title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0726/00 från Inger Schörling (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen. Homeopatiska medel i djurhållningen.

text: 26. 1. 2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 26 E/97 Vad g(cid:228)ller r(cid:229)dets direktiv 91/271/EEG av den 21 maj 1991 om rening av avloppsvatten fr(cid:229)n t(cid:228)tbe- byggelse (3), b(cid:246)r det p(cid:229)pekas att t(cid:228)torter med en personekvivalent p(cid:229) (cid:246)ver 15 000 (personekvivalent (cid:228)r den enhet som anv(cid:228)nds f(cid:246)r ange den organiska f(cid:246)rorening som motsvarar den genomsnittliga m(cid:228)ngd f(cid:246)rore- ning som en person ger upphov till per dag) som sl(cid:228)pper ut sitt avloppsvatten i floden Segura m(cid:229)stevara utrustade med ledningsn(cid:228)t och system f(cid:246)r biologisk vattenrening senast den 31 december 2000. F(cid:246)r t(cid:228)torter med en personekvivalent p(cid:229) mellan 2000 och 15000 (cid:228)r tidsgr(cid:228)nsen den 31 december 2005. I b(cid:246)rjan av n(cid:228)sta (cid:229)r kommer kommissionen att kontrollera om detta krav har uppfyllts i de st(cid:246)rsta t(cid:228)torterna. N(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller avloppsvatten fr(cid:229)n industrin f(cid:246)reskrivs entydigt i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 76/464/EEG att utsl(cid:228)pp som inneh(cid:229)ller (cid:228)mnen som anges i f(cid:246)rteckning I och f(cid:246)rteckning II m(cid:229)ste godk(cid:228)nnas. F(cid:246)ljaktligen finns ett krav p(cid:229) rening av industrispillvatten vid (cid:246)verskridande av gr(cid:228)nsv(cid:228)rdena f(cid:246)r utsl(cid:228)ppet eller av vattenkvalitetsm(cid:229)len f(cid:246)r floden. Kommissionen kommer som f(cid:246)rdragens v(cid:228)ktare att med hj(cid:228)lp av de instrument som den f(cid:246)rfogar (cid:246)ver vidta de n(cid:246)dv(cid:228)ndiga (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rderna f(cid:246)r att se till att gemenskapens regelverk f(cid:246)ljs i det aktuella fallet. (1) EGT L 129, 18. 5. 1976. (2) Dom fr(cid:229)n 25. 11. 1998. M(cid:229)l C-214/96. (3) EGT L 135, 30. 5. 1991. (2001/C 26 E/117) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0726/00 fr(cid:229)n Inger Sch(cid:246)rling (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen (17 mars 2000) ˜mne: Homeopatiska medel i djurh(cid:229)llningen Enligt en ny f(cid:246)rordning (r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EG) nr 1804/1999 (1) av den 19 juli 1999 om komplettering av f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 2092/91 (2) om ekologisk produktion av jordbruksprodukter och uppgifter d(cid:228)rom p(cid:229) jordbruksprodukter och livsmedel s(cid:229) att den (cid:228)ven omfattar animalieproduktionen) skall ekologiskt upp- f(cid:246)dda djur behandlas med homeopatiska medel och (cid:246)rtmediciner, under f(cid:246)ruts(cid:228)ttning att de (cid:228)r verksamma, i f(cid:246)rsta hand. Jag vill till att b(cid:246)rja med s(cid:228)ga att jag tycker att det (cid:228)r mycket positivt att de homeopatiska medlen och (cid:246)rtmedicinerna nu (cid:228)r accepterade och skall anv(cid:228)ndas, men i Sverige har veterin(cid:228)rerna protesterat mot regeln eftersom de inte har till(cid:229)telse att anv(cid:228)nda homeopatiska medel s(cid:229) l(cid:228)nge det inte finns n(cid:229)gra vetenskapliga bevis f(cid:246)r att preparaten (cid:228)r verksamma. D(cid:228)remot f(cid:229)r vem som helst som inte (cid:228)r veterin(cid:228)r behandla sjuka djur med homeopatisk medicin. Konsekvensen blir att man (cid:246)verl(cid:229)ter till bonden att f(cid:246)rst st(cid:228)lla en diagnos och sedan pr(cid:246)va en homeopatisk medicinering. Risken (cid:228)r d(cid:229) stor att en riktig diagnos och professionell behandling kommer f(cid:246)r sent. ˜ven smittspridningen riskerar att (cid:246)ka. Vad t(cid:228)nker kommissionen g(cid:246)ra f(cid:246)r att garantera att djur i alla l(cid:228)nder f(cid:229)r en professionell och adekvat behandling och att (cid:228)ven veterin(cid:228)rer f(cid:229)r anv(cid:228)nda homeopatiska medel och (cid:246)rtmediciner? (1) EGT L 222, 24. 8. 1999, s. 1. (2) EGT L 198, 22. 7. 1991, s. 1. Svar fr(cid:229)n Erkki Mr Liikanen p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (18 april 2000) Enligt r(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EG) nr 1804/1999 (1) skall sjuka eller skadade djur som f(cid:246)ds upp p(cid:229) jordbruk med ekologisk produktion behandlas med veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel av vegetabiliskt ursprung eller homeopatiska produkter, under f(cid:246)ruts(cid:228)ttning att de har en effektiv terapeutisk verkan p(cid:229) den sjukdom och djurart som behandlingen (cid:228)r avsedd f(cid:246)r. Om s(cid:229) inte (cid:228)r fallet till(cid:229)ts anv(cid:228)ndning av kemisk-syntetiskt framst(cid:228)llda allopatiska veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel under (cid:246)verinseende av en veterin(cid:228)r. C 26 E/98 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 26. 1. 2001 Alla l(cid:228)kemedel, oavsett ursprung, m(cid:229)ste uppfylla s(cid:228)rskilda regler innan de kan s(cid:228)ljas och anv(cid:228)ndas, och d(cid:228)rvidlag spelar det ingen roll om det (cid:228)r f(cid:246)r ekologiskt jordbruk eller konventionell djuruppf(cid:246)dning. Enligt de principer som fastst(cid:228)lls i artikel 4 i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 81/851/EEG (2) f(cid:229)r inget veterin(cid:228)rmedicinskt l(cid:228)kemedel sl(cid:228)ppas ut p(cid:229) marknaden i n(cid:229)gon medlemsstat eller anv(cid:228)ndas p(cid:229) djur utan att tillst(cid:229)nd utf(cid:228)rdats. I r(cid:229)dets direktiv 92/74/EEG (3) f(cid:246)reskrivs ett s(cid:228)rskilt f(cid:246)renklat f(cid:246)rfarande f(cid:246)r registrering av homeopatika, avsedda f(cid:246)r djur. Enligt detta f(cid:246)renklade registreringsf(cid:246)rfarande beh(cid:246)ver inte effektiviteten med dessa medel styrkas. I artikel 7 i direktivet fastst(cid:228)lls emellertid uttryckligen att homeopatika som genomg(cid:229)tt detta f(cid:246)renklade f(cid:246)rfarande inte f(cid:229)r anv(cid:228)ndas p(cid:229) djur inom livsmedelsproduktionen. Begreppet (cid:148)fytoterapeutiska l(cid:228)kemedel(cid:148) anv(cid:228)nds inte i gemenskapens l(cid:228)kemedelslagstiftning, och l(cid:228)kemedel som inneh(cid:229)ller aktiva (cid:246)rtingredienser m(cid:229)ste godk(cid:228)nnas som alla andra veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel. f(cid:246)r djur inom D(cid:228)rf(cid:246)r m(cid:229)ste b(cid:229)de fytoterapeutiska och homeopatiska veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel livsmedelsproduktionen godk(cid:228)nnas enligt best(cid:228)mmelserna i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 81/851/EEG, inbegripet best(cid:228)m- melserna om styrkt terapeutisk verkan. Avsikten med dessa regler (cid:228)r att s(cid:228)kra veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedels kvalitet, s(cid:228)kerhet och effektivitet. Reglerna g(cid:228)ller f(cid:246)r alla som saluf(cid:246)r och ger veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel till djur inom gemenskapen. Varken veterin(cid:228)rer eller jordbrukare har enligt gemenskapslagstiftningen r(cid:228)tt att anv(cid:228)nda homopatiska eller fytoterapeutiska veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel, om inte l(cid:228)kemedlen godk(cid:228)nts i enlighet med best(cid:228)mmel- serna i r(cid:229)dets direktiv 81/851/EEG, inbegripet best(cid:228)mmelserna om styrkt terapeutisk verkan. (1) R(cid:229)dets f(cid:246)rordning (EG) nr 1804/1999 av den 19 juli 1999 om komplettering av f(cid:246)rordning (EEG) nr 2092/91 om ekologisk produktion av jordbruksprodukter och uppgifter d(cid:228)rom p(cid:229) jordbruksprodukter och livsmedel s(cid:229) att den (cid:228)ven omfattar animalieproduktion. (2) R(cid:229)dets direktiv 81/851/EEG av den 28 september 1981 om tilln(cid:228)rmning av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning om veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel, EGT L 317, 6. 11. 1981. (3) R(cid:229)dets direktiv 92/74/EEG av den 22 september 1992 om ut(cid:246)kad r(cid:228)ckvidd f(cid:246)r direktiv 81/851/EEG om tilln(cid:228)rm- ning av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning om veterin(cid:228)rmedicinska l(cid:228)kemedel och fastst(cid:228)llande av ytterligare best(cid:228)mmel- ser som r(cid:246)r homeopatika avsedda f(cid:246)r djur, EGT L 297, 13. 10. 1992. (2001/C 26 E/118) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0727/00 fr(cid:229)n Inger Sch(cid:246)rling (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen (17 mars 2000) ˜mne: Brott mot direktiv 85/337/EG och 97/11/EG Sedan 1994 har man i Blekinge l(cid:228)n, Sverige, planerat ett v(cid:228)gbygge (cid:246)ver Rolandshav, ett skyddsv(cid:228)rt v(cid:229)tmarkskomplex vars naturv(cid:228)rden kommer att helt eller delvis f(cid:246)rst(cid:246)ras genom v(cid:228)gbygget. Under december m(cid:229)nad inl(cid:228)mnades ett klagom(cid:229)l till kommissionen mot L(cid:228)nsstyrelsen i Blekinge l(cid:228)n f(cid:246)r brister vad g(cid:228)ller (cid:246)ppenhet, objektiv granskning och kvalitetskontroll vid till(cid:228)mpning av direktiv 85/337/ EG (1) f(cid:246)r okritiskt godk(cid:228)nnande av en arbetsplan f(cid:246)r v(cid:228)gbygge. ((cid:228)ndrat genom direktiv 97/11/EG (2)). Klagom(cid:229)let riktades (cid:228)ven mot N(cid:228)ringsdepartementet Den klagande menar att de milj(cid:246)konsekvensbeskrivningar som anv(cid:228)nds till underlag f(cid:246)r beslut brister p(cid:229) ett antal punkter, varf(cid:246)r de beslut som tagits ej kan anses riktiga. Det p(cid:229)pekas att milj(cid:246)konsekvensbeskriv- ningen inte uppfyller kraven p(cid:229) relevanta uppgifter och den inneh(cid:229)ller inte heller identifikation, beskriv- ning eller bed(cid:246)mning av vare sig direkta eller indirekta konsekvenser av v(cid:228)gbygget f(cid:246)r ekosystemen inom (I det material som allm(cid:228)nheten f(cid:229)tt tillg(cid:229)ng till framkommer det de landskapsomr(cid:229)den som ber(cid:246)rs. dessutom rena felaktigheter. I informationsmaterialet p(cid:229)st(cid:229)s det att Lunds universitet (cid:228)r ansvarigt f(cid:246)r milj(cid:246)konsekvensbeskrivningens naturv(cid:228)rdering, vilket ej (cid:228)r riktigt d(cid:229) Lunds universitet inte medverkat i denna. )


