title: Common Position (EC) No 11/2000 of 29 March 1999 adopted by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, with a view to adopting a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterway

eurovoc_concepts:
inland waterway transport
rail transport
road transport
transport of dangerous goods
transport safety

text: 8. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 36/1 I (Information) COUNCIL COMMON POSITION (EC) No 11/2000 adopted by the Council on 29 March 1999 with a view to adopting Directive 2000/. /EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterway (2000/C 36/01) THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Com- munity, and in particular Article 71(1)(c) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2), After consultation with the Committee of the Regions, Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty (3), Whereas: (1) the improvement of transport safety and the protection of the environment, especially within the context of the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail and inland waterway, are important issues, as is also the human element in the safe operation of these modes of transport; (1) OJ C 148, 14. 5. 1998, p. 21, and OJ C 52, 23. 2. 1999, p. 16. (2) OJ C 407, 28. 12. 1998, p. 118. (3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 20 October 1998 (OJ C 341, 9. 11. 1998, p. 29), Council Common Position of 29 March 1999 and Decision of the European Parliament of. (not yet published in the Official Journal). (2) under the terms of Council Directive 96/35/EC of 3 June 1996 on the appointment and vocational qualification of safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail and inland waterway (4) all undertakings the activities of which include the transport of dangerous goods, as well as the loading or unloading related to that type of transport, are obliged to appoint one or more safety advisers; the said Directive does not contain any detailed provisions aimed at the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers or any provisions applicable to examination bodies; (3) Member States should set up a common minimum framework for the examination of safety advisers and the conditions for the examination bodies in order to guarantee a certain level of quality and to facilitate the mutual recognition of EC certificates of training; (4) to the subjects listed in Annex II the examination of safety advisers will as a minimum include a written test consisting of questions relating at least to Directive 96/35/EC and a case study whereby the candidates can demonstrate that they have the ability to carry out the tasks of a safety adviser; (4) OJ L 145, 19. 6. 1996, p. 10. C 36/2 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 2. 2000 (5) Member States may provide that candidates who intend to work for undertakings whose activities are concerned only with specific dangerous goods will be examined only on subject matters related to their activities; in this case, the EC certificate of training should clearly indicate the limits of its validity; (6) to approval of the examination carried out by the examination bodies will be subject the Member States’ competent authorities; Member States will define the criteria applicable to examination bodies in order to maintain a high level of quality of service; the examination bodies should be technically competent, reliable and independent; (7) Member States should assist one another in the implementation of this Directive, HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: (c) ‘undertaking’ shall mean the undertakings specified in Article 2(a) of Directive 96/35/EC; (d) ‘examination’ shall mean the examination specified in Article 5(2) of Directive 96/35/EC; (e) (f) ‘examination body’ shall mean any body designated by the the Member States to hold competent authorities of examinations; ‘EC certificate’ shall mean the certificate established in accordance with the model given in Annex III to Directive 96/35/EC. CHAPTER II Examinations Article 3 CHAPTER I Scope and definitions Article 1 1. The competent authority or examining body shall organ- ise a compulsory written examination which it may sup- plement with an oral examination to check whether candidates possess the necessary level of knowledge required to carry out the tasks of adviser in order to obtain the EC certificate. 1. This Directive lays down the minimum examination requirements for the examination needed to obtain the EC certificate of training as safety adviser for the transport of dangerous goods provided for in Directive 96/35/EC. 2. The compulsory examination shall consist of a written test adapted to the mode(s) of transport in respect of which the EC certificate is issued. 2. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods are examined in such a way that they satisfy these minimum requirements. Article 2 For the purposes of this Directive: (a) ‘safety adviser for the transport of dangerous goods’, hereinafter referred to as ‘adviser’, shall mean any person specified in Article 2(b) of Directive 96/35/EC; (b) ‘dangerous goods’ shall mean goods defined in Article 2 of and Article 2 of Directive Directive 94/55/EC (1) 96/49/EC (2); (1) Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road (OJ L 319, 12. 12. 1994, p. 7). Directive as last amended by Commission Directive 1999/47/EC (OJ L 169, 5. 7. 1999, p. 1). (2) Council Directive 96/49/EC of 23 July 1996 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States with regard to transport of dangerous goods by rail (OJ L 235, 17. 9. 1996, p. 25). Directive amended by Commission Directive 1999/48/EC (OJ L 169, 5. 7. 1999, p. 58). 3. (a) The candidate shall be given a questionnaire. It shall consist of at least 20 open questions relating, in accordance with Article 5(4) of Directive 96/35/EC, at least to the subjects listed in Annex II to the said Directive. However, use may be made of multiple choice questions. In that case, two multiple choice questions shall be equal to one open question. Among those subjects, particular attention, appropri- ate to the mode of transport concerned, shall be given to the following topics: — general prevention and safety measures; — the classification of dangerous goods; — general packaging requirements, including tanks, tank containers and rail tankers; — danger markings and labels; — references in transport documents; — handling and stowage; — the vocational training of crews; — vehicle papers and transport certificates; 8. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 36/3 — safety instructions; — transport equipment requirements. (b) Candidates shall carry out a case study in connection with Annex I to Directive 96/35/EC whereby they can demonstrate that they have the ability to carry out the tasks of adviser. (c) Member States may provide that candidates who intend to work for undertakings specialised in the transport of certain types of dangerous goods shall be tested, in accordance with Annex II of Directive 96/35/EC, only on matters related to their activities. The approved examination body shall be designated in 2. writing. Such approval may be of limited duration. Article 5 Member States shall assist one another in implementing this Directive. Each Member State shall submit on a regular basis to the Commission the compendium of questions referred to in Article 3(4). The Commission shall inform the other Member State thereof. These types of goods shall be: — class 1 (explosives); — class 2 (gases); — class 7 (radioactive material); — classes 3, 4. 1, 4. 2, 4. 3, 5. 1, 5. 2, 6. 1, 6. 2, 8 and 9 (solids and liquids); — UN numbers 1202, 1203, 1223 (mineral oils). The heading of the EC certificate must clearly indicate that it is valid only for types of dangerous goods referred to in this paragraph and on which the adviser has been examined in accordance with the requirements defined in (a) and (b). 4. The competent authority or examination body shall gradually establish a compendium of the questions which have been included in the examination. CHAPTER IV Final provisions Article 6 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 31 December 1999 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. When the Member States adopt these measures, they shall include a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference upon their official publication. The Member States shall lay down the manner in which such references shall be made. The Member States shall communicate to the Com- 2. mission the texts of the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive. CHAPTER III Criteria applicable to examination bodies Article 7 Article 4 This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. If Member States do not take direct charge of the the 1. organisation of they shall appoint examination bodies on the basis of the following criteria: the examination, Article 8 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. (a) competence of the examination body; (b) specification of the examination arrangements proposed by the examination body; Done at Brussels. (c) measures intended to ensure the impartiality of the examin- For the European Parliament For the Council ations; (d) independence of the body as regards any natural or legal persons employing advisers. The President The President. C 36/4 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 2. 2000 STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL’S REASONS I. INTRODUCTION On 20 March 1999, the Commission forwarded to the Council a proposal for a Council Directive on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterway (1). The proposal is based on Article 71(1)(c) of the EC Treaty. The European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee delivered their opinions on the Commission proposal on 20 October 1998(2) and on 9 September 1998 (3), respectively. Following the Council’s request for consultation on 25 May 1999, the Committee of the Regions communicated its decision not to give an opinion by letter on 22 July 1999. In the light of the European Parliament’s opinion, the Commission forwarded an amended proposal (4) to the Council on 23 December 1998. On 29 March 1999, the Council adopted its common position in accordance with Article 251 of the EC Treaty. II. OBJECTIVES 1. On 3 June 1996, the Council adopted Directive 96/35/EC (5) with a view to facilitating compliance with the rules on the prevention of the risks inherent in the transport of dangerous goods. Directive 96/35/EC covers all undertakings whose activity includes the transport of dangerous goods or loading or unloading connected with such transport and concerns only transport by road, rail or inland waterway. It lays down the obligation for the undertakings concerned to appoint one or more safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods with the task of helping to prevent the risks to persons, goods or the environment inherent in such activities. An adviser must hold a Community-type vocational-training certificate issued by the competent authority or the body designated for that purpose by each Member State. This certificate, which is recognised by all the other Member States, is valid for the mode or modes of transport concerned and certifies the vocational qualifications of the advisers. To obtain a certificate a candidate must undergo training providing him with sufficient knowledge of the tasks defined in Annex I to the above Directive and pass an examination covering the minimum list of subjects given in Annex II. Directive 96/35/EC does not contain any detailed provisions for harmonising the examination requirements for safety advisers or any provisions applicable to the examining bodies. In order, however, to enable all Member States to provide the necessary training and prior examination, the Council has laid down a deadline for transposing the Directive that is sufficiently far in the future, namely 31 December 1999. (1) OJ C 148, 14. 5. 1998, p. 21. (2) OJ C 341, 9. 11. 1998, p. 29. (3) OJ C 407, 28. 12. 1998, p. 118. (4) OJ C 52, 23. 2. 1999, p. 16. (5) Council Directive 96/35/EC of 3 June 1996 on the appointment and vocational qualification of safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail and inland waterway (OJ L 145, 19. 6. 1996, p. 10). 8. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 36/5 2. The Commission noted that the organisation of examinations already envisaged by certain Member States might result in differing levels and major discrepancies between the tests, and therefore thought it advisable to propose minimum harmonisation of the level of training of safety advisers in order to make transport safer and fix examination requirements at a high level. It therefore submitted a proposal for a Directive with a view to laying down minimum requirements for the organisation and content of examinations and conditions for participation by undertakings wishing to offer their services as examiners. Since Directive 96/35/EC stipulates that Member States should apply that Directive no later than 31 December 1999, the Commission is proposing that Member States apply the new Directive six months earlier. III. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON POSITION The Council’s common position takes the amended Commission proposal on board, subject to the amendments given below: — in Article 3(3)(a), the common position allows more flexibility in the breakdown of examination questions than proposed by the Commission in Article 3(5)(a). The Council felt it would be preferable for the Member States to have greater discretion as to the minimum content of tests. Candidates would have to answer at least 20 questions on subjects listed in Annex II to Directive 96/35/EC. They might also have to answer multiple-choice questions, with two multiple-choice questions counting as one open question. The Council did not think it necessary to divide the subjects listed in Annex II into three groups and to require that three questions be set on the first group of subjects, two on the second and one on the third. The Council felt it would suffice for particular attention to be paid to the subjects in the first group listed in the amended Commission proposal; — deletion of Article 4(2) and Article 8 of the amended Commission proposal. Article 4(2) provides that the Commission must approve, by committee procedure, the conditions of examination of candidates intending to work for referred to in Article 4 (Article 3(3)(c) of the common position). Article 8 lays down the committee procedure to be used. the specialised undertakings The Council felt it would be preferable for Member States to be responsible for organising the testing of candidates intending to work for the above specialised undertakings; — Article 4 of the common position broadly covers the requirements of Articles 5 and 6 of the amended Commission proposal; — in Article 6(1), the date set by the Commission in Article 9(1), namely 30 June 1999, has been put back and now falls on the same date as set in Directive 96/3/EC, namely 31 December 1999. Bearing in mind that one of the aims of the new Directive is to harmonise the organisation and content of the examinations provided for in Directive 96/35/EC, the Council felt that it would be wise to set the same transposition date for both Directives; — deletion of Article 9(3) of the Commission proposal (Article 6 of the common position), which was intended to introduce a system of penalties. C 36/6 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 2. 2000 The Council did not think there was any need for the new Directive to include a provision designed to lay down a system of penalties to apply if the Directive were infringed. IV. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AMENDMENTS 1. European Parliament amendments adopted by the Council and accepted by the Com- mission The Council has followed the amended Commission proposal in adopting the content, if not the wording, of the following European Parliament amendments: — in Article 1(2), the common position takes on board the first part of amendment 1, which is an addition to the wording to indicate the area of activity covered by the safety advisers, namely the transport of dangerous goods; — in Article 1(2), the common position takes on board the second part of amendment 1, which is intended to make clear that provisions of the Directive constitute minimum requirements; — in Article 3(1), the common position takes account of amendment 2, which is designed to define more accurately the knowledge which candidates must demonstrate in order to perform the duties of an adviser; — in Article 3(1), the common position takes account of amendment 4, which provides that the compulsory written examination may be supplemented by an oral test; — in Article 3(3)(a), the common position takes account of amendment 5, which is designed to amend Article 3(5)(a) of the amended Commission proposal to state that the requirements laid down as regards questions on the subjects listed in Annex II to Directive 96/35/EC constitute minimum requirements; — in Article 3(3)(a), the common position takes on board amendment 7, which is intended to increase Member States’ ability to grant exemptions restricting the number of subjects for examination and to issue specific certificates; — in Article 5, the common position takes account of amendment 9, which is designed to improve the efficiency of the exchange of information on the catalogue of questions referred to in Article 3(3) of the amended Commission proposal (Article 3(4) of the common position) as it provides that Member States are to forward this catalogue to the Commission, which will inform the other Member States thereof. 2. European Parliament amendments not adopted by the Council, and (a) not accepted by the Commission The Council has followed the amended Commission proposal in not adopting: — the third part of amendment 1, whereby a provision on the mutual recognition of the EC certificate of training by the Member States and the EEA would be added to Article 1(2) of the amended Commission proposal. The Council stressed that this was superfluous, given that the certificate was an EC certificate established in accordance with the model given in Annex III to Directive 96/35/EC. 8. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 36/7 — amendment 3, whereby a provision also requiring candidates to demonstrate their ability to perform the duties of an adviser by making a case study would be added to Article 3(3) of the amended Commission proposal. The Council pointed out that this was already provided for in Article 3(5)(b) of the amended Commission proposal and appeared in Article 3(3)(b) of the common position. — amendment 6, adding a new paragraph on the period of validity and renewal of the diploma to Article 3(5) of the amended Commission proposal. The Council pointed out that Article 6 of Directive 96/35/EC already contained a provision to this effect. — amendment 8, clarifying the criteria laid down in Article 5(b) of the amended Commission proposal (Article 4(1)(b) of the common position) by adding that examining bodies must also allow candidates to use certain documents during the examination (documents permitted). The Council felt that this addition was already encompassed in the more general concept laid down both in the amended proposal and in the new wording for Article 4(1)(b): ‘specification of the examination arrangements proposed by the examination body’. (b) accepted by the Commission — amendment 10, intended to adjust the deadline for notification for penalties referred in Article 9(3) of the amended Commission proposal. Article 6 of the common position does not include Article 9(3), since the Council felt it preferable not to lay down any specific provisions on penalties in the Directive (see section III above)


