title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-2518/99 från Gianfranco Dell'Alba (TDI) till kommissionen. Användning av laserutrustning i Modena.

eurovoc_concepts:
Italy
application of EU law
civil defence
competence of the Member States
laser weapon
occupational health

text: C 303 E/74 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 24. 10. 2000 (2000/C 303 E/064) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-2518/99 fr(cid:229)n Gianfranco Dell(cid:146)Alba (TDI) till kommissionen (22 december 1999) ˜mne: Anv(cid:228)ndning av laserutrustning i Modena Sedan m(cid:229)nga (cid:229)r tillbaka har man i staden Modena anv(cid:228)nt (cid:148)laserutrustning(cid:148)) f(cid:246)r att v(cid:228)rja sig mot starar, duvor och andra f(cid:229)gelarter i stadens centrum. lasergev(cid:228)r (som nyligen b(cid:246)rjade kallas Detta forts(cid:228)tter trots de protester och initiativ som m(cid:229)nga medborgare och f(cid:246)retag genomf(cid:246)rt mot denna metod, (cid:228)ven p(cid:229) gemenskapsniv(cid:229). De italienska myndigheterna meddelande i maj 1997 (inrikesministeriet) och i december 1997 (h(cid:228)lsov(cid:229)rds- ministeriet) att dessa laserinstrument (cid:228)r farliga, i enlighet med de europeiska best(cid:228)mmelserna CEI EN 60825. Dessa best(cid:228)mmelser, som reglerar tillverkningen och anv(cid:228)ndningen av laserutrustning, till(cid:229)ter endast tre anv(cid:228)ndningsomr(cid:229)den, n(cid:228)mligen (cid:129) industri, (cid:129) telekommunikation, (cid:129) h(cid:228)lsov(cid:229)rd, vilket inneb(cid:228)r att Modena och troligen (cid:228)ven andra st(cid:228)der, inte skulle ha r(cid:228)tt att anv(cid:228)nda denna metod. Den laserutrustning som anv(cid:228)nds i Modena (cid:228)r f(cid:246)rsedd med ett optiskt system som regleras manuellt p(cid:229) ett s(cid:228)tt som dock inte beskrivs i det franska f(cid:246)retaget Desmans bruksanvisningar. Bjerregard fr(cid:229)n kommissionen svarade den 28 januari 1997 (E-3175/96) (1) och den 16 december 1997 (E-3800/97) (2) p(cid:229) Taminos fr(cid:229)gor i detta (cid:228)mne. Har kommissionen bett om, och erh(cid:229)llit, ytterligare information om s(cid:228)kerheten f(cid:246)r inv(cid:229)narna i Modena och om den personal som skall hantera utrustning s(cid:229)som denna laserutrustning, fr(cid:229)n de italienska myndigheterna som, enligt artikel 9 i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 79/409/EEG (3) (cid:228)r skyldiga att tillhandah(cid:229)lla s(cid:229)dan information? Anser inte kommissionen att man, med tanke p(cid:229) att denna metod forts(cid:228)tter att till(cid:228)mpas, snabbt m(cid:229)ste genomf(cid:246)ra en inspektion p(cid:229) plats, och om s(cid:229) (cid:228)r l(cid:228)mpligt formellt meddela de italienska myndigheterna om att de m(cid:229)ste f(cid:246)lja gemenskapsbest(cid:228)mmelserna p(cid:229) omr(cid:229)det fullt ut? (1) EGT C 186, 18. 6. 1997, s. 41. (2) EGT C 187, 16. 6. 1998, s. 59. (3) EGT L 103, 25. 4. 1979, s. 1. Svar fr(cid:229)n Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (23 februari 2000) Betr(cid:228)ffande s(cid:228)kerheten och h(cid:228)lsoskyddet f(cid:246)r arbetare som hanterar till exempel laserutrustning h(cid:228)nvisar kommissionen parlamentsledamoten till svaren p(cid:229) de skriftliga fr(cid:229)gorna E-3175/96 och E-3800/97 fr(cid:229)n Gianni Tamino. Det ankommer p(cid:229) de italienska myndigheterna att kontrollera och (cid:246)vervaka efterlevnaden av de nationella best(cid:228)mmelser som genomf(cid:246)r direktiven om h(cid:228)lsa och s(cid:228)kerhet i arbetet. Ber(cid:246)rda parter b(cid:246)r allts(cid:229) v(cid:228)nda sig till dessa myndigheter. N(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller artikel 9 i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 79/409/EEG av den 2 april 1979 om bevarande av vilda f(cid:229)glar har de italienska myndigheterna informerat kommissionen om att de vidtagna (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rderna inte har medf(cid:246)rt n(cid:229)gra allvarliga st(cid:246)rningar f(cid:246)r den ber(cid:246)rda populationen av vilda f(cid:229)glar. ¯tg(cid:228)rderna har genomf(cid:246)rts efter f(cid:229)glarnas parningsperiod och f(cid:229)glarna har varken skadats eller d(cid:246)dats. Eftersom ingen betydande st(cid:246)rning har orsakats (cid:228)r artikel 9 i direktiv 79/409/EEG inte till(cid:228)mplig i detta fall. Kommissionen ans(cid:229)g att den information man mottog ang(cid:229)ende n(cid:228)mnda direktiv var fullt tillr(cid:228)cklig och betraktade d(cid:228)rmed fallet som avslutat. 24. 10. 2000 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 303 E/75 Ett brev inneh(cid:229)llande kompletterande information till svaret p(cid:229) den skriftliga fr(cid:229)gan E-3800/97 skickades till Gianni Tamino under v(cid:229)ren 1998. (2000/C 303 E/065) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-2519/99 fr(cid:229)n Roberta Angelilli (UEN) till kommissionen (22 december 1999) ˜mne: Konkurs f(cid:246)r f(cid:246)retaget IMEG (i Lucca) F(cid:246)retaget IMEG (marmor- och granitindustri) (cid:228)r v(cid:228)rldens st(cid:246)rsta f(cid:246)retag som schaktar och bearbetar marmor. I omr(cid:229)det Apuo-Versiliese har f(cid:246)retaget ett stenbruk som t(cid:228)cker mer (cid:228)n 60 procent av marmor- omr(cid:229)det och syssels(cid:228)tter 180 arbetstagare i tre olika kommuner, n(cid:228)mligen Carrara, Manciano och Massarosa. Den 2 april 1999 f(cid:246)rklarades f(cid:246)retaget i konkurs och de anst(cid:228)llda frist(cid:228)lldes. De tv(cid:229) auktioner som skulle h(cid:229)llas f(cid:246)r att s(cid:228)lja hela industrianl(cid:228)ggningen som en enhet avlystes, och den 30 november 1999 kommer f(cid:246)retaget att s(cid:228)ljas ut i tv(cid:229) olika delar. 1. Kan kommissionen, mot bakgrund av det ovanst(cid:229)ende, ange om det finns n(cid:229)gra gemenskapsbe- st(cid:228)mmelser som avser att h(cid:229)lla samman en hel industriprocess som en enhet, i synnerhet med h(cid:228)nsyn till att uppr(cid:228)tth(cid:229)lla syssels(cid:228)ttningen? Finns det n(cid:229)gra finansiella instrument som avser st(cid:246)d f(cid:246)r utveckling och omstrukturering av 2. industriverksamhet? Svar fr(cid:229)n Michel Barnier p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (16 februari 2000) F(cid:246)ljande tre direktiv (cid:228)r till(cid:228)mpliga p(cid:229) den situation som beskrivs: Direktiv 77/187/EEG av den 1. 14 februari 1977, (cid:228)ndrat genom direktiv 98/50/EG av den 29 juni 1998, om tilln(cid:228)rmning av medlems- staternas lagstiftning om skydd f(cid:246)r arbetstagares r(cid:228)ttigheter vid (cid:246)verl(cid:229)telse av f(cid:246)retag, verksamheter eller delar av verksamheter (1). I detta direktiv f(cid:246)reskrivs skydd f(cid:246)r arbetstagare vid (cid:246)verl(cid:229)telse av f(cid:246)retag, s(cid:228)rskilt n(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller arbetstagarnas r(cid:228)ttigheter. Direktiv 98/59/EG av den 20 juli 1998 om tilln(cid:228)rmning av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning om kollektiva upps(cid:228)gningar (2). Syftet med detta direktiv (cid:228)r att skydda arbetstagarna vid kollektiva upps(cid:228)gningar genom att det f(cid:246)reskrivs att arbetstagarrepresentanterna m(cid:229)ste informeras och tillfr(cid:229)gas innan det fattas beslut om upps(cid:228)gningar och att myndigheterna m(cid:229)ste informeras om planerade upps(cid:228)gningar. Huvudsyftet (cid:228)r att motverka kollektiva upps(cid:228)gningar. Direktiv 80/987/EEG av den 20 oktober 1980 om tilln(cid:228)rmning av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning om skydd f(cid:246)r arbetstagarna vid arbetsgivarens insolvens (3). Genom detta direktiv s(cid:228)kras att arbetstagarnas utest(cid:229)ende fordringar g(cid:228)ldas (cid:228)ven om arbetsgivaren (cid:228)r insolvent. 2. Genom strukturfonderna (cid:228)r det m(cid:246)jligt att samfinansiera projekt f(cid:246)r industriell omst(cid:228)llning av det slag som fr(cid:229)gest(cid:228)llaren n(cid:228)mner, f(cid:246)rutsatt att de ber(cid:246)rda f(cid:246)retagen (cid:228)r bel(cid:228)gna i st(cid:246)dber(cid:228)ttigade omr(cid:229)den. ˜ven utbildning av arbetsl(cid:246)sa i syfte att underl(cid:228)tta dessas (cid:229)terintr(cid:228)de p(cid:229) arbetsmarknaden kan sam- finansieras. N(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller denna typ av (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder inom ramen f(cid:246)r m(cid:229)l 2 v(cid:228)ntar kommissionen p(cid:229) att de italienska myndigheterna skall inkomma med en ny version av sitt f(cid:246)rslag som omarbetats i enlighet med g(cid:228)llande best(cid:228)mmelser f(cid:246)r n(cid:228)sta programplaneringsperiod (2000(cid:141)2006) (4). (1) EGT L 201, 17. 7. 1998. (2) EGT L 225, 12. 8. 1998. (3) EGT L 283, 28. 10. 1980. (4) EGT L 161, 26. 6. 1999


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-2503/99 af Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) til Kommissionen. Mindstekrav til beskyttelse af æglæggende høner.