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-0709/00 υποβολή: Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) προς την Επιτροπή. Οι εγκαταστάσεις επανεπεξεργασίας στο Sellafield και στο Cap de la Hague.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU environmental policy
Lower Normandy
North West (England)
fuel reprocessing
health risk
marine pollution

formats: html pdf print

text: 20. 2. 2001 EL Επι΄σηµη Εφηµερι΄δα των Ευρωπαι¤κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των C 53 E/19 (2001/C 53 E/023) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0709/00 ypobolh·: Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) prow thn Epitroph· (17 Marti·oy 2000) Ue·ma: Οι εγκαταστα΄σεις επανεπεξεργασι΄ας στο Sellafield και στο Cap de la Hague Ως συµβαλλο΄µενο µε΄ρος της συ΄µβασης OSPAR (συ΄µβαση για την προστασι΄α του θαλα΄σσιου περιβα΄λλοντος του βορειοανατολικου΄ Ατλαντικου΄), η Επιτροπη΄ ε΄χει στο΄χο να φε΄ρει τις τιµε΄ς ραδιενε΄ργειας σε ολο΄κληρο το βιο΄τοπο των ευρωπαι¤κω΄ν θαλασσω΄ν και του βορειοανατολικου΄ Ατλαντικου΄ σε φυσιολογικα΄ επι΄πεδα µε΄χρι το 2020. Με ερω΄τηση΄ του τον Ιανουα΄ριο το γραφει΄ο µας επιση΄µανε εκ νε΄ου την αυξανο΄µενη ρυ΄πανση των ευρωπαι¤κω΄ν θαλασσω΄ν απο΄ τις εγκαταστα΄σεις επανεπεξεργασι΄ας στο Sellafield και στο Cap de la Hague. Η συ΄µβαση OSPAR ορι΄ζει ο΄τι µε΄χρι το 2020 οι τιµε΄ς τεχνητω΄ν, σχηµατισµε΄νων απο΄ ανθρω΄πινη παρε΄µβαση 1. ραδιονουκλει¤δι΄ων πρε΄πει να πλησια΄ζει το µηδε΄ν σε ολο΄κληρο το βιο΄τοπο των ευρωπαι¤κω΄ν θαλασσω΄ν και του βορειοανατολικου΄ Ατλαντικου΄. ∆εδοµε΄νων των εξελι΄ξεων στις µετρη΄σεις τα τελευται΄α χρο΄νια, πιστευ΄ει η Επιτροπη΄ ο΄τι η συνε΄χιση της λειτουργι΄ας των εγκαταστα΄σεων επανεπεξεργασι΄ας συµβιβα΄ζεται µε αυτο΄ το στο΄χο; Αν ναι, σε ποια επιστηµονικη΄ βα΄ση (παρακαλω΄ αναφε΄ρετε σχετικε΄ς µελε΄τες) και ποια στοιχει΄α θεµελιω΄νεται αυτη΄ η εκτι΄µηση; Σε ποιο βαθµο΄ ε΄χει απασχολη΄σει την Επιτροπη΄ το ερω΄τηµα αν η συνεχη΄ς ε΄κθεση σε µικρε΄ς δο΄σεις 2. ραδιενεργου΄ ακτινοβολι΄ας πολλω΄ν αλλεπα΄λληλων γενεω΄ν κατοι΄κων των µολυσµε΄νων παραλι΄ων ε΄χει προκαλε΄σει γενετικα΄ προβλη΄µατα; Σε περι΄πτωση δε που βλε΄πει κινδυ΄νους απο΄ αυτο΄, σε ποιες επιστηµονικε΄ς µελε΄τες βασι΄ζεται αυτη΄ η εκτι΄µηση (παρακαλω΄ αναφε΄ρετε µελε΄τες); Προτι΄θεται η Επιτροπη΄ της ΕΕ, σε συνεργασι΄α µε την επιτροπη΄ OSPAR, να υποβα΄λει τω΄ρα τις εγκατα- 3. στα΄σεις επανεπεξεργασι΄ας σε αυστηρο΄τερο ε΄λεγχο; Ποια βη΄µατα και µε΄τρα για το µε΄λλον, συµπεριλαµβανοµε΄νης της χρηµατοδο΄τηση΄ς τους σχεδια΄ζει η Επιτροπη΄ για την επι΄τευξη του καταλο΄γου των στο΄χων που ε΄χει καταρτι΄σει τα συµβαλλο΄µενα µε΄ρη της OSPAR; Apa·nthsh thw kaw Wallström ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (18 Mai(cid:138)oy 2000) Υπογρα΄φοντας την απο΄ 23 Ιουλι΄ου 1998 δη΄λωση Sintra στο πλαι΄σιο της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR (Oslo-Paris), 1. υπουργοι΄ και Επιτροπη΄ υπογρα΄µµισαν τη δε΄σµευση΄ τους σε µια σειρα΄ στο΄χων της OSPAR οι οποι΄οι εκτι΄θενται στην υπο΄ψη δη΄λωση. Συγκεκριµε΄να, αναφορικα΄ µε τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες, τα συµβαλλο΄µενα µε΄ρη που συνεδρι΄ασαν στο πλαι΄σιο της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR, δεσµευ΄τηκαν να µεριµνη΄σουν ω΄στε οι απορρι΄ψεις, εκποµπε΄ς και απω΄λειες ραδιενεργω΄ν ουσιω΄ν να µειωθου΄ν µε΄χρι το ε΄τος 2020 σε επι΄πεδα τε΄τοια ω΄στε οι συγκεντρω΄σεις στο θαλα΄σσιο περιβα΄λλον που θα υπερβαι΄νουν τις µε΄χρι ση΄µερα συγκεντρω΄σεις και που θα προκυ΄πτουν ως αποτε΄λεσµα των απορρι΄ψεων, εκποµπω΄ν και απωλειω΄ν να ει΄ναι σχεδο΄ν µηδενικε΄ς. Τα συµβαλλο΄µενα µε΄ρη ενε΄κριναν το΄τε στο΄χο και στρατηγικη΄ για τις µελλοντικε΄ς εργασι΄ες της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR µε αντικει΄µενο τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες. Αρµο΄δια για να αξιολογει΄ την αποτελεσµατικο΄τητα των µε΄τρων στο πλαι΄σιο της υπο΄ψη στρατηγικη΄ς, καθω΄ς και την προ΄οδο που σηµειω΄νεται, ει΄ναι η επιτροπη΄ OSPAR, ενω΄ προβλε΄πεται αναθεω΄ρηση ανα΄ πενταετι΄α και, εφο΄σον κριθει΄ αναγκαι΄ο, τροποποι΄ηση της στρατηγικη΄ς. Η Επιτροπη΄ ε΄χει δεσµευτει΄ να βοηθη΄σει την επιτροπη΄ OSPAR στο ε΄ργο της. Στο πλαι΄σιο της στρατηγικη΄ς 2. OSPAR για τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες, η επιτροπη΄ OSPAR ε΄χει αναλα΄βει τη δε΄σµευση να εντοπι΄ζει ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες και ανθρω΄πινες δραστηριο΄τητες που εγει΄ρουν ανησυχι΄α για τις επιπτω΄σεις των απορρι΄ψεων, εκποµπω΄ν και απωλειω΄ν ραδιενεργω΄ν ουσιω΄ν, λαµβα΄νοντας υπο΄ψη τα αποτελε΄σµατα της επιστηµονικη΄ς ε΄ρευνας που ε΄χει ως αντικει΄µενο τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες στο θαλα΄σσιο περιβα΄λλον. Αξιολογη΄σεις, µε΄τρα και προγρα΄µµατα στην κατευ΄θυνση του στο΄χου της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR πρου¤ποθε΄τουν µεταξυ΄ α΄λλων εφαρµογη΄ της αρχη΄ς της προφυ΄λαξης. Αναµε΄νεται συνεπω΄ς απο΄ την επιτροπη΄ OSPAR να ασχοληθει΄ επαρκω΄ς µε τα επιστηµονικα΄ ζητη΄µατα που θε΄τει το Αξιο΄τιµο Με΄λος του Κοινοβουλι΄ου. Η Επιτροπη΄ ε΄χει δεσµευτει΄ να συµµετα΄σχει κατα΄ διαφο΄ρους τρο΄πους στις εργασι΄ες της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR 3. πα΄νω στις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες. Αναλαµβα΄νει ε΄τσι την πραγµατοποι΄ηση µιας µελε΄της για εκσυγχρονισµο΄ του ε΄ργου Mar(cid:237)na σχετικα΄ µε την ε΄κθεση σε ραδιενε΄ργεια προερχο΄µενη απο΄ το θαλα΄σσιο περιβα΄λλον της βο΄ρειας Ευρω΄πης. Η µελε΄τη αυτη΄ µνηµονευ΄εται στη στρατηγικη΄ της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR για τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες, η δε Επιτροπη΄ ε΄χει συνεκτιµη΄σει τις απο΄ψεις της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR αναφορικα΄ µε τον χαρακτη΄ρα και το ευ΄ρος της µελε΄της προκειµε΄νου να τη βοηθη΄σει στο ε΄ργο της. Στο πλαι΄σιο της στρατηγικη΄ς της για τις ραδιενεργου΄ς ουσι΄ες, η επιτροπη΄ OSPAR δει΄χνει ζωηρο΄ ενδιαφε΄ρον για την επανεπεξεργασι΄α. Η ι΄δια αυτη΄ στρατηγικη΄ πρου¤ ποθε΄τει ο΄τι η επιτροπη΄ OSPAR θα λα΄βει υπο΄ψη τα πορι΄σµατα µιας µελε΄της της επιτροπη΄ς πυρηνικη΄ς ενε΄ργειας του ΟΟΣΑ C 53 E/20 Επι΄σηµη Εφηµερι΄δα των Ευρωπαι¤κω΄ν Κοινοτη΄των EL 20. 2. 2001 σχετικα΄ µε µια ενδελεχη΄ επανεξε΄ταση και αξιολο΄γηση της επεξεργασι΄ας η΄ ο΄χι του εξαντληµε΄νου καυσι΄µου. Ο ΟΟΣΑ ζη΄τησε απο΄ την Επιτροπη΄ να συµβα΄λει στην εκπο΄νηση αυτη΄ς της ε΄κθεσης για λογαριασµο΄ της OSPAR. Η Επιτροπη΄ θα εξακολουθη΄σει τους ελε΄γχους στα κρα΄τη µε΄λη δυνα΄µει του α΄ρθρου 35 της συνθη΄κης Ευρατο΄µ. ∆εν ει΄ναι στις προοπτικε΄ς της Επιτροπη΄ς να προχωρη΄σει σε επιθεωρη΄σεις εγκαταστα΄σεων επανεπεξεργασι΄ας σε συνεργασι΄α µε την επιτροπη΄ OSPAR διο΄τι, ενω΄ η Επιτροπη΄ ε΄χει αυτο΄ το δικαι΄ωµα δυνα΄µει του α΄ρθρου 35 της συνθη΄κης Ευρατο΄µ, κα΄τι τε΄τοιο θα βρισκο΄ταν εκτο΄ς της εντολη΄ς της επιτροπη΄ς OSPAR. (2001/C 53 E/024) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0722/00 ypobolh·: Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) prow thn Epitroph· (17 Marti·oy 2000) Ue·ma: Κοινοτικη΄ διαδικασι΄α καταχω΄ρισης και εµπορι΄ας των δραστικω΄ν ουσιω΄ν και των φυτου¤ γειονοµικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων Η οδηγι΄α 91/414/ΕΟΚ (1) του Συµβουλι΄ου, της 15ης Ιουλι΄ου 1991, θε΄σπιζε νε΄ο συ΄στηµα καταχω΄ρισης και εµπορι΄ας για τα προι¤ο΄ντα αυτα΄, εισα΄γοντας ε΄ναν α΄τυπο µηχανισµο΄ καταχω΄ρισης των δραστικω΄ν ουσιω΄ν και των φυτου¤γειονοµικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων που παρασκευα΄ζονται µε βα΄ση αυτε΄ς τις ουσι΄ες, που µε΄χρι το΄τε παρα΄γονταν και κυκλοφορου΄σαν ελευ΄θερα. Η α΄τυπη αυτη΄ κατα΄σταση ε΄χει ση΄µερα σοβαρε΄ς συνε΄πειες για τις ΜΜΕ λο΄γω της καταχω΄ρισης των ουσιω΄ν αυτω΄ν στο Παρα΄ρτηµα 1 της οδηγι΄ας. Υπα΄ρχουν περιπτω΄σεις κατα΄ τις οποι΄ες ο κοινοποιω΄ν µια δραστικη΄ ουσι΄α απο΄ αυτε΄ς που περιλαµβα΄νονται στο παρα΄ρτηµα 1, ερµηνευ΄οντας το α΄ρθρο 13. 3 δ) της οδηγι΄ας κατα΄ τρο΄πο λανθασµε΄νο και µη συ΄µφωνο µε τις κοινοτικε΄ς αρχε΄ς, επιτρε΄πει την προ΄σβαση στην απο΄κτηση της ουσι΄ας καθω΄ς και την προ΄σβαση στα προστατευµε΄να δεδοµε΄να που ζητου΄νται απο΄ ενδιαφερο΄µενο τρι΄το, αλλα΄ σε καταχρηστικε΄ς τιµε΄ς και υπο΄ συνθη΄κες παρα΄λογες σε συνα΄ρτηση µε τη συγκε- κριµε΄νη αγορα΄. Με αυτο΄ν τον τρο΄πο, ο΄σοι ε΄χουν τα αποκλειστικα΄ δικαιω΄µατα εκτοπι΄ζουν απο΄ την αγορα΄ µικροµεσαι΄ους ανταγωνιστε΄ς που χρησιµοποιου΄ν τις ουσι΄ες αυτε΄ς ε΄ως την εισαγωγη΄ τους στο Παρα΄ρτηµα 1 της οδηγι΄ας. Γνωρι΄ζει η Επιτροπη΄ τον κι΄νδυνο που συνεπα΄γεται για τις ΜΜΕ του φυτου¤γειονοµικου΄ τοµε΄α η περιγραφει΄σα πρακτικη΄, η οποι΄α βασι΄ζεται σε µια συγκεκριµε΄νη ερµηνει΄α της οδηγι΄ας; Γνωρι΄ζει τον κι΄νδυνο που µπορει΄ να διατρε΄ξουν οι συνη΄θεις παραγωγοι΄ δραστικω΄ν οσιω΄ν η΄ παρασκευαστε΄ς φυτου¤ γειονοµικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων που περιε΄χουν στη συ΄σταση΄ τους ορισµε΄νες δραστικε΄ς ουσι΄ες; Προτι΄θεται η Επιτροπη΄ να επιτρε΄ψει αυτη΄ τη συµπεριφορα΄; Προτι΄θεται να επιτρε΄ψει η Επιτροπη΄ µια πρακτικη΄ βα΄σει της οποι΄ας οι τρι΄τοι που επιθυµου΄ν την προ΄σβαση στα προστατευµε΄να δεδοµε΄να ει΄ναι υποχρεωµε΄νοι να πληρω΄νουν ποσα΄ που καθορι΄ζονται αποκλειστικα΄ µε βα΄ση το κο΄στος του φακε΄λου που συντα΄σσει ο πρω΄τος κοινοποιω΄ν, χωρι΄ς να λαµβα΄νεται υπο΄ψη η χρη΄ση που προτι΄θεται να κα΄νει των δεδοµε΄νων, σε σχε΄ση µε τα προι¤ο΄ντα του αιτου΄ντος, το µερι΄διο αγορα΄ς του και την ικανο΄τητα και το δυναµικο΄ του στους τοµει΄ς της διανοµη΄ς και της εµπορι΄ας; Ποια µε΄τρα προτι΄θεται να λα΄βει η Επιτροπη΄ για να αντιµετωπι΄σει τις αρνητικε΄ς συνε΄πειες που προξενει΄ η εν λο΄γω οδηγι΄α στις ΜΜΕ του συγκεκριµε΄νου τοµε΄α; (1) ΕΕ L 230 της 19. 8. 1991, σελ. 1. Apa·nthsh toy k. Byrne ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (28 Aprili·oy 2000) Η χρη΄ση φυτοπροστατευτικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων ρυθµι΄ζεται απο΄ την οδηγι΄α 91/414/ΕΟΚ του Συµβουλι΄ου της 15ης Ιουλι΄ου 1991 σχετικα΄ µε τη θε΄ση στην αγορα΄ των φυτοπροστατευτικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων (1). Οι κυ΄ριοι στο΄χοι της οδηγι΄ας αυτη΄ς ει΄ναι: (α) να διασφαλι΄σουν υψηλο΄ επι΄πεδο προστασι΄ας της ανθρω΄πινης υγει΄ας για τον καταναλωτη΄ και τους γεωργου΄ς, (β) να διασφαλι΄σουν υψηλο΄ επι΄πεδο προστασι΄ας του περιβα΄λλοντος και των γεωργικω΄ν πο΄ρων και γ) να διασφαλι΄σουν την ελευ΄θερη κυκλοφορι΄α των φυτοπροστατευτικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων και των γεωργικω΄ν προι¤ο΄ντων στην Κοινο΄τητα. Η οδηγι΄α παρε΄χει ε΄ναν θετικο΄ πι΄νακα των αποδεκτω΄ν δραστικω΄ν ουσιω΄ν που θεωρου΄νται ως ασφαλει΄ς για την ανθρω΄πινη και τη ζωικη΄ υγει΄α και για το περιβα΄λλον µετα΄ απο΄ µι΄α σε βα΄θος εκτι΄µηση. Τα κρα΄τη µε΄λη δεν µπορου΄ν να επιτρε΄ψουν ε΄να φαρµακευτικο΄ προι¤ο΄ν παρα΄ µο΄νον εα΄ν οι δραστικε΄ς ουσι΄ες που περιε΄χει απαριθµου΄ν- ται στον σχετικο΄ πι΄νακα και µε την επιφυ΄λαξη ο΄τι ορισµε΄να κριτη΄ρια που αφορου΄ν την αποτελεσµατικο΄τητα και την ασφα΄λεια των εν λο΄γω ουσιω΄ν για τον α΄νθρωπο και το περιβα΄λλον πληρου΄νται. Τα κριτη΄ρια ει΄ναι


