title: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Retail payments in the internal market

eurovoc_concepts:
credit transfer
electronic money
harmonisation of standards
intra-EU payment
single market

text: COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 31. 01. 2000 COM(2000) 36 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RETAIL PAYMENTS IN THE INTERNAL MARKET COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RETAIL PAYMENTS IN THE INTERNAL MARKET EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The European Union has an internal market and the euro. It does not yet have a "single payments area". Large value (wholesale) payments can now be made across borders nearly as quickly and cheaply as they can domestically, yet small value (retail) cross-border payments are less reliable, usually take longer and cost significantly more than domestic payments. There needs to be a significant improvement in the efficiency of small value cross-border payments, and substantial reductions in cross-border charges to customers, by 1 January 2002. This Communication urges the need for efficient, secure and inexpensive retail payment services in the internal market accompanied by the introduction of the Euro. The Commission acknowledges that retail payment services and the conditions governing them are important in assuring consumer confidence in e-commerce. Some issues addressed in this Communication are relevant in that context. However, the role of payment services for the development of e- commerce is not covered by this Communication but will be dealt with separately. The main focus needs to be on small value credit transfers. The implementation of the Cross- Border Credit Transfers Directive is a major first step. Common technical standards will also help and banks should commit themselves fully to implement the existing standards on instructions by 1 January 2002. The international account numbering and payment Commission will also propose the introduction of a common minimum exemption threshold for balance of payments statistics, below which cross-border payments need not be reported, to take effect no later than 1 January 2002. But an improvement in the efficiency of cross-border retail credit transfers ultimately depends on establishing efficient cross-border transfer linkages. Banks or groups of banks are invited to put forward proposals by the end of September 2000. The Commission will examine them, in co-operation with the ESCB, and will hold a Round Table in the autumn of 2000 to consider the various options. The Commission may also reconsider to reduce further the maximum execution time for cross-border transfers to bring it more into line with domestic transfers. The difference between the charges for the cross-border and domestic use of payments cards is much less marked than for credit transfers. But banks are strongly encouraged to phase out the differences that remain. Banks also need to improve the information that they give to customers on general conditions, fees, charges and (non euro) exchange rates. The Commission intends to issue a competition notice outlining the scope for, and limits to, co- operation among banks on payment cards. Banks are also strongly encouraged to ensure interoperability for electronic means of payment, and in particular that electronic purses can be used across borders by 1 January 2002. The difference between the charges for the cross-border use of cheques as opposed to domestic transactions is more marked than those for any other payment instrument. Banks are urged to consider how to meet the needs of the public for the type of cross-border distance payment facility currently met by the eurocheque system. 2 The Commission continues to be concerned about the level of charges levied on the exchange of euro area national banknotes across borders, and has asked banks and bureaux de change to publicly display information about the level of their charges. The Commission repeats its call to banks to re-examine their charges, particularly for small value transactions. To encourage a positive response, the Commission intends to highlight instances of excessive charging. It will also pursue its investigation into possible anti-competitive practices. A new Communication on fraud prevention is under preparation. The Commission will industry’s efforts to achieve a secure environment, and the monitor Communication will also focus on other preventive actions, notably the exchange of information, training programmes and educational material. the payment 3 INTRODUCTION The European Union has an internal market and the euro. It does not yet have a "single payments area". Large value (wholesale) payments can now be made across borders nearly as quickly and cheaply as they can domestically, yet small value (retail) cross-border payments are less reliable, usually take longer and cost significantly more than domestic payments. The Framework for Financial Markets Action Plan1, endorsed by the Council and the European Parliament, calls for integrated retail payment systems that provide for secure and competitive small-value cross-border transfers comparable with the service provided within domestic payments systems. In this context the Commission builds largely on a market-led approach requiring voluntary co-operation by the banking sector and investments which should become a business case in the long run. These should be put in place before the end of the euro transitional period (i. e. by the beginning of 2002). The Commission objectives are shared by the European Central Bank in its statement2. focuses on cross-border credit Nevertheless, while the ECB statement this Communication deals with this essential issue and considers other electronic means of payments, cheques and cash as well. It addressed also the problems in the wider context of the European Union rather than in the euro-zone only and discusses other policy issues as competition, fraud prevention and the enlargement. The Commission believes that, together with the ESCB, the other EU institutions and the private sector, a concerted effort is necessary to achieve the objectives set in the Action Plan. This Communication maps out a strategy to meet them with a series of identified actions to be undertaken by various (private and public) actors concerned. transfers, 1. OBJECTIVES There needs to be a significant improvement in the efficiency of small value cross-border payments, and substantial reductions in cross-border charges to customers, by 1 January 2002. This requires a market-based approach which can achieve early results. Public authorities should complement it by tackling administrative obstacles and ensuring the reliability and security of the systems. There should be seven objectives3: 1. 2. 1 2 3 The efficiency and cost-effectiveness of payments, notably credit transfers, must be improved. Ameliorating the basic infrastructure for credit transfers may also be of central importance in improving other areas such as direct and other debit transfer based payments. The charges for cross-border credit transfers should be cut substantially towards the levels charged for equivalent domestic credit transfers. Implementing the Framework for Financial Markets: Action Plan. ” “Financial Services: COM(1999)232, 11. 05. 99. The ECB issued a statement on 13. 9. 1999: “Improving cross-border retail payment services in the euro area: the Eurosystem’s view” The objectives are identical with those in the ECB statement resulting from a close co-operation of both institutions. 4 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Settlement times for cross-border payments should, where possible, not exceed the time taken for domestic payments. The end-to-end execution of a cross-border payment should not exceed the time taken for a domestic payment by more than one day. The fees for a cross-border transfer in a system should normally be borne entirely by the originator and not charged to the beneficiary, in line with domestic practice in most EU credit transfer systems. There should be no proliferation of standards. Existing standards should be implemented as soon as possible. Cross-border payment systems should have open access. These improvements 1 January 2002. leading to efficient systems should be in place by It is important that these objectives are also met in view of the enlargement of the EU. A modern retail payment infrastructure would provide a model for accession countries. 2. CREDIT TRANSFERS € Credit transfers are used to transfer funds from the account of a sender to the account of a beneficiary. Charges for cross-border retail credit transfers are still several orders of magnitude greater than corresponding charges for domestic transfers. Although charges for cross-border transfers have tended to decline over the past five years, typical charges4 for a 12, although in some instances very low value transfer of 20 (exceptionally they can exceed that amount). The they may be as low as 1 in all Member charge for a comparable domestic retail transfer is considerably less than States, being usually measured in cents. While charges for domestic transfers are made on a transaction basis, irrespective of the value transferred, cross-border transfer charges are commonly based on a percentage of the value or a combination of flat fees and value based fees. 100 are currently of the order of 5 or as high as € € € € The cost and performance of cross-border credit transfers has been a concern for the Commission since many years. Already in 1990, the Commission gave an in-depth analysis of the problem in 1990 (COM(90)447 – “Payments in the European Single Market”) emphasising that in the 90s structures were established to ensure payment services between Member States which are as inexpensive, quick and reliable as domestic systems. In 1992, the Commission established a work programme (SEC(92)621 – “Easier cross-border payments: breaking down the barriers”), indicating that there was a need to improve retail cross-border payment services before the completion of the EMU. In 1994, COM(94)436 – “Fund transfers in the EU: transparency, performance and stability” was published which included the proposal for a Directive on cross-border credit transfers. The latter was adopted in 1997. 4 Estimates based on partial and provisional data provided by some of the EU banking associations together with results of complaints received by the Commission during the first months of 1999. 5 In order to meet the Commission’s long-standing objective, four target actions have been implementation of the Cross-Border Credit Transfers Directive (97/5/EC)5, identified: technical standards, reporting and, above all, the payment systems infrastructure. Implementation of the Cross-Border Credit Transfers Directive The date of implementation of the Cross-Border Credit Transfers Directive, which covers transfers up to 50,000, is 14 August 1999. It provides that: € • a customer be given, in advance, a tariff that s/he can understand clearly for any type of credit transfer; • a transfer should be credited to the beneficiary’s account within a clearly defined timescale; • transfers for which the originator pays all the costs ("OUR" mode) will be the rule, unless otherwise stipulated. An intermediary or receiving bank may not make any further charges, in particular not to the beneficiary; and • when a transfer goes astray, a “money-back” guarantee up to € 12,500 is provided. The implementation of the Cross-Border Credit Transfers Directive will help to improve the efficiency of retail transfers. The implementation of the "OUR" mode, coupled with the to establish more systematic it necessary for banks money-back-guarantee, makes arrangements transparency for provisions require banks to improve their processing of transfers so that they effectively fulfil the conditions offered to customers, and will stimulate competition by allowing comparisons increased timing and other conditions. Customers should take advantage of of fees, transparency by comparing conditions of various banks in order to get the best possible deal. sending retail cross-border transfers. The Directive’s Action point: The Directive must now be implemented in all Member States, correctly transposed and complied with by all banks. Banks must inform customers in advance of the charges, the timescale and all other relevant conditions. Immediate improvements in the organisation of retail cross-border transfer procedures by many banks are the operational consequence. The Commission will monitor progress. Technical standards Technical standards need to be implemented in order to create better conditions for a single retail payments area. This is especially true for bank identifiers and account numbering systems, where it is extremely difficult to route a payment order directly and automatically from the originator’s bank in one country to the beneficiary’s institution in another. Standards have already been developed by the European Committee for Banking Standards (ECBS), of particular importance in this context are the IBAN (International Bank Account Number)6 and 5 6 OJ L 43, 14. 2. 1997, p. 25. The IBAN invites banks to add a country code and two control digits to existing numbers. This code helps banks to route cross-border transactions automatically. 6 IPI (International Payment Instruction)7. They need to be implemented as soon as possible by all parties involved. Action point: Banks should commit themselves fully to implement IBAN and IPI as early as possible and by 1 January 2002 at the latest and should therefore agree a timetable for doing so at national and EU level. Bank customers should be informed about the speed and cost advantages of such standards. They should be encouraged to use them immediately after their introduction. The national central banks, through the ESCB, could play a coordinating role both in speeding up decisions on standards and by encouraging banks to implement them. Reporting requirements Banks are required for balance of payment statistics purposes to report cross-border transfers in both the incoming and outgoing Member States. These reporting requirements involve additional work in processing transfers, thereby increasing the cost and processing time. Reporting requirements and statistical methods vary from one Member State to another. Efforts to review and harmonise the methods of compiling balance of payments statistics have been under way for a very long time. 8 The reporting of cross-border transfers needs to be streamlined in order to render the process easier and less costly for the banks and, ultimately, customers. It is politically unacceptable to leave the implementation of streamlined reporting requirements beyond 2002. Action point: The Commission, together with the ECB and other competent authorities, will continue to work towards reaching agreement on the approach to be followed for streamlining reporting requirements and on a timetable for implementation. Pending a definitive reform of statistical reporting, the Commission will propose the introduction, at latest by 1 January 2002, of a common minimum exemption threshold of an appropriate high fixed amount, below which cross-border payments need not be reported for balance of payments statistics. Developing the payment infrastructure Even when all these improvements are fully implemented, they will not on their own be sufficient to achieve the objectives set out in this Communication. The principal reason why cross-border retail than domestic retail transfers are more expensive and less efficient the development of cross-border payment channels has lagged behind transfers is that domestic development of electronic transfer systems. While retail credit transfers within Member States have become automated and more efficient, manual intervention is still required at nearly every stage in the banks’ internal processing of cross-border transfers. In addition, comprehensive automated linkages between domestic systems or cross-border systems are currently lacking. 