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern European Countries
Community acquis
EU aid
European standard
animal welfare
laying poultry
protection of animals
regulation (EU)
terms for aid

formats: html pdf print

text: C 330 E/14 De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende DA 21. 11. 2000 foranstaltninger aktioner for samarbejde inden for b(cid:230)redygtig vandforvaltning (oversvłmmelser, tłrke) i forbindelse med planl(cid:230)gning af arealanvendelse. (1) EFT C 108 af 7. 4. 1998. (2) (3) EFT C 150 af 28. 5. 1999. F(cid:230)lles holdning vedtaget af R(cid:229)det den 22. 10. 1999, endnu ikke offentliggjort i EFT. (2000/C 330 E/013) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-2503/99 af Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) til Kommissionen (22. december 1999) Om: Mindstekrav til beskyttelse af (cid:230)gl(cid:230)ggende hłner juli 1999 om fastl(cid:230)ggelse af mindstekrav til P(cid:229) baggrund af R(cid:229)dets direktiv 1999/74/EF (1) af 19. beskyttelse af (cid:230)gl(cid:230)ggende hłner og under henvisning til kapitel i dette direktiv, som indeholder bestemmelsen om, at medlemsstaterne sikrer, at alle bure, der er omhandlet i dette kapitel, fra den 1. januar 2003 opfylder mindstekravene, at produktionen i bure som omhandlet i dette kapitel, forbydes fra 1. januar 2012, og at bygning og ibrugtagning for fłrste gang af bure som omhandlet i dette kapitel forbydes fra 1. januar 2003, II samt under henvisning til den mulighed, at Unionen bidrager til finansiering af hłnsefarme i ansłger- landene, anmodes Kommissionen om at oplyse: (cid:129) om der i forbindelse med s(cid:229)danne delfinansieringer tages hensyn til ovenn(cid:230)vnte bestemmelser og deres nłje overholdelse, (cid:129) om Kommissionen p(cid:229)t(cid:230)nker at oprette et kontrolorgan, som besk(cid:230)ftiger sig med den konkrete overv(cid:229)gning og kontrol af ovenn(cid:230)vnte bestemmelser. (1) EFT L 203 af 3. 8. 1999, s. 53. Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Franz Fischler (14. februar 2000) R(cid:229)dets forordning (EF) nr. 1268/1999 af 21. juni 1999 fastl(cid:230)gger rammerne for f(cid:230)llesskabsstłtte til fłrtiltr(cid:230)delsesforanstaltninger inden for landbrug og udvikling af landdistrikter i ansłgerlandene i Central- og (cid:216)steuropa i fłrtiltr(cid:230)delsesperioden (1). Stłtten skal fremme gennemfłrelsen af den g(cid:230)ldende f(cid:230)lles- skabsret vedrłrende den f(cid:230)lles landbrugspolitik og besl(cid:230)gtede politikker og lłse de vigtigste problemer samt specifikke problemer i forbindelse med en b(cid:230)redygtig tilspasning af landbrugssektoren og land- distrikterne i ansłgerlandene. Artikel 2 i ovenst(cid:229)ende forordning indeholder bestemmelser for investering i landbrugsbedrifter, og det forventes, at de fleste ansłgerlande vil foresl(cid:229) s(cid:229)danne foranstaltninger i deres planer. I overensstemmelse med artikel 4, stk. 3, i samme forordning, skal ansłgerlandene bl. a. sikre, at deres planer prioriterer foranstaltninger til forbedring af kvalitets- og sundhedsnormer og foranstaltninger i overensstemmelse med bestemmelserne om beskyttelse af miljłet. I henhold til Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 2759/1999 af 22. december 1999 om gennemfłrelses- bestemmelser til R(cid:229)dets forordning (EF) nr. 1268/1999 om f(cid:230)llesskabsstłtte til fłrtiltr(cid:230)delsesforanstalt- ninger inden for landbrug og udvikling af landdistrikter i ansłgerlandene i Central- og (cid:216)steuropa i fłrtiltr(cid:230)delsesperioden (2) kan der ydes stłtte til investeringer i landbrugsbedrifter, der opfylder de nationale mindstekrav med hensyn til miljł, hygiejne og dyrevelf(cid:230)rd p(cid:229) det tidspunkt, hvor der tr(cid:230)ffes beslutning om at yde stłtte. I samme artikel siges det ogs(cid:229), at hvis der kort tid fłr, at ansłgningen modtages, i henhold til g(cid:230)ldende EU-ret vedtages mindstekrav med hensyn til miljł, hygiejne og dyrevelf(cid:230)rd, tr(cid:230)ffes der dog beslutning om at yde stłtte p(cid:229) den betingelse, at bedriften opfylder de nye krav ved investe- ringsperiodens slutning. Den nye investering skal imidlertid selv opfylde f(cid:230)llesskabkravene, hvad enten bedriften som helhed opfylder disse krav eller ej. 21. 11. 2000 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende C 330 E/15 Med henblik p(cid:229) at overv(cid:229)ge og evaluere anvendelsen af planerne, herunder opfyldelsen af ovenn(cid:230)vnte bestemmelser, neds(cid:230)ttes der for hvert ansłgerland et overv(cid:229)gningsudvalg, og der fasts(cid:230)ttes i planerne regler og procedurer for udarbejdelse af rapporter. (1) EFT L 161 af 26. 6. 1999. (2) EFT L 331 af 23. 12. 1999. (2000/C 330 E/014) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-2504/99 af Astrid Thors (ELDR) til Kommissionen (22. december 1999) Om: Nye giftige og miljłskadelige stoffer i levnedsmidler Ifłlge en artikel i det svenske dagblad »Dagens Nyheter« af 11. oktober 1999 har svenske forskere opdaget et nyt stof, som er skadeligt for miljłet og fremkalder kr(cid:230)ft. Brominerede flammeh(cid:230)mmere fra udrange- rede elektriske husholdningsapparater er nu blevet fundet i hłje koncentrationer i sild og łstersłsild. Koncentrationerne er stadig lave i kłd, smłr og ost, men opdagelsen er foruroligende af to (cid:229)rsager. For det fłrste vil koncentrationerne stige lige s(cid:229) hurtigt som for pcb(cid:146)ernes vedkommende, og for det andet skal toksiner fra flammeh(cid:230)mmerne ses i tilknytning til andre stoffer, som er miljłskadelige s(cid:229)som pcb(cid:146)er, s(cid:229)ledes at den samlede sundhedsrisiko kan vurderes. Har Kommissionen kendskab til denne nye opdagelse, og agter man at foretage sig noget i sagen? Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionen vegne af Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m (25. februar 2000) Kommissionen henviser det (cid:230)rede medlem til svarene p(cid:229) skriftlig forespłrgsel E-3004/98 fra hr. Eisma (1) og P-1976/99 fra fr. Sch(cid:246)rling (2) og til mundtlig forespłrgsel H-776/99 fra fr. Sch(cid:246)rling fremsat i Parlamentets spłrgetid p(cid:229) młdet i december 1999 (3). Foranlediget af et memorandum fra Danmark og Sverige havde miljłr(cid:229)det endvidere, den 13. december 1999, en debat om behovet for EF-hasteforanstaltninger med hensyn til bromerede flammeh(cid:230)mmere. I denne forbindelse mindede Kommissionen om, at tre bromerede flammeh(cid:230)mmere for tiden gennemg(cid:229)r en omfattende risikovurdering, i overensstemmelse med R(cid:229)dets forordning (E(cid:216)F) nr. 793/93 om vurdering af og kontrol med risikoen ved eksisterende stoffer (4). N(cid:229)r risikovurderingsrapporterne er f(cid:230)rdige, vil de blive forelagt Den Videnskabelige KomitØ for Toksicitet, (cid:216)kotoksicitet og Miljł med henblik p(cid:229) ekspertud- talelse. Miljłkommiss(cid:230)ren anmodede den 15. december 1999 medlemsstaternes ressortministre om at słrge for, at risikovurderingerne blev tilendebragt s(cid:229) hurtigt som muligt. N(cid:229)r rapporterne er f(cid:230)rdige, vil Kommissionen offentliggłre resultaterne i De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabes Tidende og om nłdvendigt foresl(cid:229) yderligere foranstaltninger til at mindske risikoen. Da der er fundet stigende koncentrationer af stoffer af gruppen polybromerede diphenylethere (PBDE) i blodet fra arbejdere i oparbejdningsanl(cid:230)g, og da F(cid:230)llesskabets kommende lovgivning om affald fra elektrisk og elektronisk udstyr vil medfłre en betydelig stigning i genanvendelsen af PBDE-holdigt plast, behandler Kommissionen for tiden spłrgsm(cid:229)let om substitution af disse bromerede flammeh(cid:230)mmere i produktionen af elektrisk og elektronisk udstyr. (1) EFT C 142 af 21. 5. 1999. (2) EFT C 203 E af 18. 7. 2000, s. 101. (3) Europa-Parlamentets forhandlinger (december 1999). (4) EFT L 84 af 5. 4. 1993


title: 2000/167/CE: Décision de la Commission, du 22 décembre 1999, approuvant un programme finlandais d'aide nationale portant application, en particulier, de l'article 141 de l'acte concernant les conditions d'adhésion de la République d'Autriche, de la République de Finlande et du Royaume de Suède [notifiée sous le numéro C(1999) 5200] (Les textes en langues finnoise et suédoise sont les seuls faisant foi.)

eurovoc_concepts:
Finland
State aid
accession to the European Union
aid programme
aid to agriculture