title: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 597/2000 av den 17 mars 2000 om fastställande av det högsta exportbidraget för helt slipat rundkornigt ris inom ramen för det anbudsförfarande som avses i förordning (EG) nr 2180/1999

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
rice
third country

text: L 71/14 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 18. 3. 2000 KOMMISSIONENS FÖRORDNING (EG) nr 597/2000 av den 17 mars 2000 om fastställande av det högsta exportbidraget för helt slipat rundkornigt ris inom ramen för det anbudsförfarande som avses i förordning (EG) nr 2180/1999 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION HAR ANTAGIT DENNA FÖRORDNING med beaktande av Fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen, med beaktande av rådets förordning (EG) nr 3072/95 av den 22 december 1995 om den gemensamma organisationen av marknaden för ris (1), senast ändrad genom förordning (EG) nr 2072/98 (2), särskilt artikel 13. 3 i denna, och farandet beviljas varje anbudsgivare vars anbud är lika med eller lägre än det högsta exportbidraget. (3) (4) Tillämpningen av de ovannämnda kriterierna på den nuvarande marknadssituationen för ifrågavarande ris medför att det högsta exportbidraget fastställs till det belopp som anges i artikel 1. De åtgärder som föreskrivs i denna förordning är fören- liga med yttrandet från Förvaltningskommittén för spannmål. av följande skäl: (1) (2) Genom kommissionens 1999 (3) ges möjlighet exportbidrag för ris. förordning (EG) nr 2180/ för ett anbudsförfarande för På grundval av lämnade anbud kan kommissionen i enlighet med artikel 5 i kommissionens förordning (EEG) nr 584/75 (4), senast ändrad genom förordning (EG) nr 299/95 (5), och i enlighet med det förfarande som föreskrivs i artikel 22 i förordning (EG) nr 3072/95 besluta om fastställande av ett högsta exportbidrag. Vid fastställandet bör de kriterier som föreskrivs i artikel 13 i förordning (EG) nr 3072/95 särskilt beaktas. Anbudsför- HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE. Artikel 1 Det högsta exportbidraget för helt slipat rundkornigt ris avsett för vissa tredje länder, skall på grundval av anbud som lämnats från och med den 10 till och med den 16 mars 2000 fastställas till 163,00 EUR/t inom ramen för det anbudsförfarande som avses i förordning (EG) nr 2180/1999. Denna förordning träder i kraft den 18 mars 2000. Artikel 2 Denna förordning är till alla delar bindande och direkt tillämplig i alla medlemsstater. Utfärdad i Bryssel den 17 mars 2000. På kommissionens vägnar Franz FISCHLER Ledamot av kommissionen (1) EGT L 329, 30. 12. 1995, s. 18. (2) EGT L 265, 30. 9. 1998, s. 4. (3) EGT L 267, 15. 10. 1999, s. 16. (4) EGT L 61, 7. 3. 1975, s. 25. (5) EGT L 35, 15. 2. 1995, s. 8


eurovoc_concepts:
child care
judicial cooperation
matrimonial law
national law
parental responsibility