title: Nõukogu otsus, 29. märts 1999, rahvusvahelist Oderi reostusevastase kaitse komisjoni käsitleva konventsiooni sõlmimise kohta

eurovoc_concepts:
Poland
environmental cooperation
pollution control measures
pollution of waterways
watercourse

formats: html pdf print

text: 11/31. kd ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 89 31999D0257 L 100/20 EUROOPA ÜHENDUSTE TEATAJA 15. 4. 1999 NÕUKOGU OTSUS, 29. märts 1999, rahvusvahelist Oderi reostusevastase kaitse komisjoni käsitleva konventsiooni sõlmimise kohta (1999/257/EÜ) EUROOPA LIIDU NÕUKOGU, võttes arvesse Euroopa Ühenduse asutamislepingut, eriti selle artikli 130s lõiget 1 koos artikli 228 lõike 2 esimese lausega ja lõike 3 esimese lõiguga, võttes arvesse komisjoni ettepanekut, (1) võttes arvesse Euroopa Parlamendi arvamust (2) ning arvestades, et: komisjon on ühenduse nimel osalenud rahvusvahelist Oderi reos- tusevastase kaitse komisjoni käsitleva konventsiooni koostamise läbirääkimistel; konventsioon on ühenduse nimel alla kirjutatud 11. aprillil 1996 Wroclawis (Poola); konventsiooni sõlmimine ühenduse poolt aitab kaasa asutamisle- pingu artiklis 130r sätestatud eesmärkide saavutamisele, ON VASTU VÕTNUD JÄRGMISE OTSUSE: Artikkel 1 Ühenduse nimel reostusevastase kaitse komisjoni käsitlev konventsioon. kiidetakse heaks rahvusvahelist Oderi Konventsiooni tekst lisatakse käesolevale otsusele. Artikkel 2 konventsiooni eesmärk on tugevdada mitmepoolset koostööd, et ära hoida ja kontrollida Oderi reostumist, kaitsta keskkonda ja tagada veeressursside säästev kasutus; Nõukogu eesistujal on õigus nimetada isik või isikud, kes on volitatud andma heakskiitmisdokumendi hoiule nõukogu peasekretariaati vastavalt konventsiooni artikli 18 lõikele 2. ühenduse keskkonnapoliitika peamine eesmärk on kaitse kõrge tase; see rajaneb põhimõtetel, mille kohaselt võetakse ettevaatus- ja ennetusmeetmeid, lahendatakse keskkonnakahjustuste eelista- tavalt nende tekkekohas ning kahjude eest maksab saastaja; oma pädevuse piires teevad ühendus ja liikmesriigid koostööd kolmandate riikide ja pädevate rahvusvaheliste organisatsioonide- ga; Brüssel, 29. märts 1999 Nõukogu nimel eesistuja F. MÜNTEFERING (1) EÜT C 316, 14. 10. 1998, lk 5. (2) Arvamus on esitatud 16. detsembril 1998 (Euroopa Ühenduste Tea- tajas seni avaldamata)


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 729/99 dell'on. José GARCÍA- MARGALLO Y MARFIL Fondi strutturali

eurovoc_concepts:
EU aid
Germany
Structural Funds
eligible region
gross domestic product
statistics
terms for aid

text: 21. 12. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 370/95 Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Danimarca non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/135) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0727/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati. Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Svezia non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/136) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0728/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati. Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Finlandia non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/137) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0729/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 734/99 van James MOORHOUSE Subsidie aan de Turks-Europese Stichting

eurovoc_concepts:
EU relations
European Training Foundation
Türkiye
accession to the European Union
financing method
government
public awareness campaign
type of business

text: C 348/124 Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen NL 3. 12. 1999 De Directeur-generaal van het Bureau voor de Statistiek der Europese Gemeenschappen (Eurostat) maakte in de vergadering van de Subcommissie monetaire zaken op 17. 2. 1999 bekend dat in de statistische gegevens over de boekjaren 1994, 1995 en 1996 ook die van het grijze circuit van de geanalyseerde regio’s waren verdisconteerd, zonder echter de criteria voor de schatting of beoordeling van dit soort bedrijvigheid te vermelden. Welke deel van het regionale inkomen in Melilla wordt in elk van deze jaren aan het „grijze circuit” toegeschreven en welk deel aan het „witte circuit”? (1) PB C 176 van 9. 6. 1998, blz. 1. Gecombineerd Antwoord van de heer de Silguy namens de Commissie op de schritftelijke vragen E-0698/99, E-0699/99, E-0700/99, E-0701/99, E-0702/99, E-0703/99, E-0704/99, E-0705/99, E-0706/99, E-0707/99, E-0708/99, E-0709/99, E-0710/99, E-0711/99, E-0712/99, E-0713/99, E-0714/99, E-0715/99 en E-0716/99 (6 mei 1999) Zoals in het antwoord op schriftelijke vraag E-0697/99 (1) van het geachte parlementslid uiteengezet, verricht Eurostat geen directe metingen naar de omvang van de grijze economie in de lidstaten. De Commissie heeft de lidstaten echter gevraagd een aantal procedures uit te voeren om de schattingen van het bruto nationaal product (BNP) en het bruto binnenlands product (BBP) te controleren en te verbeteren, om zo een volledig beeld van de grijze economie te krijgen. In de nationale gegevens over de jaren 1994, 1995 en 1996, die Spanje in oktober 1998 heeft verstrekt, is rekening gehouden met de resultaten die deze procedures hebben opgeleverd. Deze gegevens zijn derhalve volledig en zij omvatten de grijze economie. Uit de nationale gegevens die aan Eurostat worden toegezonden, kan het aandeel van het grijze circuit in het totaalcijfer echter niet worden afgeleid. Dit is evenmin mogelijk voor regionale gegevens. (1) Zie blz. 115. (1999/C 348/168) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0734/99 van James Moorhouse (ELDR) aan de Commissie (29 maart 1999) Betreft: Subsidie aan de Turks-Europese Stichting Kan de Commissie antwoord geven op de volgende vragen: 1. Steunt de EU de Turks-Europese Stichting (TEF), een instantie die in Londen is opgericht ter bevordering van de betrekkingen tussen EU en Turkije en zo ja, om welk bedrag gaat het? 2. Als het antwoord op het vorenvermelde negatief is komt de TEF dan in aanmerking voor subsidie en heeft zij de Commissie daarover benaderd? 3. Als de TEF EU-steun ontvangt of daarvoor in aanmerking komt, kan de Commissie dan uitleggen hoe zij ervoor kan zorgen dat de TEF geen misleidende of onjuiste informatie over Turkije publiceert op kosten van belastingbetalers in de EU? Antwoord van de heer van den Broek namens de Commissie (15 april 1999) De Commissie geeft geen steun aan de in Londen opgezette Turks-Europese Stichting (TEF). Na door de TEF te zijn benaderd heeft de Commissie de directeur ervan op de hoogte gesteld dat zij geen activiteiten van deze stichting kan financieren. De Commissie heeft aangegeven dat het een zaak is van de Turkse autoriteiten of van Turkse ondernemers om activiteiten te financieren die gericht zijn op „voorlichting van het publiek en van ambtenaren over de achtergrond van de Turkse aanvraag voor lidmaatschap van de Unie en de redenen waarom lidstaten hierop positief zouden moeten reageren”