text: L 54/44 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes 26. 2. 2000 II (Actes dont la publication n'est pas une condition de leur applicabilité) COMMISSION DÉCISION DE LA COMMISSION du 22 décembre 1999 approuvant un programme finlandais d'aide nationale portant application, en particulier, de l'article 141 de l'acte concernant les conditions d'adhésion de la République d'Autriche, de la République de Finlande et du Royaume de Suède [notifiée sous le numéro C(1999) 5200] (Les textes en langues finnoise et suédoise sont les seuls faisant foi. ) (2000/167/CE) LA COMMISSION DES COMMUNAUTÉS EUROPÉENNES, (5) vu le traité instituant la Communauté européenne, et notam- ment son article 88, paragraphe 2, premier alinéa, vu l'acte d'adhésion de l'Autriche, de la Finlande et de la Suède, et notamment son article 141, considérant ce qui suit: (1) (2) (3) (4) Le 25 octobre 1999, la Finlande a notifié à la Commis- sion, en vertu de l'article 143 de l'acte d'adhésion et de l'article 88 du traité CE, un programme d'aide nationale portant notamment application de l'article 141 et comprenant d'autres mesures connexes pour les régions A et B et l'archipel de ces régions. Le 6 décembre 1999, la Finlande a soumis une version modifiée du programme. Le 30 juillet 1996, à la suite d'une précédente notifica- tion de la Finlande, la Commission a adopté la décision 97/428/CE, approuvant un programme d'aide finlandais portant application en particulier de l'article 141 de l'acte concernant les conditions d'adhésion de la Répu- blique d'Autriche, de la République de Finlande et du Royaume de Suède et d'autres mesures connexes (1). D'après la version modifiée de la notification de la Finlande, il est mis fin à certaines mesures d'aide précé- demment autorisées par la Commission dans la décision 97/428/CE, d'autres aides autorisées sont maintenues, la durée de certaines aides est prolongée jusqu'à la fin de 2003 et de nouvelles aides applicables à compter du 1er janvier 2000 jusqu'au 31 décembre 2003 sont intro- duites. (1) JO L 184 du 12. 7. 1997, p. 50. À l'article 1er, point a), de la décision 97/428/CE, la Commission a autorisé, en vertu de l'article 141 de l'acte d'adhésion, du 1er janvier 1997 au 31 décembre 2001 une aide nationale accordée aux agriculteurs présentant un plan de développement concernant des investisse- ments dans la production primaire (activités agricoles et horticoles dans l'exploitation) qui n'entraînent pas d'aug- mentation de la capacité de production totale des secteurs existant à la date d'adoption de ladite décision (30 juillet 1996). Cette aide est de 50 % au maximum pour les secteurs de la viande de porc, de la viande de volaille et des œufs et de 75 % pour les autres secteurs du coût total de l'investissement, à condition que les limites maximales individuelles fixées par la décision C(96) 733 de la Commission du 19 avril 1996 soient respectées. L'article 1er, point b), de la décision 97/428/ CE autorise également une aide accordée aux agricul- teurs pendant une période n'excédant pas cinq ans comme aide aux revenus en cas de changement de production. (6) (7) La Finlande a demandé à la Commission de proroger jusqu'au 31 décembre 2003 l'autorisation concernant cette aide aux investissements dans la production primaire. Il ressort des données fournies par la Finlande, confor- mément à l'article 3 de la décision 97/428/CE, que l'aide aux investissements dans la production primaire permet, grâce à des aménagements structurels, de maintenir et d'améliorer les structures de production existantes; c'est pourquoi il convient d'accéder à la demande de proroga- tion de l'aide. 26. 2. 2000 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 54/45 (8) (9) L'article 2 de la décision 97/428/CE prévoit que la Commission peut autoriser certaines mesures d'aide pendant une durée indéterminée, conformément à l'ar- ticle 88 du traité. Dans sa notification du programme d'aide, la Finlande a indiqué son intention de suspendre certaines de ces mesures, tout en maintenant l'aide à la mise au point des contrôles de qualité visés à l'article 2, point d), de la décision 97/428/CE, ainsi que les aides supplémentaires mentionnées à l'article 2, point e), de ladite décision. (10) Il n'y a pas lieu de revenir sur la précédente évaluation de la Commission, selon laquelle ces aides peuvent être jugées compatibles avec le marché commun. Ces aides restent donc autorisées, conformément à la décision 97/ 428/CE. (11) Dans sa notification du 25 octobre 1999, la Finlande a également demandé à la Commission d'approuver, conformément à l'article 141 de l'acte d'adhésion, et à partir du 1er janvier 2000 jusqu'au 31 décembre 2003, certaines aides directes aux producteurs dans les secteurs de l'élevage, de la production laitière et de l'horticulture. (12) Aux termes de l'article 141 de l'acte d'adhésion, la Commission peut autoriser la Finlande à octroyer des aides nationales aux producteurs afin de faciliter leur intégration dans la politique agricole commune si des difficultés graves résultant de l'adhésion subsistent après la pleine application des dispositions des articles 138, 139, 140 et 142 et des autres mesures découlant de la réglementation existante dans la Communauté. (13) (14) (15) Conformément à l'article 137, paragraphe 3, de l'acte d'adhésion, la période durant laquelle des aides relevant des articles 138, 139 et 140 peuvent être accordées expire le 31 décembre 1999. L'article 142 de l'acte d'adhésion ne s'applique pas aux régions figurant dans le programme d'aide nationale notifié le 25 octobre 1999 à la Commission. En raison des conditions climatiques, ainsi que de la petite taille des exploitations et du niveau élevé des coûts fixes, la rentabilité de la production agricole dans le sud de la Finlande est très faible. (16) D'après les données fournies par la Finlande, la soudaine réduction du soutien, du fait de l'expiration des aides relevant des articles 138, 139 et 140 de l'acte d'adhésion poserait de graves problèmes, une baisse importante du revenu des agriculteurs risquant de compromettre la poursuite de la production agricole dans le sud de la Finlande. (17) Même si certaines améliorations ont été enregistrées au cours des dernières années, des ajustements structurels du secteur agricole restent nécessaires dans le sud de la Finlande, afin d'assurer une intégration efficace de l'agri- culture finlandaise dans la politique agricole commune. (18) La Commission a estimé, dans la décision 97/428/CE, que les aides relevant de l'article 141 de l'acte d'adhésion devraient remédier aux faiblesses structurelles afin de (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) faciliter la pleine intégration des producteurs dans la politique agricole commune. Compte tenu de l'expérience acquise, des aides directes aux revenus, sur une base transitoire et dégressive, peuvent toutefois être envisagées comme complément nécessaire de la politique d'ajustements structurels, à condition que lesdites aides servent essentiellement à accompagner l'adaptation structurelle, à ne pas entraver les mutations structurelles requises et soient limitées à la période nécessaire. Étant donné le temps requis pour parvenir à des change- ments structurels à long terme, il convient de fixer la date d'expiration de l'aide autorisée par la présente déci- sion au 31 décembre 2003. Il convient de limiter le volume total de production éligible à l'aide à la production accordée en vertu de l'article 138 de l'acte d'adhésion. La production en ques- tion représente moins de 1 % de la production commu- nautaire dans tous les secteurs concernés et ne devrait donc pas avoir d'effet les marchés communautaires. important sur La Finlande devrait être tenue de présenter, avant le 30 juin 2003, un rapport détaillé sur l'ensemble des mesures et secteurs concernés, ainsi qu'une évaluation indiquant si ces mesures ont eu pour effet de remédier à des difficultés importantes et de faciliter la pleine inté- gration des agriculteurs finlandais dans la politique agri- cole commune. En ce qui concerne le secteur de l'élevage et pour des raisons d'efficacité administrative, la Finlande a demandé l'autorisation d'appliquer, dans certains cas, une aide calculée par unité de gros bétail au lieu de l'aide par kilogramme ou par animal, A ARRÊTÉ LA PRÉSENTE DÉCISION: Article premier La Commission autorise la Finlande à continuer d'accorder l'aide visée à l'article 1er, point a), de la décision 97/428/CE jusqu'au 31 décembre 2003. Article 2 1. La Commission autorise la Finlande à accorder, à partir du 1er janvier 2000 jusqu'au 31 décembre 2003, l'aide visée à indiqué dans le l'annexe I à hauteur du montant maximal tableau. L'aide visée au paragraphe 1 est accordée dans les limites 2. suivantes: — pour le lait de vache: les quantités de référence individuelles des agriculteurs concernés, conformément au règlement (CEE) no 3950/92 du Conseil (1), (1) JO L 405 du 31. 12. 1992, p. 1. L 54/46 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes 26. 2. 2000 — pour les bovins: les plafonds prévus par le règlement (CE) no 1254/1999 du Conseil (1) (annexes I et II), — pour les bovins mâles: 90 têtes par exploitation, — pour les vaches allaitantes et les bovins mâles: le nombre total d'animaux pouvant faire l'objet d'une aide ne peut excéder un facteur de densité égal à 2 UGB/ha de superficie fourragère, — pour les brebis et les chèvres: les limites individuelles attri- buées aux producteurs, conformément à l'article 10 du règlement (CE) no 2467/98 du Conseil (2). Article 4 La Finlande présente le 30 juin 2003 au plus tard un rapport détaillé concernant l'application des mesures autorisées par la décision 97/428/CE et par la présente décision, ainsi que les effets de ces mesures sur l'intégration de l'agriculture finlan- daise dans la politique agricole commune. Article 5 La République de Finlande est destinataire de la présente déci- sion. Article 3 Fait à Bruxelles, le 22 décembre 1999. La Commission autorise la Finlande à accorder une prime supplémentaire par taureau au cours de la période d'adaptation allant de janvier à juin 2000, à hauteur du montant maximal indiqué à l'annexe II, en raison du passage du régime d'aide liée à l'abattage à l'aide par tête de bétail. Par la Commission Franz FISCHLER Membre de la Commission (1) JO L 160 du 26. 6. 1999, p. 21. (2) JO L 312 du 20. 11. 1998, p. 1. 26. 2. 2000 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 54/47 ANNEXE I Unité Taux maximal d'aide FIM/unité 2000 2001 2002 2003 Lait — Åland et archipel — Autres zones des régions A et B kg kg 0,45 0,37 0,43 0,355 0,415 0,345 0,405 0,335 Vaches allaitantes Régions A et B Bovins mâles Régions A et B Brebis et chèvres Régions A et B UGB 420 400 385 376 UGB 2 210 2 120 2 050 2 000 UGB 2 260 2 140 2 045 1 980 Bovins et brebis: aide s'ajoutant dans l'archipel à l'aide normale versée aux régions A et B (pour les vaches laitières, vaches allaitantes, bovins mâles, autres bovins et brebis) UGB 2 570 2 460 2 380 2 322 Viande porcine et porcins — Åland et archipel — Autres zones des régions A et B Poules pondeuses — Åland et archipel — Autres zones des régions A et B Autres volailles Régions A et B Chevaux Régions A et B UGB UGB UGB UGB 2 290 1 930 2 160 1 830 2 070 1 750 2 004 1 692 2 300 1 860 2 180 1 760 2 080 1 685 2 017 1 634 UGB 2 270 2 150 2 055 1 992 UGB 2 115 2 000 1 910 1 852 Génisses destinées à l'abattage Régions A et B Animal 710 680 660 642 Serres m2 76 73 70 68 Entrepôts de produits horticoles — équipés de systèmes de thermocontrôle — non équipés de systèmes de thermocontrôle m3 m3 95 67 92 64 89 62 86 60 L 54/48 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes 26. 2. 2000 Notes: Dans la colonne «unité», «UGB» signifie unité de gros bétail. 1. Il convient d'utiliser le tableau suivant pour déterminer le nombre moyen d'unités de gros bétail (UGB au maximum): Bovins 6 mois-24 mois Bovins de plus de 24 mois Brebis Chèvres Truies Poules pondeuses, y compris poules reproductrices Canards parents, poulets, oies ou dindes Faisans et canards sauvages reproducteurs Poulets Chevaux de plus de 6 mois: — Poulinières (y compris poneys) — Chevaux finlandais — Chevaux et poneys: 1-3 ans UGB 0,6 1,0 0,15 0,48 0,7 0,013 0,026 0,013 0,0053 1,0 0,85 0,60 2. Il convient d'utiliser le tableau suivant pour déterminer les unités de bétail (UGB) dans le cas des porcs et volailles destinés à la boucherie (nombre minimal d'animaux abattus par unité de gros bétail): 13 porcs d'engraissement abattus 1 UGB 1 UGB 1 UGB 1 UGB 1 UGB 1 UGB 550 canards abattus 320 oies abattues 190 dindes abattues 1 375 faisans abattus 1 375 canards sauvages abattus 26. 2. 2000 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 54/49 ANNEXE II Primes aux taureaux durant la période d'adaptation allant de janvier à juin 2000, lors du passage du régime d'aide liée à l'abattage à l'aide par unité de gros bétail Archipel Janvier — février 2000 Mars — avril 2000 Mai — juin 2000 Territoire et îles d'Åland Janvier — février 2000 Mars — avril 2000 Mai — juin 2000 Autres zones des régions A et B Janvier — février 2000 Mars — avril 2000 Mai — juin 2000 1 030 FIM/animal 655 FIM/animal 280 FIM/animal 740 FIM/animal 470 FIM/animal 200 FIM/animal 675 FIM/animal 430 FIM/animal 185 FIM/animal


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA P-2604/99 di Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) al Consiglio. Promozione e tutela delle lingue meno diffuse.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU action
language teaching
minority language
youth exchange scheme