7 8 The IPI is a standard form for transfer orders. It would help to expand the practical usage of the IBAN. Currently some Member States have exemption thresholds, below which reporting is not required, while there are no settlement based reporting requirements in the UK, Finland and Ireland (their data is based on sample surveys). settlement-based reporting systems apply simplification thresholds. In the other Member States, 7 Lower charges by individual banks to their retail customers largely depend on an improvement in the efficiency of cross-border retail credit transfers. This would require the enhancement of both banks’ internal processes and development of more efficient cross- border transfer linkages. The internal process could be improved by developing straight- through-processing (STP) capable internal systems and implementing STP-capable message formats, such as SWIFT’s MT102/103. The main options for enhancing the efficiency of the cross-border linkages fall broadly into two categories: overarching solution; and combined network solutions. The Financial Services Action Plan already states in this context that remedying the infrastructural gaps requires a concerted strategy, supported at the highest political level and including the EU institutions, the ECBS and the private sector to surmount the technical and commercial hurdles. A concerted effort should be launched to deliver a technically secure and operational solution as a matter of utmost urgency. Overarching solutions Overarching solutions are those which would connect the vast majority of all payment systems participants, across borders. These are solutions which link national systems to which all or most banks belong, or alternatively which set up a new EU-wide cross-border clearing system for transfers, in which most EU banks would participate. The TARGET9 system of the ESCB delivers, with complete finality across borders payments in a matter of minutes from sending bank to beneficiary bank. TARGET can be used for payments of all values but as it is designed to process primarily large value payments, it may not provide an adequate solution for the processing of cross-border retail payments. This would be the case because i) for the banks, the direct and indirect cost of real-time, non-batch processing may be too high to provide an economical solution for the processing of retail payments, and ii) the potential number of such payments could be higher than the capacity of TARGET. However, TARGET it could play a complementary role as a settlement channel for retail transfers (e. g. for urgent payments) Automated Clearing Houses (ACHs) are bodies through which automated payments are directed, cleared and settled domestically in most Member States. The efficiency of cross- border transfers could be considerably improved, either by linkages between ACHs at EU level or by a new and separate European ACH. Such ACH-based solutions would have to be driven mainly by the EU banking industry, with support from public authorities, e. g. on standards, legal and reporting requirements. Combined network solutions Combined network solutions, although less universal than such overarching solutions as TARGET or EU ACHs, might also offer promising solutions in view of the experience which the industry has already gained with regard to some existing schemes based on cross-border co-operation. Combined network solutions might also be a preliminary step towards the ultimate provision of an overarching solution. Among the possibilities are the following: The Euro 1 system of the Euro Banking Association (EBA) currently processes medium to large value credit transfers in euro. The EBA is proposing to proceed in two stages: 9 Trans-European Automated Real-time Gross settlement Express Transfer system. 8 • The first stage is to expand the existing Euro 1 system to euro retail payments. The EBA considers that this stage could be implemented quickly. • The second stage may create an ACH. The international credit card systems (i. e. VISA, Mastercard, Eurocard) have the advantage of having been specifically designed for end to end processing over the complete payment cycle and of internationally uniform technical standards which they used from the outset. These payment cards have a unique identification system recognisable and functional in every jurisdiction without adaptations. If this efficient infrastructure were adapted to carrying credit transfers then anyone who has an international payment card could receive or send funds to any other cardholder. Substantial modifications in operating procedures would be required to achieve this, but the basic networks exist. Several groups of banks (eg Eurogiro, TIPANET, Unico, S-Interpay), have already in recent years made the move from “traditional” to “enhanced” correspondent banking by entering into more systematic cross-border transfer arrangements. While the overarching solutions addressed earlier would give access to cross-border clearing possibilities to all credit institutions within the Community, initiatives which are limited to certain groups of institutions may also be useful if they work efficiently and at low cost for the customer. Automation of the payment means and infrastructure should, however, be combined with efficient linkages (gateways) to other networks. Action points: Banks are invited to put forward specific proposals to the Commission and the ECB no later than end September 2000 for improving the efficiency of cross-border retail transfers, to achieve the objectives of this Communication and, in particular, in such a way as to permit significant reductions in charges to customers by the end of the transitional period (1 January 2002). The Commission, in co-operation with the ESCB, will consider whether the banks’ proposals for improving the efficiency of cross-border retail transfers meet the objectives of this Communication. The Commission will promote a wide debate and will hold a Round Table in the autumn of 2000 to consider various options set out in this Communication or proposed in the meantime by industry. The Commission may reconsider in the Cross-Border Credit Transfer Directive the maximum execution time for cross-border credit/debit transfers (which by default is now 5+1 days) to bring it more in line with domestic transfers. The Commission will evaluate on a regular basis the level of charges for cross-border transfers and the implementation of standards, and publish the findings in the Single Market Scoreboard. 3. OTHER ELECTRONIC MEANS OF PAYMENT Apart from credit transfers, electronic means of payment embrace a variety of instruments, including those involving a plastic card and a magnetic stripe and/or a micro-processor chip. 9 Differences in charges between cross-border and domestic use of payment cards are much less marked than for credit transfers (eg the extra price payable by a credit cardholder for cross- border use is often of the order of 2%). The Commission welcomes certain banks’ decision not to make a specific charge for cross-border credit card use. Domestically, direct debiting is a convenient and increasingly used means of making recurrent payments (eg subscriptions, policy premiums etc. ), but the payer needs to trust that his/her account will not be debited incorrectly by the party which is to receive the payment. This guarantee is harder to provide for cross-border payments. Direct debiting requires the same basic infrastructure as credit transfers, so it may be possible to combine work on these systems and instruments. There may also be legal issues to resolve. Electronic purses are being intensively developed in some Member States. However, in the absence of common technical standards and systems agreements an electronic purse is of less practical use for cross-border payments than a foreign banknote (which can be exchanged into tender). The recent Common Electronic Purse Specifications (CEPS) may be a legal promising way to develop common standards. The proposed Directive on e-money providers10 will clarify the prudential rules under which licensed institutions can provide e-money services and thus will provide the necessary legal framework for these activities both domestically and cross-border. The Commission invites the Council and the Parliament to ensure its rapid adoption. Three elements are key to achieving the objective of a single payment area for all electronic means of payment:- a high degree of transparency, a new approach to competition policy and enhanced interoperability. Transparency - implementing Recommendation 97/489/EC The Commission's Recommendation of 1997 on electronic payment instruments11 introduces increased transparency of payment card conditions and of transaction prices. It also contains rules to determine the mutual responsibilities of issuers and holders of electronic means of payment. The implementation of the Recommendation may be uneven: a study will be launched to check compliance. Competition policy Transactions carried out by means of payment cards often require co-operation between banks. This is especially the case where an issuing bank provides its customers with the instrument and settles transactions on their accounts while an “acquiring bank” processes card payment transactions, typically from retailers receiving such payments. Arrangements of this kind have to comply with the competition rules enshrined in the EC Treaty and in secondary legislation. The Commission is currently reviewing various competition issues, both price issues and non-price issues, in the context of some notified national and international payment card schemes. When these cases are completed the Commission will be able to issue a general notice on competition in the field of payment cards. 10 11 COM(1998) 461 final, “Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the taking up, the pursuit and the prudential supervision of the business of electronic money institutions”. OJ L 208, 2. 8. 1997, p. 52. 10 Achieving interoperability Cross-border interoperability should be the general the rule for all functions provided through existing electronic means of payments including payment cards. Interoperability of electronic purses across borders is essential to allow for the development of this new instrument and technology. Action points: Following the introduction of the euro, banks and other providers of payment means are strongly encouraged to review the functioning of the existing electronic means of payment to ensure cross-border interoperability for all functions provided through such instruments. They should also examine possible synergies with the developments in the transfer infrastructure. Banks and industry suppliers are strongly encouraged to ensure- in particular through implementing common standards and developing open and interoperable cross-border clearing and settlement - that electronic purses can be used across borders as soon as possible, and no later than 1 January 2002. The Commission will issue a competition notice to outline in general terms the possibilities and limits of co-operation in the area of payment cards. Banks are strongly encouraged to phase out remaining discrimination in fees between cross- border card use and domestic card use. The Commission will monitor these developments. Banks should improve the information given to customers with respect to general conditions, fees, charges and (for non euro currencies) exchange rates. If serious problems emerge with the implementation of Recommendation 97/489/EC, the Commission will propose transforming it into a binding instrument. 4. CHEQUES Cheques are the oldest form of “book money” instrument in use today. Their use varies greatly between Member States ( 30% of all retail payments in the UK and 46% in France, against only 5 to 10 % in Germany and Belgium). However, in all countries, cheques represent a paper based payments technology, which banks aim to phase out, or at least scale down, as soon as practicable. The difference in charges between domestic and cross-border use in the case of cheques is more marked than for any other payment instrument. Charges for the cross-border collection of a domestic cheque can be as high as 40 euro, even for a low value cheque. The eurocheque system establishes charges for clearing which are substantially lower than those for cross- border use of domestic cheques. If the eurocheque system is to be severely curtailed in 2001 (its guarantee function may no longer be available)12, then a replacement instrument is likely to be needed. 12 The Commission considers that the benefits of the existing eurocheque system, standardised cheque format and its clearing facilities in all European countries should not be lost. in particular its 11 Action point: Banks are urged to consider how to meet the needs of the public for the type of cross-border distance payment facility currently met by the eurocheque system. The Commission will monitor and assess the extend to which public’s need for an alternative to the eurocheque system is being met. Should significant problems be encountered, the Commission will make proposals to address this issue. 5. CASH The charges levied for the exchange of euro area national banknotes are currently strongly criticised by citizens in the whole of the EU. Until recently, charges have (wholly or partially) been hidden in the exchange rate spread between bank buying and selling rates. Since the introduction of the euro, banks have been obliged to use a single fixed conversion rate when converting between participating currencies, and thus to identify, clearly and separately, all charges. The problem in the euro area will disappear from 1 January 2002, when national banknotes will be replaced by euro banknotes. But in the meantime, the public perception is that charges have increased, when the removal of exchange risk should have reduced them. Complaints are notably frequent when low amounts are exchanged, since the relative effect of a flat fee is proportionately greater for lower amounts. The Commission has already addressed to banks the concerns of citizens about the level of charges levied for banknote exchange, in addition to other cross-border transactions. It has called on them to provide public information showing the changes in the level of charges following the introduction of the euro. While information provided by banks tends to show a general decrease in the level of charges consistent with the removal of exchange rate risk, the level of charges for very small transactions has not decreased and has, in many instances, increased. Before exchanging currencies customers should of course inform themselves of the charges which will be applied. But the Commission repeats its call to banks to re-examine their charging structures, particularly for small value transactions. Failure by banks to heed such calls may adversely affect the acceptance of the euro by the public, and the Commission will combat abuses which it discovers. The Commission has begun an investigation to determine whether banks and banking associations may have acted in collusion to fix either the form of charges (flat fee, percentage etc. ) or their amount, for euro area currency conversion charges. Action points: Banks are strongly urged to re-examine their charging structures and pursue a transparent, customer friendly, pricing policy, with particular attention to the charges for small value transactions. To encourage a positive response, the Commission intends to highlight instances of excessive charging, and to pursue its investigation into possible anti competitive practices 6. ACTION AGAINST FRAUD Work on fraud prevention at EU level is currently focused largely on payment cards. On average, the incidence of card fraud is some 50% higher for cross-border card transactions 12 € € 440 million out of a total volume of than for domestic transactions. Overall card fraud losses in the EU in 1998 were 1,100 billion. Reducing such cross- approximately border fraud costs should permit cross-border card costs and fees to fall somewhat (although the overall part in costs represented by such fraud should not be overestimated). In 1998 the Commission issued a Communication which provides an initial assessment of these problems. It was the first step to create a secure environment for payment instruments. One further action is already under way: a legislative proposal aimed at harmonising criminal law provisions in all Member States (“Framework Decision”) is under discussion in the Council. To complement these, the Commission will undertake the following: Action point: A new Communication on fraud prevention is under preparation. The Commission intends to monitor the payment industry’s efforts to achieve a secure environment. The Communication will also focus on preventive actions, such as the exchange of information (both within payment systems and between industry and public authorities), training programmes (for bank staff, retailers, police officers) and educational material. These initiatives are in conformity with the conclusions of the European Council recently held in Tampere, which underlined the importance of preventive actions, cooperation and the exchange of best practice in fighting financial crime. CONCLUSIONS Improvements in the efficiency of small value cross-border payments are required. The Council and the European Parliament have endorsed the Framework for Financial Markets Action Plan. This Communication has indicated the actions to be undertaken, within the area of retail payments, in order to meet the needs - and expectations - of citizens and SMEs for a "single payments area": i. e. so they can make small-value payments across borders nearly as easily and cheaply as they can within their own countries. Both the private and public sector have their respective roles to play. The Commission will keep the Parliament and the Council regularly informed of progress on the issues discussed in this Communication. 13