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA n. 723/99 del José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Rakennerahastot

eurovoc_concepts:
EU aid
Luxembourg
Structural Funds
eligible region
gross domestic product
statistics
terms for aid

text: 21. 12. 1999 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas C 370/93 En el momento actual sólo se dispone de las cifras correspondientes a los ejercicios 1994, 1995 y 1996. ¿Qué regiones estima la Comisión que no serán calificadas como regiones objetivo 1 para dicho período en Francia? (1) DO C 176 de 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/129) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0721/99 de José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) a la Comisión (29 de marzo de 1999) Asunto: Fondos estructurales Las regiones cuyo nivel de renta por habitante sea inferior al 75 % del que corresponde al habitante medio comunitario se califican de «regiones objetivo 1» y se benefician de importantes ayudas comunitarias. Para saber si este umbral ha sido superado o no, el proyecto de Reglamento del Consejo, COM(98)131 final (1), por el que se establecen disposiciones generales sobre los Fondos estructurales, prescribe que se tendrán en cuenta las cifras correspondientes a los tres últimos años de los que se disponga de datos en EUROSTAT. En el momento actual sólo se dispone de las cifras correspondientes a los ejercicios 1994, 1995 y 1996. ¿Qué regiones estima la Comisión que no serán calificadas como regiones objetivo 1 para dicho período en Bélgica? (1) DO C 176 de 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/130) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0722/99 de José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) a la Comisión (29 de marzo de 1999) Asunto: Fondos estructurales Las regiones cuyo nivel de renta por habitante sea inferior al 75 % del que corresponde al habitante medio comunitario se califican de «regiones objetivo 1» y se benefician de importantes ayudas comunitarias. Para saber si este umbral ha sido superado o no, el proyecto de Reglamento del Consejo, COM(98)131 final (1), por el que se establecen disposiciones generales sobre los Fondos estructurales, prescribe que se tendrán en cuenta las cifras correspondientes a los tres últimos años de los que se disponga de datos en EUROSTAT. En el momento actual sólo se dispone de las cifras correspondientes a los ejercicios 1994, 1995 y 1996. ¿Qué regiones estima la Comisión que no serán calificadas como regiones objetivo 1 para dicho período en los Países Bajos? (1) DO C 176 de 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/131) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0723/99 de José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) a la Comisión (29 de marzo de 1999) Asunto: Fondos estructurales Las regiones cuyo nivel de renta por habitante sea inferior al 75 % del que corresponde al habitante medio comunitario se califican de «regiones objetivo 1» y se benefician de importantes ayudas comunitarias. Para saber si este umbral ha sido superado o no, el proyecto de Reglamento del Consejo, COM(98)131 final (1), por el que se establecen disposiciones generales sobre los Fondos estructurales, prescribe que se tendrán en cuenta las cifras correspondientes a los tres últimos años de los que se disponga de datos en EUROSTAT


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 741/99 de Alessandro DANESIN Zones de montagne et Fonds structurels

eurovoc_concepts:
EAGGF Guarantee Section
Structural Funds
aid to undertakings
craft business
mountain region
rural development
small and medium-sized enterprises
structural policy
working conditions

formats: html print


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 729/99 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Structural Funds

text: 21. 12. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 370/95 Currently, only the figures corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 are available. What regions in Denmark does the Commission expect not to be classed as Objective 1 regions for this three-year period? (1) OJ C 176, 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/135) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0727/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999) Subject: Structural Funds The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Community aid. In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. Currently, only the figures corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 are available. What regions in Sweden does the Commission expect not to be classed as Objective 1 regions for this three-year period? (1) OJ C 176, 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/136) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0728/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999) Subject: Structural Funds The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Community aid. In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account. Currently, only the figures corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 are available. What regions in Finland does the Commission expect not to be classed as Objective 1 regions for this three-year period? (1) OJ C 176, 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0729/99 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 March 1999) Subject: Structural Funds The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as ‘Objective 1 regions’ and are entitled to substantial Community aid. In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final (1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account


title: Komisijas Lēmums (1999. gada 29. marts) par Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienas un Kazahstānas Republikas Sadarbības nolīguma noslēgšanu kodoldrošības jomā

eurovoc_concepts:
Kazakhstan
cooperation agreement (EU)
nuclear safety

text: 11/51. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 41 32004D0282 L 89/36 EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS OFICIĀLAIS VĒSTNESIS 26. 3. 2004. KOMISIJAS LĒMUMS (1999. gada 29. marts) par Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienas un Kazahstānas Republikas Sadarbības nolīguma noslēgšanu kodoldrošības jomā (2004/282/Euratom) EIROPAS KOPIENU KOMISIJA, ņemot vērā Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienas dibināšanas līgumu, jo īpaši tā 101. panta otro daļu, ņemot vērā Padomes apstiprinājumu, tā kā jāapstiprina Nolīgums starp Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienu un Kazahstānas Republiku kodoldrošības jomā, IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠĀDU LĒMUMU. Ar šo Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienas vārdā apstiprina Nolīgumu starp Eiropas Atomenerģijas kopienu un Kazahstānas Republiku kodoldrošības jomā. Vienīgais pants Nolīguma teksts ir pievienots šim lēmumam. Briselē, 1999. gada 29. martā Komisijas vārdā — Komisijas loceklis Hans VAN DEN BROEK


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 745/99 de Anita POLLACK Pêches et développement soutenable

eurovoc_concepts:
aquaculture
conservation of resources
ecosystem
fishery management
fishery resources
operational programme
sustainable development

text: 21. 12. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes C 370/99 Pour ce qui est plus particulièrement des petites et moyennes entreprises (PME) et des entreprises artisanales, elles continueront de bénéficier des aides à la transformation et à la commercialisation et pourront de plus se voir attribuer des aides dans le cadre des mesures visant à l’adaptation et au développement des zones rurales. Celles-ci couvriront un nombre important de secteurs d’activités où opèrent les PME et les entreprises artisanales et devraient avoir un impact particulier en zone de montagne du fait de l’importance des besoins à satisfaire. En outre, le projet d’orientations de la Commission pour les programmes de la période 2000-2006 pour les fonds structurels (1) accorde une priorité aux PME pour assurer le développement économique régional et l’emploi. (1) SEC(1999) 103 final. (1999/C 370/142) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0745/99 posée par Anita Pollack (PSE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Pêches et développement soutenable La Commission peut-elle garantir que les fonds affectés à l’initiative PESCA sont utilisés aux fins de soutenir les objectifs de conservation de la nature? Dans la négative, peut-elle en indiquer la raison? Réponse donnée par Mme Bonino au nom de la Commission (23 avril 1999) Le programme opérationnel PESCA ne finance pas directement d’action de conservation de la nature, puisque ce n’est pas son objet, mais un certain nombre de mesures de PESCA ont un effet positif en termes de conservation des ressources naturelles. On peut citer, en particulier la protection des espèces surexploitées et des écosystèmes marins à travers le soutien à des actions de diversification de l’effort de pêche vers de nouvelles espèces ou de nouvelles zones ainsi qu’à des projets pilotes de suivi de l’impact de l’effort de pêche et de cartographie des fonds marins; le soutien à des aménagements et équipements aquacoles extensifs ainsi qu’à des pratiques aquacoles à faible impact environnemental (nouvelles méthodes de recyclage des déchets, et élevages extensifs de moules sur fonds) ainsi que les actions de formation des pêcheurs en matière de gestion durable des pêcheries. PESCA présente donc un potentiel important pour financer des projets innovants visant à concilier des objectifs de viabilité économique du secteur et de protection des ressources halieutiques et des écosystèmes marins ainsi que pour tester de nouvelles stratégies de gestion durable des pêches et de l’aquaculture. (1999/C 370/143) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0749/99 posée par Anita Pollack (PSE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Cryptosporidium La Commission peut-elle indiquer si elle dispose d’une étude (ou si une étude est en cours) sur l’infectivité du cryptosporidium de type 1 par rapport au cryptosporidium de type 2? Réponse donnée par Mme Cresson au nom de la Commission (30 avril 1999) La Commission finance, dans le cadre du programme Biomed 2, un projet sur la cryptosporidiose (1), qui a débuté le 1er mai 1997 pour une durée de 36 mois. L’infection par le Cryptosporidium des personnes ayant une fonction immunitaire intacte est asymptoma- tique ou autolimitée, mais cette infection est très dangereuse pour les nourrissons et les personnes immunodéficientes. La transmission se fait de personne à personne ou de l’animal à l’homme, souvent


title: Padomes Lēmums (1999. gada 29. marts), ar ko noslēdz Konvenciju par Starptautisko Oderas aizsardzības komisiju

text: 11/31. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 89 31999D0257 L 100/20 EIROPAS KOPIENU OFICIĀLAIS VĒSTNESIS 15. 4. 1999. PADOMES LĒMUMS (1999. gada 29. marts), ar ko noslēdz Konvenciju par Starptautisko Oderas aizsardzības komisiju (1999/257/EK) EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS PADOME, ņemot vērā Eiropas Kopienas dibināšanas līgumu, jo īpaši tā 130. s panta 1. punktu kopā ar 228. panta 2. punkta pirmo teikumu un 228. panta 3. punkta pirmo daļu, ņemot vērā Komisijas priekšlikumu (1), ņemot vērā Eiropas Parlamenta atzinumu (2), tā kā Komisija Kopienas uzdevumā ir piedalījusies sarunās, lai izstrādātu Konvenciju par Starptautisko Oderas aizsardzības komisiju; tā kā šī konvencija Kopienas vārdā ir parakstīta 1996. gada 11. aprīlī Vroclavā (Polija); tā kā Konvencijas mērķis ir nostiprināt daudzpusēju sadarbību, lai novērstu un ierobežotu Oderas piesārņojumu, aizsargātu vidi un nodrošinātu ūdens resursu ilgstošu izmantošanu; tā kā Kopienas politikas galvenais mērķis vides jomā ir augsta līmeņa aizsardzība; tā kā tās pamatā ir piesardzības pasākumu un profilaktiskas darbības princips, vides postījumu novēršana no pirmsākumiem princips, kā arī princips “maksā piesārņotājs”; tā kā Kopiena un dalībvalstis katra atbilstīgi savai kompetencei sadarbojas ar trešām valstīm un kompetentajām starptautiskajām organizācijām; tā kā tas, ka Kopiena noslēdz Konvenciju, sekmē Līguma 130. r punktā paredzēto mērķu sasniegšanu, IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO LĒMUMU. 1. pants Ar šo Kopienas vārdā apstiprina Konvenciju par Starptautisko Oderas aizsardzības komisiju. Konvencijas teksts ir pievienots šim lēmumam. 2. pants Ar šo Padomes priekšsēdētājs ir pilnvarots iecelt personu vai personas, kam ir piešķirtas pilnvaras deponēt apstiprināšanas dokumentu Padomes Ģenerālsekretariātā saskaņā ar Konvencijas 18. panta 2. punktu. Briselē, 1999. gada 29. martā Padomes vārdā — priekšsēdētājs F. MÜNTEFERING (1) OV C 316, 14. 10. 1998. , 5. lpp. (2) Atzinums sniegts 1998. gada 16. decembrī (Oficiālajā Vēstnesī vēl nav publicēts)