text: C 219 E/182 Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunit(cid:224) europee IT 1. 8. 2000 Tale questione Ł all(cid:146)esame del Consiglio? In caso affermativo, in che fase sono i negoziati? Quando il Consiglio adotter(cid:224) una posizione comune? (1) GU C 100 del 9. 4. 1994, pag. 12. (2) GU L 103 del 25. 4. 1979, pag. 1. (3) GU C 65 del 4. 3. 1996, pag. 151. Risposta (14 febbraio 2000) Si invita l(cid:146)Onorevole Parlamentare a vedere la risposta data all(cid:146)interrogazione scritta n. 1676/99. (2000/C 219 E/233) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-2590/99 di Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) alla Commissione (11 gennaio 2000) Oggetto: Revoca dell(cid:146)adesione agli accordi di Schengen E(cid:146) previsto un meccanismo che consenta a uno Stato membro di revocare la propria adesione agli accordi di Schengen? Risposta data dal sig. Vitorino in nome della Commissione (24 gennaio 2000) La Commissione si pregia di rinviare l(cid:146)Onorevole Parlementare alla risposta da essa data all(cid:146)interrogazione scritta E-2853/98 dell(cid:146)Onorevole Bonde (1). (1) GU C 297 del 15. 10. 1999, pag. 33. (2000/C 219 E/234) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA P-2604/99 di Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) al Consiglio (22 dicembre 1999) Oggetto: Promozione e tutela delle lingue meno diffuse Pu(cid:242) il Consiglio illustrare la sua politica in materia di salvaguardia e promozione delle lingue meno diffuse nell(cid:146)Unione europea e intende esso appoggiare nuove iniziative volte a promuovere gli scambi culturali e linguistici, ad esempio tra giovani che vivono in regioni periferiche? Risposta (31 gennaio 2000) Il Consiglio ha costantemente sottolineato taluni principi per quanto concerne la diversit(cid:224) linguistica all(cid:146)interno della Comunit(cid:224) e ricorda che l(cid:146)azione Lingua nel quadro del programma vigente in materia di istruzione «SOCRATES» prevede un sostegno prioritario per le lingue meno diffuse e meno insegnate dell(cid:146)Unione europea. Il Consiglio inoltre terr(cid:224) nella dovuta considerazione qualsiasi futura proposta della Commissione concernente le lingue meno diffuse. 1. 8. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunit(cid:224) europee C 219 E/183 Per quanto concerne la presa in considerazione delle regioni periferiche, si richiama l(cid:146)attenzione dell(cid:146)Ono- revole Parlamentare sulle seguenti disposizioni: (cid:129) il vigente programma SOCRATES, al capitolo I (Erasmus), azione 2, punto 2 prevede, per quanto concerne la mobilit(cid:224) degli studenti, che «La Commissione adotter(cid:224) provvedimenti atti ad incoraggiare una partecipazione equilibrata tra le varie discipline e regioni»; (cid:129) l(cid:146)azione A. I, punto 4 del programma «Gioventø per l(cid:146)Europa» include la «lontananza geografica» nell(cid:146)elenco de fattori sulla base dei quali «il calcolo della ripartizione dell(cid:146)aiuto dovr(cid:224) tener conto della necessit(cid:224) di garantire un equilibrio tra il flusso degli scambi nonchØ della parit(cid:224) delle condizioni di accesso dei giovani di ciascuno Stato membro. » (2000/C 219 E/235) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA P-2633/99 di Maria Berger (PSE) alla Commissione (22 dicembre 1999) Oggetto: L(cid:146)applicazione della direttiva 93/83/CEE sulla ritrasmissione via cavo La trasposizione della direttiva 93/83/CEE (1) sulla ritrasmissione via cavo ha avuto esclusivamente conseguenze negative per i gestori austriaci della TV via cavo. Un contratto collettivo Ł stato sostituito ora da 927 singoli contratti, Ł aumentata l(cid:146)insicurezza giuridica e sono inasprite le distorsioni concorren- ziali tra cavo e satellite. Quando intende presentare la Commissione al Parlamento, al Consiglio e al Comitato economico e 1. sociale la relazione sull(cid:146)applicazione della direttiva 93/83/CEE? Intende la Commissione introdurre una «neutralit(cid:224) tecnologica», ovvero consentire la parit(cid:224) di 2. trattamento della radiodiffusione via satellite e della ritrasmissione via cavo? Intende la Commissione rivedere la direttiva 93/83/CEE al fine di tener conto delle proteste a livello 3. europeo dei gestori della Tv via cavo? (1) GU L 248 del 6. 10. 1993, pag. 15. Risposta fornita dal sig. Bolkestein a nome della Commissione (20 gennaio 2000) La Commissione non ha ricevuto alcuna lamentela da parte degli operatori austriaci per quanto riguarda l(cid:146)applicazione pratica delle disposizioni austriache che recepiscono la direttiva del Consiglio 93/83/CEE del 27 settembre 1993 per il coordinamento di alcune norme in materia di diritto d(cid:146)autore e diritti connessi applicabili alla radiodiffusione via satellite e alla ritrasmissione via cavo. Per quanto concerne l(cid:146)applicazione pratica della direttiva 93/83/CEE, alcuni consulenti esterni stanno realizzando uno studio. Tale studio comprende l(cid:146)applicazione delle direttive del Consiglio 93/98/CEE del 20 ottobre 1993 concernente l(cid:146)armonizzazione della durata di protezione del diritto d(cid:146)autore e di taluni diritti connessi (1), 92/100/CEE del 19 novembre 1992 concernente il diritto di noleggio, il diritto di prestito e taluni diritti connessi al diritto d(cid:146)autore in materia di propriet(cid:224) intellettuale (2) e 93/83/CEE. Basandosi sui risultati di tale studio, che dovrebbe essere ultimato entro la fine del marzo 2000, la Commissione presenter(cid:224) la relazione alla quale fa riferimento l(cid:146)onorevole parlamentare. In tale contesto, la in un(cid:146)eventuale proposta di modifica, delle richieste presentate dalle parti Commissione terr(cid:224) conto, interessate. (1) GU L 290 del 24. 11. 1993. (2) GU L 346 del 27. 11. 1992


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-2503/99 υποβολή: Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) προς την Επιτροπή. Κατώτατες προδιαγραφές σχετικά με την προστασία των ωοτόκων ορνίθων.

text: C 330 E/14 Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da tvn Eyrvpai¤kv·n Koinoth·tvn EL 21. 11. 2000 thn katey·uynsh thw oikonomikh·w ana·ptyjhw, thw koinvnikh·w synoxh·w kai thw prostasi·aw toy periba·llontow- me a·lla lo·gia, prow thn katey·uynsh thw aeifo·roy ana·ptyjhw. H mellontikh· prvtoboyli·a thw Koino·thtaw Interreg III proble·pei, metajy· tvn epile·jimvn me·trvn, dra·seiw synergasi·aw ston tome·a thw aeifo·roy diaxei·rishw tvn yda·tvn. (plhmmy·rew, jhrasi·ew) ento·w eno·w xvrikoy· sxediastikoy· plaisi·oy. EE C 108 thw 7. 4. 1998. (1) (2) Koinh· Ue·sh poy yioue·thse to Symboy·lio stiw 22. 10. 1999• den e·xei ako·mh dhmosieyuei· sthn Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da. (3) EE C 150 thw 28. 5. 1999. (2000/C 330 E/013) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-2503/99 ypobolh·: Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) prow thn Epitroph· (22 Dekembri·oy 1999) Ue·ma: Katv·tatew prodiagrafe·w sxetika· me thn prostasi·a tvn voto·kvn orni·uvn Lamba·nontaw ypo·ch thn odhgi·a 1999/74/EK (1) thw 19hw Ioyli·oy 1999 sxetika· me ton kauorismo· katv·tatvn prodiagrafv·n gia thn prostasi·a tvn voto·kvn orni·uvn, kai e·xontaw ypo·ch to kefa·laio II thw en lo·gv odhgi·aw, sthn opoi·a perilamba·netai dia·tajh, o·ti ta kra·th me·lh pre·pei na ejasfali·soyn o·ti apo· thn 1h Ianoyari·oy 2003 o·loi oi klvboi· (cid:129) sy·mfvna me thn e·nnoia toy en lo·gv kefalai·oy (cid:129) ua pre·pei na plhroy·n tiw sxetike·w katv·tatew prodiagrafe·w, o·ti h topoue·thsh· toyw stoyw klvboy·w sy·mfvna me to en lo·gv kefa·laio apagorey·etai apo· thn 1h Ianoyari·oy 2012, kai o·ti h kataskeyh· h· h prv·th xrhsimopoi·hsh paromoi·vn klvbv·n sy·mfvna me thn e·nnoia toy en lo·gv kefalai·oy apagorey·etai apo· thn 1h Ianoyari·oy 2003, e·xontaw ypo·ch th dynato·thta h Eyrvpai¤kh· nvsh na sygxrhmatodotei· ekmetalley·seiw orni·uvn stiw ypoch·fiew prow e·ntajh xv·rew, kalei·tai h Epitroph· na anafe·rei, (cid:129) ea·n sto plai·sio paromoi·vn sygxrhmatodoth·sevn lamba·nontai ypo·ch oi anvte·rv diata·jeiw kai h aysthrh· th·rhsh· toyw, (cid:129) ea·n h Epitroph· proti·uetai, na ue·sei se efarmogh· prosexv·w mi·a yphresi·a ele·gxoy sthn opoi·a ua anateuei· na ejasfali·sei thn epith·rhsh kai ton e·legxo tvn anvte·rv diata·jevn; (1) EE L 203 thw 3. 8. 1999, sel. 53. Apa·nthsh toy k. Fischler ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (14 Febroyari·oy 2000) O kanonismo·w toy Symboyli·oy (EK) ariu. 1268/1999, thw 21hw Ioyni·oy 1999, proble·pei koinotikh· sth·rijh gia proentajiaka· me·tra gia th gevrgi·a kai thn agrotikh· ana·ptyjh stiw ypoch·fiew xv·rew thw kentrikh·w kai anatolikh·w Eyrv·phw kata· thn proentajiakh· peri·odo (1). H sth·rijh ei·xe vw sto·xo thn symbolh· sthn efarmogh· toy koinotikoy· kekthme·noy o·son afora· thn koinh· gevrgikh· politikh· kai tiw synafei·w politike·w kauv·w kai thn epi·lysh problhma·tvn proteraio·thtaw kauv·w kai eidikv·n problhma·tvn gia th biv·simh prosarmogh· toy gevrgikoy· tome·a kai tvn agrotikv·n perioxv·n tvn ypoch·fivn xvrv·n. To a·ruro 2 toy anvte·rv kanonismoy· proble·pei ependy·seiw se gevrgike·w ekmetalley·seiw kai aname·netai o·ti oi perisso·terew ypoch·fiew xv·rew ua protei·noyn te·toia me·tra sta progra·mmata· toyw. Sy·mfvna me to a·ruro 4 para·grafow 3 toy i·dioy kanonismoy·, oi ypoch·fiew xv·rew pre·pei na merimnh·soyn, metajy· a·llvn, na di·netai proteraio·thta se me·tra poy beltiv·noyn thn poio·thta kai ta epi·peda ygei·aw sy·mfvna me tiw diata·jeiw gia thn prostasi·a toy periba·llontow. O kanonismo·w thw Epitroph·w (EK) ariu. 2759/1999, thw 22aw Dekembri·oy 1999, gia th ue·spish kano·nvn gia thn efarmogh· toy kanonismoy· toy Symboyli·oy (EK) ariu. 1268/1999 gia koinotikh· sth·rijh gia proentajiaka· me·tra gia th gevrgi·a kai thn agrotikh· ana·ptyjh stiw ypoch·fiew xv·rew thw kentrikh·w kai anatolikh·w Eyrv·phw kata· thn proentajiakh· peri·odo (2), anafe·rei o·ti pre·pei na xorhgei·tai sth·rijh stiw ependy·seiw se gevrgike·w ekmetalley·seiw oi opoi·ew symmorfoy·ntai me ta eunika· ela·xista epi·peda anaforika· me to periba·llon, thn ygieinh· kai thn kalh· diabi·vsh tvn zv·vn kata· ton xro·no thw lh·chw thw apo·fashw gia th xorh·ghsh thw sth·rijhw. Sto i·dio a·ruro anafe·retai epi·shw o·ti o·poy e·xoyn pro·sfata uespisuei· ela·xista epi·peda sxetika· me to kekthme·no o·son afora· to periba·llon, thn ygieinh· kai thn kalh· diabi·vsh tvn zv·vn kata· ton xro·no lh·chw thw ai·thshw, h apo·fash xorh·ghshw sth·rijhw ua ejarta·tai apo· thn th·rhsh tvn ne·vn aytv·n epipe·dvn apo· thn ekmeta·lleysh me·xri to te·low thw ylopoi·hshw thw epe·ndyshw. Entoy·toiw, h ne·a epe·ndysh ua pre·pei na symmorfoy·tai me ta koinotika· pro·typa a·sxeta apo· to ea·n h ekmeta·lleysh synolika· symmorfoy·tai prow ta pro·typa ayta·. 21. 11. 2000 EL Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da tvn Eyrvpai¤kv·n Koinoth·tvn C 330 E/15 Gia thn parakoloy·uhsh kai ajiolo·ghsh thw efarmogh·w tvn sxedi·vn, symperilambanome·nhw thw th·rhshw tvn anvte·rv diata·jevn, idry·etai epitroph· parakoloy·uhshw gia ka·ue ypoch·fia xv·ra kai uespi·zontai kano·new kai diadikasi·ew gia tiw ekue·seiw sta sxe·dia. (1) (2) EE L 161 thw 26. 6. 1999. EE L 331 thw 23. 12. 1999. (2000/C 330 E/014) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-2504/99 ypobolh·: Astrid Thors (ELDR) prow thn Epitroph· (22 Dekembri·oy 1999) Ue·ma: Ne·ew tojike·w oysi·ew, blaptike·w gia to periba·llon, poy entopi·sthkan sta tro·fima Sy·mfvna me a·ruro poy dhmosi·eyse h soyhdikh· efhmeri·da Dagens Nyheter stiw 11 Oktvbri·oy 1999, Soyhdoi· episth·monew ento·pisan mi·a ne·a oysi·a h opoi·a ei·nai blaptikh· sto periba·llon kai prokalei· karki·no. Brvmioy·xew oysi·ew yste·rhshw ana·flejhw (TeBDE) apo· fuarme·new hlektrike·w oikiake·w syskeye·w entopi·sthkan se ychle·w sygkentrv·seiw sth re·gga kai th re·gga thw Baltikh·w. Oi en lo·gv sygkentrv·seiw ei·nai ako·mh xamhle·w sto kre·aw, to boy·tyro kai to tyri· alla· h diapi·stvsh ei·nai anhsyxhtikh· gia dy·o lo·goyw: prv·ton dio·ti oi sygkentrv·seiw ua ayja·nontai to·so grh·gora o·so kai to PCB kai, dey·teron, oi toji·new apo· tiw oysi·ew yste·rhshw ana·flejhw pre·pei na prosteuoy·n mazi· me a·llew oysi·ew oi opoi·ew ei·nai epizh·miew sto periba·llon, o·pvw ta PCB, prokeime·noy na ektimhuei· o synoliko·w ki·ndynow. Gnvri·zei a·rage h Epitroph· thn ne·a ayth· anaka·lych; Skopey·ei a·rage na la·bei me·tra o·son afora· ayto· to zh·thma; Apa·nthsh thw kaw Wallström ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (25 Febroyari·oy 2000) H Epitroph· parakalei· to Ajio·timo Me·low toy Koinoboyli·oy na anatre·jei stiw apanth·seiw tvn graptv·n ervth·sevn E-3004/98 toy k. Eisma (1), P-1976/99, thw kaw Schörling (2) kai thw proforikh·w erv·thshw H- 776/99 thw kaw Schörling kata· thn v·ra tvn ervth·sevn sthn tmhmatikh· sy·nodo toy Koinoboyli·oy toy Dekembri·oy 1999 (3). Epiple·on, meta· thn ypobolh· ypomnh·matow ek me·royw thw Dani·aw kai thw Soyhdi·aw, pragmatopoih·uhke stiw 13 Dekembri·oy 1999 syzh·thsh sto Symboy·lio Periba·llon gia thn ana·gkh epeigo·ntvn koinotikv·n me·trvn o·son afora· ta brvmivme·na epibradyntika· flo·gaw. Sto plai·sio ayto·, h Epitroph· ypenuy·mise o·ti dienergoy·ntai diejodike·w ektimh·seiw epikindyno·thtaw epi· triv·n brvmivme·nvn epibradyntika· flo·gaw, aneilhmme·nvn sy·mfvnvn me ton kanonismo· (EOK) ariu. 793/93 gia thn ajiolo·ghsh kai ton e·legxo tvn kindy·nvn apo· tiw ypa·rxoysew oysi·ew (4). (cid:211)tan oloklhrvuoy·n oi ekue·seiw ekti·mhshw thw epikindyno·thtaw, ayte·w ua ypoblhuoy·n gia aneja·rthto e·legxo sthn episthmonikh· epitroph· gia thn tojiko·thta, thn oikotojiko·thta kai to periba·llon. Stiw 15 Dekembri·oy 1999, to armo·dio gia to Periba·llon Me·low thw Epitroph·w apeyuy·nuhke graptv·w prow toyw armo·dioyw ypoyrgoy·w tvn kratv·n melv·n prokeime·noy na oloklhrvuei· to syntomo·tero dynato·n h ekti·mhsh thw epikindyno·thtaw. Mo·liw oloklhrvuoy·n oi ekue·seiw, h Epitroph· ua dhmosiey·sei ta apotele·smata sthn Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da kai ua protei·nei, efo·son ayto· ei·nai anagkai·o, th lh·ch peraite·rv me·trvn mei·vshw thw epikindyno·thtaw. Dedome·noy o·ti e·xoyn aneyreuei· sto ai·ma tvn ergazome·nvn se mona·dew anaky·klvshw hyjhme·new sygkentrv·seiw pe·nte syggenv·n pthtikv·n polybrvmivme·nvn difainylaiue·rvn (PBDE) kai o·ti h mellontikh· koinotikh· nomouesi·a gia ton prow apo·rricin hlektriko· kai hlektroniko· ejoplismo· ua ayjh·sei shmantika· thn anaky·klvsh plastikv·n poy perie·xoyn PBDE, h ypokata·stash tvn en lo·gv brvmivme·nvn epibradyntikv·n flo·gaw sthn paragvgh· ne·oy hlektrikoy· kai hlektronikoy· ejoplismoy· apotelei· to antikei·meno syzhth·sevn sthn Epitroph·. EE C 142 thw 21. 5. 1999. EE C 203 E thw 18. 7. 2000, sel. 101. (1) (2) (3) Syzhth·seiw toy Eyrvpai¤koy· Koinoboyli·oy (Deke·mbriow 1999). (4) EE L 84 thw 5. 4. 1993