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0168/00 de Alejandro Agag Longo (PPE-DE) a la Comisión. Bloqueo de carreteras por camiones franceses.

eurovoc_concepts:
France
Portugal
Spain
application of EU law
commercial vehicle
competence of the Member States
drivers
economic consequence
free movement of goods
labour dispute

formats: html pdf print

text: C 280 E/192 Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas ES 3. 10. 2000 (2000/C 280 E/223) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0168/00 de Alejandro Agag Longo (PPE-DE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (31 de enero de 2000) Asunto: Bloqueo de carreteras por camiones franceses Durante los œltimos aæos hemos asistido recurrentemente a huelgas y, recientemente, al bloqueo de las fronteras intracomunitarias por parte de los camioneros franceses con evidentes efectos negativos sobre el correcto desarrollo del mercado interior. No es accidental que esta protesta coincida con la Øpoca de exportaci(cid:243)n de ciertos productos procedentes de la Pen(cid:237)nsula IbØrica, siendo los transportistas espaæoles y portugueses, as(cid:237) como el resto de sectores implicados, los realmente perjudicados al tener a Francia como œnica salida por carretera hacia el resto del mercado comunitario. ¿Puede informar la Comisi(cid:243)n sobre las medidas concretas que se van a tomar en el futuro para solucionar el problema actual y prevenir actuaciones que se producen casi cada aæo y por las mismas fechas, y cuyo resultado final son pØrdidas millonarias para econom(cid:237)as como la espaæola y la portuguesa? Respuesta del Sr. Bolkestein en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (16 de marzo de 2000) Su Seæor(cid:237)a ha llamado la atenci(cid:243)n de la Comisi(cid:243)n sobre los importantes perjuicios econ(cid:243)micos que han supuesto para las empresas comunitarias los bloqueos fronterizos efectuados por los transportistas franceses en concreto durante estas œltimas semanas. A este respecto, la Comisi(cid:243)n desear(cid:237)a seæalar que, conforme al derecho comunitario, es responsabilidad de los Estados miembros tomar todas las medidas necesarias y proporcionadas a fin de restablecer la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as en su territorio cuando se produzcan acontecimientos de este tipo. En lo que respecta a las acciones que puede emprender la Comisi(cid:243)n, es preciso observar que el Reglamento (CE) no 2679/98 del Consejo, de 7 de diciembre de 1998, sobre el funcionamiento del mercado interior en relaci(cid:243)n con la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as entre los Estados miembros (1), le permite intervenir rÆpidamente en estas situaciones. En un primer momento, la Comisi(cid:243)n puede intervenir presentando una petici(cid:243)n de informaci(cid:243)n al Estado miembro en cuyo territorio se produzcan los problemas, lo que hizo durante las protestas de los transportistas de los d(cid:237)as 10 y 11 de enero de 2000 y 31 de enero a 1 de febrero de 2000. En cada ocasi(cid:243)n, las autoridades francesas enviaron a la Comisi(cid:243)n, respetando el plazo de dos d(cid:237)as establecido, informaci(cid:243)n sobre el estado del conflicto y las acciones emprendidas para evitar los bloqueos. A continuaci(cid:243)n, la Comisi(cid:243)n puede remitir al Estado miembro una notificaci(cid:243)n para que inicie todas las medidas necesarias y proporcionadas para restablecer la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as en un plazo fijado por ella. Esta segunda posibilidad todav(cid:237)a no se ha utilizado ya que, en los recientes conflictos, la Comisi(cid:243)n consider(cid:243) que el levantamiento de los bloqueos fronterizos hac(cid:237)a innecesaria la utilizaci(cid:243)n de tal procedimiento. Por supuesto, la Comisi(cid:243)n se reserva el derecho de recurrir a Øl cuando la situaci(cid:243)n lo justifique. Por œltimo, la Comisi(cid:243)n desea subrayar que, aparte de los medios de intervenci(cid:243)n de los que dispone en virtud del Reglamento (CE) no 2679/98, no le corresponde inmiscuirse en el tratamiento de los problemas sociales existentes en los Estados miembros que, dado el caso, podr(cid:237)an desembocar en acciones como las que dieron lugar a los bloqueos denunciados por Su Seæor(cid:237)a. (1) DO L 337 de 12. 12. 1998


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-0177/00 apresentada por Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) à Comissão. Sujeição à livre concorrência de seguros de doença baratos.

eurovoc_concepts:
European social policy
Netherlands
competence of the Member States
health insurance

text: 3. 10. 2000 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 280 E/195 (2000/C 280 E/227) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-0177/00 apresentada por Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) (cid:224) Comissªo (31 de Janeiro de 2000) Objecto: Sujei(cid:231)ªo (cid:224) livre concorrŒncia de seguros de doen(cid:231)a baratos 1. PoderÆ a Comissªo confirmar a exactidªo da declara(cid:231)ªo proferida pelo «Raad voor Volksgezondheid en Zorg» (Conselho para a Saœde Pœblica e AssistŒncia aos Doentes) dos Pa(cid:237)ses Baixos, segundo a qual a lei de acesso ao seguro de doen(cid:231)a («WTZ») em vigor nesse pa(cid:237)s deixarÆ de poder fornecer (cid:224)s pessoas com idade superior a 65 anos o modelo da ap(cid:243)lice de seguro global, que todas as seguradoras devem obrigatoriamente oferecer? PoderÆ a Comissªo ainda confirmar se a chamada «MOOZ» (lei de co-financiamento da sobrerepre- 2. senta(cid:231)ªo de idosos nos seguros de doen(cid:231)a), ou seja a cotiza(cid:231)ªo de solidariedade paga por todos os segurados particulares a t(cid:237)tulo de compensa(cid:231)ªo pelos prØmios reduzidos e os custos elevados a que devem fazer face as Caixas de Doen(cid:231)a com grande nœmero de filiados idosos, deixarÆ de ser autorizada pela Uniªo Europeia? Tem a Comissªo consciŒncia de que, em caso de resposta afirmativa (cid:224)s perguntas 1 e 2, centenas de 3. milhares de segurados individuais de baixos rendimentos ficarªo em situa(cid:231)ªo dif(cid:237)cil? PoderÆ a Comissªo igualmente confirmar se pondera adoptar ainda outras medidas que, a serem 4. concretizadas, levariam a um forte aumento das despesas colectivas no sector da saœde, tais como a obriga(cid:231)ªo de celebrar contractos com um maior nœmero de prestadores de cuidados de saœde e novos acordos sobre os custos e extensªo dos cuidados de saœde abrangidos pelo seguro? Que medidas tenciona a Comissªo adoptar no sentido de evitar que os cuidados de saœde nos Pa(cid:237)ses 5. Baixos sejam subordinados a considera(cid:231)ıes de «livre concorrŒncia», nomeadamente se essa concorrŒncia se traduzir num aumento desnecessÆrio das despesas individuais e colectivas ligadas ao conjunto das disposi(cid:231)ıes existentes? Resposta dada por Anna Diamantopoulou em nome da Comissªo (14 de Mar(cid:231)o de 2000) Cabe a cada Estado-membro organizar o seu sistema de seguran(cid:231)a social (incluindo os sistemas de saœde) da forma que melhor entender e determinar as condi(cid:231)ıes de concessªo de benef(cid:237)cios ao abrigo desse sistema, desde que, evidentemente, o fa(cid:231)a em conformidade com a legisla(cid:231)ªo comunitÆria. Existem disposi(cid:231)ıes comunitÆrias relativas (cid:224) coordena(cid:231)ªo dos sistemas de seguran(cid:231)a social que removem obstÆculos (cid:224) livre circula(cid:231)ªo das pessoas no interior da comunidade bem como disposi(cid:231)ıes relativas (cid:224) discrimina(cid:231)ªo entre homens e mulheres no que respeita (cid:224) seguran(cid:231)a social. Contudo, a Comissªo desconhece a situa(cid:231)ªo espec(cid:237)fica descrita pelo Senhor Deputado bem como quaisquer medidas comunitÆrias com essas caracter(cid:237)sticas. Por conseguinte, a Comissªo tentarÆ obter informa(cid:231)ıes complementares junto das autoridades neerlandesas. (2000/C 280 E/228) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-0182/00 apresentada por Paul R(cid:252)big (PPE-DE) (cid:224) Comissªo (31 de Janeiro de 2000) Objecto: Exclusªo do direito (cid:224) dedu(cid:231)ªo do IVA sobre os ve(cid:237)culos ligeiros na `ustria Na `ustria, estÆ exclu(cid:237)da a possibilidade de dedu(cid:231)ªo do IVA no caso dos ve(cid:237)culos ligeiros e dos ve(cid:237)culos mistos, da(cid:237) resultando para as empresas austr(cid:237)acas manifestas distor(cid:231)ıes de concorrŒncia comparativamente a outros Estados-membros. Assim, seria necessÆrio dar aplica(cid:231)ªo imediata (cid:224) parte da proposta de directiva da Comissªo COM(98) 377 final (1) relativa (cid:224) uniformiza(cid:231)ªo das disposi(cid:231)ıes aplicÆveis (cid:224)s despesas nªo suscept(cid:237)veis de beneficiar da plena dedu(cid:231)ªo do IVA, na versªo alterada pelo Parlamento Europeu


title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0172/00 från Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) till kommissionen. 1999 års institutionella betydelse i Europeiska unionens historia.