text: 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/13 Amended proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for joint children (1) (2000/C 274 E/03) COM(2000) 151 final (cid:151) 1999/0110(CNS) (Submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty on 17 March 2000) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular point (c) of Article 61 and Article 67(1) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament, Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee, Whereas: security (1) The Member States have set themselves the objective of maintaining and developing the Union as an area of free and justice, freedom, in which the to establish such an movement of persons is assured; area the Community is to adopt, among others, the measures relating to judicial cooperation in civil matters needed for the sound operation of the internal market. (2) The sound operation of the internal market entails the need to improve and expedite the free movement of judgments in civil matters. (3) This is a subject now falling within the ambit of Article 65 of the Treaty. (4) Differences between certain national rules governing juris- diction and enforcement hamper the free movement of persons and the sound operation of the internal market. There are accordingly grounds for enacting provisions to unify the rules of conflict of jurisdiction in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility so as to simplify the formalities for rapid and automatic recog- nition and enforcement of judgments. (5) In accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty, the sufficiently objectives of achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved by the Community. This Regulation this Regulation cannot be to the minimum required in order to confines itself achieve those objectives and does not go beyond what is necessary for that purpose. with their (6) The Council, by Act dated 28 May 1998 (2), concluded a Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and recommended it for adoption by the Member States in constitutional accordance requirements. Continuity in the results of the negotiations for conclusion of the Convention should be ensured. The content of this Regulation is substantially taken over from the Regulation contains a number of new it, but in the Convention in order to secure provisions not consistency with certain provisions of the Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. respective (7) In order to attain the objective of responsibility within the Community, free movement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental is necessary and appropriate that the cross-border recog- nition of jurisdiction and judgments in relation to the dissolution of matrimonial ties and to responsibility for the children of both spouses be governed by a mandatory, and directly applicable, Community legal instrument. it (8) The and other scope of non-judicial this Regulation should include civil proceedings proceedings occurring in matrimonial matters in certain States, and excludes purely religious procedures. It should therefore be provided that the reference to (cid:145)courts(cid:146) includes all the authorities, judicial or otherwise, with jurisdiction in matrimonial matters. (9) This Regulation should be confined to proceedings relating to the dissolution or annulment of matrimonial ties as such. The recognition of divorce and annulment rulings affects only the dissolution of matrimonial ties; despite the fact that they may be interrelated, the Regu- the lation does not affect the spouses, property consequences of maintenance obligation or any other ancillary measures. issues such as the fault of the marriage, (10) The Regulation covers parental responsibility issues that are closely linked to proceedings for divorce, separation or annulment; it will apply only to children of both spouses. (1) OJ C 247 E, 31. 8. 1999, p. 1. (2) OJ C 221, 16. 7. 1998, p. 1. Ms Borras’ explanatory report is also published in the same Official Journal. C 274 E/14 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 (11) The grounds for jurisdiction accepted in this Regulation are based on the rule that there must be a real link between the party concerned and the Member State exer- cising jurisdiction. The decision to include certain grounds corresponds to the fact that they exist in different national legal systems and are accepted by the other Member States. (12) One of fundamental interests of country. The the risks to be considered in relation to the protection of the children of both spouses in a marital crisis is that one of the parents will take the child to another the children must in accordance therefore be protected, with, in particular, the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of the International Abduction of Children. The lawful habitual residence is accordingly maintained as the criterion for jurisdiction in cases where, because the child has been moved or has not been returned without lawful reason, there has been a de facto change in the habitual residence. (13) The Regulation does not preclude the courts of a Member State from taking provisional or protective measures in an urgent situation regarding persons and property situated within the territory of such Member State. (14) The word (cid:145)judgment(cid:146) refers only to positive decisions, that is to say those that lead to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment. Those documents which have been formally drawn up or registered as authentic instruments and are enforceable in one Member State are treated as equivalent to such (cid:145)judgments(cid:146). (15) The recognition and enforcement of judgments given in a Member State are based on the principle of mutual trust. to the The grounds for non-recognition are kept minimum required. None the less, means of redress should be available in order to ensure observance of public policy in the State addressed and to safeguard the rights of the defence and those of the parties, so as to withhold recognition of irreconcilable judgments. (20) The Member States should remain free to agree among themselves on practical measures for the application of the Regulation so long as no Community measures have been taken to that end. (21) No later than five years after the date of the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission must review its application and propose such amendments as may appear necessary. (22) In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, the United Kingdom and Ireland have given notice of their intention of partici- pating in the adoption of this Regulation. (23) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the European Community, Denmark is not participating in the adoption of this Regulation is this Regulation; accordingly not binding on Denmark, nor is it applicable in its regard. the Treaty establishing (24) The measures required for the implementation of this Regulation must, in accordance with Article 2 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (1) be laid down by the advisory committee procedure provided for in Article 3 of that Decision, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: CHAPTER I SCOPE Article 1 (16) The State addressed should review neither the jurisdiction of the State of origin nor the findings of fact. 1. This Regulation shall apply to: (17) No procedures may be required for the updating of civil- status documents in one Member State where a final judgment has been given in another Member State. (a) civil proceedings relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment; (18) The Convention concluded by the Nordic States in 1931 should be capable of application within the limits set by this Regulation and in compliance with the principle of non-discrimination. (19) Spain, Italy and Portugal had concluded Concordats before these matters were brought within the ambit of the Treaty; it is necessary to ensure that these States do not breach their international commitments in relation to the Holy See. (b) civil proceedings relating to parental responsibility for the children of both spouses on the occasion of the matri- monial proceedings referred to in (a). 2. Other proceedings officially recognised in a Member State shall be regarded as equivalent to judicial proceedings. The term (cid:145)court(cid:146) shall cover all the authorities with jurisdiction in these matters in the Member States. (1) OJ L 184, 17. 7. 1999, p. 23. 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/15 CHAPTER II JURISDICTION S E C T I O N 1 G E N E R A L P R O V I S I O N S Article 2 Divorce, legal separation and marriage annulment 1. In matters marriage annulment, the Member State: relating to divorce, jurisdiction shall legal separation or lie with the courts of (a) at least one of the spouses has parental responsibility in relation to the child, and (b) the jurisdiction of the courts has been accepted by the spouses and is in the best interests of the child. The jurisdiction conferred by paragraphs 1 and 2 shall 3. cease as soon as: (a) the judgment allowing or legal refusing the application for separation or marriage annulment has divorce, become final, or (a) in whose territory: (cid:151) the spouses are habitually resident, or (b) in those cases where proceedings in relation to parental responsibility are still pending on the date referred to in (a), a judgment in these proceedings has become final, or (cid:151) the spouses were last habitually resident, in so far as one of them still resides there, or (c) the proceedings referred to in (a) and (b) have come to an end for another reason. (cid:151) the respondent is habitually resident, or (cid:151) in the event of a joint application, either of the spouses is habitually resident, or (cid:151) the applicant is habitually resident if he or she resided immediately before the least a year there for at application was made, or (cid:151) the applicant is habitually resident if he or she resided there for at least six months immediately before the application was made and is a national of the Member State in question or has his domicile there; (b) of nationality of both spouses or, in the case of the United Kingdom and Ireland, of their durable common domicile. For the purposes of this Regulation, the word (cid:145)domicile(cid:146) 2. has the meaning given to it in the legal systems of the United Kingdom and Ireland. Article 3 Parental responsibility Article 4 Child abduction The courts with jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 3 shall exercise their jurisdiction in conformity with the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of Inter- national Child Abduction, and in particular Articles 3 and 16 thereof. Article 5 Counterclaim The court in which proceedings are pending on the basis of Articles 2 to 4 shall also have jurisdiction to examine a counterclaim, in so far as the latter comes within the scope of this Regulation. Article 6 Conversion of legal separation into divorce Without prejudice to Article 2, a court of a Member State which has given a judgment on a legal separation shall also have jurisdiction for converting that judgment into a divorce, if the law of that Member State so provides. 1. The Courts of a Member State exercising jurisdiction by virtue of Article 2 on an application for divorce, legal sepa- ration or marriage annulment shall have jurisdiction in a matter relating to parental responsibility over a child of both spouses where the child is habitually resident in that Member State. 2. Where the child is not habitually resident in the Member State referred to in paragraph 1, the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction in such a matter if the child is habitually resident in one of the Member States and: Article 7 Exclusive nature of jurisdiction under Articles 2 to 6 A spouse who: (a) is habitually resident in the territory of a Member State; or (b) is a national of a Member State, or has his domicile there within the meaning of Article 2(2), C 274 E/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 may be sued in another Member State only in accordance with Articles 2 to 6. S E C T I O N 3 L I S P E N D E N S A N D D E P E N D E N T A C T I O N S Article 8 Residual jurisdiction 1. Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 2 to 6, jurisdiction shall be determined, in each Member State, by the laws of that State. Article 11 1. Where proceedings involving the same cause of action and between the same parties are brought before courts of different Member States, the court second seised shall of its own motion stay its proceedings until such time as the juris- diction of the court first seised is established. As against a respondent who is not habitually resident 2. and is not a national of a Member State or does not have his domicile there within the meaning of Article 2(2), any national of a Member State who is habitually resident within the territory of another Member State may, like the nationals of that State, avail himself of the rules of jurisdiction applicable in that State. S E C T I O N 2 E X A M I N A T I O N A S T O J U R I S D I C T I O N A N D A D M I S S I B I L I T Y 2. Where proceedings relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment not involving the same cause of action but between the same parties are brought before courts of different Member States, the court second seised shall of its own motion stay its proceedings until such time as the jurisdiction of the court first seised is established. 3. Where the jurisdiction of the court first seised is estab- the court second seised shall decline jurisdiction in lished, favour of that court. Article 9 Examination as to jurisdiction In that case, the party who brought the relevant action before the court second seised may bring that action before the court first seised. Where a court of a Member State is seised of a case over which it has no jurisdiction under this Regulation and over which a court of another Member State has jurisdiction by virtue of this Regulation, it shall declare of its own motion that it has no jurisdiction. Article 10 Examination as to admissibility 1. Where a respondent does not enter an appearance, the court with jurisdiction shall stay the proceedings so long as it is not shown that the respondent has been able to receive the an equivalent document document in sufficient time to enable him to arrange for his defence, or that all necessary steps have been taken to this end. the proceedings or instituting Article 19 of Council Regulation (EC) No. of. on 2. the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters shall apply in lieu of the provisions of paragraph 1 if the document commencing the action has had to be transmitted abroad pursuant to that Regulation. the Where that Regulation does not apply, Article 15 of the Hague of 15 November 1965 on the Convention of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Service Abroad of Civil or Commercial Matters shall apply if the document commencing the action has had to be transmitted abroad pursuant to that Convention. For the purposes of Article 11, a court shall be deemed to 4. be seised: (a) at the time when the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document is lodged with the court, provided that the plaintiff has not subsequently failed to take the steps he was required to take to have service effected on the defendant, or (b) if the document has to be served before being lodged with the court, at the time when it is received by the authority responsible for service, provided that the plaintiff has not subsequently failed to take the steps he was required to take to have the document lodged with the court. S E C T I O N 4 P R O V I S I O N A L A N D P R O T E C T I V E M E A S U R E S Article 12 including protective, measures In urgent cases, the provisions of this Regulation shall not 1. the courts of a Member State from taking such prevent provisional, in respect of persons or assets in that State as may be available under the law of that Member State, even if, under this Regulation, the court of another Member State has jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/17 Provisional, including protective, measures taken pursuant 2. to paragraph 1 and relating to matters within the scope of this Regulation shall expire when a judgment with the same subject-matter has been given by the court having jurisdiction to hear the case on the merits pursuant to this Regulation and has been recognised or enforced pursuant thereto. CHAPTER III RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT Article 13 Meaning of (cid:145)judgment(cid:146) For the purposes of this Regulation, (cid:145)judgment(cid:146) means a 1. divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment pronounced by a court of a Member State, as well as a judgment relating the spouses given on the to the parental responsibility of occasion of the judgment may be called, including a decree, order or decision. such matrimonial proceedings, whatever The provisions of this Chapter shall also apply to the 2. determination of the amount of costs and expenses of proceedings under this Regulation and to the enforcement of any order concerning such costs and expenses. For the purposes of 3. implementing this Regulation, documents which have been formally drawn up or registered as authentic instruments and are enforceable in one Member State and also settlements which have been approved by a court in the course of proceedings and are enforceable in the Member State concluded shall be recognised and declared enforceable under the same conditions as the judgments referred to in paragraph 1. in which they were S E C T I O N 1 R E C O G N I T I O N Article 14 Recognition of a judgment A judgment given in a Member State shall be recognised 1. in the other Member States without any special procedure being required. In particular, and without prejudice to paragraph 3, no 2. special procedure shall be required for up-dating the civil-status records of a Member State on the basis of a judgment relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment given in another Member State, and against which no further appeal lies under the law of that Member State. Any interested party may, 3. in accordance with the procedures provided for in Sections 2 and 3 of this Chapter, apply for a decision that the judgment be or not be recognised. 4. Where the recognition of a judgment is raised as an inci- dental question in a court of a Member State, that court may determine that issue. Article 15 Grounds of non-recognition 1. A judgment relating to a divorce, marriage annulment shall not be recognised: legal separation or (a) if such recognition is manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member State in which recognition is sought; (b) where it was given in default of appearance, the respondent was not duly served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document time and in such a way as to enable the respondent to arrange for his or her defence unless it is determined that the respondent has accepted the judgment unequivocally; in sufficient if (c) if it is irreconcilable with a judgment given in proceedings between the same parties in the Member State in which recognition is sought; (d) if it is irreconcilable with an earlier judgment given in another Member State or in a non-member country earlier same parties, provided that between the judgment fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the Member State in which recognition is sought. the A judgment relating to the parental responsibility of the 2. spouses given on the occasion of matrimonial proceedings as referred to in Article 13 shall not be recognised: (a) if such recognition is manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member State in which recognition is sought taking into account the best interests of the child; (b) if it was given, except in case of urgency, without the child having been given an opportunity to be heard, in violation of the Member State in which recognition is sought; fundamental principles of procedure of (c) if the person in default was not duly served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defence unless it is determined that such person has accepted the judgment unequivocally; (d) on the request of any person claiming that the judgment infringes his or her parental responsibility, if it was given without such person having been given an opportunity to be heard; (e) if is irreconcilable with a later judgment relating to responsibility given in the Member State in it parental which recognition is sought; or C 274 E/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 (f) it is irreconcilable with a later judgment relating to if parental responsibility given in another Member State or in the non-member country of the habitual residence of the child provided that fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the Member State in which recognition is sought. judgment the later Article 16 Prohibition of review of jurisdiction of court of origin The jurisdiction of the court of the Member State of origin may not be reviewed. The test of public policy referred to in Article 15(1)(a) and (2)(a) may not be applied to the rules relating to jurisdiction set out in Articles 2 to 8. Article 17 Differences in applicable law The recognition of a judgment relating to a divorce, legal separation or a marriage annulment may not be refused because the law of the Member State in which such recognition is sought would not allow divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment on the same facts. Where a Member State is required by this Regulation to recognise a divorce, it shall not prevent either of the spouses from contracting a new marriage on the basis of the fact that the national law of a Member State of which the spouses have the nationality does not recognise the divorce. Article 18 Non-review as to substance Under no circumstances may a judgment be reviewed as to its substance. Article 19 Stay of proceedings A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought of a judgment given in another Member State may stay the proceedings if an ordinary appeal against the judgment has been lodged. A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought of a the judgment given in the United Kingdom or enforcement of which is suspended in the Member State or origin by reason of an appeal, may stay the proceedings. Ireland, S E C T I O N 2 E N F O R C E M E N T Article 20 Enforceable judgments enforceable in that Member State and has been duly served shall be enforced in another Member State when, on the application of any interested party, it has been declared enforceable there. However, in the United Kingdom, judgments shall be enforced in England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, after regis- tration for enforcement on application by an interested party, in one or other of those parts of the United Kingdom as the case requires. Article 21 Jurisdiction of local courts The application shall be submitted to the local courts 1. listed in Annex I. local courts The jurisdiction of 2. in relation to an application for enforcement shall be determined by reference to the place of the habitual residence of the person against whom enforcement is sought or by reference to the place of habitual residence of any child to whom the application relates. the places first Where neither of subparagraph can be found in the Member State where enforcement local courts is determined by reference to the place of enforcement. referred to in the the jurisdiction of is sought, 3. In relation to procedures referred to in Article 14(3), the jurisdiction of local courts shall be determined by the internal law of the Member State in which proceedings for recognition or non-recognition are brought. Article 22 Procedure for enforcement The procedure for making the application shall be in which the Member State law of 1. governed by the enforcement is sought. 