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 752/99 dell'on. Fernand HERMAN Libera circolazione delle persone prepensionate del territorio degli Stati membri

eurovoc_concepts:
Belgium
administrative formalities
early retirement
free movement of persons
social security
travel

text: 29. 11. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 341/141 (1999/C 341/200) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA P-0743/99 di Yves Verwaerde (PPE) alla Commissione (9 marzo 1999) Oggetto: ONG sovvenzionate nel quadro della politica estera dell’UE Può precisare la Commissione quali criteri sono stati adottati per stabilire quali ONG possono beneficiare di sovvenzioni comunitarie per partecipare a missioni d’osservazione o di formazione elettorale, nel quadro dell’attività di politica estera dell’UE volta a favorire lo sviluppo del processo democratico? Risposta data dal sig. Van den Broek a nome della Commissione (8 aprile 1999) I criteri seguiti dalla Commissione per concedere sovvenzioni comunitarie a favore di organizzazioni non governative (ONG) che partecipano a missioni di osservazione o di formazione elettorale si basano sull’esperienza e sul carattere professionale dell’organizzazione in questione, nonché sulla qualità delle attività proposte. Un altro criterio importante adottato nella selezione di ONG che partecipano al processo elettorale in veste di osservatori è la loro imparzialità. Si tratta di un elemento particolarmente importante quando l’azione di appoggio al processo elettorale nei paesi terzi si concreta attraverso misure di sostegno e formazione delle ONG locali volte a sviluppare le capacità del paese in cui si svolgono le elezioni. Talvolta, la sovvenzione comunitaria favorisce un partenariato tra una ONG europea e una ONG locale. In particolare, quando si tratta di sorvegliare i media durante il processo elettorale, la Commissione sceglie ONG con capacità professionale, personale esperto, conoscenza delle lingue di lavoro e metodi efficaci. Per quanto riguarda la formazione in materia di osservazione del processo elettorale, la Commissione sostiene le iniziative degli istituti accademici degli Stati membri che hanno sviluppato un’attività scientifica riconosciuta in materia. (1999/C 341/201) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0752/99 di Fernand Herman (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Libera circolazione delle persone prepensionate del territorio degli Stati membri Il prepensionato belga è considerato dalla legge belga come un disoccupato che non cerca lavoro e per questa ragione non può lasciare il territorio belga per più di 30 giorni all’anno, per quanto non sia sottoposto né al punteggio né all’obbligo di accettare un impiego. Il suo solo obbligo consiste nel rinviare all’Onem una carta sulla quale è pregato d’indicare le date delle sue vacanze mentre egli è necessariamente in vacanza permanente e definitiva. Quest’assurda situazione costituisce un serio ostacolo alla libertà di circolazione delle persone sul territorio degli Stati membri. Essa è contraria allo spirito e alla lettera dei trattati. Mi risulta che la Commissione è consapevole del problema e che ha presentato una proposta al Consiglio intesa a introdurre le disposizioni convenzionali relative alle prestazioni di prepensionamento nel campo d’applicazione materiale del regolamento n. 1408/71 (1). Il Consiglio non ha ancora trovato il consenso necessario per adottare la proposta. Che cosa intende intraprendere la Commissione per sbloccare tale fascicolo, arenatosi ormai da cinque anni quasi? (1) GU L 149 del 5. 7. 1971, pag. 2


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA n. 773/99 del José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Käsintehdyt jäätelöt

eurovoc_concepts:
brand name
consumer information
craft production
dairy ice cream
producer organisation
product designation
product quality
trademark law

text: C 348/132 Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas ES 3. 12. 1999 ¿Cuántos productos han accedido a la protección parcial a la que se refiere el artículo 13. 1? (1) DO L 208 de 24. 7. 1992, p. 9. (1999/C 348/181) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0773/99 de José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) a la Comisión (29 de marzo de 1999) Asunto: Helados artesanos El Reglamento CEE no 2082/92 (1) se aprobó para proteger las recetas específicas y tradicionales definidas por un pliego de condiciones. El artículo 13 prevé dos tipos de protección: protección total (art. 13. 2). la llamada protección parcial (art. 13. 1), la denominada ¿Cuántos productos han accedido a la protección total a la que se refiere el artículo 13. 2? (1) DO L 208 de 24. 7. 1992, p. 9. Respuesta común a las preguntas escritas E-0770/99, E-0771/99, E-0772/99 y E-0773/99 dada por el Sr. Fischler en nombre de la Comisión (20 de abril de 1999) La denominación «Helado artesano» fue objeto de una solicitud de registro en virtud del Reglamento (CEE) 2082/92 del Consejo, de 14 de julio de 1992, relativo a la certificación de las características específicas de los productos agrícolas y alimenticios. Este Reglamento establece la protección de los métodos de producción específicos y tradicionales a iniciativa de una agrupación de productores. La protección a que se refiere la mencionada solicitud de registro es la del apartado 2 del artículo 13 de dicho Reglamento (protección llamada «absoluta», ya que sólo se protege el nombre). En cuanto la Comisión efectuó una primera comprobación de los elementos presentados y consideró que, a priori, se ajustaban a las disposiciones del Reglamento, en particular a sus artículos 2, 4, 5 y 6, se hizo una primera publicación de los elementos principales de la solicitud de registro en el Diario Oficial. Esa primera publicación concede a los Estados miembros y a cualquier persona legítima y económicamente interesada un derecho a oponerse al registro solicitado. Haciendo uso de este derecho, se presentaron a la Comisión nueve notificaciones de oposición en el plazo establecido. De conformidad con el procedimiento, la Comisión invitó a los Estados miembros interesados a llegar a un acuerdo. No obstante, y tras diversos intercambios de información, el Gobierno español confirmó que no se había llegado a un acuerdo con arreglo al artículo 9. Por tanto, corresponde a la Comisión decidir, por medio del Comité de reglamentación, si la denominación en cuestión se registra o no. La Comisión está actualmente intentando encontrar una solución a este asunto. En el pliego de condiciones elaborado por la agrupación de productores se explica que el método propuesto corresponde a un helado específico y tradicional. Varios elementos precisan en qué consiste un método de producción artesana de helado. El objetivo de la solicitud es por lo tanto que los consumidores puedan identificar correctamente un helado artesano y diferenciarlo de otros con una garantía comunitaria. Hay que señalar que, según el principio del Reglamento, en cuanto la denominación se registre, cualquier productor comunitario podrá utilizarla libremente siguiendo las condiciones de producción registradas en virtud del mismo. De momento, se han presentado a la Comisión quince solicitudes de registro de certificado de características específicas. Sólo tres de ellas se han presentado en virtud del apartado 2 del artículo 13. Las demás lo han sido en virtud del apartado 1 del mismo artículo. En este caso, la protección es limitada. El nombre puede utilizarse libremente, pero si el productor quiere utilizar la mención reservada a la «especialidad tradicional garantizada» y el logotipo, debe ajustarse al pliego de condiciones


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 739/99 dell'on. Alessandro DANESIN Riconoscimento dei titoli di studio nell'UE

eurovoc_concepts:
Germany
access to a profession
capacity to exercise rights
freedom to provide services
higher education
lawyer
professional qualifications
recognition of diplomas
right of establishment
vocational training

text: 3. 12. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 348/125 (1999/C 348/169) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0738/99 di Alessandro Danesin (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Negoziati di adesione della Slovenia all’unione europea Grazie all’effettivo stato di avanzamento delle sue istituzioni, alla loro stabilità politica, ed alla loro affidabilità economica la Slovenia risulta essere uno dei 6 paesi del primo gruppo (prioritario) con i quali l’unione europea ha avviato negoziati per l’adesione già nel marzo 1998 (anche se solo dal 1o febbraio è entrato in vigore l’Accordo europeo. Ancora non è stato tuttavia risolto il confeziono per la restituzione delle proprietà appartenenti alla minoranza italiana da sempre presente nel suo territorio (questa pratica di confisca esiste tuttavia anche se in misura minore e è stata oggetto di un’arrogante politica di espropriazione da parte del precedente regime jugoslavo). L’oggetto del contenzioso continua a costituire una discriminazione palese dei diritti della minoranza italiana, nonostante le intese tra il governo italiano e quello sloveno e, alla luce dei nuovi rapporti fra Unione europea e Slovenia appare ancora più ingiustificato in sede di negoziato di adesione. È ben vero infatti che, tra i criteri di adesione stabiliti fin dal Consiglio europeo di Copenaghen del 1993 e che i paesi candidati dovrebbero rispettare prima dell’adesione, vi è un solo criterio politico del pieno soddisfaci- mento dei diritti delle minoranze, ma anche la ripartizione delle confische subite in passato. É la Commissione europea al corrente: 1. 2. di questa questione ancora irrisolta? L’ha già tenuta in considerazione durante i suoi colloqui con le autorità slovene (proprio in questi giorni si terrà la prima riunione ministeriale di associazione)? 3. Ritiene sia il caso di far difendere l’andamento del negoziato dalla sua soluzione? Risposta data dal sig. van den Broek a nome della Commissione (7 maggio 1999) La Commissione è cosciente del fatto che il processo di privatizzazione in Slovenia procede molto lentamente. Essa non è però al corrente di eventuali discriminazioni nei confronti della minoranza italiana in Slovenia per quanto riguarda tale processo di privatizzazione. L’attuale legge sulle privatizzazioni non prevede discrimi- nazioni di questo tipo. In base alla legge, i membri della minoranza italiana godono di pari diritti dal momento in cui chiedono la cittadinanza slovena. Il problema generale del processo di privatizzazione è stato discusso recentemente con il governo sloveno alla riunione del Comitato di associazione Comunità/Slovenia che si è svolta a Liubiana il 25 marzo 1999. Nel corso di tale incontro il governo ha fornito informazioni aggiornate sullo stato di avanzamento di tale processo. Alla luce di quanto precede, non vi sono ragioni per modificare l’andamento del negoziato di adesione. (1999/C 348/170) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0739/99 di Alessandro Danesin (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Riconoscimento dei titoli di studio nell’UE In Germania in almeno due casi quello del land tedesco dellAssia e quello della bassa Sassonia, la legislazione locale (rispettivamente l’art. 231 e l’art. 5 relativi alla pratica legale) prevede come requisito essenziale per l’ammissione alla pratica di avvocato il conseguimento della laurea nella repubblica federale di Germania