text: C 280 E/194 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 3. 10. 2000 ˜r det inte kommissionens sak att se till att apotekskunderna inte diskrimineras, oavsett om de k(cid:246)per sina mediciner p(cid:229) dagen eller p(cid:229) natten? Svar fr(cid:229)n Frederik Bolkestein p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (1 mars 2000) Kommissionen anser att de f(cid:246)rh(cid:229)llanden som fr(cid:229)gest(cid:228)llaren h(cid:228)nvisar till inte inneb(cid:228)r n(cid:229)got problem n(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller gemenskapsr(cid:228)tten. De nationella best(cid:228)mmelser som den angivna avgiften grundar sig p(cid:229) f(cid:246)refaller inte vara direkt eller indirekt diskriminerande p(cid:229) grund av nationalitet. Avgiften tas ut under objektiva f(cid:246)rh(cid:229)llanden, n(cid:228)mligen n(cid:228)r en medborgare k(cid:246)per medicin i ett apotek som har nattjour, och har inget samband med subjektiva synpunkter p(cid:229) k(cid:246)paren. Vidare konstaterar kommissionen att best(cid:228)mmelserna saknar samband med fri varur(cid:246)rlighet n(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller l(cid:228)kemedel, liksom med etableringsfriheten eller friheten att tillhandah(cid:229)lla tj(cid:228)nster. (2000/C 280 E/226) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0172/00 fr(cid:229)n Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) till kommissionen ˜mne: 1999 (cid:229)rs institutionella betydelse i Europeiska unionens historia (31 januari 2000) F(cid:246)rra (cid:229)ret var, i historia sedan den skapades 1957. institutionellt h(cid:228)nseende, det mest svindlande och betydelsefulla (cid:229)ret i gemenskapens B(cid:229)de med tanke p(cid:229) den allvarliga institutionella krisen som tvingade kommissionen att avg(cid:229), och med tanke p(cid:229) Europeiska unionens nya huvudroll i den internationella politiken, har Europeiska unionen genomg(cid:229)tt en omv(cid:228)lvning som teoretiker och forskare inom statsvetenskapen b(cid:246)r studera f(cid:246)r att dra slutsatser och g(cid:246)ra uttalanden om den framtida utvecklingen, vilka man kan ta h(cid:228)nsyn till i institutionella sammanhang. T(cid:228)nker kommissionen mot denna bakgrund fr(cid:228)mja forskning och debatt mellan experter och akademiker som intresserar sig f(cid:246)r gemenskapsinstitutionerna, s(cid:229) att man kan erh(cid:229)lla uttalanden och slutsatser om hur den institutionella kris skall tolkas, som EU gick igenom f(cid:246)rra (cid:229)ret? Svar fr(cid:229)n Romano Prodi p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (20 mars 2000) Kommissionen uppmuntrar till och leder unders(cid:246)kningar och diskussioner mellan experter och forskare som studerar unionens politiska och institutionella utveckling. Den st(cid:246)djer exempelvis forskning och undervisning i fr(cid:229)gor med anknytning till unionen inom Jean Monnet-programmet, inbegripet fr(cid:229)gor som r(cid:246)r unionens institutionella och politiska system. Inom ramen f(cid:246)r arbetet med att utarbeta underlag till regeringskonferensen 2000 om institutionella reformer har kommissionen uppdragit (cid:229)t Universitetsinstitutet f(cid:246)r Europastudier i Florens att unders(cid:246)ka f(cid:246)ruts(cid:228)ttningarna och villkoren f(cid:246)r en omorganisering av f(cid:246)rdragen. Resultatet av unders(cid:246)kningen kommer att presenteras f(cid:246)r stats- och regeringscheferna vid Europeiska r(cid:229)dets m(cid:246)te i juni. P(cid:229) det internationella planet st(cid:246)djer och bidrar kommissionen aktivt till (cid:229)siktsutbyten och diskussioner mellan forskare med s(cid:228)rskild inriktning p(cid:229) EU och Europapolitik inom n(cid:228)tverket ECSA ((cid:148)European Community Studies Association(cid:148)). Kommissionen driver vidare i samarbete med utomst(cid:229)ende organisationer ett viktigt projekt om unionens styrning. Den l(cid:228)mnar ocks(cid:229) bidrag till debatter och unders(cid:246)kningar inom forskningsinstitut och offentliga och privata tankesmedjor


title: SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0149/00 von Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) an die Kommission. Verkehrstrennungsgebiete, Auslegung der Kollisionsverhütungsregeln in der Deutschen Bucht.

eurovoc_concepts:
Germany
International Maritime Organisation
international waters
interpretation of the law
law of the sea
maritime safety
maritime shipping
maritime surveillance
pleasure craft

text: C 330 E/92 Amtsblatt der Europ(cid:228)ischen Gemeinschaften DE 21. 11. 2000 Die gr(cid:246)(cid:223)te Transportstrecke der aus mittel- und osteurop(cid:228)ischen L(cid:228)ndern importierten Pferde liegt au(cid:223)er- halb der Gemeinschaftsgrenzen. Die Durchsetzbarkeit der Rechtsvorschriften der Gemeinschaft f(cid:252)r den Schutz von Tieren beim Transport au(cid:223)erhalb der Gemeinschaftsgrenzen wird gegenw(cid:228)rtig noch gepr(cid:252)ft. Unabh(cid:228)ngig davon gelten zweifelsohne die einschl(cid:228)gigen Vorschriften in vollem Umfang, sobald die Tiere die Gemeinschaftsgrenzen erreicht haben. Im Zusammenhang mit dem Tierschutz gab es verschiedene Kontakte mit den wichtigsten mittel- und osteurop(cid:228)ischen L(cid:228)ndern, die lebende Tiere in die Gemeinschaft transportieren; die einschl(cid:228)gigen Rechts- vorschriften dieser Drittl(cid:228)nder wurden eingeholt. Die Kommission erw(cid:228)gt, zu gegebener Zeit formellere Initiativen gegen(cid:252)ber diesen Drittl(cid:228)ndern zu ergreifen. Wegen der Priorit(cid:228)t des Themas soll in diesem Rahmen das Problem des Ferntransports von Tieren, insbesondere von Pferden, auf der zweiten Sitzung der Leiter der Veterin(cid:228)rdienststellen der interessierten L(cid:228)nder am 28. /29. M(cid:228)rz 2000 er(cid:246)rtert und analysiert werden. Ferner trifft die Kommission zu gegebener Zeit eine Entscheidung dar(cid:252)ber, ob Vertragsverletzungsverfahren nach Artikel 226 (ex-Artikel 169) des EG-Vertrags gegen(cid:252)ber Italien wegen mangelhafter Durchsetzung der Richtlinien (cid:252)ber den Tiertransport er(cid:246)ffnet werden soll. (1) ABl. L 148 vom 30. 6. 1995. (2000/C 330 E/102) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0149/00 von Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) an die Kommission (31. Januar 2000) Betrifft: Verkehrstrennungsgebiete, Auslegung der Kollisionsverh(cid:252)tungsregeln in der Deutschen Bucht Hinsichtlich der Auslegung der Kollisionsverh(cid:252)tungsregeln in der Deutschen Bucht sind insbesondere bei deutschen Segelverb(cid:228)nden Irritationen (cid:252)ber die h(cid:228)ufige Verh(cid:228)ngung von Bu(cid:223)geldern aufgrund von Regel- verst(cid:246)(cid:223)en entstanden. Inwieweit sind die Kollisionsverh(cid:252)tungsregeln in den Verkehrstrennungsgebieten der Deutschen 1. Bucht international anerkannt? 2. Wird die Einhaltung der Regelungen durch internationale Organisationen (cid:252)berwacht? Ist der Kommission bekannt, da(cid:223) diese Regelungen in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten unterschiedlich 3. ausgelegt werden? 4. Welche M(cid:246)glichkeiten sieht die Kommission, die Auslegung und Anwendung der Kollisionsverh(cid:252)- tungsregeln auf europ(cid:228)ischer Ebene einheitlich zu gestalten? Antwort von Frau de Palacio im Namen der Kommission (2. M(cid:228)rz 2000) Die gesamte Seeschiffahrt (die auch Boote und Jachten einschlie(cid:223)t) unterliegt dem (cid:220)bereinkommen (cid:252)ber internationale Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen auf See (Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen). Der Kommission ist bekannt, da(cid:223) die genauen Befugnisse des K(cid:252)stenstaates bez(cid:252)glich der Schiffahrt 1. in Bereichen der Deutschen Bucht, die au(cid:223)erhalb seiner Hoheitsgew(cid:228)sser liegen, rechtlich umstritten sind. Ihr ist jedoch von Sonderregelungen in der Deutschen Bucht, die im Widerspruch zu den Anforderungen der Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen st(cid:252)nden, nichts bekannt. Es ist davon auszugehen, da(cid:223) die Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen im Bereich der Deutschen Bucht angewendet und durchgesetzt werden. 21. 11. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europ(cid:228)ischen Gemeinschaften C 330 E/93 Die Umsetzung der Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen wird von keiner internationalen Orga- 2. nisation (cid:252)berwacht. Die Verantwortung daf(cid:252)r, da(cid:223) seine Schiffe den Regeln gen(cid:252)gen, tr(cid:228)gt der Flaggenstaat des jeweiligen Schiffes. Die K(cid:252)stenstaaten k(cid:246)nnen die Einhaltung (cid:252)berwachen. Im Falle eines Versto(cid:223)es k(cid:246)nnen sie den Schiffsf(cid:252)hrer nach Ma(cid:223)gabe ihrer einzelstaatlichen Gesetzgebung zur Verantwortung ziehen, wenn das Schiff einen Hafen anl(cid:228)uft. 3. Der Kommission ist von unterschiedlichen Auslegungen der Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von Kollisionen in den Mitgliedstaaten nichts bekannt. Diese Regelungen wurden (cid:252)ber einen langen Zeitraum hinweg gestaltet. Ihre Auslegung wurde unter den Mitgliedstaaten der Internationalen Seeschiffahrtsorganisation (IMO) er(cid:246)rtert und vereinbart. Daher sieht die Kommission keinen Bedarf, die Anwendung der Regeln zur Verh(cid:252)tung von 4. Kollisionen in der Gemeinschaft zu harmonisieren. (2000/C 330 E/103) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0152/00 von Mar(cid:237)a Sornosa Mart(cid:237)nez (PSE) an die Kommission (31. Januar 2000) Betrifft: (cid:220)berschreitung des zul(cid:228)ssigen H(cid:246)chstwertes f(cid:252)r den Nitratgehalt von Wasser f(cid:252)r den menschlichen Gebrauch in der Autonomen Region Valencia (Spanien) Ende des vergangenen Jahres wurde ein Bericht der f(cid:252)r die (cid:220)berwachung der Gew(cid:228)sser zust(cid:228)ndigen Stelle der Regionalregierung von Valencia ver(cid:246)ffentlicht, demzufolge in 46 Gemeinden der Autonomen Region Valencia das Wasser f(cid:252)r den menschlichen Gebrauch einen Nitratgehalt aufweist, der (cid:252)ber dem von der Europ(cid:228)ischen Union und von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation festgesetzten H(cid:246)chstwert liegt. Dies bedeu- tet, da(cid:223) (cid:252)ber 375. 000 Menschen (10 % der Bev(cid:246)lkerung von Valencia) den gesundheitlichen Risiken von Nitrat ausgesetzt sind (insbesondere der Gefahr einer Krebserkrankung bei Erwachsenen und von An(cid:228)mie bei Kindern). Diese Art der Verunreinigung des Wassers ist in erster Linie auf die exzessive und nicht sachgem(cid:228)(cid:223)e Verwendung nitrathaltiger D(cid:252)ngemittel in der Landwirtschaft, die in der Region betrieben wird, zur(cid:252)ck- zuf(cid:252)hren. Die Regionalregierung von Valencia hat sich in dieser ernsten Situation darauf beschr(cid:228)nkt, insgesamt 193 Gemeinden als durch die Verunreinigung durch Nitrate gef(cid:228)hrdete Gebiete auszuweisen, ohne da(cid:223) irgendeine weitere Ma(cid:223)nahme getroffen wurde, um Abhilfe zu schaffen. Damit hat sie letztlich die gemeinschaftlichen Rechtsvorschriften in unkorrekter Weise angewendet, d. h. sie ist den rein formalen Aspekten nachgekommen, ohne L(cid:246)sungen des Problems anzubieten. In Anbetracht der Bestimmungen der Richtlinie (cid:252)ber die Qualit(cid:228)t von Wasser f(cid:252)r den menschlichen Gebrauch (98/83/EG) (1) und der Richtlinie zum Schutz der Gew(cid:228)sser vor Verunreinigung durch Nitrat aus landwirtschaftlichen Quellen (91/676/EG) (2) sowie der Vorschriften der k(cid:252)nftigen Rahmenrichtlinie (cid:252)ber Gew(cid:228)sser, die in K(cid:252)rze erlassen werden soll, wird die Kommission um folgende Auskunft gebeten: Ist der Kommission die Nichteinhaltung der gemeinschaftlichen Rechtsvorschriften bekannt, die im Falle der (cid:220)berschreitung des zul(cid:228)ssigen Nitratgehalts, unter der die Bev(cid:246)lkerung der Autonomen Region Valencia zu leiden hat, vorliegt? Welche Ma(cid:223)nahmen hat sie infolgedessen zum Schutz der (cid:246)ffentlichen Gesundheit in dieser Region getroffen bzw. beabsichtigt sie noch zu treffen? (1) ABl. L 330 vom 5. 12. 1998, S. 32. (2) ABl. L 375 vom 31. 12. 1991, S. 1. Antwort von Frau Wallstr(cid:246)m im Namen der Kommission (30. M(cid:228)rz 2000) Die Kommission ist sich des von der Frau Abgeordneten erw(cid:228)hnten Problems der Verschmutzung des f(cid:252)r den menschlichen Verbrauch bestimmten Wassers infolge (cid:220)berschreitens des zul(cid:228)ssigen H(cid:246)chstwertes f(cid:252)r den Nitratgehalt bewu(cid:223)t. Der Gerichtshof hat (cid:252)brigens Spanien wegen Nichteinhaltung der Vorschriften der Richtlinie 91/676/EWG des Rates vom 12. Dezember 1991 zum Schutz der Gew(cid:228)sser vor Verunreinigung durch Nitrat aus landwirtschaftlichen Quellen verurteilt. Der Gerichtshof hat insbesondere die mangelnde Ausweisung empfindlicher Gebiete und die mangelnde Einf(cid:252)hrung von Regeln der guten fachlichen Praxis in der Landwirtschaft festgestellt (1)