2. The applicant must give an address for service within the area of jurisdiction of the court applied to. However, if the law of the Member State in which enforcement is sought does not provide for the furnishing of such an address, the applicant shall appoint a representative ad litem. The documents referred to in Articles 31 and 32 shall be 3. attached to the application. Article 23 Judgment of the court A judgment on the exercise of parental responsibility in respect of a child of both parties given in a Member State which is 1. The court applied to shall give judgment without delay. The person against whom enforcement is sought shall not at 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/19 stage of this submissions on the application. the proceedings be entitled to make any The application may be refused only for one of 2. reasons specified in Article 15. the Under no circumstances may a judgment be reviewed as 3. to its substance. Article 24 Service of judgment The appropriate officer of the court shall without delay serve on the applicant the judgment given on the application in accordance with the procedure laid down by the law of the Member State in which enforcement is sought. Article 25 Appeal against the judgment Either party may appeal against the judgment given on the application for a declaration of enforceability. The appeal shall be brought in the relevant court in the list in Annex II. It shall be examined in accordance with the rules governing adversarial proceedings. If the appeal is brought by the party who applied for the against whom declaration the party enforcement is sought shall appear before the court hearing the appeal. If that party does not appear, Article 10 shall apply. enforceability, of judgment. The appeal against the judgment making the declaration of enforceability shall be brought within one month following against whom the service of If is habitually resident enforcement in a Member is sought in which the judgment making the State other than that declaration of enforceability was given, the time allowed shall be two months and shall run from the date of service either on that party or at his residence. No extension of time may be granted on account of distance. the party If the decision is given in the United Kingdom or Ireland, all in the Member State of origin shall be appeals brought considered to be ordinary appeals the purposes of for paragraph 1. Article 28 Partial enforcement 1. Where a judgment has been given in respect of several matters and enforcement cannot be authorised for all of them, the court shall authorise enforcement for one or more of them. An applicant may request partial enforcement of a 2. judgment. Article 29 Legal aid An applicant who, in the Member State of origin, has benefited from complete or partial legal aid or exemption from costs or expenses shall be entitled, in the procedures provided for in Articles 21 to 24, to benefit from the most favourable legal aid or the most extensive exemption from costs and expenses provided for by the law of the Member State addressed. Article 30 Security, bond or deposit No security, bond or deposit, however described, shall be required of a party who in one Member State applies for enforcement of a judgment given in another Member State on the ground that he or she is a foreign national or that he or she is not habitually resident in the Member State in which enforcement is sought. S E C T I O N 3 C O M M O N P R O V I S I O N S Article 31 Documents Article 26 Courts of appeal and means of contest A party seeking or contesting recognition or applying for 1. enforcement of a judgment shall produce: The judgment given on appeal may be contested only in the manners listed in Annex III. (a) a copy of the judgment which satisfies the conditions necessary to establish its authenticity; Article 27 Stay of proceedings The court with which the appeal is lodged pursuant to Articles 25 and 26 may, on the application of the party against whom enforcement is sought, stay the proceedings if an ordinary appeal has been lodged against the judgment in the Member State of origin or if the time for such appeal has not yet expired. In the latter case, the court may specify the time within which an appeal is to be lodged. (b) the certificate provided for by Article 34, without prejudice to Article 35. 2. In addition, in the case of a judgment given in default, the party seeking recognition or applying for enforcement shall produce: (a) the original or a certified true copy of the document which establishes that the defaulting party was served with the document instituting the proceedings or with an equivalent document; or C 274 E/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 (b) any document indicating that the defendant has accepted the judgment unequivocally. Article 32 Other documents The court or competent authority of the Member State in which the judgment was given shall, at the request of any interested party, issue a certificate on the model at Annex IV (judgments in matrimonial matters) or Annex V (judgments in matters of parental responsibility). Article 33 Absence of documents If the documents specified in Article 31(1)(b) or (2) are their it considers information before it, dispense with 1. not produced, production, accept equivalent documents or, that their production. the court may specify a time for it has sufficient if Member States which are parties to it, supersede conventions existing at the time of entry into force of this Regulation which have been concluded between two or more Member States and relate to matters governed by this Regulation. 2. Finland and Sweden shall have the option of declaring that the Convention of 6 February 1931 between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden comprising international private law provisions on marriage, adoption and guardianship, together with the Final Protocol thereto, will apply, in whole or in part, in their mutual relations, in place of the rules of this Regulation. Such declarations shall be annexed to this Regu- lation and published in the Official the European Communities. They may be withdrawn, in whole or in part, at any moment by the said Member States. Journal of The principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality between citizens of the Union shall be respected. If the Court so requires, a translation of such documents 2. shall be furnished. The translation shall be certified by a person qualified to do so in one of the Member States. jurisdiction in any future Agreement The rules of to be concluded between the Member States referred to in the first subparagraph which relate to matters governed by this Regu- lation shall be in line with those laid down in this Regulation. Article 34 Legalisation or other similar formality No legalisation or other similar formality shall be required in respect of the documents referred to in Articles 31, 32 and 33(2) or in respect of a document appointing a representative ad litem. CHAPTER IV TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS Article 35 The provisions of this Regulation shall apply only to legal 1. proceedings instituted, to documents formally drawn up or registered as authentic instruments and to settlements which have been approved by a court in the course of proceedings after its entry into force. 2. Judgments given after the date of entry into force of this Regulation in proceedings instituted before that date shall be recognised and enforced in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III if jurisdiction was founded on rules which accorded with those provided for either in Chapter II of this Regulation or in a convention concluded between the Member State of origin and the Member State addressed which was in force when the proceedings were instituted. CHAPTER V GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 36 Relation with other Conventions 1. Subject paragraph 2 of to the provisions of Articles 35 and 38 and for the this Regulation shall, this Article, Judgments handed down in any of the Nordic States which have made first the declaration provided for subparagraph under a forum of jurisdiction corresponding to one of those laid down in Chapter II, shall be recognised and enforced in the other Member States under the rules laid down in Chapter III thereof. in the 3. Member States shall send to the Commission: (a) a copy of the agreements and uniform laws implementing first and third referred to in the these agreements subparagraphs of paragraph 2; (b) any denunciations of, or amendments to, those agreements or uniform laws. Article 37 Relation with certain multilateral conventions In relations between the Member States which are parties to it, this Regulation shall the following Conventions in so far as they concern matters governed by this Regulation: take precedence over (cid:151) the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 concerning the Powers of Authorities and the Law Applicable in respect of the Protection of Minors, (cid:151) the Luxembourg Convention of 8 September 1967 on the Recognition of Decisions Relating to the Validity of Marriages, 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/21 (cid:151) the Hague Convention of 1 June 1970 on the Recognition (cid:151) Agreement between the Holy See and Spain on legal affairs of Divorces and Legal Separations, of 3 January 1979. (cid:151) the European Convention of 20 May 1980 on Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions concerning Custody of Children and on Restoration of Custody of Children, (cid:151) the Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children, provided that the child concerned is habitually resident in a Member State. Article 38 Extent of effects The agreements and conventions referred to in Articles 1. 36(1) and 37 shall continue to have effect in relation to matters to which this Regulation does not apply. 2. They shall continue to have effect in respect of judgments given and documents formally drawn up or registered as authentic before the entry into force of this Regulation. Article 39 Agreements between Member States 1. Two or more Member States may conclude agreements or arrangements to amplify this Regulation or to facilitate its application. Member States shall send to the Commission: (a) a copy of the draft agreements; and (b) any denunciations of, or amendments to, these agreements. In no circumstances may the agreements or arrangements 2. derogate from Chapters II or III. Article 40 Treaties with the Holy See 1. This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to the Inter- national Treaty (Concordat) between the Holy See and Portugal, signed at the Vatican City on 7 May 1940. 2. Any decision as to the invalidity of a marriage taken under the Treaty referred to in paragraph 1 shall be recognised in the Member States on the conditions laid down in Chapter III. 3. The provisions laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall also apply to the following International Treaties (Concordats) with the Holy See: (cid:151) Concordato lateranense of 11 February 1929 between Italy and the Holy See, modified by the agreement, with additional Protocol signed in Rome on 18 February 1984, 4. In Italy and Spain the recognition of decisions to which paragraph 2 applies may be referred to the same procedures and the same reviews as decisions given by ecclesiastical courts in accordance with the international treaties with the Holy See referred to in paragraph 3. 5. Member States shall send to the Commission: (a) a copy of the Treaties referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3; (b) any denunciations of or amendments to those Treaties. Article 41 Member States with two or more legal systems With regard to a Member State in which two or more systems of law or sets of rules concerning matters governed by this Regulation apply in different territorial units: (a) any reference to habitual residence in that Member State shall refer to habitual residence in a territorial unit; (b) any reference to nationality shall refer to the territorial unit designated by the law of that State; (c) any reference to the authority of the Member State having received an application for divorce or legal separation or for marriage annulment shall refer to the authority of a territorial unit which has received such an application; (d) any reference to the rules of the requested Member State in which shall refer to the rules of jurisdiction, recognition or enforcement is invoked. the territorial unit CHAPTER VI FINAL PROVISIONS Article 42 Review No later than five years after the date of the entry into force of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Regulation, and in particular Articles 36, 39 and 40 thereof. The report shall be accompanied if need be by proposals for adaptations. Article 43 Amendment of Annexes 1. The Member States shall notify the Commission of their legislative provisions amending the designations of courts and competent authorities listed in Annexes I and II and the redress procedures listed in Annex III. The Commission shall adapt those Annexes accordingly. C 274 E/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 Updates and technical amendments to the standard forms 2. in Annexes IV and V shall be adopted by the procedure provided for by Article 44. apply, shall Decision. in compliance with Article 7(3) of that Article 44 Article 45 Entry into force 1. The Commission shall be assisted by an Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of the Member States and chaired by the Commission. This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall have effect from 1 January 2001. 2. Where reference is made to paragraph 1, the advisory procedure laid down by Article 3 of Decision 1999/468/EC This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. ANNEX I The applications provided for by Article 21 shall be submitted to the following courts or competent authorities: (cid:151) in Belgium, the (cid:145)Tribunal de premiŁre instance(cid:146) or the (cid:145)Rechtbank van eerste aanleg(cid:146) or the (cid:145)erstinstanzliche Gericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in the Federal Republic of Germany, the (cid:145)Familiengericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in Greece, (cid:145)(cid:204)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:236)(cid:229)º(cid:221)(cid:242) —æø(cid:244)(cid:239)(cid:228)ØŒ(cid:229)(cid:223)(cid:239)(cid:146), (cid:151) in Spain, the (cid:145)Juzgado de Primera Instancia(cid:146), (cid:151) in France, the presiding Judge of the (cid:145)Tribunal de grande instance(cid:146), (cid:151) in Ireland, the High Court, (cid:151) in Italy, the (cid:145)Corte d’appello(cid:146), (cid:151) in Luxembourg, the presiding Judge of the (cid:145)Tribunal d’arrondissement(cid:146), (cid:151) in the Netherlands, the presiding Judge of the (cid:145)Arrondissementsrechtbank(cid:146), (cid:151) in Austria, the (cid:145)Bezirksgericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in Portugal, the (cid:145)Tribunal de Comarca(cid:146) or (cid:145)Tribunal de Fam(cid:237)lia(cid:146), (cid:151) in Finland, the (cid:145)k(cid:228)r(cid:228)j(cid:228)oikeus/tingsr(cid:228)tt(cid:146), (cid:151) in Sweden, the (cid:145)Svea hovr(cid:228)tt(cid:146), (cid:151) in the United Kingdom: (a) in England and Wales, the High Court of Justice, (b) in Scotland, the Court of Session, (c) in Northern Ireland, the High Court of Justice. 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/23 ANNEX II The appeal provided for by Article 25 shall be lodged with the courts listed below: (cid:151) in Belgium, the (cid:145)Tribunal de premiŁre instance(cid:146) or the (cid:145)Rechtbank van eerste aanleg(cid:146) or the (cid:145)erstinstanzliche Gericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in the Federal Republic of Germany, the (cid:145)Oberlandesgericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in Greece, the (cid:145)¯(cid:246)(cid:229)(cid:244)(cid:229)(cid:223)(cid:239)(cid:146), (cid:151) in Spain, the (cid:145)Audiencia Provincial(cid:146), (cid:151) in France, the (cid:145)Cour d’appel(cid:146), (cid:151) in Ireland, the High Court of Justice, (cid:151) in Italy, the (cid:145)Corte d’appello(cid:146), (cid:151) in Luxembourg, the (cid:145)Cour d’appel(cid:146), (cid:151) in the Netherlands, the (cid:145)Arrondissementsrechtbank(cid:146), (cid:151) in Austria, the (cid:145)Bezirksgericht(cid:146), (cid:151) in Portugal, the (cid:145)Tribunal de Rela(cid:231)ªo(cid:146), (cid:151) in Finland, the (cid:145)Hovioikeus/Hovr(cid:228)tt(cid:146), (cid:151) in Sweden, the (cid:145)Svea hovr(cid:228)tt(cid:146), (cid:151) in the United Kingdom: (a) in England and Wales, the High Court of Justice, (b) in Scotland, the Court of Session, (c) in Northern Ireland, the High Court of Justice. ANNEX III The appeals provided for by Article 26 may be brought only: (cid:151) in Belgium, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg and in the Netherlands, by an appeal in cassation, (cid:151) in the Federal Republic of Germany, by a (cid:145)Rechtsbeschwerde(cid:146), (cid:151) in Ireland, by an appeal on a point of law to the Supreme Court, (cid:151) in Austria, by a (cid:145)Revisionsrekurs(cid:146), (cid:151) in Portugal, by a (cid:145)recurso restrito (cid:224) matØria de direito(cid:146), (cid:151) in Finland, by an appeal to (cid:145)Korkein oikeus/h(cid:246)gsta domstolen(cid:146), (cid:151) in Sweden, by an appeal to the (cid:145)H(cid:246)gsta domstolen(cid:146), (cid:151) in the United Kingdom, by an appeal on a point of law only. C 274 E/24 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 Certificate under Article 34 of the Regulation concerning judgments in matrimonial matters of parental responsibility. ANNEX IV 1. Member State of origin 2. Court or authority issuing the certificate 2. 1. Name 2. 2. Address 2. 3. Tel/Fax/E-mail 3. Marriage 3. 1. Wife 3. 1. 1. Name 3. 1. 2. Country and place of birth 3. 1. 3. Date of birth 3. 2. Husband 3. 2. 1. Name 3. 2. 2. Country and place of birth 3. 2. 3. Date of birth 3. 3. Country and date of marriage 3. 3. 1. Country 3. 3. 2. Date 4. Court which delivered the judgment 4. 1. Type of court 4. 2. Place of court 5. Judgment 5. 1. Date 5. 2. Reference number 5. 3. Nature of judgment 5. 3. 1. Divorce 5. 3. 2. Annulment 5. 3. 3. Separation & & & 5. 4. Judgment given in default of appearance 5. 4. 1. No 5. 4. 2. Yes (1) & & 6. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/25 7. IIs the judgment appealable in the State of origin? 7. 1. No 7. 2. Yes 8. Date of legal effect: 8. 1. of divorce (2) 8. 2. of separation Done at. (date) (1) The documents referred to in Article 33(2) must be attached. (2) If different from that given at 5. 1. Signature/stamp C 274 E/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 9. 2000 Certificate under Article 34 of the Regulation concerning judgments in matters of parental responsibility. ANNEX V 1. Member State of origin 2. Court or authority issuing the certificate 2. 1. Name 2. 2. Address 2. 3. Tel/Fax/E-mail 3. Parents 3. 1. Mother 3. 1. 1. Name 3. 2. Father 3. 2. 1. Name 4. Court which delivered the judgment 4. 1. Type of court 4. 2. Place of court 5. Judgment 5. 1. Date 5. 2. Reference number 5. 3. Judgment given in default of appearance 5. 3. 1. No 5. 3. 2. Yes (1) 6. Children concerned by the judgment (2) 6. 1. Name and date of birth 6. 2. Name and date of birth 6. 3. Name and date of birth 6. 4. Name and date of birth 7. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted (1) The documents referred to in Article 33(2) must be attached. (2) If more than four children are involved, use a second form. 26. 9. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 274 E/27 8. Enforceability of service/notification 8. 1. Is the judgment enforceable in accordance with the laws of the State of origin? 8. 1. 1. Yes 8. 1. 2. No 8. 2. Has the judgment been served on/notified to the party against whom enforcement is sought? 8. 2. 1. Yes 8. 2. 1. 1. Name of party 8. 2. 1. 2. Date of service/notification 8. 2. 2. No Done at. (date). Signature/stamp