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ αρ θ. 710/99 του Jose GARCIA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Διαρθρωτικά Ταμεία

eurovoc_concepts:
OSCE
Rioja
Structural Funds
economic statistics
eligible region
gross domestic product
less-favoured region
regional aid
regional economy
underground economy

text: 3. 12. 1999 EL Επι΄σηµη Εφηµερι΄δα των Ευρωπαι¨κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των C 348/121 (1999/C 348/160) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-0709/99 υποβολη΄: José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) προς την Επιτροπη΄ (29 Μαρτι΄ου 1999) Θε΄µα: ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α Οι περιφε΄ρειες το κατα΄ κεφαλη΄ν εισο΄δηµα των οποι΄ων ει΄ναι κατω΄τερο του 75 % του µε΄σου κοινοτικου΄ ο΄ρου ονοµα΄ζονται «περιφε΄ρειες του στο΄χου 1» και λαµβα΄νουν σηµαντικε΄ς κονοτικε΄ς ενισχυ΄σεις. Προκειµε΄νου να διαπιστωθει΄ εα΄ν µι΄α περιφε΄ρεια υπερε΄βη το ο΄ριο αυτο΄ η΄ ο΄χι, το σχε΄διο Κανονισµου΄ του Συµβουλι΄ου, COM(98)131 τελ. (1), το οποι΄ο καθορι΄ζει γενικε΄ς διατα΄ξεις σχετικα΄ µε τα ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α, προβλε΄πει ο΄τι θα λαµβα΄νονται υπο΄ψη τα αριθµητικα΄ δεδοµε΄να που αντιστοιχου΄ν στα τρι΄α τελευται΄α ε΄τη για τα οποι΄α διαθε΄τει στοιχει΄α το EUROSTAT. Ο Γενικο΄ς ∆ιευθυντη΄ς της Στατιστικη΄ς Υπηρεσι΄ας των Ευρωπαι¨κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των (EUROSTAT) απεκα΄λυψε κατα΄ την συνεδρι΄αση της Νοµισµατικη΄ς Υποεπιτροπη΄ς του Ευρωπαι¨κου΄ Κοινοβουλι΄ου της 17. 2. 1999 ο΄τι τα στατιστικα΄ στοιχει΄α που αντιστοιχου΄ν στα οικονοµικα΄ ε΄τη 1994, 1995 και 1996 περιελα΄µβαναν η΄δη και τα στοιχει΄α της παραοικονοµι΄ας των εξεταζο΄µενων περιφερειω΄ν, χωρι΄ς εντου΄τοις να προσδιορι΄ζει και τα κριτη΄ρια που ει΄χαν επιλεγει΄ για την εκτι΄µηση η΄ την αξιολο΄γηση των δραστηριοτη΄των αυτου΄ του ει΄δους. Ποιο΄ τµη΄µα των εισοδηµα΄των της περιφε΄ρειας αντιστοιχει΄ στην παραοικονοµι΄α και ποιο΄ στις κανονικε΄ς οικονοµικε΄ς δραστηριο΄τητες στην Γαλικι΄α για το καθε ε΄να απο΄ τα ε΄τη αυτα΄; (1) ΕΕ C 176 της 9. 6. 1998, σελ. 1. (1999/C 348/161) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-0710/99 υποβολη΄: José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) προς την Επιτροπη΄ (29 Μαρτι΄ου 1999) Θε΄µα: ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α Οι περιφε΄ρειες το κατα΄ κεφαλη΄ν εισο΄δηµα των οποι΄ων ει΄ναι κατω΄τερο του 75 % του µε΄σου κοινοτικου΄ ο΄ρου ονοµα΄ζονται «περιφε΄ρειες του στο΄χου 1» και λαµβα΄νουν σηµαντικε΄ς κονοτικε΄ς ενισχυ΄σεις. Προκειµε΄νου να διαπιστωθει΄ εα΄ν µι΄α περιφε΄ρεια υπερε΄βη το ο΄ριο αυτο΄ η΄ ο΄χι, το σχε΄διο Κανονισµου΄ του Συµβουλι΄ου, COM(98)131 τελ. (1), το οποι΄ο καθορι΄ζει γενικε΄ς διατα΄ξεις σχετικα΄ µε τα ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α, προβλε΄πει ο΄τι θα λαµβα΄νονται υπο΄ψη τα αριθµητικα΄ δεδοµε΄να που αντιστοιχου΄ν στα τρι΄α τελευται΄α ε΄τη για τα οποι΄α διαθε΄τει στοιχει΄α το EUROSTAT. Ο Γενικο΄ς ∆ιευθυντη΄ς της Στατιστικη΄ς Υπηρεσι΄ας των Ευρωπαι¨κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των (EUROSTAT) απεκα΄λυψε κατα΄ την συνεδρι΄αση της Νοµισµατικη΄ς Υποεπιτροπη΄ς του Ευρωπαι¨κου΄ Κοινοβουλι΄ου της 17. 2. 1999 ο΄τι τα στατιστικα΄ στοιχει΄α που αντιστοιχου΄ν στα οικονοµικα΄ ε΄τη 1994, 1995 και 1996 περιελα΄µβαναν η΄δη και τα στοιχει΄α της παραοικονοµι΄ας των εξεταζο΄µενων περιφερειω΄ν, χωρι΄ς εντου΄τοις να προσδιορι΄ζει και τα κριτη΄ρια που ει΄χαν επιλεγει΄ για την εκτι΄µηση η΄ την αξιολο΄γηση των δραστηριοτη΄των αυτου΄ του ει΄δους. Ποιο΄ τµη΄µα των εισοδηµα΄των της περιφε΄ρειας αντιστοιχει΄ στην παραοικονοµι΄α και ποιο΄ στις κανονικε΄ς οικονοµικε΄ς δραστηριο΄τητες στην Ριο΄χα για το καθε ε΄να απο΄ τα ε΄τη αυτα΄; (1) ΕΕ C 176 της 9. 6. 1998, σελ. 1. (1999/C 348/162) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-0711/99 υποβολη΄: José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) προς την Επιτροπη΄ (29 Μαρτι΄ου 1999) Θε΄µα: ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α Οι περιφε΄ρειες το κατα΄ κεφαλη΄ν εισο΄δηµα των οποι΄ων ει΄ναι κατω΄τερο του 75 % του µε΄σου κοινοτικου΄ ο΄ρου ονοµα΄ζονται «περιφε΄ρειες του στο΄χου 1» και λαµβα΄νουν σηµαντικε΄ς κονοτικε΄ς ενισχυ΄σεις. Προκειµε΄νου να διαπιστωθει΄ εα΄ν µι΄α περιφε΄ρεια υπερε΄βη το ο΄ριο αυτο΄ η΄ ο΄χι, το σχε΄διο Κανονισµου΄ του Συµβουλι΄ου, COM(98)131 τελ. (1), το οποι΄ο καθορι΄ζει γενικε΄ς διατα΄ξεις σχετικα΄ µε τα ∆ιαρθρωτικα΄ Ταµει΄α, προβλε΄πει ο΄τι θα λαµβα΄νονται υπο΄ψη τα αριθµητικα΄ δεδοµε΄να που αντιστοιχου΄ν στα τρι΄α τελευται΄α ε΄τη για τα οποι΄α διαθε΄τει στοιχει΄α το EUROSTAT


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 756/99 dell'on. Nikitas KAKLAMANIS Finanziamenti comunitari a favore della minoranza musulmana della Tracia occidentale

eurovoc_concepts:
EU financing
Eastern Macedonia and Thrace
European Commission
Islam
non-governmental organisation
protection of minorities
religious group
rights of minorities

text: C 348/128 Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee IT 3. 12. 1999 Durante l’attuale periodo di programmazione strutturale 1994-1999 le dimensioni complessive della flotta peschereccia comunitaria sono diminuite circa del 13 % in stazza e del 11 % in potenza come si può vedere nelle relazioni annuali della Commissione al Parlamento e al Consiglio sui programmi di orientamento pluriennali. Nella proposta di interventi strutturali nel settore della pesca (1), attualmente all’esame in sede di Consiglio e di Parlamento, la Commissione propone il mantenimento dello schema di cessazione definitiva e condizioni aggiuntive per la concessione di sovvenzioni per il rinnovo della flotta. Inoltre, la Commissione propone che gli Stati membri debbano dimostrare la necessità degli aiuti pubblici per quanto riguarda gli obiettivi perseguiti e, in particolare, che senza gli aiuti pubblici la flotta peschereccia in questione non potrebbe essere rinnovata o ammodernata e che le azioni pianificate non vadano a pregiudicare l’equilibrio a lungo termine delle risorse della pesca. Inoltre, in ogni Stati membro si devono instaurare meccanismi permanenti per il controllo del rinnovo della flotta. Gli aiuti comunitari sono concessi nel quadro dei programmi strutturali nazionali, che sono presentati dagli Stati membri ed approvati dalla Commissione. Inoltre, secondo il principio della sussidiarietà, questi programmi possono contenere disposizioni complementari volte ad una gestione locale adeguata delle risorse marine. (1) GU C 16 del 21. 1. 1999. (1999/C 348/173) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0756/99 di Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Finanziamenti comunitari a favore della minoranza musulmana della Tracia occidentale Può dirci la Commissione se mai ha finanziato, attraverso un qualsiasi canale, «organizzazioni» impegnate nella «tutela dei diritti» della minoranza musulmana della Tracia occidentale, e qual é stato l’ammontare di questi eventuali finanziamenti? Risposta data dalla sig. ra Wulf-Mathies in nome della Commissione (27 aprile 1999) In base alle informazioni trasmesse alla Commissione dallo Stato membro in questione alle riunioni del comitato di sorveglianza del programma operativo «Macedonia orientale e Tracia», non risulta che alcuna organizzazione per la tutela dei diritti della minoranza musulmana della Tracia occidentale abbia beneficiato sinora di finanziamenti comunitari. (1999/C 348/174) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0757/99 di Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Finanziamenti comunitari a favore di organizzazioni cipriote Può dirci la Commissione se dal 1995 a tutt’oggi ha finanziato, attraverso un qualsiasi canale, «organizzazioni» o «fondazioni» ubicate nella zona occupata di Cipro, di che tipo di finanziamenti si è trattato, quando sono stati eventualmente erogati e qual è stato il loro ammontare? Risposta data dal sig. van den Broek a nome della Commissione (15 aprile 1999) Accogliendo l’invito rivoltole dal Consiglio nelle conclusioni del 6 marzo 1995, la Commissione ha varato una serie di iniziative volte ad illustrare alla comunità turco-cipriota i vantaggi dell’adesione alla Comunità


title: Council Directive 1999/22/EC of 29 March 1999 relating to the keeping of wild animals in zoos

eurovoc_concepts:
animal life
leisure park
protection of animals
trade licence
veterinary inspection
wildlife