title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0176/00 från Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) till kommissionen. Parkeringsförbud och inreseavgift i Roms kommun.

eurovoc_concepts:
Italy
Latium
bus
cultural event
infringement of EU law
parking area
travel
vehicle tax

text: C 26 E/14 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 26. 1. 2001 Kommissionen har dessutom stoppat utbetalningen av bidrag till en grupp bidragstagare d(cid:228)r centret ing(cid:229)r, och straffar d(cid:228)rmed f(cid:246)retag som inte har n(cid:229)gonting med (cid:228)rendet att g(cid:246)ra. Kompletterande svar fr(cid:229)n Michaele Schreyer p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (27 april 2000) Kommissionen har inte k(cid:228)nnedom om att en av dess tj(cid:228)nstem(cid:228)n offentligt skulle ha uttalat sig i skuldfr(cid:229)gan i det (cid:228)rende som parlamentsledamoten h(cid:228)nvisar till. Europeiska byr(cid:229)n f(cid:246)r bedr(cid:228)geribek(cid:228)mpning (OLAF) har emellertid uppgett f(cid:246)r kommissionen att en tj(cid:228)nsteman fr(cid:229)n byr(cid:229)n uttalat sig om det faktum att, i detta fall, en (cid:246)verklagan l(cid:228)mnats till riks(cid:229)klagaren enligt Danmarks straffprocesslag mot (cid:229)klagarens beslut att inte v(cid:228)cka (cid:229)tal. Kommissionen p(cid:229)pekar att fr(cid:229)gan om betalningar till mottagare naturligtvis bed(cid:246)ms mot bakgrund av skyddet av gemenskapens finansiella intressen. Andra betalningar till samma mottagare i samband med (cid:228)renden som inneh(cid:229)ller oegentligheter kan vid behov upph(cid:246)ra, eller ge upphov till beslut om uppb(cid:246)rd genom avr(cid:228)kning enligt kommissionens f(cid:246)rordning (Euratom, EKSG, EG) nr 3418/93 av den 9 december 1993 om n(cid:228)rmare best(cid:228)mmelser f(cid:246)r genomf(cid:246)randet av vissa best(cid:228)mmelser i budgetf(cid:246)rordningen av den 21 december 1977 (1) och de interna f(cid:246)rfarandena f(cid:246)r uppb(cid:246)rd av fordringar enligt EG-f(cid:246)rdraget och EKSG-f(cid:246)rdraget. Hittills har inga slutliga beslut fattats i det (cid:228)rende som parlamentsledamoten h(cid:228)nvisar till. (1) Kommissionens f(cid:246)rordning (Euratom, EKSG, EG) nr 3418/93 av den 9 december 1993 om n(cid:228)rmare best(cid:228)mmelser f(cid:246)r genomf(cid:246)randet av vissa best(cid:228)mmelser i budgetf(cid:246)rordningen av den 21 december 1977, EGT L 315, 16. 12. 1993. (2001/C 26 E/017) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0176/00 fr(cid:229)n Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) till kommissionen ˜mne: Parkeringsf(cid:246)rbud och inreseavgift i Roms kommun (31 januari 2000) Roms kommun har med anledning av jubel(cid:229)ret beslutat att utf(cid:228)rda parkeringsf(cid:246)rbud f(cid:246)r turistbussar i hela innerstaden och att bel(cid:228)gga dessa bussar med en inreseavgift. Detta beslut kommer att p(cid:229)verka turist- och transportf(cid:246)retagen mycket negativt. Anser kommissionen inte att ett s(cid:229)dant beslut skadar de icke-italienska europeiska turistf(cid:246)retag som har anordnat resor till Rom innan kommunen fattade sitt beslut? Hur t(cid:228)nker kommissionen bem(cid:246)ta protesterna fr(cid:229)n den tyska transportorganisationen BDO? Svar fr(cid:229)n Loyola de Palacio p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (29 mars 2000) Fr(cid:229)gan om avst(cid:228)ngningen av Roms innerstad har varit f(cid:246)rem(cid:229)l f(cid:246)r flera fr(cid:229)gor fr(cid:229)n olika organisationer. Kommissionen har svarat tyska transportf(cid:246)rbundet (BDO) med en skrivelse av den 18 januari 2000, och 26. 1. 2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 26 E/15 f(cid:246)rbereder nu ett svar p(cid:229) en fr(cid:229)ga fr(cid:229)n de tyska myndigheterna. Efter att ha granskat de dokument som de italienska myndigheterna l(cid:228)mnat in avseende begr(cid:228)nsningen av turistbusstrafiken i innerstaden anser kommissionen att de italienska myndigheterna inte har brutit mot gemenskapslagstiftningen. Tv(cid:228)rt om uppfyller de romerska myndigheternas plan flera syften, med tanke p(cid:229) den tillstr(cid:246)m av bes(cid:246)kare som v(cid:228)ntas i Rom under (cid:229)r 2000 (cirka 29 miljoner bes(cid:246)kare, och 2000-2500 turistbussar per dag). Planen g(cid:229)r ut p(cid:229) att skydda kulturarvet och stadsarkitekturen, s(cid:228)kra befolkningens livskvalitet och h(cid:228)lsa och begr(cid:228)nsa den redan kraftiga f(cid:246)roreningen i staden. I detta syfte vill de romerska myndigheterna dela in staden i flera zoner, av vilka vissa kommer att vara avst(cid:228)ngda f(cid:246)r trafik. I st(cid:228)llet st(cid:228)lls parkeringar till turistbussarnas f(cid:246)rfogande, och det tas fram andra metoder f(cid:246)r att transportera bes(cid:246)karna till innerstaden. Tillfartsv(cid:228)garna till staden kommer att kontrolleras, och turistbussarna kommer att ledas till bussparkeringarna. Undantag kommer att g(cid:246)ras f(cid:246)r vissa resande, t. ex. funktionshindrade. Stadens kollektivtrafikn(cid:228)t kommer att f(cid:246)rst(cid:228)rkas, liksom (cid:228)ven skyltningen. Alla (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder f(cid:246)r att uppn(cid:229) dessa m(cid:229)l kommer att skrivas ut i offentliga anbudsf(cid:246)rfaranden s(cid:229) att insyn och r(cid:228)ttvis konkurrens garanteras. Dess (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder (cid:228)r f(cid:246)renliga med r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 684/92 av den 16 mars 1992 (1), (cid:228)ndrad genom r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EG) nr 11/98 av den 11 december 1997 om gemensamma regler f(cid:246)r internationell persontransport med buss (2) och s(cid:228)rskilt artikel 12 i denna, som inneb(cid:228)r att lokala utflykter f(cid:229)r genom- f(cid:246)ras inom ramen f(cid:246)r tillf(cid:228)llig internationell trafik. Det b(cid:246)r p(cid:229)pekas att r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 684/92 i f(cid:246)rsta hand syftar till att reglera internationell trafik. Reglering av den lokala trafiken faller inom de lokala polismyndigheternas beh(cid:246)righetsomr(cid:229)de. Till(cid:228)mpningen av r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 684/92 p(cid:229)verkar inte ut(cid:246)vandet av polisens befogenheter under de villkor som staden Rom fastst(cid:228)llt. D(cid:228)rf(cid:246)r har kommissionen inte f(cid:246)r avsikt att inleda n(cid:229)got f(cid:246)rfarande mot Italien f(cid:246)r brott mot r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 684/92. Vad betr(cid:228)ffar inf(cid:246)randet av en intr(cid:228)desavgift s(cid:229) finns det ingenting i de planer som de italienska myndigheterna har l(cid:228)mnat in som tyder p(cid:229) att en s(cid:229)dan avgift planeras. Hur det (cid:228)n f(cid:246)rh(cid:229)ller sig med det s(cid:229) kan inf(cid:246)randet av avgifter f(cid:246)r turistbussar, s(cid:229) l(cid:228)nge de lokala skatterna och avgifterna inte (cid:228)r harmonierade p(cid:229) gemenskapsniv(cid:229), bara anses strida mot gemenskapslagstiftningen om de omfattar diskriminerande best(cid:228)mmelser, t. ex. genom att h(cid:246)gre avgifter tas ut f(cid:246)r turistbussar fr(cid:229)n andra medlems- stater. (1) EGT L 74, 20. 3. 1992. (2) EGT L 4, 8. 1. 1998. (2001/C 26 E/018) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0187/00 fr(cid:229)n Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen (31 januari 2000) ˜mne: Larmrapport om dioxin och PVC V(cid:228)rldsh(cid:228)lsoorganisationen WHO rekommenderade nyligen att m(cid:228)nniskor inte borde uts(cid:228)ttas f(cid:246)r mer (cid:228)n 1. 4 TEQ/kg kroppsvikt per dag, inklusive dioxin och dioxinliknande substanser. I en nyligen offentliggjord rapport fr(cid:229)n den 30 november 1999 uppskattade EU-experter att konsumenterna i EU via kosten uts(cid:228)tts f(cid:246)r s(cid:229) h(cid:246)ga doser som 2. 6 TEQ/kg kroppsvikt varje dag. Den genomsnittliga EU-konsumenten konsumerar s(cid:229)lunda mer dioxin och dioxinliknande substanser (cid:228)n vad WHO accepterar. Detta inneb(cid:228)r att de mest s(cid:229)rbara grupperna, som sm(cid:229)barn och barn, dagligen intar mer av dessa farliga (cid:228)mnen (cid:228)n vad som fastst(cid:228)llts i WHO:s rekommendationer. Situationen m(cid:229)ste f(cid:246)r(cid:228)ndras s(cid:229) snart som m(cid:246)jligt. Vad (cid:228)mnar kommissionen g(cid:246)ra f(cid:246)r att minska de skadliga h(cid:228)lsoeffekterna som h(cid:228)nger samman med att m(cid:228)nniskor uts(cid:228)tts f(cid:246)r dioxin?