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-0717/00 apresentada por Carlos Carnero González (PSE) à Comissão. Preparação da VIII Cimeira para o progresso e o desenvolvimento na Guiné Equatorial.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU relations
Equatorial Guinea
democracy
development aid
terms for aid

text: 13. 2. 2001 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 46 E/31 obriga(cid:231)ıes relativas (cid:224) nªo divulga(cid:231)ªo de informa(cid:231)ıes comercialmente sens(cid:237)veis a outros sectores da companhia de electricidade. A maioria dos Estados-membros decidiu ir mais longe que as obriga(cid:231)ıes da directiva, tendo procedido (cid:224) separa(cid:231)ªo jur(cid:237)dica do ORT ou mesmo da propriedade do ORT. A Comissªo pediu aos Estados-membros que apenas separaram a gestªo do ORT que fornecessem informa(cid:231)ıes sobre a implementa(cid:231)ªo prÆtica desta exigŒncia. A Comissªo estÆ a avaliar as respostas e tomarÆ as medidas adequadas caso considere que a separa(cid:231)ªo da gestªo nªo estÆ suficientemente garantida. Compete (cid:224)s entidades reguladoras regular os pre(cid:231)os do transporte e Ø objectivo de todos os 2. reguladores independentes manter os pre(cid:231)os ao n(cid:237)vel mais baixo poss(cid:237)vel. 3. As tarifas de transporte foram recentemente estabelecidas nos Estados-membros devido (cid:224) trans- posi(cid:231)ªo da Directiva «Electricidade». As tarifas de transporte sªo controladas pelas entidades reguladoras dos Estados-membros. A Comissªo considera que Ø importante comparar essas tarifas nos Estados- -membros para que exista transparŒncia no mercado da electricidade. Um acesso nªo discriminat(cid:243)rio e equitativo (cid:224) rede Ø fundamental para estabelecer a concorrŒncia. Por essa razªo, a Comissªo lan(cid:231)arÆ, ainda este ano, um estudo comparativo das tarifas de transporte nos Estados-membros. Como as tarifas de transporte apenas recentemente foram elaboradas e estªo ainda em elabora(cid:231)ªo 4. nos Estados-membros aos quais foi concedido um per(cid:237)odo de transi(cid:231)ªo adicional para transpor a directiva, a recolha desses dados (cid:224) escala comunitÆria nªo foi ainda poss(cid:237)vel. AtravØs dos seus contactos com os intervenientes no mercado, a Comissªo estÆ, no entanto, 5. consciente do facto de existirem diferen(cid:231)as substanciais a n(cid:237)vel das tarifas de transpsorte em toda a Comunidade. As razıes para essas diferen(cid:231)as serªo um dos temas do estudo que a Comissªo tenciona lan(cid:231)ar ainda este ano. No entanto, Ø poss(cid:237)vel jÆ afirmar que tais diferen(cid:231)as se devem (cid:224)s diferen(cid:231)as de dimensªo das redes, ao nœmero de consumidores pelos quais repartir os custos, aos n(cid:237)veis de produtividade e eficiŒncia e tambØm aos diferentes n(cid:237)veis dos investimentos, incluindo o investimento em capacidade de interliga(cid:231)ªo para facilitar o comØrcio no mercado interno. O controlo dos diferentes n(cid:237)veis de tarifas de transporte Ø um elemento importante para garantir que 6. o mercado interno da electricidade funcione em moldes nªo discriminat(cid:243)rios. A Comissªo considera que Ø, em absoluto, sua tarefa garantir que as tarifas permitam um acesso equitativo (cid:224) rede de transporte. (1) JO L 27 de 30. 1. 1997. (2001/C 46 E/036) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-0717/00 apresentada por Carlos Carnero GonzÆlez (PSE) (cid:224) Comissªo (17 de Mar(cid:231)o de 2000) Objecto: Prepara(cid:231)ªo da «VIII Cimeira para o progresso e o desenvolvimento na GuinØ Equatorial» No passado dia 11 de Fevereiro, uma comunica(cid:231)ªo da agŒncia noticiosa France Presse divulgava a realiza(cid:231)ªo, em Malabo, no dia 10, de um encontro entre o Presidente da GuinØ Equatorial, Teodoro Obiang, e Friedrich Nagel, Chefe da Delega(cid:231)ªo da Comissªo Europeia em IaundØ (Camarıes). De acordo a telec(cid:243)pia, o Sr. Nagel declarara (cid:224) rÆdio que o objectivo da sua visita consistia em entregar ao Sr. Obiang uma carta oficial de notifica(cid:231)ªo da «VIII Cimeira para o progresso e o desenvolvimento na GuinØ Equatorial». A data e o local da mesma nªo foram publicamente noticiados. Tal como assinalaram numerosas ONG, entre as hÆ que referir a organiza(cid:231)ªo espanhola Asodegue e a organiza(cid:231)ªo internacional MØdicos Sem Fronteiras, a situa(cid:231)ªo deteriora-se por momentos a tal ponto, na GuinØ Equatorial, que a segunda das organiza(cid:231)ıes se viu obrigada a abandonar a ac(cid:231)ªo humanitÆria que desenvolvia no terreno. C 46 E/32 Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias PT 13. 2. 2001 Essa deteriora(cid:231)ªo relaciona-se com a manuten(cid:231)ªo de uma situa(cid:231)ªo geral caracterizada pela ausŒncia de democracia e de respeito dos direitos humanos e por uma pobreza generalizada da popula(cid:231)ªo em contraste com uma acelerada explora(cid:231)ªo dos recursos naturais do pa(cid:237)s. A responsabilidade dessa deplorÆvel situa(cid:231)ªo recai obviamente sobre o regime de Obiang que incumpriu sistematicamente todas as suas promessas no sentido de progredir na via de um Estado de Direito. Nestes contexto, a missªo do Sr. Nagel origina a preocupa(cid:231)ªo justificÆvel de que a Comissªo Europeia pretenda restabelecer a coopera(cid:231)ªo com a GuinØ, apesar do imobilismo da ditadura que governa o pa(cid:237)s. Tendo em conta o que precede, (cid:129) PoderÆ a Comissªo prestar informa(cid:231)ıes pormenorizadas sobre o conteœdo da visita do Sr. Nagel a Malabo? (cid:129) Qual a posi(cid:231)ªo da Comissªo quanto (cid:224) ausŒncia de quaisquer progressos em matØria de democratiza- (cid:231)ªo, na GuinØ Equatorial? (cid:129) Tenciona a Comissªo aplicar a condicionalidade democrÆtica ao restabelecimento da coopera(cid:231)ªo com esse pa(cid:237)s? (cid:129) Em que consiste a referida «VIII Cimeira para o progresso e o desenvolvimento na GuinØ Equatorial»? Resposta dada por Poul Nielson em nome da Comissªo (18 de Abril de 2000) As informa(cid:231)ıes publicadas sobre as rela(cid:231)ıes da Comissªo com a GuinØ Equatorial nªo sªo exactas. A Comissªo nªo tem conhecimento da «Oitava Cimeira para o progresso e o desenvolvimento da GuinØ Equatorial». Contudo, Ø um facto que, em 11 de Fevereiro de 2000, o Chefe da Delega(cid:231)ªo da Comissªo na GuinØ Equatorial se encontrou com o Presidente Obiang. Este encontro tinha um objectivo duplo: por um lado, entregar a carta de notifica(cid:231)ªo do montante afectado (cid:224) GuinØ Equatorial com base no VIII Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento (FED) e, por outro lado, anunciar a chegada pr(cid:243)xima ao pa(cid:237)s de uma missªo comunitÆria para os Direitos do Homem. Nos œltimos anos, as rela(cid:231)ıes entre a Comunidade e a GuinØ Equatorial foram muito afectadas pelas dificuldades com que o pa(cid:237)s se defronta no que se refere ao seu processo de democratiza(cid:231)ªo e de respeito pelos Direitos do Homem. A Comissªo e os Estados-membros representados na GuinØ Equatorial mantŒm um diÆlogo pol(cid:237)tico intenso com o Governo, com o objectivo de fazer avan(cid:231)ar o processo de democra- tiza(cid:231)ªo. A GuinØ Equatorial Ø, todavia, um pa(cid:237)s onde a coopera(cid:231)ªo comunitÆria pode desempenhar um papel significativo em termos de impacto sobre as popula(cid:231)ıes mais pobres. Assim, a Comissªo estÆ a financiar um projecto de adu(cid:231)ªo de Ægua potÆvel e de saneamento da cidade de Malabo, estando previsto o financiamento de um projecto semelhante para Bata. Ambos os projectos contribuirªo significativamente para a melhoria das condi(cid:231)ıes de vida dos sectores mais vulnerÆveis da popula(cid:231)ªo do pa(cid:237)s. AlØm disso, a Comissªo previu enviar em breve (cid:224) GuinØ Equatorial uma missªo constitu(cid:237)da por trŒs peritos independentes, com vista a estabelecer um plano de ac(cid:231)ªo nos dom(cid:237)nios da democratiza(cid:231)ªo, dos Direitos do Homem, da luta contra a pobreza e do desenvolvimento da sociedade civil. A Comissªo segue de muito perto a situa(cid:231)ªo neste pa(cid:237)s, tanto atravØs do seu gabinete em Malabo como dos frequentes contactos com os Estados-membros e os outros doadores internacionais. A Comissªo tem agido e continuarÆ a agir com a maior prudŒncia no que se refere (cid:224)s rela(cid:231)ıes com este pa(cid:237)s, a fim de contribuir para o estabelecimento de um Estado de Direito e para o desenvolvimento do processo de democratiza(cid:231)ªo, assuntos que continuarªo a ser prioritÆrios nas discussıes com as autoridades da GuinØ Equatorial