text: L 94/24 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 4. 1999 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 1999/22/EC of 29 March 1999 relating to the keeping of wild animals in zoos THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 130s(1) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (1), Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189c of the Treaty (2), Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (3) requires evidence of the availability of adequate facilities for the accomoda- tion and care of live specimens of a great many species before their importation into the Community is author- ised; whereas that Regulation prohibits the display to the public for commercial purposes of specimens of species listed in Annex A thereof unless a specific exemption was granted for education, research or breeding purposes; Whereas Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (4), and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (5), prohibit the capture and keeping of and trade in a great number of species, whilst providing for exemptions for specific reasons, such as research and education, repopulation, reintroduction and breeding; Whereas the proper implementation of existing and future Community legislation on the conservation of wild fauna and the need to ensure that zoos adequately fulfil their important role in the conservation of species, public education, and/or scientific research make it necessary to provide a common basis for Member States’ legislation with regard to the licensing and inspection of zoos, the keeping of animals in zoos, the training of staff and the education of the visiting public; (1) OJ C 204, 15. 7. 1996, p. 63. (2) Opinion of the European Parliament of 29 January 1998. (OJ C 56, 23. 2. 1998, p. 34), Council Common Position of 20 July 1998 (OJ C 364, 25. 11. 1998, p. 9), and Decision of the Euro- pean Parliament of 10 February 1999 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (3) OJ L 61, 3. 3. 1997, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2307/97 (OJ L 325, 27. 11. 1997, p. 1). (4) OJ L 103, 25. 4. 1979, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Directive 97/49/EC (OJ L 223,. 13. 8. 1997, p. 9). (5) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992, p. 7. Directive as last amended by Commission Directive 97/62/EC (OJ L 305, 8. 11. 1997, p. 42). Whereas action at the Community level is required in order to have zoos throughout the Community contri- buting to the conservation of biodiversity in accordance with the Community’s obligation to adopt measures for ex situ conservation under Article 9 of the Convention on Biological Diversity; Whereas a number of organisations such as the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria have produced guide- lines for the care and accomodation of animals in zoos which could, where appropriate, assist in the development and adoption of national standards, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Aim The objectives of this Directive are to protect wild fauna and to conserve biodiversity by providing for the adoption of measures by Member States for the licensing and inspection of zoos in the Community, thereby strength- ening the role of zoos in the conservation of biodiversity. Article 2 Definition For the purpose of this Directive, ‘zoos' means all perma- nent establishments where animals of wild species are kept for exhibition to the public for 7 or more days a year, with the exception of circuses, pet shops and establish- ments which Member States exempt from the require- ments of this Directive on the grounds that they do not exhibit a significant number of animals or species to the public and that the exemption will not jeopardise the objectives of this Directive. Article 3 Requirements applicable to zoos Member States shall take measures under Articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 to ensure all zoos implement the following conser- vation measures: 9. 4. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 94/25 (cid:190) participating in research from which conservation benefits accrue to the species, and/or training in relevant conservation skills, and/or the exchange of information relating to species conservation and/or, where appropriate, captive breeding, repopulation or reintroduction of species into the wild, (cid:190) promoting public education and awareness in relation to the conservation of biodiversity, particularly by providing information about the species exhibited and their natural habitats, the individual (cid:190) accommodating their animals under conditions which aim to satisfy the biological and conservation require- inter alia, by ments of providing species specific enrichment of the enclos- ures; and maintaining a high standard of animal husbandry with a developed programme of preventive and curative veterinary care and nutrition, species, (cid:190) preventing the escape of animals in order to avoid possible ecological threats to indigenous species and preventing intrusion of outside pests and vermin, (cid:190) keeping of up-to-date records of the zoo’s collection appropriate to the species recorded. Article 4 Licensing and inspection 1. Member States shall adopt measures for licensing and inspection of existing and new zoos in order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3 are met. Every zoo shall have a licence within four years after 2. the entry into force of this Directive or, in the case of new zoos, before they are open to the public. Each licence shall contain conditions to enforce the 3. requirements of Article 3. Compliance with the condi- tions shall be monitored inter alia by means of regular inspection and appropriate steps shall be taken to ensure such compliance. 4. Before granting, refusing, extending the period of, or significantly amending a licence, an inspection by Member States’ competent authorities shall be carried out in order to determine whether or not the licensing condi- tions or proposed licensing conditions are met. (a) shall be closed to the public by the competent authority; and/or (b) shall comply with appropriate requirements imposed by the competent authority to ensure that the licensing conditions are met. Should these requirements not be complied with within an appropriate period to be determined by the competent authorities but not exceeding two years, the competent authority shall withdraw or modify the licence and close the zoo or part thereof. Article 5 the Commission that Licensing requirements set out in Article 4 shall not apply where a Member State can demonstrate to the satis- faction of this Directive as set out in Article 1 and the requirements applicable to zoos set out in Article 3 are being met and continously maintained by means of a system or regula- tion and registration. Such a system should, inter alia, contain provisions regarding inspection and closure of zoos equivalent to those in Article 4(4) and (5). the objective of Article 6 Closure of zoos In the event of a zoo or part thereof being closed, the competent the animals authority shall ensure that concerned are treated or disposed of under conditions which the Member State deems appropriate and consis- tent with the purposes and provisions of this Directive. Article 7 Competent authorities Member States shall designate competent authorities for the purposes of this Directive. Article 8 Penalties 5. If the zoo is not licensed in accordance with this Directive or the licensing conditions are not met, the zoo or part thereof: Member States shall determine the penalties applicable to breaches of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. The penalties shall be effective, propor- tionate and dissuasive. L 94/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 4. 1999 Article 9 Implementation Article 10 Entry in force 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regu- lations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this directive not later than 9 April 2002. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompa- nied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by the Member States. 2. Member States shall communicate to the Commis- sion the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Article 11 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 29 March 1999. For the Council The President F. M(cid:154)NTEFERING


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 726/99 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Structural Funds

eurovoc_concepts:
Denmark
EU aid
Structural Funds
eligible region
gross domestic product
statistics
terms for aid

text: C 370/94 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 21. 12. 1999 För närvarande finns endast siffrorna för budgetåren 1994, 1995 och 1996 tillgängliga. Vilka luxemburgiska regioner kommer enligt kommissionen inte att klassificeras som mål 1-regioner under denna treårsperiod? (1) EGT C 176, 9. 6. 1998, s. 1. (1999/C 370/132) SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0724/99 från José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) till kommissionen (29 mars 1999) Angående: Strukturfonderna De regioner vars inkomstnivå per invånare är lägre än 75 procent av den genomsnittliga inkomstnivån för gemenskapens invånare klassificeras som mål 1-områden och är berättigade till omfattande gemenskaps- stöd. För att ta reda på om detta tröskelvärde har överskridits eller inte fastställer man i förslaget till rådets förordning (KOM(98) 131) (1) om allmänna bestämmelser för strukturfonderna att man vid beräkningarna skall ta hänsyn till siffrorna för de tre senaste åren som Eurostat har information om. För närvarande finns endast siffrorna för budgetåren 1994, 1995 och 1996 tillgängliga. Vilka brittiska regioner kommer enligt kommissionen inte att klassificeras som mål 1-regioner under denna treårsperiod? (1) EGT C 176, 9. 6. 1998, s. 1. (1999/C 370/133) SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0725/99 från José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) till kommissionen (29 mars 1999) Angående: Strukturfonderna De regioner vars inkomstnivå per invånare är lägre än 75 procent av den genomsnittliga inkomstnivån för gemenskapens invånare klassificeras som mål 1-områden och är berättigade till omfattande gemenskaps- stöd. För att ta reda på om detta tröskelvärde har överskridits eller inte fastställer man i förslaget till rådets förordning (KOM(98) 131) (1) om allmänna bestämmelser för strukturfonderna att man vid beräkningarna skall ta hänsyn till siffrorna för de tre senaste åren som Eurostat har information om. För närvarande finns endast siffrorna för budgetåren 1994, 1995 och 1996 tillgängliga. Vilka irländska regioner kommer enligt kommissionen inte att klassificeras som mål 1-regioner under denna treårsperiod? (1) EGT C 176, 9. 6. 1998, s. 1. (1999/C 370/134) SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0726/99 från José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) till kommissionen (29 mars 1999) Angående: Strukturfonderna De regioner vars inkomstnivå per invånare är lägre än 75 procent av den genomsnittliga inkomstnivån för gemenskapens invånare klassificeras som mål 1-områden och är berättigade till omfattande gemenskaps- stöd. För att ta reda på om detta tröskelvärde har överskridits eller inte fastställer man i förslaget till rådets förordning (KOM(98) 131) (1) om allmänna bestämmelser för strukturfonderna att man vid beräkningarna skall ta hänsyn till siffrorna för de tre senaste åren som Eurostat har information om


title: 2004/282/Euratom: Odluka Komisije od 29. ožujka 1999. o sklapanju Sporazuma o suradnji između Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju i Republike Kazakstana u području nuklearne sigurnosti (2004/282/Euratom)

text: L_2004089HR. 01003601. xml 11/Sv. 114 HR Službeni list Europske unije 270 32004D0282 L 089/36 SLUŽBENI LIST EUROPSKE UNIJE ODLUKA KOMISIJE od 29. ožujka 1999. o sklapanju Sporazuma o suradnji između Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju i Republike Kazakstana u području nuklearne sigurnosti (2004/282/Euratom) KOMISIJA EUROPSKIH ZAJEDNICA, uzimajući u obzir Ugovor o osnivanju Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju, a posebno njegov članak 101. drugi stavak, uzimajući u obzir odobrenje Vijeća, budući da je potrebno odobriti Sporazum između Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju i Republike Kazakstana u području nuklearne sigurnosti, ODLUČILA JE: Jedini članak Ovime se u ime Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju odobrava Sporazum o suradnji između Europske zajednice za atomsku energiju i Republike Kazakstana u području nuklearne sigurnosti Tekst Sporazuma priložen je ovoj Odluci. Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 29. ožujka 1999. Za Komisiju Hans VAN DEN BROEK Član Komisije


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 729/99 de José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Fonds structurels

text: 21. 12. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes C 370/95 On ne dispose actuellement que des chiffres relatifs aux années 1994, 1995 et 1996. Selon la Commission, quelles sont les régions du Danemark qui ne seront pas désignées régions de l’objectif no 1 pour la période prise en compte? (1) JO C 176 du 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/135) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0727/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Fonds structurels Les régions dont le PIB par habitant est inférieur au seuil de 75 % de la moyenne communautaire sont classées «régions éligibles à l’objectif no 1» et bénéficient d’importantes aides communautaires. La proposition de règlement du Conseil, COM(98) 131 final, portant dispositions générales sur les Fonds structurels (1) indique que le calcul permettant de déterminer si ce seuil a été ou non dépassé sera basé sur des chiffres relatifs aux trois dernières années disponibles auprès d’Eurostat. On ne dispose actuellement que des chiffres relatifs aux années 1994, 1995 et 1996. Selon la Commission, quelles sont les régions de Suède qui ne seront pas désignées régions de l’objectif no 1 pour la période prise en compte? (1) JO C 176 du 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/136) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0728/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Fonds structurels Les régions dont le PIB par habitant est inférieur au seuil de 75 % de la moyenne communautaire sont classées «régions éligibles à l’objectif no 1» et bénéficient d’importantes aides communautaires. La proposition de règlement du Conseil, COM(98) 131 final, portant dispositions générales sur les Fonds structurels (1) indique que le calcul permettant de déterminer si ce seuil a été ou non dépassé sera basé sur des chiffres relatifs aux trois dernières années disponibles auprès d’Eurostat. On ne dispose actuellement que des chiffres relatifs aux années 1994, 1995 et 1996. Selon la Commission, quelles sont les régions de Finlande qui ne seront pas désignées régions de l’objectif no 1 pour la période prise en compte? (1) JO C 176 du 9. 6. 1998, p. 1. (1999/C 370/137) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0729/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Fonds structurels Les régions dont le PIB par habitant est inférieur au seuil de 75 % de la moyenne communautaire sont classées «régions éligibles à l’objectif no 1» et bénéficient d’importantes aides communautaires. La proposition de règlement du Conseil, COM(98) 131 final, portant dispositions générales sur les Fonds structurels (1) indique que le calcul permettant de déterminer si ce seuil a été ou non dépassé sera basé sur des chiffres relatifs aux trois dernières années disponibles auprès d’Eurostat