title: 2000/130/JAI: Posición común del Consejo, de 31 de enero de 2000, relativa a la propuesta de Protocolo contra la fabricación y el tráfico ilícitos de armas de fuego, sus piezas y componentes y municiones, complementario de la propuesta de Convención de las Naciones Unidas contra la delincuencia transnacional organizada

eurovoc_concepts:
arms limitation
arms trade
fight against crime
firearms and munitions
illicit trade
organised crime

text: 12. 2. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 37/1 (Actos adoptados en aplicación del título VI del Tratado de la Unión Europea) POSICIÓN COMÚN DEL CONSEJO de 31 de enero de 2000 relativa a la propuesta de Protocolo contra la fabricación y el tráfico ilícitos de armas de fuego, sus piezas y componentes y municiones, complementario de la propuesta de Convención de las Naciones Unidas contra la delincuencia transnacional organizada (2000/130/JAI) EL CONSEJO DE LA UNIÓN EUROPEA, Visto el Tratado de la Unión Europea y, en particular, la letra a) del apartado 2 de su artículo 34, Vista la Iniciativa de la República Portuguesa, Considerando lo siguiente: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Se reconoce la importancia de la cooperación interna- cional en materia penal a los efectos de prevenir y combatir todas las formas graves de delincuencia, inclu- yendo el tráfico ilegal de armas, como se prevé en el artículo 29 del Tratado. Se han alcanzado acuerdos para desarrollar y negociar un protocolo contra la fabricación y el tráfico ilícitos de armas de fuego y sus piezas y componentes y muni- ciones, complementario de la propuesta de Convención de las Naciones Unidas contra la delincuencia transna- cional organizada. La Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas decidió que se le presentara el texto definitivo del proyecto de Convención y los Protocolos del mismo con vistas a su pronta adopción, previa de la Conferencia de alto nivel para la firma que tendrá lugar en Palermo. Determinados instrumentos internacionales adoptados en la Unión y en otros foros ya prevén la adopción de medidas para luchar contra la fabricación y el tráfico ilegales de aparatos destructivos. El 17 de diciembre de 1998 se adoptó la Acción común sobre la contribución de la Unión Europea para combatir la acumulación desestabilizadora y la prolifera- ción de armas ligeras y de pequeño calibre (1). (6) Conviene contribuir en la medida de lo posible a la negociación sobre las propuestas de Protocolo y evitar (7) (8) incompatibilidades entre el Protocolo propuesto y los instrumentos elaborados en la Unión. En sus conclusiones de 5 de octubre de 1998, el Consejo pidió a la Presidencia que propusiera una o varias Posi- ciones comunes de conformidad con el Tratado de la Unión Europea en relación con el proyecto de Conven- ción de las Naciones Unidas y sus protocolos. Se tiene en cuenta la Posición común adoptada por el Consejo el 29 de marzo de 1999 sobre la propuesta de Convención de las Naciones Unidas contra la delin- cuencia organizada (2). HA ADOPTADO LA PRESENTE POSICIÓN COMÚN: Artículo 1 En la negociación del proyecto de Protocolo de las Naciones Unidas contra la fabricación y el tráfico ilícitos de armas de fuego, sus piezas y componentes y municiones, los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea apoyarán la definición de arma de fuego basada en la idea de arma letal con cañón que expulsa, que ha sido concebida para expulsar o que puede transformarse fácilmente para expulsar una descarga, bala o proyectil mediante la acción de un explosivo, pero excluyendo las armas de fuego antiguas o sus reproducciones. En este contexto, la definición de arma de fuego antigua debería abor- darse de conformidad con la legislación nacional, pero no debería abarcar las armas de fuego fabricadas con posterioridad a 1870. Artículo 2 A los efectos del proyecto de Protocolo no deberán conside- rarse armas de fuego las armas explosivas, tales como bombas, granadas, cohetes o misiles. No obstante, en el texto debe preverse la penalización de la fabricación y el tráfico ilegales de dichas armas. (1) DO L 9 de 15. 1. 1999, p. 1. (2) DO L 87 de 31. 3. 1999, p. 1. L 37/2 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 12. 2. 2000 Artículo 3 Los Estados miembros acuerdan que, antes de seguir 1. examinando cuestiones relativas a la fabricación y el tráfico ilegales de explosivos por delincuentes y su utilización con fines delictivos, deberá esperarse el resultado del estudio que lleve a cabo el Grupo ad hoc de expertos establecido por la Resolución E/1999/30 de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas y la posible elaboración de un instrumento interna- cional sobre la fabricación y el tráfico ilícitos de explosivos por el Comité ad hoc de las Naciones Unidas encargado de la elaboración de una Convención contra la delincuencia organi- zada transnacional. Los Estados miembros respaldarán la labor del Grupo ad 2. hoc de expertos de las Naciones Unidas y procurarán que sus actividades se lleven a cabo lo antes posible. Artículo 4 El Consejo se esforzará por definir otras Posiciones comunes, en caso necesario, en relación con el proyecto de Protocolo. Hecho en Bruselas, el 31 de enero de 2000. Por el Consejo El Presidente J. PINA MOURA


title: 2000/108/EG: Rådets beslut av den 31 januari 2000 om utnämning av en luxemburgsk ledamot i Regionkommittén

eurovoc_concepts:
European Committee of the Regions
Luxembourg
appointment of staff

text: L 33/16 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 8. 2. 2000 RÅDETS BESLUT av den 31 januari 2000 om utnämning av en luxemburgsk ledamot i Regionkommittén (2000/108/EG) EUROPEISKA UNIONENS RÅD HAR BESLUTAT FÖLJANDE med beaktande av Fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen, särskilt artikel 263 i detta, med beaktande av rådets beslut av den 26 januari 1998 (1) om utnämning av ledamöter och suppleanter i Regionkommittén, och av följande skäl: En plats som ordinarie ledamot i Regionkommittén har blivit ledig till luxemburgsk ledamot, har avgått, vilket meddelats rådet den 15 september 1999. följd av att Anne Brasseur, Den luxemburgska regeringens förslag har beaktats. HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE. Enda artikel Simone Beissel utnämns till ordinarie ledamot i Regionkommittén som ersättare för Anne Brasseur under återstoden av dennas mandatperiod, dvs. till och med den 25 januari 2002. Utfärdat i Bryssel den 31 januari 2000. På rådets vägnar J. PINA MOURA Ordförande (1) EGT L 28, 4. 2. 1998, s. 19


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0153/00 de Alonso Puerta (GUE/NGL) a la Comisión. Obstáculos a la libre circulación por carretera en las fronteras francesas.

eurovoc_concepts:
France
application of EU law
free movement of goods
indemnification