title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0728/00 från Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) till kommissionen. Om dammbygget Vuotos i norra Finland.

eurovoc_concepts:
Finland
Sweden
engineering structure
environmental impact
impact study
power plant
public health
water pollution

text: C 113 E/2 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 18. 4. 2001 platser f(cid:246)rblev tomma under hennes tal. Efter att den tj(cid:228)nstg(cid:246)rande OSSE-ordf(cid:246)randen Ferrero-Waldner avslutat sitt tal och l(cid:228)mnat rummet, (cid:229)terv(cid:228)nde diplomaterna till arbetsm(cid:246)tet. Under ett informellt ministerm(cid:246)te i Lissabon den 11 februari marknadsministrar omedelbart rummet n(cid:228)r deras (cid:246)sterrikiska kollega tog till orda. l(cid:228)mnade Belgiens och Frankrikes arbets- Belgien och Frankrike anstr(cid:228)nger sig uppenbarligen intensivt f(cid:246)r att inf(cid:246)ra en ny form av samarbete och en ny kultur i den politiska dialogen i de europeiska och internationella f(cid:246)rbindelserna. Sin isoleringsstrategi motiverar de med att de (cid:228)r bekymrade (cid:246)ver att de m(cid:228)nskliga r(cid:228)ttigheterna och minoriteternas r(cid:228)ttigheter i (cid:214)sterrike skulle kunna vara i fara p(cid:229) grund av att FP(cid:214) ((cid:214)sterrikiska liberala partiet) deltar i den nya mitten-h(cid:246)ger-regeringen i Wien. F(cid:246)ljande fr(cid:229)gor uppkommer i detta sammanhang: 1. Avser r(cid:229)det att h(cid:228)danefter acceptera denna nya form av samarbete, n(cid:228)rhelst det passar r(cid:229)det? 2. Vid det informella m(cid:246)tet i r(cid:229)det (arbetsmarknadsfr(cid:229)gor och sociala fr(cid:229)gor) i Lissabon skulle det extraordinarie EU-toppm(cid:246)tet i mars om syssels(cid:228)ttningspolitik ha f(cid:246)rberetts. Kommer s(cid:229)dana viktiga politiska fr(cid:229)gor (cid:129) vilket fr(cid:228)mst arbetsmarknadspolitiken (cid:228)r (cid:129) att (cid:229)sidos(cid:228)ttas i framtiden av Frankrike och Belgien s(cid:229) snart det ges m(cid:246)jlighet att, p(cid:229) ett s(cid:228)tt som v(cid:228)cker uppm(cid:228)rksamhet i massmedia, isolera en partner som hittills varit mycket p(cid:229)litlig? Gemensamt svar p(cid:229) de skriftliga fr(cid:229)gorna E-0645/00 och E-0646/00 (20 november 2000) De (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder som den (cid:228)rade parlamentsledamoten h(cid:228)nvisar till tillk(cid:228)nnagavs i en f(cid:246)rklaring av den portugisiske premi(cid:228)rministern p(cid:229) fjorton medlemsstaters regeringars v(cid:228)gnar. Denna f(cid:246)rklaring (cid:228)r inte bindande f(cid:246)r r(cid:229)det. R(cid:229)det har inte uttalat sig i denna fr(cid:229)ga och kan d(cid:228)rf(cid:246)r inte svara p(cid:229) de fr(cid:229)gor som den (cid:228)rade parlamentsledamoten st(cid:228)ller. (2001/C 113 E/003) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0728/00 fr(cid:229)n Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) till kommissionen (17 mars 2000) ˜mne: Om dammbygget Vuotos i norra Finland Det r(cid:229)der stor oro i norra Sverige (cid:246)ver att dammbygget Vuotos i norra Finland skall orsaka milj(cid:246)skador i form av kraftigt (cid:246)kade utsl(cid:228)pp av n(cid:228)rings(cid:228)mnen och tungmetaller i Bottenviken. Bland annat befaras att belastningen av metylkvicksilver kan komma att (cid:246)ka med 20-30 procent. Givetvis inneb(cid:228)r det att kvicksilverhalten i svensk fisk (cid:246)kar. Ett 240 kvadratkilometer stort myromr(cid:229)de (cid:228)r t(cid:228)nkt att l(cid:228)ggas under vatten. Flera svenska myndigheter har protesterat mot byggnadsplanerna. Har kommissionen haft tillf(cid:228)lle att studera denna utbyggnad och har man granskat om den uppfyller kraven i EU:s direktiv om milj(cid:246)konsekvensbeskrivningar? 18. 4. 2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 113 E/3 Svar fr(cid:229)n Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (8 maj 2000) Kommissionen k(cid:228)nner till projektet i Vuotos som r(cid:246)r ett kraftverk och en konstgjord sj(cid:246). Vattendomstolen f(cid:246)r norra Finland beviljade nyligen (29 februari 2000) byggnadslov f(cid:246)r projektet. Enligt uppgifter i pressen kommer beslutet att (cid:246)verklagas. ˜ven om projekt av den h(cid:228)r typen i princip faller under r(cid:229)dets direktiv 85/337/EEG av den 27 juni 1985 om bed(cid:246)mning av inverkan p(cid:229) milj(cid:246)n av vissa offentliga och privata projekt (1), (cid:228)r medlemsstaterna enligt det direktivet inte tvungna att l(cid:229)ta projekt omfattas d(cid:228)r tillst(cid:229)ndsf(cid:246)rfaranden har inletts f(cid:246)re sista datum f(cid:246)r genomf(cid:246)rande, vilket var den 1 januari 1995 f(cid:246)r Finland (se m(cid:229)l C-362/92, Bund Naturschutz in Bayern, punkt 19 och C-431/92, kommissionen mot Tyskland, punkt 29). Ans(cid:246)kan om Vuotos-projektet l(cid:228)mnades in under 1992. De finska myndigheterna har informerat kommissionen om att projekt, enligt den finska lagstiftningen om f(cid:246)rfaranden f(cid:246)r milj(cid:246)konsekvensbed(cid:246)mning, som varit f(cid:246)rem(cid:229)l f(cid:246)r offentlig utfr(cid:229)gning f(cid:246)re den 14 januari 1994 (cid:228)r undantagna, vilket g(cid:228)ller Vuotos-projektet. Milj(cid:246)konsekvenserna beroende p(cid:229) n(cid:228)rings(cid:228)mnen och tungmetaller som (cid:228)r ett resultat av projektet har bed(cid:246)mts inom ramen f(cid:246)r tillst(cid:229)ndsgivning i enlighet med den finska vattenlagen. I beslutet d(cid:228)r byggnads- lovet beviljas analyseras de uppskattade effekterna fr(cid:229)n den konstgjorda sj(cid:246)n p(cid:229) vattenkvaliteten och fiskarna i den konstgjorda sj(cid:246)n, i floden Kemijoki och i norra delen av Bottenviken. Det uppskattas att vattenkvaliteten och fritidsfisket kommer att p(cid:229)verkas av bland annat (cid:246)kade halter av n(cid:228)rings(cid:228)mnen, i synnerhet kv(cid:228)ve och fosfor, men att effekterna fr(cid:228)mst kommer att drabba den konstgjorda sj(cid:246)n och floden nedstr(cid:246)ms sj(cid:246)n, men att dessa (cid:228)r relativt obetydliga i norra delen av Bottenviken. Dessutom gjordes uppskattningen att kvicksilverniv(cid:229)n i vissa fiskarter (g(cid:228)dda, abborre, lake) under de f(cid:246)rsta 8-15 (cid:229)ren efter byggnationen kommer att (cid:246)ka kraftigt (mer (cid:228)n 1 milligram per kilo (mg/kg) i den konstgjorda sj(cid:246)n, markant (mellan 0,5 och 1,0 mg/kg) i floden Kemijoki, men i mindre utstr(cid:228)ckning i den norra delen av Bottenviken. Vattendomstolen understr(cid:246)k att skador p(cid:229) h(cid:228)lsan kan undvikas genom (cid:246)vervakning och genom att allm(cid:228)nheten informeras. Med unders(cid:246)kningen som underlag uppskattades (cid:228)ven att koncentra- tion av andra tungmetaller knappast skulle f(cid:229) effekter liknande dem som koncentration av kvicksilver ger upphov till. Vattendomstolen (cid:229)lade den s(cid:246)kande att ytterligare bed(cid:246)ma och (cid:246)vervaka konsekvenserna f(cid:246)r fisket och fisken. Enligt den information som kommissionen mottagit fr(cid:229)n de finska myndigheterna har Finland under tillst(cid:229)ndsf(cid:246)rfarandet informerat beh(cid:246)riga svenska myndigheter om projektets uppskattade milj(cid:246)effekter p(cid:229) den svenska sidan. I enlighet med detta, och mot bakgrund av den information kommissionen f(cid:246)rfogar (cid:246)ver, finns det ingen anledning f(cid:246)r kommissionen att vidta (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder i fr(cid:229)ga om den milj(cid:246)konsekvensbed(cid:246)mning som gjorts f(cid:246)r projektet. Kommissionen kommer att forts(cid:228)tta f(cid:246)lja det arbete som utf(cid:246)rs p(cid:229) nationell niv(cid:229). (1) EGT L 175, 5. 7. 1985. (2001/C 113 E/004) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-1039/00 fr(cid:229)n Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen (4 april 2000) ˜mne: Minskning av svinstocken i Flandern, (cid:229)tf(cid:246)ljd av socioekonomiska st(cid:246)d(cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder I slutet av februari meddelade kommissionsledamoten med ansvar f(cid:246)r milj(cid:246)fr(cid:229)gor, Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m, i ett svar p(cid:229) min skriftliga fr(cid:229)ga E-2686/99 (1) att hon k(cid:228)nde till vilka allvarliga problem regionen Flandern var utsatt f(cid:246)r till f(cid:246)ljd av de stora m(cid:228)ngder fosfor och kv(cid:228)ve som d(cid:228)r fanns anhopade


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0728/00 af Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) til Kommissionen. Dæmningsbyggeriet i Vuotos i det nordlige Finland.