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 732/99 de Gerhard SCHMID Centrales nucléaires et bogue de l'an 2000

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern European Countries
EU aid
EU programme
International Atomic Energy Agency
computer system
information
nuclear power station
nuclear safety
software
technical cooperation


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL nr. 748/99 af Anita POLLACK EF- udviklingshjælp til sydasiatiske lande

eurovoc_concepts:
EU aid
European Commission
South Asia
development aid
exchange of information

text: 12. 11. 1999 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende C 325/131 Samlet svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Yves-Thibault de Silguy på skriftlige forespørgsler E-0657/99, E-0658/99, E-0659/99, E-0660/99, E-0661/99, E-0662/99, E-0663/99, E-0664/99, E-0665/99, E-0666/99, E-0667/99, E-0668/99, E-0669/99, E-0670/99, E-0671/99, E-0672/99, E-0673/99, E-0674/99 og E-0675/99 (23. april 1999) Et skema med de ønskede oplysninger sendes direkte til det ærede medlem og Parlamentets generalsekretariat. (1999/C 325/193) SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0696/99 af José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) til Kommissionen (26. marts 1999) Om: Strukturfondene Regioner, hvis købekraftstandarder er lavere end 75 % af EF-gennemsnittet, klassificeres som »mål 1-regioner« og modtager betydelige EF-støttemidler. Beregningen af, hvorvidt dette loft er overskredet eller ej, foretages som fastsat i forslag til Rådets forordning (EF) om generelle bestemmelser om strukturfondene, KOM(98) 0131 (1), på grundlag af EUROSTATs statistiske oplysninger for de seneste tre år. I øjeblikket foreligger der kun tal for regnskabsårene 1994, 1995 og 1996. Hvornår erstattes tallene for 1994 med 1997-tallene for de regioner, som søger om klassificering som »mål 1- regioner«? (1) EFT C 176 af 9. 6. 1998, s. 1. Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Yves-Thibault de Silguy (19. april 1999) Overslagene for 1997 over bruttonationalproduktet efter region (BNPR) pr. indbygger udtrykt i købekraft- standarder forventes at foreligge i december 1999. (1999/C 325/194) SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0748/99 af Anita Pollack (PSE) til Kommissionen (29. marts 1999) Om: EF-udviklingshjælp til sydasiatiske lande Vil Kommissionen udarbejde en liste over den samlede EF-udviklingshjælp til de følgende lande for hvert af de sidste fem år: Indien, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan og Maldiverne? Kan den også udarbejde en liste over EF-udviklingshjælpen pr. indbygger til de samme lande for hvert af de sidste fem år? Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Manuel Marín (29. april 1999) De ønskede oplysninger sendes direkte til det ærede medlem og Parlamentets generalsekretariat


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 772/99 de José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL Glaces artisanales

text: 3. 12. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes C 348/131 La Commission pourrrait-elle dire si, outre la création du musée, elle considère également le projet de conservation, de mise en valeur et de promotion du site antique de Nikopoli comme éligible à un financement? Réponse donnée par M. Oreja au nom de la Commission (5 mai 1999) Jusqu’à présent, la Commission n’a pas été saisie d’une demande concernant le financement éventuel des travaux sur le site de Nikopolis. Elle rappelle toutefois que les autorités helléniques peuvent soumettre une demande à cet effet suivant les procédures prévues dans le cadre communautaire d’appui (CCA). La Commission est prête à examiner, en partenariat avec lesdites autorités, toute possibilité de financement à l’intérieur des disponibilités budgétaires du CCA. (1999/C 348/178) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0770/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Glaces artisanales Une demande d’enregistrement de la dénomination «glace artisanale» conformément au règlement CEE 2082/92 (1) du Conseil relatif aux attestations de spécificité a été publiée dans le Journal officiel des Communautés européennes (JO C 329/97) le 31. 10. 1997. Cependant, il n’a pas encore été donné suite à cette demande. La Commission peut-elle indiquer quel est l’état d’avancement de la procédure communautaire à cet égard? (1) JO L 208 du 24. 7. 1992, p. 9. (1999/C 348/179) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0771/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Glaces artisanales Une demande d’enregistrement de la dénomination «glace artisanale» conformément au règlement CEE 2082/92 (1) du Conseil relatif aux attestations de spécificité a été publiée dans le Journal officiel des Communautés européennes (JO C 329/97) le 31. 10. 1997. Cependant, il n’a pas encore été donné suite à cette demande. La Commission peut-elle indiquer s’il existe des raisons pour lesquelles le consommateur ne peut être en mesure de distinguer entre les glaces artisanales et celles qui sont produites à travers des processus industriels? (1) JO L 208 du 24. 7. 1992, p. 9. (1999/C 348/180) QUESTION ÉCRITE E-0772/99 posée par José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) à la Commission (29 mars 1999) Objet: Glaces artisanales Le règlement CEE no 2082/92 (1) a été approuvé en vue de protéger les recettes spécifiques et traditionnelles définies par une série de conditions. L’article 13 de ce dernier prévoit deux types de protection: la protection dite partielle (article 13, paragraphe 1) et la protection dite totale (article 13, paragraphe 2)


title: 1999/257/EG: Beschluss des Rates vom 29. März 1999 über den Abschluß des Vertrags über die Internationale Kommission zum Schutz der Oder gegen Verunreinigung

text: L 100/20 DE Amtsblatt der Europ(cid:132)ischen Gemeinschaften 15. 4. 1999 II (Nicht ver(cid:148)ffentlichungsbed(cid:129)rftige Rechtsakte) RAT BESCHLUSS DES RATES vom 29. M(cid:132)rz 1999 (cid:129)ber den Abschluß des Vertrags (cid:129)ber die Internationale Kommission zum Schutz der Oder gegen Verunreinigung (1999/257/EG) DER RAT DER EUROP(cid:142)ISCHEN UNION (cid:190) gest(cid:129)tzt auf den Vertrag zur Gr(cid:129)ndung der Europ(cid:132)ischen Gemeinschaft, insbesondere auf Artikel 130s Absatz 1 in Verbindung mit Artikel 228 Absatz 2 Satz 1 und Absatz 3 Unterabsatz 1, und den zust(cid:132)ndigen internationalen Organisationen zusammen. Der Abschluß des Vertrags durch die Gemeinschaft tr(cid:132)gt zur Verwirklichung der in Artikel 130r des EG-Vertrags festgelegten Ziele bei (cid:190) auf Vorschlag der Kommission (1), nach Stellungnahme des Europ(cid:132)ischen Parlaments (2), BESCHLIESST: in Erw(cid:132)gung nachstehender Gr(cid:129)nde: Die Kommission beteiligte sich im Namen der Gemein- schaft an den Verhandlungen zur Vorbereitung eines Vertrags (cid:129)ber die Internationale Kommission zum Schutz der Oder gegen Verunreinigung. Der Vertrag wurde am 11. April 1996 in Breslau (Polen) im Namen der Gemeinschaft unterzeichnet. Der Vertrag hat den Ausbau der mehrseitigen Zusam- menarbeit zur Verh(cid:129)tung und Einschr(cid:132)nkung der Verschmutzung der Oder und zur Gew(cid:132)hrleistung einer dauerhaften und umweltgerechten Nutzung der Wasser- ressourcen zum Ziel. Das große Ziel der Umweltpolitik der Gemeinschaft ist sich auf das ein hohes Schutzniveau. Dieses Vorsorge- und Verh(cid:129)tungsprinzip, auf das Prinzip der Einstellung (cid:190) wenn m(cid:148)glich am Ursprung (cid:190) der Umweltbeeintr(cid:132)chtigungen sowie das Verursacherprinzip. st(cid:129)tzt Im Rahmen ihrer jeweiligen Zust(cid:132)ndigkeit arbeiten die Gemeinschaft und die Mitgliedstaaten mit Drittl(cid:132)ndern Artikel 1 Der Vertrag (cid:129)ber die Internationale Kommission zum Schutz der Oder gegen Verunreinigung wird im Namen der Gemeinschaft genehmigt. Der Wortlaut des Vertrags ist diesem Beschluß beigef(cid:129)gt. Artikel 2 Der Pr(cid:132)sident des Rates wird erm(cid:132)chtigt, die Person(en) zu bestellen, die befugt ist (sind), die Ratifikations- oder Best(cid:132)tigungsurkunde beim Generalsekretariat des Rates gem(cid:132)ß Artikel 18 Absatz 2 des Vertrags zu hinterlegen. Geschehen zu Br(cid:129)ssel am 29. M(cid:132)rz 1999. Im Namen des Rates Der Pr(cid:132)sident F. M(cid:154)NTEFERING (1) ABl. C 316 vom 14. 10. 1998, S. 5. (2) Stellungnahme vom 16. Dezember 1998 (noch nicht im Amts- blatt ver(cid:148)ffentlicht)


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 727/99 dell'on. José GARCÍA- MARGALLO Y MARFIL Fondi strutturali

eurovoc_concepts:
EU aid
Structural Funds
Sweden
eligible region
gross domestic product
statistics
terms for aid

text: 21. 12. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 370/95 Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Danimarca non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/135) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0727/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati. Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Svezia non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/136) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0728/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati. Attualmente, sono disponibili solo i dati relativi agli esercizi 1994, 1995 e 1996. Secondo la Commissione, quali regioni della Finlandia non entreranno a far parte dell’obiettivo 1 per tale periodo? (1) GU C 176 del 9. 6. 1998, pag. 1. (1999/C 370/137) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-0729/99 di José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) alla Commissione (29 marzo 1999) Oggetto: Fondi strutturali Le regioni il cui livello di reddito pro capite è inferiore al 75 % della media comunitaria sono definite «regioni dell’obiettivo 1» e beneficiano di importanti aiuti comunitari. Per sapere se questo livello sia stato superato o meno, il progetto di regolamento del Consiglio COM(98) 0131 def. (1) recante disposizioni generali relative ai Fondi strutturali prescrive che si faccia riferimento ai dati comunitari degli ultimi tre anni per i quali EUROSTAT dispone di dati


title: Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 684/1999 της Επιτροπής της 29ης Μαρτίου 1999 για τροποποίηση του κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1484/95 περί των κανόνων εφαρμογής του καθεστώτος συμπληρωματικών εισαγωγικών δασμών και του καθορισμού αντιπροσωπευτικών τιμών στον τομέα του κρέατος πουλερικών και αυγών και της αυγοαλβουμίνης καθώς και της κατάργησης του κανονισμού αριθ. 163/67/ΕΟΚ