text: C 303 E/150 Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas ES 24. 10. 2000 (2000/C 303 E/162) PREGUNTA ESCRITA P-0148/00 de Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (24 de enero de 2000) Asunto: Entrada de Croacia en la OMC En vista de la reciente elecci(cid:243)n de un nuevo Gobierno progresista en Croacia, ¿puede explicar la Comisi(cid:243)n por quØ se ha paralizado durante varios meses la entrada de Croacia en la OMC, a causa de objeciones por parte de la Uni(cid:243)n Europea? ¿QuØ medidas se estÆn tomando para asegurar que Croacia entre en la OMC lo antes posible, siguiendo la l(cid:237)nea de la pol(cid:237)tica general de la UE con respecto a los Balcanes? Respuesta del Sr. Lamy en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (17 de febrero de 2000) La Comisi(cid:243)n se ha comprometido a una conclusi(cid:243)n rÆpida de las negociaciones para la adhesi(cid:243)n de Croacia a la Organizaci(cid:243)n Mundial del Comercio (OMC). Los cambios pol(cid:237)ticos que estÆn teniendo lugar en este pa(cid:237)s permiten abrir nuevas sendas en las relaciones bilaterales. Sin embargo, dado que la nueva senda es la de una mayor integraci(cid:243)n en la Uni(cid:243)n, esta integraci(cid:243)n no deber(cid:237)a hacerse mÆs dif(cid:237)cil tanto para la Comunidad como para Croacia por las condiciones de adhesi(cid:243)n a la OMC de este pa(cid:237)s. Las negociaciones con las partes interesadas continœan y se intensificarÆn en las pr(cid:243)ximas semanas con objeto de alcanzar pronto una conclusi(cid:243)n satisfactoria. (2000/C 303 E/163) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0153/00 de Alonso Puerta (GUE/NGL) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (31 de enero de 2000) Asunto: ObstÆculos a la libre circulaci(cid:243)n por carretera en las fronteras francesas Las organizaciones patronales francesas de transporte por carretera organizaron del 10 al 12 de enero de 2000 el bloqueo de las fronteras con Espaæa, Italia, Alemania y BØlgica, as(cid:237) como los puertos de enlace con el Reino Unido, en protesta contra la ley de las 35 horas y el aumento del precio del gas(cid:243)leo. Teniendo en cuenta que enero es habitualmente uno de los meses de mayor actividad en el comercio exterior de frutas y hortalizas espaæolas, con una previsi(cid:243)n de exportaciones por carretera a travØs de las fronteras francesas por valor de unos 6 000 millones de pesetas diarias, y ante el riesgo de que el bloqueo provoque en los pr(cid:243)ximos d(cid:237)as un exceso de oferta y el hundimiento de los precios en el mercado europeo: ¿QuØ medidas ha adoptado o piensa tomar la Comisi(cid:243)n para garantizar que, de acuerdo con las disposiciones vigentes, el Estado francØs compense a los exportadores y transportistas por las pØrdidas ocasionadas y que Østas se tramiten de forma urgente, suficiente y acorde con los daæos y perjuicios causados? ¿QuØ nuevas medidas podr(cid:237)a adoptar la Comisi(cid:243)n para garantizar en el futuro el restablecimiento de la libre circulaci(cid:243)n, en casos similares al acaecido en Francia? Respuesta del Sr. Bolkestein en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (16 de marzo de 2000) Su Seæor(cid:237)a ha tenido a bien llamar la atenci(cid:243)n de la Comisi(cid:243)n sobre las considerables consecuencias econ(cid:243)micas que para las empresas comunitarias del sector de frutas y hortalizas tendrÆn los bloqueos que los transportistas franceses llevaron a cabo en las fronteras los d(cid:237)as 9 a 12 de enero de 2000. A este respecto, la Comisi(cid:243)n desea destacar que, con el fin de restablecer lo antes posible la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as y, de esta manera, limitar lo mÆs posible los daæos causados a los operadores econ(cid:243)micos comunitarios, ha decidido aplicar las disposiciones previstas en el Reglamento (CE) no 2679/98 del 24. 10. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas C 303 E/151 Consejo, de 7 de diciembre de 1998, sobre el funcionamiento del mercado interior en relaci(cid:243)n con la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as entre los Estados miembros (1). De esta manera y a tenor de lo dispuesto en el art(cid:237)culo 3 de dicho Reglamento, el 10 de enero de 2000 se envi(cid:243) a las autoridades francesas una petici(cid:243)n de informaci(cid:243)n, en la que se invitaba a las autoridades francesas a informar a la Comisi(cid:243)n de las medidas adoptadas para restablecer la libre circulaci(cid:243)n de mercanc(cid:237)as. Las autoridades francesas enviaron su respuesta con fecha 12 de enero de 2000 y en ella comunicaron a la Comisi(cid:243)n la informaci(cid:243)n correspondiente al paquete de medidas adoptado para restablecer en este caso la libre circulaci(cid:243)n. Asimismo, las autoridades francesas precisaron que el ministro francØs del interior ten(cid:237)a especial empeæo en proteger los posibles intereses de ciudadanos de otros Estados miembros que pudiesen ser v(cid:237)ctimas del bloqueo y que, por ello, hab(cid:237)a insistido en que los responsables del orden pœblico tomasen medidas para que se pudiese dar curso en su d(cid:237)a a las posibles solicitudes de indemnizaci(cid:243)n. En este punto, la Comisi(cid:243)n desea recordar que, efectivamente y de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el ordenamiento jur(cid:237)dico comunitario, es responsabilidad de los Estados miembros garantizar que se indemnice a los operadores econ(cid:243)micos que hayan podido resultar perjudicados en los derechos que para ellos se derivan del art(cid:237)culo 28 (antiguo art(cid:237)culo 30) del Tratado CE. (1) DO L 337 de 12. 12. 1998. (2000/C 303 E/164) PREGUNTA ESCRITA P-0157/00 de Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (26 de enero de 2000) Asunto: Plan de modernizaci(cid:243)n y calidad industrial para Andaluc(cid:237)a Al considerar el baremo de la riqueza por habitante de las comunidades aut(cid:243)nomas espaæolas, en base al PIB por habitante (porcentaje sobre la media espaæola), la regi(cid:243)n andaluza refleja un decepcionante (cid:237)ndice de 72,26 frente a la regi(cid:243)n espaæola del primer nivel al respecto, Baleares, que se sitœa con 154,48. Para que Andaluc(cid:237)a pueda salir del pozo actual en que se encuentra, no s(cid:243)lo en referencia a Espaæa, sino al conjunto de las regiones comunitarias, entre las que ocupa el triste puesto de los furgones de cola, se necesitar(cid:237)an crear 80 000 empresas en los pr(cid:243)ximos cuatro aæos, que permitan alcanzar el pleno empleo en la referida comunidad aut(cid:243)noma espaæola. ¿Puede indicar la Comisi(cid:243)n si estima que, ademÆs de las actuales pol(cid:237)ticas comunitarias favorecedoras del desarrollo del Æmbito econ(cid:243)mico andaluz, debe contribuir a poner en marcha un plan de modernizaci(cid:243)n y calidad industrial de la regi(cid:243)n andaluza que active la generaci(cid:243)n de empresas, en zonas desfavorecidas, y facilite a las pequeæas empresas el acceso a fuentes de financiaci(cid:243)n mÆs ventajosas, que favorezcan su expansi(cid:243)n y crecimiento? Respuesta del Sr. Barnier en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (24 de febrero de 2000) En los proyectos de orientaci(cid:243)n (1) adoptados el 1 de julio de 1999, la Comisi(cid:243)n seæalaba, entre otras cosas, la importancia que concede a las medidas de apoyo a las pequeæas y medianas empresas (PYME), tanto en lo que respecta a su creaci(cid:243)n como a su desarrollo, y hac(cid:237)a hincapiØ en cuestiones tales como la sociedad de la informaci(cid:243)n, la integraci(cid:243)n de dichas empresas en una red y los servicios de ayuda a los que tendrÆn acceso. El 29 de octubre de 1999, la Comisi(cid:243)n recibi(cid:243) de las autoridades espaæolas un plan de desarrollo regional para las regiones espaæolas del objetivo no 1 durante el periodo de programaci(cid:243)n 2000-2006. La Comisi(cid:243)n estÆ examinando dicha propuesta a fin de perfilar, en colaboraci(cid:243)n con dichas autoridades, el marco comunitario de apoyo que fijarÆ las condiciones de aplicaci(cid:243)n de la programaci(cid:243)n. Asimismo, velarÆ por que las prioridades que ha definido se tengan en cuenta de forma adecuada en las diferentes medidas y en las modalidades de intervenci(cid:243)n a las que darÆn lugar. (1) Documento de trabajo de la Comisi(cid:243)n SEC(1999) 103 final: Los Fondos estructurales y su coordinaci(cid:243)n con el Fondo de cohesi(cid:243)n (cid:129) Proyecto de directrices para los programas del periodo 2000-2006


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-0202/00 van Dominique Souchet (UEN) aan de Commissie. Douanemaatregelen tegen Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon.

eurovoc_concepts:
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
common tariff policy

text: 3. 10. 2000 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 280 E/199 Sindsdien is het gehekelde verschijnsel zo mogelijk nog erger geworden, met het gevolg dat sommige programma(cid:146)s juist reclame zijn gaan maken met het ontbreken of het geringe aantal reclameboodschappen. Kan de Commissie na ruim een jaar meedelen wat de uitslag is van het door haar aangekondigde onderzoek en wat zij denkt te doen opdat Spanje de genoemde richtlijn naleeft? (1) (2) PB C 207 van 21. 7. 1999, blz. 138. PB L 298 van 17. 10. 1989, blz. 23. Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie (28 februari 2000) Uit hoofde van artikel 226 (ex artikel 169) van het EG-Verdrag loopt een inbreukprocedure tegen Spanje wegens de niet-naleving van de reclamevoorschriften van de richtlijn (cid:132)Televisie zonder grenzen(cid:148) (Richtlijn 89/552/EEG van de Raad betreffende de co(cid:246)rdinatie van bepaalde wettelijke en bestuursrechtelijke bepalingen in de lidstaten inzake de uitoefening van televisie-omroepactiviteiten, zoals gewijzigd bij Richtlijn 97/36/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 30 juni 1997). (2000/C 280 E/233) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-0202/00 van Dominique Souchet (UEN) aan de Commissie Betreft: Douanemaatregelen tegen Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon (31 januari 2000) Ingevolge een door de Eenheid voor co(cid:246)rdinatie van de fraudebestrijding ingesteld onderzoek is sommige Europese douanediensten opgedragen om over te gaan tot weigering van uitvoercertificaten strekkende tot invoer van producten met vrijdom van douanerechten en heffingen van gelijke werking in de Gemeen- schap, welke in toepassing van artikel 101 van besluit 91/482/EEG (1) zijn opgesteld door de territoriale overheid van Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon. Kan de Commissie aangeven hoe zij in dit geval douane-inklaring en douane-uitklaring zietvan producten (cid:132)waarop geen vrijstelling of restitutie, geheel of gedeeltelijk, van douanerechten of heffingen van gelijke werking is toegepast(cid:148)? Ziet zij mogelijkheden om de autoriteiten van Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon, gelet op de enorme problemen waarmee deze daardoor nu en in de toekomst te kampen krijgen, uitstel van executie te verlenen in afwachting van de definitieve resultaten van het lopende onderzoek, aangezien de betrokken autoriteiten zich bereid verklaard hebben om enigerlei, door de Commissie voorgestelde aanpassingsmaatregel uit te voeren? (1) PB L 263 van 19. 9. 1991, blz. 1. Antwoord van Mevr. Schreyer namens de Commissie (25 februari 2000) In het door het geachte parlementslid bedoelde geval werd vastgesteld dat met name in Saint Pierre et Miquelon vervoerssteun werd toegekend aan de marktdeelnemers die overgaan tot de overslag van bepaalde producten op het grondgebied. Tevens rekening houdend met de door de Franse autoriteiten en de autoriteiten van Saint Pierre et Miquelon verstrekte gegevens onderzoekt de Commissie of deze vervoerssteun overeenstemt met een restitutie van douanerechten overeenkomstig Besluit 91/482/EEG van de Raad van 25 juli 1991 betref- fende de associatie van de landen en gebieden overzee (LGO) met de Europese Economische Gemeen- schap (1). Uit hoofde van dit besluit worden de producten die niet van oorsprong zijn uit een LGO en die zich daar in het vrije verkeer bevinden en in ongewijzigde toestand worden heruitgevoerd naar de Gemeenschap, in de Gemeenschap toegelaten met vrijdom van douanerechten en heffingen van gelijke werking op voorwaarde dat de in artikel 101, lid 2, vermelde voorwaarden in acht worden genomen (betaling van douanerechten of heffingen van gelijke werking in de LGO, geen vrijstelling of restitutie, geheel of gedeeltelijk, van douanerechten of heffingen van gelijke werking, overlegging van een uitvoer- certificaat). C 280 E/200 Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen NL 3. 10. 2000 Teneinde de financiºle belangen van de Gemeenschappen te beschermen werden de nationale autoriteiten verzocht in deze fase de nodige conservatoire maatregelen te nemen (storting van een waarborgsom door de betrokken marktdeelnemers). De Commissie zal de betrokken autoriteiten rechtstreeks in kennis stellen van de conclusies van haar onderzoek. (1) PB L 263 van 19. 9. 1991, gewijzigd bij Besluit 97/803/EG; PB L 329 van 29. 11. 1997. (2000/C 280 E/234) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0205/00 van Caroline Jackson (PPE-DE) aan de Commissie (4 februari 2000) Betreft: Eventuele communautaire regelgeving over gevaarlijke sporten Kan de Commissie mededelen of er in de EU-wetgeving enige specifieke regelgeving is over gevaarlijke sporten zoals vechtsporten en de bescherming van de beoefenaars van dergelijke sporten? Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie (8 maart 2000) De Commissie deelt de geachte afgevaardigde mee dat op communautair niveau geen specifieke sport- wetgeving bestaat. Het EG-Verdrag stelt de Commissie niet in staat om op dat gebied regels op te stellen. De reglementering van sporten, in het bijzonder gevaarlijke sporten, valt voornamelijk onder de bevoegd- heid van de lidstaten. Verscheidene lidstaten hebben trouwens een aantal voorschriften goedgekeurd voor de kwalificatie van de begeleiders, de toegang tot de sport en de veiligheidsnormen, met name voor sporten die als gevaarlijk bekend staan. Ook de sportbonden spelen een belangrijke rol in de organisatie en de reglementering van hun sporttak. De Commissie vestigt de aandacht van de geachte afgevaardigde op het verslag van Helsinki over sport (1) dat de Commissie op 1 december 1999 heeft goedgekeurd. In dit verslag benadrukt de Commissie de noodzaak van een nieuw partnerschap tussen de sportbonden, de lidstaten en de communautaire instellingen, met inachtneming van het subsidiariteitsbeginsel en de autonomie van de sportbonden. (1) Verslag van Helsinki over sport (cid:129) COM(1999) 644 def. Verslag van de Commissie aan de Europese Raad teneinde de bestaande sportstructuren te vrijwaren en de sport haar sociale functie in het kader van de Gemeenschap te laten behouden. (2000/C 280 E/235) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0212/00 van GØrard Caudron (PSE) aan de Commissie (4 februari 2000) Betreft: Steun aan de staalindustrie Tijdens de plenaire vergadering heb ik mijn mening kunnen geven over de toepassing in 1998 van de zesde code inzake de steun aan de ijzer- en staalindustrie. Hoewel ik het verslag van de Commissie van hoge kwaliteit acht, betreur ik het dat dit verslag niet alle aspecten van de steun dekt. Hoewel de Commissie een code voor steun aan de ijzer- en staalindustrie heeft opgesteld die niets aan duidelijkheid te wensen overlaat, heeft zij herhaaldelijk steun aan ijzer- en staalondernemingen toegekend die niet tot de categorieºn behoort die onder de code vallen. Met het oog op het gelijkheidsbeginsel zal de steuncode hetzij strikt moeten worden toegepast hetzij moeten worden gewijzigd als de Commissie steun wil toekennen die niet onder steunmaatregelen valt die op dit moment wettelijk zijn toegestaan