title: 2000/410/EC: Commission Decision of 22 December 1999 on the aid scheme which France is planning to implement in favour of the French port sector (notified under document number C(1999) 5204) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the French text is authentic)

eurovoc_concepts:
France
aid for restructuring
handling
harbour installation
industrial restructuring

text: L 155/52 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 6. 2000 COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 22 December 1999 on the aid scheme which France is planning to implement in favour of the French port sector (notified under document number C(1999) 5204) (Only the French text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2000/410/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, (4) Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provision(s) cited above (1), and having regard to their comments, (5) Whereas: (1) (2) (3) I. PROCEDURE By letter dated 25 May 1998, France notified the Commission of the aid scheme in favour of the French port sector. It furnished the Commission with supple- mentary information by letters dated 31 July 1998, 6 November 1998, 27 November 1998, 26 January 1999, 16 February 1999 and 20 April 1999. By letter dated 14 June 1999, the Commission informed France of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of this aid scheme. (6) The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communi- ties (2). The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments. (1) OJ C 233, 14. 8. 1999, p. 25. (2) See footnote 1. The Commission has received comments from interested parties. It has transmitted them to France, which has had the opportunity to react. Its comments were received by letter dated 13 October 1999. II. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID The French port sector can at present be characterised by substantial public involvement in the financing and management particularly of the heavy port equipment, such as gantry cranes (hereinafter ‘the equipment’), which is operated partly by personnel employed in the public sector. The aim of the proposed aid scheme is to render the provision of cargo handling services more efficient by completing the restructuring process started through a reform whereby cargo handling in 1992, companies will become fully responsible for the provi- sion of these services in the ports concerned. The means to do so is by modernising and rationalising the organ- isation of these services, and to this end the notified scheme proposes a reduction of the tax base for the French ‘taxe professionnelle’ the private cargo handling companies. for As notified by France, the proposed tax reduction would affect 23 French ports (see Annex to the present Decision), where currently some 99 private cargo handling (stevedoring) companies operate. The vast these companies are SMEs. The French majority of authorities also expressed their wish that the proposed scheme would attract foreign investments from non- French companies that may be interested in establishing themselves in these ports. The equipment is currently owned and financed by the public (port) authorities that 28. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 155/53 are not subject to the ‘taxe professionnelle’. The equip- ment is usually rented to the private cargo handling companies that carry out the loading and unloading of cargo in the ports. (10) the port equipment, which is at present primarily owned by the public. The proposed tax reduction is linked to the new purchase value for equipment. For the port equipment concerned, the investment volume to be made over the period 2000 to 2004, amounts to FRF 2,800 million, of which FRF 2,100 million is destined for the replacement of existing equipment by more performant equipment, and FRF 700 million for the acquisition of new, addi- tional cargo-handling equipment in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque. The total amount of tax reduc- tion to be granted through the scheme is set, following the submissions made by the French authorities in their letter of 20 July 1999, at FRF 368,35 million, and will be disbursed during the period 2000 to 2006. In refer- ence to the investment value, the French authorities conclude that the aid intensity of the scheme, expressed as a percentage of the first, is 13,15 %. III. COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES (11) expressed agreement By letter of 14 September 1999, the Government of the United Kingdom submitted its comments, which in essence to the Commission's decision to open the formal investigation procedure in this case. The concern of the United Kingdom relates to the proposed aid for the purchase of new, additional equipment in Le Havre and Dunkerque, as this would create excessive capacity that would distort competition with other European ports. IV. COMMENTS FROM FRANCE (12) The Commission had forwarded the comments of the Government of the United Kingdom to France by letter of 22 September 1999, and by letter of 13 October 1999, the French authorities replied thereupon. V. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID SCHEME 1. Legal base threatens (13) Under Article 87(1) of the Treaty ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’. As had been stated in the decision to initiate the procedure, the notified aid scheme is to be considered State aid under Article 87(1) of the Treaty, as the scheme is financed through State resources, is attri- butable to the State budget and is selective in its applica- tion. (7) (8) (9) The ‘taxe professionnelle’ is a local tax payable to and fixed by the local authorities (thus the level of the tax may vary between different regions). The tax base is calculated on the basis of three factors, (i) the rental value of property (immeubles), (ii) 16 % of the new purchase value for equipment (valeur d'achat à neuf), and (iii) 18 % of the gross salaries. The proposed scheme for cargo handling companies would only concern (ii), i. e. the purchase of equipment, in that this factor would be excluded from the taxation base for the private cargo handling companies. The proposed scheme envisages a tax reduction on the one hand for the transfer and replacement of existing equipment, and on the other hand, for the acquisition of additional, new equipment in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque. for The proposed scheme takes place in the context of the reform started in 1992 whereby the dock workers, who used to be employed by the public sector, became employees of the private cargo handling companies. To this avail, a social plan had been elaborated at that time. Since the introduction of this reform, the number of dock workers in French ports has decreased by 50 %. According to the French authorities, the cargo handling companies have also contributed with over 1 000 million French francs (FRF) to the financing of ‘social plans’ the dock workers, while approximately FRF 5 000 million still remains to be paid until year 2006. To complete this process concerning the work- the scheme currently under examination also force, entails the the remaining personnel, notably the crane-operators (grut- iers) from the public to the private companies. The objective is for the private cargo handling companies to take over full and the human responsibility for resources needed for cargo handling operations in French ports. involved in cargo handling activities, responsibility for transfer of equipment the the According to the French authorities, the reduction of the burden of the ‘taxe professionnelle’ is an incentive to progressively transfer the ownership and management of the existing equipment from public to private, and to encourage investments in renewing this equipment. The transfer to individual cargo handling companies would be carried out against payment, covering at least the net book value (valeur net comptable), and through public tender procedures. The tax reduction is thus linked to the cargo handling companies' willingness to invest in L 155/54 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 6. 2000 (14) While the proposed scheme concerns a specific sector, the public support would only benefit those cargo handling companies that are located in the 23 selected ports and who take over the responsibility for the existing equipment and its renewal. This selectivity is not justified by ‘the nature or general scheme of the system’, and the French authorities have not provided any evidence that this would be the case. (See paragraphs 12 and 23 of Commission notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation (1)). the Treaty, the aid does not appear to be eligible under the exemptions under Article 87(3)(a) and (b). Nor does the proposed scheme aim to facilitate the development of certain economic areas as set out in subparagraph (c), but concerns rather a particular sector. However, the exemption under Article 87(3)(c) concerning ‘aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities, where such aid does not adversely affect trading condi- tions to an extent contrary to the common interest. ’ may be applicable in this case. (15) (16) Finally, in the cargo handling sector, companies compete with other cargo handling companies within the same port and in other ports for trade. Depending on the final destination of the cargo, there is often a choice between different ports for loading and unloading. In this partic- ular case, as the cargo handling companies in the 23 ports concerned are in many cases actually or potentially competing for traffic with cargo handling undertakings in other French and Community ports, there may be an effect on trade between Member States. The French authorities also argued that the ‘taxe profes- sionnelle’ exists only in France and that the aid is needed to compensate French cargo handling companies from the disadvantage of such a tax compared with their European counterparts. However, even if the scheme in question would bring the costs of the cargo handling companies concerned closer to those of its competitors in the other Member States, which has not been demon- strated, it does not change the fact that the financing has the character of aid. 2. Compatibility (17) As to the compatibility of the State aid with the common market, aid is prohibited unless it can benefit from any of the specific exemptions laid down in the Treaty. In this particular case, the aid does not appear to be eligible for any of the exemptions laid down in Article 87(2) of the Treaty. Article 86 of the Treaty is not applicable either as cargo handling services cannot be considered as services of general economic interest. See the Judgement of the European Court of Justice in case C-179/90 Merci, convenzionali porto di Genova of 10 December 1991 (2). When examining Article 87(3) of (18) As to the applicability of existing horizontal guidelines to the proposed aid scheme, the Commission has exam- ined those that might be applied, i. e. the guidelines for regional (3) and restructuring (4) aid. The regional guide- lines, however, would only cover cargo handling compa- nies located in eligible regions and, moreover, these guidelines explicitly exclude aid for initial investment in mobile assets in the transport sector. The application of the restructuring guidelines is not an option either, since, within the understanding of these guidelines, the private cargo handling companies, as the beneficiaries of the aid, are not in financial difficulties. As a result, none of the above guidelines seem to cover as such the proposed aid scheme. (19) Following the above analysis, the Commission has decided to examine the compatibility of the proposed aid scheme under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. (20) The proposed scheme entails a tax reduction for the transfer and replacement of existing equipment to modernise and rationalise cargo handling, as well as the acquisition of additional, new equipment in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque to extend the capacity. The Commission considers that a distinction should be made between these two types of investments, given their different purpose. With regard to the existing equipment, the French authorities argue that the proposed aid scheme will facil- itate the transfer of the ownership and management responsibilities of the equipment from public to private. The aid scheme envisages giving an impetus to moder- nise and rationalise the provision of cargo handling services which affects the overall performance of the (1) OJ C 384, 10. 12. 1998, p. 3. (2) Rec. 1991 I-, p. 5889. (3) OJ C 74, 10. 3. 1998, p. 4. (4) OJ C 283, 19. 9. 1997, p. 2. 28. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 155/55 ports. The emphasis on equipment is due to the fact that the aid is linked to investments in the equipment, which is one of the three factors determining the tax base. Further, the expected transfer of the existing equipment will be carried out in a transparent and non-discrimina- tory manner on the basis of public tender procedures, to which also competitors will be able to bid for the equip- ment. The price paid for the transfer of the existing equipment from the public to the private is, therefore, likely to reflect the market price. would be overly burdensome for the cargo handling companies. This is notably because these companies are mainly SMEs with limited financial resources, that more- over need to continue to provide funding for the ‘social plans’ of the dock workers. (21) Such a transfer is in line with policy developments for the Community port sector, as explained in the Green Paper on sea ports and maritime infrastructure (1). The trend has been to shift the provision of commercial cargo handling services from the public to private service providers notably to increase efficiency. To this end, reforms have taken place in a number of Member States to adjust the ports to the new requirements as a result of the technological development and intensified competition in the sector. The Commission has consid- ered State aid to support such reforms and the restruc- turing of the port sector compatible with the common market in the past. This was the case for example in 1986 concerning aid granted to certain ports for the reduction of labour in the context of restructuring and privatisation of the cargo handling sector. Public author- ities are still involved in carrying out cargo handling services in some Community ports as the cargo handling market has not yet been fully opened up to competition through Community legislation. The proposed scheme will help the private cargo handling companies to adapt to a market that is opening up to competition without, however, unnecessarily causing distortions, and to this end contribute to the economic development of the sector. In view of the above, the objective of the scheme can be considered to be in the Community interest. (22) As to the necessity of the proposed scheme to gradually change the ownership and management responsibilities of the existing equipment, it can be argued that the market forces alone would not secure this objective. The private cargo handling companies are reluctant to take over the responsibility for the equipment mainly because they would become subject to the ‘taxe professionnelle’. Noting that the existing equipment, which in many cases is rather old and out-of date, would need to be renewed through heavy investments, the Commission considers that the ‘taxe professionnelle’, being calculated on the the equipment, basis of the new purchase value of (1) COM(97) 678 final of 10. 12. 