en consid(cid:130)ration les (cid:130)l(cid:130)ments vis(cid:130)s (cid:133) l’article 1er du r(cid:138)glement (CE) no 1501/95 de la Commission, du 29 juin 1995, (cid:130)tablissant certaines modalit(cid:130)s d’application du r(cid:138)glement (CEE) no 1766/92 du Conseil en ce qui concerne l’octroi des restitutions (cid:133) l’exportation ainsi que les mesures (cid:133) prendre, en cas de perturbation, dans le secteur des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales (3), modifi(cid:130) en dernier lieu par le r(cid:138)glement (CE) no 2513/98 (4); consid(cid:130)rant que, en ce qui concerne les farines, les gruaux et les semoules de froment ou de seigle, la restitution applicable (cid:133) ces produits doit (cid:136)tre calcul(cid:130)e en tenant compte de la quantit(cid:130) de c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales n(cid:130)cessaire (cid:133) la fabrica- tion des produits consid(cid:130)r(cid:130)s; que ces quantit(cid:130)s ont (cid:130)t(cid:130) fix(cid:130)es dans le r(cid:138)glement (CE) no 1501/95; consid(cid:130)rant que la situation du march(cid:130) mondial ou les exigences sp(cid:130)cifiques de certains march(cid:130)s peuvent rendre n(cid:130)cessaire la diff(cid:130)renciation de la restitution pour certains produits, suivant leur destination; consid(cid:130)rant que la restitution doit (cid:136)tre fix(cid:130)e une fois par mois; qu’elle peut (cid:136)tre modifi(cid:130)e dans l’intervalle; consid(cid:130)rant que l’application de ces modalit(cid:130)s (cid:133) la situa- tion actuelle des march(cid:130)s dans le secteur des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales, et notamment aux cours ou prix de ces produits dans la Communaut(cid:130) et sur le march(cid:130) mondial, conduit (cid:133) fixer la restitution aux montants repris en annexe; consid(cid:130)rant que les mesures pr(cid:130)vues au pr(cid:130)sent r(cid:138)glement sont conformes (cid:133) l’avis du comit(cid:130) de gestion des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales, A ARR(cid:219)T(cid:144) LE PR(cid:144)SENT R(cid:221)GLEMENT: Article premier Les restitutions (cid:133) l’exportation, en l’(cid:130)tat, des produits vis(cid:130)s (cid:133) l’article 1er, points a), b) et c), du r(cid:138)glement (CEE) no 1766/92, (cid:133) l’exception du malt, sont fix(cid:130)es aux montants repris en annexe. Article 2 Le pr(cid:130)sent r(cid:138)glement entre en vigueur le 15 janvier 1999. Le pr(cid:130)sent r(cid:138)glement est obligatoire dans tous ses (cid:130)l(cid:130)ments et directement applicable dans tout (cid:144)tat membre. Fait (cid:133) Bruxelles, le 14 janvier 1999. Par la Commission Franz FISCHLER Membre de la Commission (1) JO L 181 du 1. 7. 1992, p. 21. (2) JO L 126 du 24. 5. 1996, p. 37. (3) JO L 147 du 30. 6. 1995, p. 7. (4) JO L 313 du 21. 11. 1998, p. 16. 15. 1. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communaut(cid:130)s europ(cid:130)ennes L 9/15 ANNEXE du r(cid:138)glement de la Commission, du 14 janvier 1999, fixant les restitutions applicables (cid:133) l’exportation des c(cid:130)r(cid:130)ales, des farines et des gruaux et semoules de froment ou de seigle Code produit Destination (1) (en EUR/t) Montant des restitutions Code produit Destination (1) (en EUR/t) Montant des restitutions 1001 10 00 9200 1001 10 00 9400 1001 90 91 9000 1001 90 99 9000 1002 00 00 9000 1003 00 10 9000 1003 00 90 9000 1004 00 00 9200 1004 00 00 9400 1005 10 90 9000 1005 90 00 9000 1007 00 90 9000 1008 20 00 9000 — 01 — 03 02 03 02 — 03 02 — — — 03 02 — — (1) Les destinations sont identifi(cid:130)es comme suit: 01 tous les pays tiers, 02 autres pays tiers, 03 Suisse, Liechtenstein. — 0 — 19,00 0 64,00 0 — 46,75 0 — — — 40,00 0 — — 1101 00 11 9000 1101 00 15 9100 1101 00 15 9130 1101 00 15 9150 1101 00 15 9170 1101 00 15 9180 1101 00 15 9190 1101 00 90 9000 1102 10 00 9500 1102 10 00 9700 1102 10 00 9900 1103 11 10 9200 1103 11 10 9400 1103 11 10 9900 1103 11 90 9200 1103 11 90 9800 — 01 01 01 01 01 — — 01 — — 01 01 — 01 — — 40,00 37,50 34,50 31,75 29,50 — — 82,00 — — 21,00 (2) 18,00 (2) — 21,00 (2) — (2) Lorsque ce produit contient des semoules agglom(cid:130)r(cid:130)es, aucune restitution n’est octroy(cid:130)e. NB: Les zones sont celles d(cid:130)limit(cid:130)es par le r(cid:138)glement (CEE) no 2145/92 de la Commission (JO L 214 du 30. 7. 1992, p. 20) modifi(cid:130)