title: Council Decision of 31 January 2000 appointing a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency

eurovoc_concepts:
Euratom Supply Agency
advisory committee (EU)
appointment of staff

text: C 37/4 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 2. 2000 COUNCIL DECISION of 31 January 2000 appointing a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency (2000/C 37/04) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second and third paragraphs of Article 54 thereof, Having regard to Article X of the Statutes of the Euratom Supply Agency (1), as last amended by Decision 95/1/EC, Euratom, ECSC of 1 January 1995 (2), Having regard to the Council Decision of 14 June 1999 appointing the members of Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency (3), the Advisory Having regard to the opinion of the Commission, Whereas a member’s seat on the aforementioned Committee has become vacant following the resignation of Mr Jean-Fran(cid:231)ois DEMALDENT, which was brought to the Council’s attention on 8 July 1999; Whereas that vacancy should be filled; Having regard to the nomination submitted by the French Government on 8 July 1999, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Sole Article Mr Thierry KNOCKAERT is hereby appointed a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency for the remainder of the Committee’s term of office, that is until 28 March 2001. Done at Brussels, 31 January 2000. For the Council The President J. PINA MOURA (1) OJ 27, 6. 12. 1958, p. 534/58. (2) OJ L 1, 1. 1. 1995, p. 1. (3) OJ C 186, 2. 7. 1999, p. 1


title: Απόφαση του Συμβουλίου, της 31ης Ιανουαρίου 2000, περί του διορισμού μέλους της συμβουλευτικής επιτροπής του οργανισμού εφοδιασμού της Ευρατόμ

text: C 37/4 EL ¯(cid:240)(cid:223)(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:231) ¯(cid:246)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:229)æ(cid:223)(cid:228)Æ (cid:244)ø(cid:237) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) ˚(cid:239)Ø(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:244)ø(cid:237) 9. 2. 2000 `—ˇ(cid:214)`(cid:211)˙ (cid:212)ˇ(cid:213) (cid:211)(cid:213)(cid:204)´ˇ(cid:213)¸(cid:201)ˇ(cid:213) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 31(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:201)Æ(cid:237)(cid:239)ıÆæ(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 2000 (cid:240)(cid:229)æ(cid:223) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:228)Ø(cid:239)æØ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:236)(cid:221)º(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:243)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)ıº(cid:229)ı(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:239)æªÆ(cid:237)Ø(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:229)(cid:246)(cid:239)(cid:228)ØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæÆ(cid:244)(cid:252)(cid:236) (2000/C 37/04) (cid:212)ˇ (cid:211)(cid:213)(cid:204)´ˇ(cid:213)¸(cid:201)ˇ (cid:212)(cid:217)˝ ¯(cid:213)(cid:209)(cid:217)—`(cid:218)˚(cid:217)˝ ˚ˇ(cid:201)˝ˇ(cid:212)˙(cid:212)(cid:217)˝, ‚(cid:247)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:244)Æ(cid:242) ı(cid:240)(cid:252)ł(cid:231): (cid:244)(cid:231) (cid:243)ı(cid:237)Ł(cid:222)Œ(cid:231) ªØÆ (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) (cid:223)(cid:228)æı(cid:243)(cid:231) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) ˚(cid:239)Ø(cid:237)(cid:252)(cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:244)Æ(cid:242) `(cid:244)(cid:239)(cid:236)ØŒ(cid:222) ¯(cid:237)(cid:221)æª(cid:229)ØÆ(cid:242), ŒÆØ Ø(cid:228)(cid:223)ø(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:220)æŁæ(cid:239) 54 (cid:228)(cid:229)(cid:253)(cid:244)(cid:229)æ(cid:239) ŒÆØ (cid:244)æ(cid:223)(cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:229)(cid:228)(cid:220)(cid:246)Ø(cid:239), (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:220)æŁæ(cid:239) (cid:215) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı ŒÆ(cid:244)Æ(cid:243)(cid:244)Æ(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:239)æªÆ(cid:237)Ø(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:229)(cid:246)(cid:239)(cid:228)ØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæÆ(cid:244)(cid:252)(cid:236) (1), (cid:252)(cid:240)ø(cid:242) (cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)Ø(cid:222)Ł(cid:231)Œ(cid:229) (cid:244)(cid:229)º(cid:229)ı(cid:244)Æ(cid:223)Æ Æ(cid:240)(cid:252) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) Æ(cid:240)(cid:252)(cid:246)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231) 95/1/¯˚, ¯ıæÆ(cid:244)(cid:252)(cid:236), ¯˚`(cid:215) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 1(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:201)Æ(cid:237)(cid:239)ıÆæ(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 1995 (2), (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) Æ(cid:240)(cid:252)(cid:246)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)ıº(cid:223)(cid:239)ı, (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 14(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:201)(cid:239)ı(cid:237)(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 1999, (cid:240)(cid:229)æ(cid:223) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:228)Ø(cid:239)æØ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)ø(cid:237) (cid:236)(cid:229)º(cid:254)(cid:237) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:243)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)ıº(cid:229)ı(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:239)æªÆ(cid:237)Ø(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:229)(cid:246)(cid:239)(cid:228)ØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæÆ(cid:244)(cid:252)(cid:236) (3), (cid:244)(cid:231) ª(cid:237)(cid:254)(cid:236)(cid:231) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242), ¯Œ(cid:244)Ø(cid:236)(cid:254)(cid:237)(cid:244)Æ(cid:242): (cid:252)(cid:244)Ø (cid:221)(cid:247)(cid:229)Ø Œ(cid:229)(cid:237)øŁ(cid:229)(cid:223) (cid:236)ØÆ Ł(cid:221)(cid:243)(cid:231) (cid:236)(cid:221)º(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:240)æ(cid:239)Æ(cid:237)Æ(cid:246)(cid:229)æ(cid:252)(cid:236)(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:229)(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242), º(cid:252)ªø (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:240)ÆæÆ(cid:223)(cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı Œ. Jean-Fran(cid:231)ois DEMALDENT, (cid:231) (cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:223)Æ ª(cid:237)ø(cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)Ø(cid:222)Ł(cid:231)Œ(cid:229) (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) (cid:243)(cid:244)Ø(cid:242) 8 (cid:201)(cid:239)ıº(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 1999• (cid:252)(cid:244)Ø (cid:240)æ(cid:221)(cid:240)(cid:229)Ø, ŒÆ(cid:244)(cid:220) (cid:243)ı(cid:237)(cid:221)(cid:240)(cid:229)ØÆ, (cid:237)Æ (cid:240)º(cid:231)æøŁ(cid:229)(cid:223) Æı(cid:244)(cid:222) (cid:231) Ł(cid:221)(cid:243)(cid:231)• (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) ı(cid:240)(cid:239)ł(cid:231)(cid:246)Ø(cid:252)(cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:244)Æ (cid:240)(cid:239)ı (cid:240)æ(cid:252)(cid:244)(cid:229)Ø(cid:237)(cid:229) (cid:231) ªÆººØŒ(cid:222) Œı(cid:226)(cid:221)æ(cid:237)(cid:231)(cid:243)(cid:231) (cid:243)(cid:244)Ø(cid:242) 8 (cid:201)(cid:239)ıº(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 1999, `—ˇ(cid:214)`(cid:211)(cid:201)Z¯(cid:201): ¢æŁæ(cid:239) (cid:236)(cid:252)(cid:237)(cid:239) ˇ Œ. Thierry KNOCKAERT (cid:228)Ø(cid:239)æ(cid:223)(cid:230)(cid:229)(cid:244)ÆØ (cid:236)(cid:221)º(cid:239)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:243)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)ıº(cid:229)ı(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı (cid:239)æªÆ(cid:237)Ø(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:229)(cid:246)(cid:239)(cid:228)ØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæÆ(cid:244)(cid:252)(cid:236) ªØÆ (cid:244)(cid:239) ı(cid:240)(cid:252)º(cid:239)Ø(cid:240)(cid:239) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) Ł(cid:231)(cid:244)(cid:229)(cid:223)Æ(cid:242) Æı(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:240)Ø(cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:222)(cid:242), (cid:228)(cid:231)ºÆ(cid:228)(cid:222) (cid:221)ø(cid:242) (cid:244)Ø(cid:242) 28 (cid:204)Ææ(cid:244)(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 2001. ´æı(cid:238)(cid:221)ºº(cid:229)(cid:242), 31 (cid:201)Æ(cid:237)(cid:239)ıÆæ(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 2000. ˆØÆ (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) ˇ —æ(cid:252)(cid:229)(cid:228)æ(cid:239)(cid:242) J. PINA MOURA (1) ¯¯ 27 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 6. 12. 1958, (cid:243). 534/58. (2) ¯¯ L 1 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 1. 1. 1995, (cid:243). 1. (3) ¯¯ C 186 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 2. 7. 1999, (cid:243). 1