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
egg
egg product
import
poultrymeat
representative price

text: L 86/6 EL Ep(cid:148)sglg Evgleq(cid:148)da tym Euqypa(cid:152)j(cid:150)m Joimot(cid:147)tym 30. 3. 1999 JAMOMISLOS (EJ) aqih. 684/1999 TGS EPITQOPGS tgr 29gr Laqt(cid:148)ou 1999 cia tqopopo(cid:148)gsg tou jamomislo(cid:151) (EJ) aqih. 1484/95 peq(cid:148) tym jam(cid:149)mym evaqloc(cid:147)r tou jahest(cid:150)tor sulpkgqylatij(cid:150)m eisacycij(cid:150)m dasl(cid:150)m jai tou jahoqislo(cid:151) amtipqosypeu- tij(cid:150)m til(cid:150)m stom tol(cid:146)a tou jq(cid:146)ator poukeqij(cid:150)m jai auc(cid:150)m jai tgr aucoakboul(cid:148)mgr jah(cid:150)r jai tgr jat(cid:145)qcgsgr tou jamomislo(cid:151) aqih. 163/67/EOJ G EPITQOPG TYM EUQYPA(cid:136)JYM JOIMOTGTYM, (cid:130)womtar up(cid:149)xg: tg sumh(cid:147)jg cia tgm (cid:148)dqusg tgr Euqypa(cid:152)j(cid:147)r Joim(cid:149)tgtar, tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EJ) aqih. 2771/75 tou Sulbouk(cid:148)ou, tgr 29gr Ojtybq(cid:148)ou 1975, peq(cid:148) tgr joim(cid:147)r oqcam(cid:150)seyr acoq(cid:145)r stom tol(cid:146)a tym auc(cid:150)m (1), (cid:149)pyr tqopopoi(cid:147)hgje tekeuta(cid:148)a ap(cid:149) tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EJ) aqih. 1516/96 tgr Epitqop(cid:147)r (2), jai id(cid:148)yr to (cid:145)qhqo 5 paq(cid:145)cqavor 4 jai to (cid:145)qhqo 15, tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EOJ) aqih. 2777/75 tou Sulbouk(cid:148)ou, tgr 29gr Ojtybq(cid:148)ou 1975, peq(cid:148) tgr joim(cid:147)r oqcam(cid:150)seyr acoq(cid:145)r stom tol(cid:146)a tou jq(cid:146)ator poukeqij(cid:150)m (3), (cid:149)pyr tqopopoi- (cid:147)hgje tekeuta(cid:148)a ap(cid:149) tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EJ) aqih. 2916/95 tgr Epitqop(cid:147)r (4), jai id(cid:148)yr to (cid:145)qhqo 5 paq(cid:145)cqavor 4 jai to (cid:145)qhqo 15, tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EOJ) aqih. 2783/75 tou Sulbouk(cid:148)ou, tgr 29gr Ojtybq(cid:148)ou 1975, peq(cid:148) tou joimo(cid:151) sust(cid:147)lator elpoq(cid:148)ar cia tgm aucoakboul(cid:148)mg jai tg cakajtoakboul(cid:148)mg (5), (cid:149)pyr tqopopoi(cid:147)hgje tekeuta(cid:148)a ap(cid:149) tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EJ) aqih. 2916/95, jai id(cid:148)yr to (cid:145)qhqo 3 paq(cid:145)cqavor 4 jai to (cid:145)qhqo 10, Ejtil(cid:150)mtar: jahoqishe(cid:148) pq(cid:149)shetor dasl(cid:149)r ep(cid:148) tgr basij(cid:147)r til(cid:147)r ei- sacyc(cid:147)r cif· (cid:149)ti s(cid:151)lvyma le tgm amyt(cid:146)qy ap(cid:149)vasg pq(cid:146)pei ma tqopopoigho(cid:151)m to (cid:145)qhqo 4 paq(cid:145)cqavor 2 jai to (cid:145)qhqo 6· (cid:149)ti pq(cid:146)pei ma evaqloste(cid:148) g tqopopo(cid:148)gsg aut(cid:147) to sumtol(cid:149)- teqo dumat(cid:149)· (cid:149)ti ta l(cid:146)tqa pou pqobk(cid:146)pomtai stom paq(cid:149)mta jamomisl(cid:149) e(cid:148)mai s(cid:151)lvyma le tg cm(cid:150)lg tgr epitqop(cid:147)r diawe(cid:148)qisgr jq(cid:146)a- tor poukeqij(cid:150)m jai auc(cid:150)m, ENEDYSE TOM PAQOMTA JAMOMISLO: (cid:129)qhqo 1 O jamomisl(cid:149)r (EJ) aqih. 1484/95 tqopopoie(cid:148)tai yr en(cid:147)r: 1. jataqce(cid:148)tai to (cid:145)qhqo 4 paq(cid:145)cqavor 2· 2. sto (cid:145)qhqo 6, oi k(cid:146)neir «oi opo(cid:148)oi oq(cid:148)fomtai sto paq(cid:145)qtgla I» amtijah(cid:148)stamtai ap(cid:149) tir k(cid:146)neir «oi opo(cid:148)oi amav(cid:146)qomtai sto (cid:145)qhqo 1». (cid:129)qhqo 2 (cid:149)ti o jamomisl(cid:149)r (EJ) aqih. 1484/95 tgr Epitqop(cid:147)r (6) tqo- popoi(cid:147)hgje pq(cid:149)svata ap(cid:149) tom jamomisl(cid:149) (EJ) aqih. 493/ 1999 (7) s(cid:151)lvyma le tgm ap(cid:149)vasg pou ek(cid:147)vhg sto pka(cid:148)sio tou Pacj(cid:149)sliou Oqcamislo(cid:151) Elpoq(cid:148)ou· (cid:149)ti pq(cid:146)pei ma O paq(cid:150)m jamomisl(cid:149)r aqw(cid:148)fei ma isw(cid:151)ei tgm gl(cid:146)qa tgr dglo- s(cid:148)eus(cid:147)r tou stgm Ep(cid:148)sglg Evgleq(cid:148)da tym Euqypa(cid:152)j(cid:150)m Joimot(cid:147)tym. Evaql(cid:149)fetai ap(cid:149) tir 25 Laqt(cid:148)ou 1999. O paq(cid:150)m jamomisl(cid:149)r e(cid:148)mai desleutij(cid:149)r yr pqor (cid:149)ka ta l(cid:146)qg tou jai isw(cid:151)ei (cid:145)lesa se j(cid:145)he jq(cid:145)tor l(cid:146)kor. Bqun(cid:146)kker, 29 Laqt(cid:148)ou 1999. Cia tgm Epitqop(cid:147) Franz FISCHLER L(cid:146)kor tgr Epitqop(cid:147)r (1) EE L 282 tgr 1. 11. 1975, s. 49. (2) EE L 189 tgr 30. 7. 1996, s. 99. (3) EE L 282 tgr 1. 11. 1975, s. 77. (4) EE L 305 tgr 19. 12. 1995, s. 49. (5) EE L 282 tgr 1. 11. 1975, s. 104. (6) EE L 145 tgr 29. 6. 1995, s. 47. (7) EE L 59 tgr 6. 3. 1999, s. 15


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 752/99 van Fernand HERMAN Vrij verkeer van bruggepensioneerden op het grondgebied van de lidstaten

text: 29. 11. 1999 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 341/141 (1999/C 341/200) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-0743/99 van Yves Verwaerde (PPE) aan de Commissie (9 maart 1999) Betreft: Gesubsidieerde NGO’s in het kader van het buitenlands beleid van de EU Kan de Commissie meedelen welke criteria zijn vastgesteld om de NGO’s te selecteren die in aanmerking komen voor communautaire subsidies, teneinde deel te nemen aan waarnemings- of opleidingsmissies met betrekking tot verkiezingen in het kader van het buitenlands beleid dat de EU voert met het oog op de bevordering van de ontwikkeling van het democratiseringsproces? Antwoord van de heer Van den Broek namens de Commissie (8 april 1999) Bij de verlening van subsidies van de Gemeenschap ten behoeve van niet-gouvernementele organisaties (NGO’s) die deelnemen aan het waarnemen bij verkiezingen of aan vorming en opleiding met betrekking tot verkiezingen, hanteert de Commissie als criteria de ervaring en de professionaliteit van de betrokken organisatie, alsook de kwaliteit van de voorgestelde activiteiten. Een andere belangrijke maatstaf bij de keuze van de bij het waarnemen van verkiezingen betrokken NGO’s, is de onpartijdigheid ervan in het verkiezingsproces. Dit is bijzonder belangrijk wanneer de steunverlening bij verkiezingen in derde landen plaatsvindt in de vorm van steun- en opleidingsmaatregelen voor de plaatselijke NGO’s, met de bedoeling om de eigen capaciteit daartoe van het land waar de verkiezingen plaatsvinden, tot ontwikkeling te brengen. De subsidie van de Gemeenschap bevordert in sommige gevallen een partnerschap tussen een Europese NGO en een plaatselijke NGO. In het bijzonder wanneer het de waarneming van de media in het verkiezingsproces betreft, kiest de Commissie NGO’s die over voldoende professionaliteit, ervaren personeel, kennis van de werktalen en een doeltreffende werkwijze beschikken. Wat de opleiding voor het waarnemen bij verkiezingen betreft, steunt de Commissie de actie van de universitaire instellingen in de Unie die een terzake erkende wetenschappelijke activiteit hebben ontwikkeld. (1999/C 341/201) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0752/99 van Fernand Herman (PPE) aan de Commissie (29 maart 1999) Betreft: Vrij verkeer van bruggepensioneerden op het grondgebied van de lidstaten Wie in België met brugpensioen is, wordt door de Belgische wet beschouwd als een niet-werkzoekende werkloze en mag om die reden het Belgisch grondgebied niet langer dan dertig dagen per jaar verlaten, ondanks het feit dat hij niet hoeft te stempelen en ook niet verplicht is een job aan te nemen. Het enige wat hij moet doen, is de RVA een kaart terugbezorgen waarop hij de data vermeldt van de vakantie die hij zichzelf toekent, hoewel hij verplicht permanent en definitief met verlof is. Deze absurde situatie vormt een ernstige belemmering voor het vrij verkeer van personen op het grondgebied van de lidstaten. Ze is bovendien strijdig met zowel de geest als de letter van de verdragen. De Commissie kent het probleem en heeft bij de Raad een voorstel tot doel heeft brugpensioenregelingen in het kader van een c. a. o. onder het toepassingsgebied van Verordening 1408/ 71 (1) te doen vallen. De Raad heeft echter nog steeds niet de vereiste consensus gevonden om dit voorstel aan te nemen. ingediend dat Wat denkt de Commissie te doen om werk te maken van dit dossier dat reeds bijna vijf jaar muurvast zit? (1) PB L 149 van 5. 7. 1971, blz. 2