1997, paragraphs 81 and 82. (23) The transfer of the existing equipment and its subse- quent replacement is part of a modernisation and ratio- nalisation exercise and needs to be seen together as part investment endeavour, as a mere of one coherent transfer of mostly obsolete equipment alone would not be meaningful. In this context, it may be recalled that the cost of a gantry-crane, as notified by the French authorities, is around FRF 40 million and its amortisa- tion period is on average 20 years. Together with the required straddle-carriers and spreaders whose utilisation and amortisation period is some 10 years, the total investment to be made by the companies amounts to some FRF 50 to 60 million per crane. The cargo handling business is capital-incentive with long-term investments, including interest payments, that needs to be spread out in time. A tax reduction, linked to such heavy investments seems justified in this particular case to encourage the cargo handling companies to invest, as the replacement of is not expected to take place simultaneously with the transfer, but within a near future, for example, depending on the financial situation of each company. the existing equipment (24) It should also be noted that the economic impact of the aid is limited because the proposed tax reduction only affects one element out of three used for establishing the taxation basis. This factor amounts to 16 % of the new purchase value for equipment, whereas the private cargo handling companies would be fully subject to the tax calculated on the basis of the other two factors, i. e. the rental value of property and the gross salaries. As noti- fied by the French authorities, the aid intensity expressed as a percentage of the investment value is limited to approximately 13 %. Furthermore, in view of the fact that crane-operators (grutiers) will become employees of the private cargo handling companies undertaking the investments, the amount of the tax to be paid on the basis of the salaries provided will in fact increase. (25) However, it is necessary for the Commission to ensure that the aid does not have a noticeable adverse effect on trade and that it is proportionate to the aims that it is supposed to achieve. Following the initiation of the procedure explaining the Commission's doubts about the French authorities the aid, the compatibility of L 155/56 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 6. 2000 (27) amended the originally envisaged scheme and reduced the amount from FRF 623,6 million to FRF 368,35 million and the duration from 10 years to 7 years, i. e. almost by half. In practice, however, not all companies that will actually invest in the existing equipment will benefit from the aid during the entire duration of the scheme. Depending on the financial situation, each company will start making the investments at different times, and will only benefit from the aid from the time of the investment. The aid will also put the private cargo handling undertakings on a more equal footing with the public entities operating in the ports. The Commission considers that the aid will help the French port system to adapt to a market, which is increasingly opening up distorting to competition. Moreover, a mere transfer of existing equipment is not bound to affect the balance in supply and demand for the port services in question. The situa- tion is rather that the private cargo handling companies will replace the public authorities as owner and manager of the existing equipment, including taking over the responsibility to make the necessary investments. The upgrading of the equipment following the transfer is necessary to ensure the continuous operation of the ports. competition, without unnecessarily is not recital 24. At the same time, In view of the above, the affect on trade is marginal in that the level and form of investment in replacing the existing equipment likely to be substantially different from investments that the public sector would have undertaken. This is supported by the fact that the economic impact of the tax reduction is limited, as explained under the proposed aid is important in order to increase produc- tivity and efficiency in the French port sector through a better organisation of the work. To this end, the aid for the transfer of existing equipment and its replacement may be considered to be in line with the common transport policy and the policy on SMEs. Such aid is not expected to distort competition in a manner that will the trading conditions between port palpably alter undertakings to an extent contrary to the common interest. It should also be noted that no objections were made by third parties with regard to the aid for the transfer of existing equipment following the decision to open the procedure. The aid can, therefore, be consid- ered to facilitate the development of certain economic activities compatible with the common market. consequently and (28) The Commission considers, however, that this is not the case for the investments in new, additional equipment in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque for the extension of capacity in these ports. In the decision to initiate the formal investigation period, the Commission expressed doubts particularly with regard to the proposed aid for the purchase of new, additional equipment because of the possible build-up of additional cargo handling capacity, which may distort the demand and supply balance of the port services concerned. As explained under recitals 22 and 23, the aid should be limited, in terms of volume and duration, to what is absolutely necessary and be proportionate to the aim of transfer- ring the financial responsibility from the public sector to the private cargo handling companies. other through available (29) Data as submitted by the French authorities confirmed information independent sources, as to which utilisation ratios for the existing equipment in the two ports mentioned are considerably below those of their competitors. Moreover, the infor- mation submitted by the French authorities following the opening of the procedure, shows an increase in traffic in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque which is indeed significantly inferior to the one recorded for the (26) Most of the cargo handling companies concerned are small enterprises with less than 50 employees and there- fore, a parallel may be drawn here to the Guidelines for SMEs (1), which apply to different forms of aid granted to SMEs. The Commission has traditionally taken a favourable attitude towards aid granted to SMEs, provided that such aid does not affect trade to a dispro- portionate extent in relation to its contributions to the achievement of Community objectives. The aid scheme in question has the character of an incentive and is necessary in order to secure the socio-economic benefits and achieve the objectives which market forces alone would not secure, which are, moreover, desirable on grounds of Community interest. The aid will cease once the take-over of the existing equipment and the subse- equipment has been quent this completed, and consequently bears resemblance to start-up aid. Such aid for the existing equipment and its replacement may be considered proportionate to the aim of transferring the financial responsibility from the public sector to the private cargo handling companies. replacement of (1) OJ C 213, 23. 7. 1996, p. 4. 28. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 155/57 other competing ports in the North Sea range. It should also be noted that the growing container traffic renders the competition increasingly fierce between ports in the North Sea range where the largest European ports are located. To this end, aid granted specifically to extend capacity of cargo handling companies in any port in this range to the detriment of the others, would undoubtedly distort competition. (30) Against this background it is emphasised, as already stated, that public support cannot be justified to respond to alleged changes in the supply and demand for the provision of commercial port services, which is up to the market forces alone. The proposed aid would put the cargo handling companies in the two ports concerned on a competitive footing which is more favourable than that of their French and Community competitors in other ports. According to the French authorities, the transfer of the ownership and management responsi- bility for the equipment would be based on open tender procedures, which would enable any interested firm to apply. Particularly with regard to the major ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque there may well be an interest among other firms in the Community to take over such responsibility. Further, the need to grant aid specifically to cargo handling companies in these two ports for the in order to purchase of additional, new equipment transfer the responsibility for the equipment from the public to the private has not been demonstrated by the French authorities. Such aid is likely to affect the balance in supply and demand due to build up of additional cargo handling capacity, thus distorting competition in a way that may affect trade flows between Member States to an extent contrary to the common interest. VI. CONCLUSIONS (33) The assessment by the Commission led to the conclu- sion that aid for the transfer of existing equipment and its replacement, where necessary, facilitates the develop- ment of an economic activity and that trading condi- tions are not affected to an extent contrary to the common interest. Subject to certain conditions specified below, this aid is, therefore, considered compatible with the common market and eligible for the derogation under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. (34) However, the application of this decision has to be monitored by the Commission and will be a condition of the approval of the aid. As stated by the French authorities, the transfer of the existing equipment shall take place on the basis of open, transparent and non- discriminatory procedures (public tender), enabling any undertaking to participate. The aid shall not take the form of a permanent, automatic reduction of the ‘taxe professionnelle’, and shall be linked to the investments which will be made at different times during the aid scheme. Each cargo handling company will benefit from the aid only from the time of the investment. Aid may be granted only once per investment. However, the payment of these heavy investments is spread out during several years and the amortisation periods are long. Compared with these, the duration of the aid scheme may be considered limited. Aid may, therefore, be provided the fiscal year(s) when a private cargo handling company in any of the 23 ports concerned takes over an existing equipment and/or replaces this specific equip- ment and during the subsequent amortisation of this equipment until the expiry of the aid scheme in 2006. Aid for investments in new, additional equipment is not authorised. (31) As mentioned under recital 11, the Government of the United Kingdom supported the doubts expressed by the Commission with regard to aid for the purchase of new, in the ports of Le Havre and additional equipment Dunkerque as this would seriously distort competition among the major ports in the North Sea range. (35) (32) In view of the foregoing, the Commission takes the view that the aid for new, additional equipment can not be considered compatible with the common market under Article 87(3)(c). the transfer of In view of the above, the French authorities shall during the applicability of the aid scheme provide the Commis- sion with annual reports about the existing equipment from the public to the private and its replacement, the public including information about tender procedure applied. This report shall notably provide details about the individual cargo handling companies that take over the existing equipment, the type and price of this equipment and the corresponding aid granted. Data is also needed about the investments made to replace the existing equipment and the amount of aid granted on the basis of such investments. The first report is to be submitted within one year from the adoption of this decision. L 155/58 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 6. 2000 (36) The Commission does not consider aid for purchasing new, additional equipment in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque as necessary or proportional to achieve the objective of the scheme, i. e. the transfer of responsibility for the equipment from the public to the private sector. Such aid is moreover bound to affect supply and demand of cargo handling services and its damaging effect on competition and trade is likely to outweigh the positive effects. (37) As to the amounts, the total investment value for the port equipment was estimated at FRF 2,800 million in the notification by the French government. According to the most accurate available data, the total amount of tax reduction envisaged is FRF 368,05 million. As a result, the aid intensity expressed as a percentage of the invest- ment value, is 13,14 %. When applying this percentage to investments for replacement of existing equipment only, i. e. FRF 2,100 million, the amount of tax reduc- tion that may be granted through the aid scheme is FRF 275,94 million (13,14 % × FRF 2,100 million), to be disbursed during the period 2000 to 2006, The aid is compatible provided it is linked to the investment(s) in that aid may only be granted for the fiscal year(s) when the investments in such equipment are made and during the subse- quent amortisation of this equipment until the expiry of the scheme. 2. Aid for the purpose of purchasing new, additional equip- ment in favour of cargo handling companies in the ports of Le Havre and Dunkerque in an amount of FRF 91,98 million is incompatible with the common market. As a result, this aid may not be put into effect. Article 2 inform the Commission, within two months France shall following the notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it. The French authorities shall provide the Commission with appropriate annual reports about the implementation of the aid scheme, notably the public tenders, the amount of aid granted and its intensity. The first report is to be submitted within one year this decision. from the notification of the investments, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 3 Article 1 This Decision is addressed to the French Republic. Aid for the transfer of existing equipment on the basis of 1. open and non-discriminatory procedures and the replacement of this equipment which France is planning to implement in favour of private cargo handling companies in the 23 French ports specified in the Annex in an amount of FRF 275,94 million during the period 2000 to 2006 is compatible with the common market. Done at Brussels, 22 December 1999. For the Commission Loyola DE PALACIO Vice-President 28. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 155/59 ANNEX The 23 French ports covered by the decision I. Nord-Pas-de-Calais coastal area: 1. 2. 3. Port of Calais Port of Boulogne sur Mer Port of Dunkirk II. Normandy coastal area: 4. Autonomous port of Le Havre 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Port of Dieppe Port of Rouen Port of Honfleur Port of Fécamp Port of Caen III. Channel coastal area: 10. Port of Cherbourg 11. Port of Granville IV. Brittany coastal area: 12. Port of Saint-Malo 13. Port of Brest 14. Port of Lorient V. Atlantic coastal area: 15. Port of Nantes-Saint-Nazaire 16. Port of La Rochelle 17. Port of Bordeaux 18. Port of Bayonne VI. Mediterranean coastal area: 19. Port of Port-Vendres 20. Port of Port La Nouvelle 21. Port of Sète 22. Port of Marseille 23. Port of Toulon