title: Verordnung (EG) Nr. 94/1999 der Kommission vom 14. Januar 1999 zur Festsetzung der Höchsterstattung bei der Ausfuhr von Gerste im Rahmen der Ausschreibung gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1564/98

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
barley
export refund

text: 15. 1. 1999 DE Amtsblatt der Europ(cid:132)ischen Gemeinschaften L 9/21 VERORDNUNG (EG) Nr. 94/1999 DER KOMMISSION vom 14. Januar 1999 zur Festsetzung der H(cid:148)chsterstattung bei der Ausfuhr von Gerste im Rahmen der Ausschreibung gem(cid:132)ß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1564/98 DIE KOMMISSION DER EUROP(cid:142)ISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFTEN (cid:190) gest(cid:129)tzt auf den Vertrag zur Gr(cid:129)ndung der Europ(cid:132)ischen Gemeinschaft, gest(cid:129)tzt auf die Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1766/92 des Rates vom 30. Juni 1992 (cid:129)ber die gemeinsame Marktorgani- sation f(cid:129)r Getreide (1), zuletzt ge(cid:132)ndert durch die Verord- nung (EG) Nr. 923/96 der Kommission (2), gest(cid:129)tzt auf die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1501/95 der Kommission vom 29. Juni 1995 mit Durchf(cid:129)hrungs- bestimmungen zur Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1766/92 des Rates hinsichtlich der Gew(cid:132)hrung von Ausfuhrerstat- tungen und zur Festlegung der bei St(cid:148)rungen im Getrei- desektor zu treffenden Maßnahmen (3), zuletzt ge(cid:132)ndert durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2513/98 (4), insbesondere auf Artikel 7, in Erw(cid:132)gung nachstehender Gr(cid:129)nde: Eine Ausschreibung der Erstattung bei der Ausfuhr von Gerste aus Spanien nach allen Drittl(cid:132)ndern wurde durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1564/98 der Kommission (5), ge(cid:132)ndert durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2309/98 (6) er(cid:148)ffnet. Nach Artikel 7 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1501/95 kann die Kommission auf der Grundlage der eingereichten Angebote nach dem Verfahren des Artikels 23 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1766/92 beschließen, unter Ber(cid:129)cksichtigung der Kriterien nach Artikel 1 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1501/95 eine H(cid:148)chstausfuhrerstat- tung festzusetzen. In einem solchen Fall wird der Zuschlag jedem Bieter erteilt, dessen Angebot der H(cid:148)chstausfuhrerstattung entspricht oder darunter liegt. Die Anwendung der vorgenannten Kriterien auf die derzeitige Marktlage bei der betreffenden Getreideart f(cid:129)hrt zur Festsetzung einer H(cid:148)chstausfuhrerstattung in H(cid:148)he des in Artikel 1 genannten Betrages. Die in dieser Verordnung vorgesehenen Maßnahmen entsprechen der Stellungnahme des Verwaltungsaus- schusses f(cid:129)r Getreide (cid:190) HAT FOLGENDE VERORDNUNG ERLASSEN: Artikel 1 Die H(cid:148)chsterstattung bei der Ausfuhr von Gerste wird f(cid:129)r die vom 8. zum 14. Januar 1999 im Rahmen der Ausschreibung gem(cid:132)ß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1564/98 eingereichten Angebote auf 63,90 EUR je Tonne festge- setzt. Artikel 2 Diese Verordnung tritt am 15. Januar 1999 in Kraft. Diese Verordnung ist in allen ihren Teilen verbindlich und gilt unmittelbar in jedem Mitgliedstaat. Br(cid:129)ssel, den 14. Januar 1999 F(cid:129)r die Kommission Franz FISCHLER Mitglied der Kommission (1) ABl. L 181 vom 1. 7. 1992, S. 21. (2) ABl. L 126 vom 24. 5. 1996, S. 37. (3) ABl. L 147 vom 30. 6. 1995, S. 7. (4) ABl. L 313 vom 21. 11. 1998, S. 16. (5) ABl. L 203 vom 21. 7. 1998, S. 6. (6) ABl. L 288 vom 27. 10. 1998, S. 11