text: C 113 E/2 De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende DA 18. 4. 2001 (OSCE). De forlod deres pladser under talen. Efter at den fungerende formand for OSCE, Ferrero-Waldner, havde afsluttet sin tale og forladt salen, vendte diplomaterne tilbage til arbejdsmłdet. P(cid:229) et uformelt EU-ministermłde i Lissabon den 11. februar forlod Belgiens og Frankrigs arbejdsministre straks salen, da deres łstrigske kollega tog ordet. Det ligger (cid:229)benbart Belgien og Frankrig meget p(cid:229) sinde i de europ(cid:230)iske og internationale forbindelser at indfłre en ny form for samarbejde og en ny kultur i den politiske dialog. Deres strategi med at isolere en enkelt medlemsstat begrunder de med, at man er bekymret over, at menneskerettighederne og minorite- ternes rettigheder kan v(cid:230)re i fare i (cid:216)strig p(cid:229) grund af Frihedspartiets (FP(cid:214)s) deltagelse i den nye centrum- hłjre regering i Wien. 1. Agter R(cid:229)det fremover at acceptere denne nye form for samarbejde, n(cid:229)r det efter R(cid:229)dets opfattelse er hensigtsm(cid:230)ssigt? 2. P(cid:229) det uformelle młde mellem arbejds- og socialministrene i Lissabon skulle EU(cid:146)s s(cid:230)rlige topmłde om besk(cid:230)ftigelsespolitikken i marts have v(cid:230)ret forberedt. Vil vigtige politiske emner (cid:129) som besk(cid:230)ftigel- sespolitikken i allerhłjeste grad er det (cid:129) fremover blive tilsidesat af Frankrig og Belgien, n(cid:229)r der byder sig en mulighed for at isolere en hidtil meget p(cid:229)lidelig partner p(cid:229) en m(cid:229)de, der opn(cid:229)r stor d(cid:230)kning i medierne? Samlet svar p(cid:229) skriftlige forespłrgsler E-0645/00 og E-0646/00 (20. november 2000) De foranstaltninger, som det (cid:230)rede medlem henviser til, er omhandlet i en erkl(cid:230)ring, som den portugisiske premierminister har fremsat p(cid:229) 14 medlemsstaters vegne. R(cid:229)det er ikke bundet af denne erkl(cid:230)ring. R(cid:229)det har ikke udtalt sig om dette spłrgsm(cid:229)l, og det er derfor ikke i stand til at besvare det (cid:230)rede medlems forespłrgsler. (2001/C 113 E/003) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0728/00 af Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) til Kommissionen (17. marts 2000) Om: D(cid:230)mningsbyggeriet i Vuotos i det nordlige Finland Der er stor bekymring i det nordlige Sverige for, at d(cid:230)mningsbyggeriet i Vuotos i det nordlige Finland vil for(cid:229)rsage miljłskader i form af kraftigt łgede udslip af n(cid:230)ringsstoffer og tungmetaller i Den Botniske Bugt. frygtes blandt andet, at koncentrationen af methylkviksłlv kan blive łget med 20-30 %. Dette Det indeb(cid:230)rer naturligvis, at kviksłlvindholdet fisk fra svenske farvande łges. Det er planen, at et moseomr(cid:229)de p(cid:229) 240 km2 l(cid:230)gges under vand. Flere svenske myndigheder har protesteret mod bygnings- planerne. i Har Kommissionen haft mulighed for at studere dette byggeri, og har man undersłgt, om det opfylder kravene i EU(cid:146)s direktiv om vurdering af indvirkning p(cid:229) miljłet? 18. 4. 2001 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende C 113 E/3 Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m (8. maj 2000) Kommissionen har kendskab til projektet vedrłrende kraftanl(cid:230)gget og den kunstige sł i Vuotos, hvortil vanddomstolen i det nordlige Finland for nylig (den 29. februar 2000) har givet byggetilladelse. Ifłlge oplysninger i pressen vil afgłrelsen kunne ankes. Selv om projekter som s(cid:229)dan principielt falder ind under R(cid:229)dets direktiv 85/337/E(cid:216)F af 27. juni 1985 om vurdering af visse offentlige og private projekters indvirkning p(cid:229) miljłet (1), har medlemsstaterne i henhold til direktivet ikke pligt til at lade det g(cid:230)lde for projekter, for hvilke godkendelsesprocedurerne er blevet indledt forud for gennemfłrelsesfristen, hvilket var den 1. januar 1995 for Finlands vedkommende (jf. sag C-362/92, Bund Naturschutz in Bayern, punkt 19, og C-431/92 Kommissionen versus Tyskland, punkt 29). Ansłgningen vedrłrende Vuotos-projektet blev indgivet i 1992. De finske myndigheder har meddelt Kommissionen, at den finske lov om miljłvurderingsprocedurer ikke omfatter projekter, hvor den offentlige hłring er gennemfłrt inden den 14. januar 1994, hvilket g(cid:230)lder Vuotos-projektet. Under alle omst(cid:230)ndigheder er der i forbindelse med godkendelsesproceduren, som er gennemfłrt i henhold til den finske vandlov, foretaget en vurdering af, hvilke miljłvirkninger projektet vil afstedkomme med hensyn til n(cid:230)ringsstoffer og tungmetaller. I afgłrelsen om anl(cid:230)gstilladelsen undersłges de skłnnede effekter af den kunstige sł p(cid:229) vandkvaliteten og p(cid:229) fiskene i den kunstige sł, i Kemielven og i den nordlige del af Den Botniske Bugt. Det skłnnes, at vandkvaliteten og lystfiskeriet vil blive berłrt af det łgede n(cid:230)ringsstofniveau, is(cid:230)r kv(cid:230)lstof og fosfor, men at effekten vil v(cid:230)re koncentreret i den kunstige sł og nedstrłms i elven, og at den vil blive meget ringe i den nordlige del af Den Botniske Bugt. Desuden skłnnes det, kviksłlvforekomsten i visse fisk (gedde, aborre og ferskvandskvabbe) i lłbet af de fłrste 8-15 (cid:229)r efter anl(cid:230)gget vil stige betydeligt (over 1 mg/kg) i den kunstige sł, markant (mellem 0,5 og 1. 0 mg/kg) i Kemielven, men i mindre grad i den nordlige del af Den Botniske Bugt. Vanddomstolen understregede, at sundhedsskadelige virkninger kan undg(cid:229)s ved at overv(cid:229)ge situationen og holde offentligheden informeret herom. Endvidere skłnnedes det, at det p(cid:229) grundlag af de gennemfłrte undersłgelser var usandsynligt, at mobiliseringen af andre tungmetaller ville have samme effekt som mobiliseringen af kviksłlv. Vand- domstolen p(cid:229)lagde ansłgeren at foretage yderligere vurderinger og overv(cid:229)ge effekten p(cid:229) fiskeri og fisk. Ud fra de oplysninger, som Kommissionen har modtaget fra de finske myndigheder, har Finland i forbindelse med godkendelsesproceduren underrettet de kompetente svenske myndigheder om projektets skłnnede miljłvirkninger p(cid:229) den svenske side. P(cid:229) grundlag af de oplysninger, som Kommissionen for tiden ligger inde med, har den fłlgelig ingen grund til at gribe ind over for de miljłvurderingsprocedurer, der er gjort brug af som led i dette projekt. Kommissionen vil fortsat holde sig underrettet om den procedure, der gennemfłres p(cid:229) nationalt plan. (1) EFT L 175 af 5. 7. 1985. (2001/C 113 E/004) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-1039/00 af Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) til Kommissionen (4. april 2000) Om: Reduktion af svinebestanden i Flandern ledsaget af socio-łkonomiske foranstaltninger I slutningen af i sit svar p(cid:229) skriftlig forespłrgsel nr. E-2686/99 (1), at Kommissionen var bekendt med de alvorlige problemer, den flamske region stod overfor som fłlge af tilstedev(cid:230)relsen af betragtelige m(cid:230)ngder af fosfor og kv(cid:230)lstof. februar oplyste kommissionsmedlem Margot Wallstr(cid:246)m (miljł)


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0714/00 de Glyn Ford (PSE) a la Comisión. Banqueros nacionales y empresarios pertenecientes a minorías étnicas.

eurovoc_concepts:
European social policy
bank
entrepreneur
ethnic discrimination
small and medium-sized enterprises

text: 28. 12. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas C 374 E/141 (2000/C 374 E/166) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0714/00 de Glyn Ford (PSE) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (17 de marzo de 2000) Asunto: Banqueros nacionales y empresarios pertenecientes a minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas En sus mesas redondas con banqueros nacionales, ¿ha planteado la Comisi(cid:243)n la cuesti(cid:243)n relativa a la discriminaci(cid:243)n de empresarios pertenecientes a minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas? En caso negativo, ¿ lo harÆ en el futuro? Respuesta del Sr. Liikanen en nombre de la Comisi(cid:243)n (18 de abril de 2000) El problema de la discriminaci(cid:243)n de las minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas en el Æmbito de las finanzas se abord(cid:243) en la 2a y 3a Mesas redondas de banqueros y pequeæas y medianas empresas (PYME), puesto que se detect(cid:243) que los empresarios de minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas forman uno de los grupos mÆs vulnerables que topan con dificultades de acceso a la financiaci(cid:243)n. La Mesa redonda de banqueros y PYME es una iniciativa de la Comisi(cid:243)n para mejorar la relaci(cid:243)n entre bancos y PYME. La 3a Mesa redonda reuni(cid:243) a organizaciones de PYME europeas y representantes de la banca europea (cajas de ahorro, bancos cooperativos y comerciales), del capital-riesgo y de asociaciones de garant(cid:237)a rec(cid:237)proca, as(cid:237) como a varios organismos pœblicos de los Estados miembros para el fomento de las PYME. El informe final de la 2a Mesa redonda se adopt(cid:243) a principios de 1997 y el informe final de la 3a Mesa redonda se adoptarÆ en mayo o junio de 2000. Algunos de los banqueros participantes tend(cid:237)an a pensar que prestar a estos empresarios significa asumir un riesgo mayor que el normal y a menudo no es rentable, lo que se traduce en mayores precauciones a la hora de evaluar las solicitudes de prØstamos. No obstante, continœan ofreciendo microprØstamos a los creadores de empresas para facilitar la integraci(cid:243)n de las minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas en la sociedad, especialmente cuando los programas pœblicos asumen una parte del riesgo. En la 2a Mesa redonda, uno de los casos que se destacaron en el informe final como mejor prÆctica fue el de Mama Cash en los Pa(cid:237)ses Bajos, organizaci(cid:243)n que ofrece consejo y garant(cid:237)as a mujeres (especialmente mujeres inmigrantes pertenecientes a minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas) que desean fundar empresas y a quienes el sector bancario ha denegado el crØdito. Se consider(cid:243) que la iniciativa es especialmente interesante porque tiene Øxito, es autosuficiente y no se basa en financiaci(cid:243)n pœblica. El proyecto de informe final de la 3a Mesa redonda tambiØn analiza el tema de las minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas, resaltando diversas iniciativas adoptadas por bancos britÆnicos para servir mejor a su clientela de minor(cid:237)as Øtnicas. La Comisi(cid:243)n examinarÆ a fondo las recomendaciones de la Mesa redonda sobre un mejor acceso a los microprØstamos. Mientras tanto, la Comisi(cid:243)n recuerda que, en su propuesta de Directiva relativa a la aplicaci(cid:243)n del principio de igualdad de trato de las personas independientemente de su origen racial o Øtnico de 25 de noviembre de 1999 (1), se proh(cid:237)be expresamente toda discriminaci(cid:243)n en el acceso a los servicios por motivos de origen racial o Øtnico. La Comisi(cid:243)n ha urgido al Consejo y al Parlamento a acelerar el tratamiento de esta propuesta con el fin de garantizar su pronta adopci(cid:243)n. Se env(cid:237)a un ejemplar del informe final de la 2a Mesa redonda directamente a Su Seæor(cid:237)a y a la secretar(cid:237)a del Parlamento. (1) COM(1999) 566 final. (2000/C 374 E/167) PREGUNTA ESCRITA E-0723/00 de Roberto Bigliardo (TDI) a la Comisi(cid:243)n (17 de marzo de 2000) Asunto: Incumplimiento de directivas por parte de las compaæ(cid:237)as de seguros en Italia ¿EstÆ informada la Comisi(cid:243)n del hecho de que las compaæ(cid:237)as de seguros italianas se niegan a asegurar los veh(cid:237)culos de los italianos residentes en las regiones del Sur de Italia y, en especial, en Campania y Apulia, a