title: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 2803/1999 av den 22 december 1999 om fastställande av det schablonvärde som skall användas vid beräkningen av den ekonomiska ersättningen och tillhörande förskott för de fiskeriprodukter som återtagits från marknaden under fiskeåret 2000

eurovoc_concepts:
fishery product
market intervention
monetary compensatory amount
producer organisation
withdrawal from the market

text: 31. 12. 1999 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning L 340/47 KOMMISSIONENS FÖRORDNING (EG) nr 2803/1999 av den 22 december 1999 om fastställande av det schablonvärde som skall användas vid beräkningen av den ekonomiska ersättningen och tillhörande förskott för de fiskeriprodukter som återtagits från marknaden under fiskeåret 2000 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION HAR ANTAGIT DENNA FÖRORDNING med beaktande av Fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen, med beaktande av rådets förordning (EEG) nr 3759/92 av den 17 december 1992 om den gemensamma organisationen av marknaden för fiskeri- och vattenbruksprodukter (1), senast ändrad genom förordning (EEG) nr 3318/94 (2), särskilt artikel 12. 6 i denna, och av följande skäl: 1. 2. 3. 4. I artikel 12 i förordning (EEG) nr 3759/92 föreskrivs att en ekonomisk ersättning skall utgå till de producentor- ganisationer som på vissa villkor gör insatser för de produkter som avses i bilaga I punkterna A och D till den förordningen. Värdet på denna ekonomiska ersätt- ning skall minskas med det schablonmässigt fastställda värdet på de produkter som är avsedda för andra ändamål än som livsmedel. föremål I kommissionens förordning (EEG) nr 1501/83 av den 9 juni 1983 om omhändertagande av vissa fiskeripro- för marknadsstabiliserande dukter som varit åtgärder (3) fastställs vilka valmöjligheter som ges när det gäller avsättning av de återtagna produkterna. Det är nödvändigt att schablonmässigt fastställa värdet för var och en av dessa valmöjligheter med hänsyn tagen till de genomsnittliga inkomster som kan erhållas genom en sådan avsättning i de olika medlemsstaterna. På grundval av uppgifterna rörande detta värde är det lämpligt att fastställa detta värde för fiskeåret 2000 i enlighet med uppgifterna i bilagan. Enligt artikel 7 i kommissionens förordning (EEG) nr 3902/92 av den 23 december 1992 om närmare bestämmelser för beviljande av ekonomisk kompensa- tion avseende vissa fiskeriprodukter (4), senast ändrad genom förordning (EEG) nr 1338/95 (5), skall det organ som ansvarar för att bevilja den ekonomiska ersätt- ningen underrättas i de fall då en producentorganisation, eller en medlem av en sådan, saluför sina produkter i en annan medlemsstat än där den blev erkänd. Med detta i den medlemsstat där organ avses således organet producentorganisationen erkändes. Därför bör det avdragsgilla schablonvärdet vara det som tillämpas i denna medlemsstat. 5. 6. Ovan angivna bestämmelser skall även tillämpas på förskottet på den ekonomiska ersättning som avses i artikel 6. 1 i förordning (EEG) nr 3902/92. De åtgärder som föreskrivs i den här förordningen är förenliga med yttrandet från Förvaltningskommittén för fiskeriprodukter. HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE. Artikel 1 Det schablonvärde som skall användas vid beräkningarna av den ekonomiska ersättningen och tillhörande förskott för de produkter som återtagits av producentorganisationerna och använts för andra ändamål än som livsmedel skall för fiskeåret 2000 fastställas på det sätt som inges i bilagan för var och en av de angivna destinationerna. Artikel 2 Det schablonvärde som kan dras av från den ekonomiska ersättningen och tillhörande förskott skall vara det som till- lämpas i den medlemsstat där producentorganisationen erkänts. Artikel 3 Denna förordning träder i kraft den 1 januari 2000. Denna förordning är till alla delar bindande och direkt tillämplig i alla medlemsstater. Utfärdad i Bryssel den 22 december 1999. På kommissionens vägnar Franz FISCHLER Ledamot av kommissionen (1) EGT L 388, 31. 12. 1992, s. 1. (2) EGT L 350, 31. 12. 1994, s. 15. (3) EGT L 152, 10. 6. 1983, s. 22. (4) EGT L 392, 31. 12. 1992, s. 35. (5) EGT L 129, 14. 6. 1995, s. 7. L 340/48 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 31. 12. 1999 BILAGA De återtagna produkternas bestämmelseland (euro/ton) 1. Användning eller torkning och delning i bitar eller beredning till mjöl avsett för djurfoder: a) för sill av arten Clupea harengus och makrill av arterna Scomber scombrus och Scomber japonicus: — Danmark och Sverige — Frankrike — övriga medlemsstater b) för räkor av arten Crangon crangon och nordhavsräkor (Pandalus borealis): — Sverige — övriga medlemsstater c) för övriga produkter: — Danmark — Sverige — Förenade kungariket, Portugal, Belgien och Irland — övriga medlemsstater 2. Andra användningar än de som åsyftas i punkt 1 avsedda för djurfoder (inbegripet i torkad form): a) sardiner av arten Sardina pilchardus och ansjovis (Engraulis spp. ): — samtliga medlemsstater b) övriga produkter: — Sverige, Frankrike och Danmark — Irland — övriga medlemsstater 3. Andra användningar än som livsmedel 60 1 18 0 10 70 50 18 0 20 50 0 35 0


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA P-2633/99 de Maria Berger (PSE) a la Comisión. Aplicación de la Directiva 93/83/CEE, relativa a la televisión por cable.

eurovoc_concepts:
Austria
cable distribution
economic consequence
restriction on competition
satellite communications

text: 1. 8. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas C 219 E/183 Por lo que se refiere a la toma en consideraci(cid:243)n de las regiones perifØricas de la Comunidad, se remite a Su Seæor(cid:237)a a lo dispuesto en: (cid:129) el apartado 2 de la acci(cid:243)n 2 del cap(cid:237)tulo I («Erasmus») del actual programa «S(cid:211)CRATES», donde, en lo referente a la movilidad de los estudiantes, se establece que «la Comisi(cid:243)n tomarÆ las medidas necesarias para fomentar una participaci(cid:243)n equilibrada de las diferentes disciplinas y regiones», y (cid:129) el apartado 4 de la acci(cid:243)n A. I del programa «La juventud con Europa», donde se seæala el «alejamiento geogrÆfico» como uno de los factores en funci(cid:243)n de los cuales «el cÆlculo del reparto de la ayuda concedida tendrÆ en cuenta la necesidad de garantizar el equilibrio de las corrientes de intercambios, as(cid:237) como la igualdad de posibilidades de acceso de los j(cid:243)venes de cada pa(cid:237)s. » (2000/C 219 E/235) PREGUNTA ESCRITA P-2633/99 de Maria Berger (PSE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (22 de diciembre de 1999) Asunto: Aplicaci(cid:243)n de la Directiva 93/83/CEE, relativa a la televisi(cid:243)n por cable La aplicaci(cid:243)n de la Directiva 93/83/CEE (1) del Consejo, relativa a la televisi(cid:243)n por cable, ha tenido repercusiones exclusivamente negativas para los concesionarios de televisi(cid:243)n por cable en Austria: ahora existen 927 contratos, en vez de un œnico contrato, ha aumentado la inseguridad jur(cid:237)dica y se ha agravado la distorsi(cid:243)n de la competencia entre el cable y el satØlite. ¿CuÆndo presentarÆ la Comisi(cid:243)n al Parlamento, al Consejo y al ComitØ Econ(cid:243)mico y Social el 1. informe sobre la aplicaci(cid:243)n de la Directiva 93/83/CEE? ¿Tiene previsto la Comisi(cid:243)n introducir la neutralidad de la tecnolog(cid:237)a, o sea, la igualdad de trato entre 2. la recepci(cid:243)n v(cid:237)a satØlite y la retransmisi(cid:243)n por cable? ¿Considera la Comisi(cid:243)n la posibilidad de revisar la Directiva 93/83/CEE, para tener en cuenta las 3. quejas en toda Europa de los concesionarios de televisi(cid:243)n por cable? (1) DO L 248 de 6. 10. 1993, p. 15. Respuesta del Sr. Bolkestein en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (20 de enero de 2000) La Comisi(cid:243)n no ha recibido ninguna objeci(cid:243)n de los concesionarios austriacos contra la aplicaci(cid:243)n prÆctica de las medidas de transposici(cid:243)n de la Directiva 93/83/CEE del Consejo, de 27 de septiembre de 1993, sobre coordinaci(cid:243)n de determinadas disposiciones relativas a los derechos de autor y derechos afines a los derechos de autor en el Æmbito de la radiodifusi(cid:243)n v(cid:237)a satØlite y de la distribuci(cid:243)n por cable. En relaci(cid:243)n con la aplicaci(cid:243)n prÆctica de la Directiva 93/83/CEE, actualmente se estÆ realizando un estudio por parte de asesores externos. Dicho estudio incluye la aplicaci(cid:243)n de las Directivas 93/98/CEE, de 29 de octubre de 1993, relativa a la armonizaci(cid:243)n del plazo de protecci(cid:243)n del derecho de autor y de determinados derechos afines (1), 92/100/CEE, de 19 de noviembre de 1992, sobre derechos de alquiler y prØstamo y otros derechos afines a los derechos de autor en el Æmbito de la propiedad intelectual (2) y 93/83/CEE del Consejo. En base a este estudio, que se espera para finales de marzo del 2000, la Comisi(cid:243)n presentarÆ la comunicaci(cid:243)n a que hace referencia Su Seæor(cid:237)a. En este contexto, se tendrÆn en cuenta las propuestas de las partes afectadas en caso de que la Comisi(cid:243)n proponga modificaciones. (1) DO L 290 de 24. 11. 1993. (2) DO L 346 de 27. 11. 1992


title: 1999/828/EG: Dokument bifogade Europeiska unionens allmänna budget - Redogörelse för inkomster och utgifter för Harmonisering i den Inre Marknaden (Varumärken och Mönster) (KHIM) för budgetåret 2000

eurovoc_concepts: European Union Intellectual Property Office

text: 22. 12. 1999 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning L 330/13 KHIM (1999/828/EG) *089AAAAB-DA-13* 10:09-(17/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-13 L 330/14 KHIM SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 22. 12. 1999 *089AAAAB-DA-14* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-14 22. 12. 1999 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning L 330/15 KHIM *089AAAAB-DA-15* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-15 L 330/16 KHIM SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 22. 12. 1999 *089AAAAB-DA-16* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-16 22. 12. 1999 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning L 330/17 KHIM *089AAAAB-DA-17* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-17 L 330/18 KHIM SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 22. 12. 1999 *089AAAAB-DA-18* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-18 22. 12. 1999 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning L 330/19 KHIM *089AAAAB-DA-19* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-19 L 330/20 KHIM SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 22. 12. 1999 *089AAAAB-DA-20* 17:14-(16/12) - 089AAAAB-DA-20


title: 2000/103/CE: Decisione della Commissione, del 22 dicembre 1999, che modifica la decisione 1999/354/CE relativa all'ammissibilità delle spese previste da alcuni Stati membri nel corso del 1999 per l'attuazione del regime di controllo applicabile alla politica comune della pesca [notificata con il numero C(1999) 4847]

eurovoc_concepts:
common fisheries policy
fishing controls
fishing regulations
maritime surveillance
national expenditure
validation of expenditure

text: 4. 2. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 29/33 DECISIONE DELLA COMMISSIONE del 22 dicembre 1999 che modifica la decisione 1999/354/CE relativa all'ammissibilità delle spese previste da alcuni Stati membri nel corso del 1999 per l'attuazione del regime di controllo applicabile alla politica comune della pesca [notificata con il numero C(1999) 4847] (2000/103/CE) LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNITÀ EUROPEE, visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea, vista la decisione 95/527/CE del Consiglio, dell'8 dicembre 1995, relativa ad una partecipazione finanziaria della Comunità alle spese sostenute dagli Stati membri per l'attuazione del regime di controllo applicabile nell'ambito della politica comune della pesca (1), in particolare l'articolo 6, sibili ad una partecipazione finanziaria ai sensi della decisione 95/527/CE. (5) (6) Occorre pertanto modificare la decisione 1999/354/CE. Le misure previste nella presente decisione sono conformi al parere del comitato di gestione per il settore della pesca e dell'acquacoltura, considerando quanto segue: HA ADOTTATO LA PRESENTE DECISIONE: (1) (2) (3) Al momento dell'adozione della decisione 1999/354/CE della Commissione relativa all'ammissibilità delle spese previste da alcuni Stati membri nel corso del 1999 per l'attuazione del regime di controllo applicabile alla poli- tica comune della pesca (2), modificata dalla decisione 2000/102/CE (3), la dotazione di bilancio disponibile era insufficiente per concedere il contributo comunitario massimo per tutte le spese ammissibili. Il potenziamento della dotazione di bilancio consente ora di concedere un contributo finanziario supplemen- tare per talune spese ammissibili. La decisione 1999/354/CE non teneva conto delle domande di contributo della Francia e dell'Irlanda, poiché queste non erano state trasmesse alla Commis- sione nel termine stabilito. Tuttavia, per garantire la continuità delle azioni di sorveglianza e controllo nelle zone CIEM VI, VII e VIII, è indispensabile che Francia e Irlanda effettuino alcune spese per le quali manca la copertura finanziaria necessaria. Una mancata partecipa- zione finanziaria potrebbe compromettere gravemente il finanziamento degli investimenti programmati nel 1999 e di conseguenza il conseguimento degli obiettivi prefis- sati di sorveglianza e controllo. È pertanto giustificato prevedere, a titolo straordinario ed entro il 1999, una partecipazione finanziaria alle spese indispensabili della Francia e dell'Irlanda. (4) La Grecia ha trasmesso informazioni che precisano la sua domanda di partecipazione finanziaria per le spese di cui all'articolo 2 della decisione 95/527/CE, previste per il 1999, e che incidono sul livello delle spese ammis- (1) GU L 301 del 14. 12. 1995, pag. 30. GU L 302 del 15. 12. 1995, pag. 45 (rettifica). (2) GU L 137 dell'1. 6. 1999, pag. 41. (3) Vedi pagina 30 della presente Gazzetta ufficiale. Articolo 1 La decisione 1999/354/CE è modificata come segue: 1) All'articolo 1, prima frase, l'importo «108 378 475 EUR» è sostituito da «113 744 098 EUR». 2) All'articolo 1, seconda frase, l'importo «33 833 388 EUR» è sostituito da «35 570 045 EUR». 3) All'articolo 2, primo paragrafo, seconda frase, l'importo «11 024 266 EUR» è sostituito da «11 424 166 EUR». 4) All'articolo 2, secondo paragrafo, prima frase, «2 500 EUR» è sostituito da «2 800 EUR». l'importo 5) All'articolo 2, secondo paragrafo, seconda frase, l'importo «2 500 EUR» è sostituito da «2 800 EUR». 6) All'articolo 2, secondo paragrafo, terza frase, «3 250 EUR» è sostituito da «3 400 EUR». l'importo 7) All'articolo 2, secondo paragrafo, ultima frase, l'importo «6 750 000 EUR» è sostituito da «7 500 000 EUR». 8) Dopo l'articolo 2, è inserito il seguente articolo 2 bis: «Articolo 2 bis Le spese di investimento dell'Irlanda, previste per il 1999, per un importo pari a 13 693 872 EUR, sono ammissibili ad una partecipazione finanziaria ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 3, della decisione 95/527/CE. Il tasso di parteci- pazione finanziaria della Comunità è pari al 65 %. Tuttavia, la partecipazione finanziaria è concessa nel limite di un importo complessivo di 2 600 000 EUR. » 9) L'allegato I è sostituito dall'allegato I della presente deci- sione. 10) L'allegato II è sostituito dall'allegato II della presente deci- sione. L 29/34 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 4. 2. 2000 Articolo 2 Il Regno del Belgio, il Regno di Danimarca, la Repubblica federale di Germania, la Repubblica ellenica, il Regno di Spagna, la Repubblica portoghese, la Repubblica finlandese, il Regno di Svezia e il Regno Unito di Gran Bretagna e Irlanda del Nord sono destinatari della presente decisione. il Regno dei Paesi Bassi, la Repubblica francese, la Repubblica italiana, l'Irlanda, Fatto a Bruxelles, il 22 dicembre 1999. Per la Commissione Franz FISCHLER Membro della Commissione ANEXO I — BILAG I — ANHANG I — ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ Ι — ANNEX I — ANNEXE I — ALLEGATO I — BĲLAGE I — ANEXO I — LIITE I — BILAGA I Estado miembro Medlemsstat Mitgliedstaat Κράτος µέλος Member State État membre Stato membro Lidstaat Estado-Membro Jäsenvaltio Medlemsstat België/Belgique Danmark Deutschland Ελλάδα España France Ireland Italia Nederland Portugal Suomi Sverige United Kingdom Gastos subvencionables en moneda nacional Støtteberettigede udgifter i national valuta Erstattungsfähige Ausgaben in nationaler Währung Επιλέξιµες δαπάνες σε εθνικό νόµισµα Eligible expenditure in national currency Dépenses admissibles en monnaie nationale Spese ammissibili in moneta nazionale In aanmerking komende uitgaven in nationale valuta Despesas elegíveis em moeda nacional Hyväksyttävät menot kansallisessa valuutassa Bidragsberättigande kostnader i nationell valuta Gastos subvencionables Støtteberettigede udgifter Erstattungsfähige Ausgaben Επιλέξιµες δαπάνες Eligible expenditure Dépenses admissibles Spese ammissibili In aanmerking komende uitgaven Despesas elegíveis Hyväksyttävät menot Bidragsberättigande kostnader (€) Contribución máxima de la Comunidad Fællesskabets maksimale finansielle bidrag Maximaler Gemeinschaftsbeitrag Μέγιστη κοινοτική συµµετοχή Maximum Community contribution Participation communautaire maximale Contributo massimo della Comunità Maximale bĳdrage van de Gemeenschap Contribuição máxima da Comunidade Yhteisön osuus enintään Gemenskapens maximala bidrag (€) DKR DRA SKR UKL 13 940 000 7 684 000 000 25 701 000 23 007 856 6 197 1 871 447 21 100 101 23 294 453 8 310 194 3 782 260 1 583 363 2 076 157 5 208 489 10 725 929 462 517 2 708 781 32 614 208 Total/I alt/Σύνολο/Totale/Totaal/Yhteensä 113 744 098 3 099 814 899 10 168 317 3 245 369 4 064 945 1 235 599 0 1 038 078 2 490 800 5 338 025 146 744 1 251 366 5 523 853 35 570 045 4. 2. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 29/35 ANEXO II — BILAG II — ANHANG II — ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ ΙΙ — ANNEX II — ANNEXE II — ALLEGATO II — BĲLAGE II — ANEXO II — LIITE II — BILAGA II Estado miembro Medlemsstat Mitgliedstaat Κράτος µέλος Member State État membre Stato membro Lidstaat Estado-Membro Jäsenvaltio Medlemsstat België/Belgique Danmark Deutschland Ελλάδα España Italia Nederland Portugal Suomi Sverige United Kingdom Gastos subvencionables en moneda nacional Støtteberettigede udgifter i national valuta Erstattungsfähige Ausgaben in nationaler Währung Επιλέξιµες δαπάνες σε εθνικό νόµισµα Eligible expenditure in national currency Dépenses admissibles en monnaie nationale Spese ammissibili in moneta nazionale In aanmerking komende uitgaven in nationale valuta Despesas elegíveis em moeda nacional Hyväksyttävät menot kansallisessa valuutassa Bidragsberättigande kostnader i nationell valuta Gastos subvencionables Støtteberettigede udgifter Erstattungsfähige Ausgaben Επιλέξιµες δαπάνες Eligible expenditure Dépenses admissibles Spese ammissibili In aanmerking komende uitgaven Despesas elegíveis Hyväksyttävät menot Bidragsberättigande kostnader (€) Contribución máxima de la Comunidad Fællesskabets maksimale finansielle bidrag Maximaler Gemeinschaftsbeitrag Μέγιστη κοινοτική συµµετοχή Maximum Community contribution Participation communautaire maximale Contributo massimo della Comunità Maximale bĳdrage van de Gemeenschap Contribuição máxima da Comunidade Yhteisön osuus enintään Gemenskapens maximala bidrag (€) DKR DRA SKR UKL 2 000 000 475 000 000 2 850 000 140 000 678 000 268 500 680 635 1 440 752 8 354 068 8 831 413 1 905 877 349 159 336 376 300 378 198 453 367 400 220 563 317 504 661 658 4 650 961 3 127 571 1 356 134 185 880 203 094 234 174 99 227 Total/I alt/Σύνολο/Totale/Totaal/Yhteensä 23 343 612 11 424 166