title: Reglamento (CE) nº 749/2000 de la Comisión, de 11 de abril de 2000, por el que se adaptan las cantidades globales fijadas en el artículo 3 del Reglamento (CEE) nº 3950/92 del Consejo por el que se establece una tasa suplementaria en el sector de la leche y de los productos lácteos

eurovoc_concepts:
agricultural levy
milk
milk product
regulation of agricultural production

text: L 90/4 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 12. 4. 2000 REGLAMENTO (CE) No 749/2000 DE LA COMISIÓN de 11 de abril de 2000 por el que se adaptan las cantidades globales fijadas en el artículo 3 del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92 del Consejo por el que se establece una tasa suplementaria en el sector de la leche y de los productos lácteos LA COMISIÓN DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS, (4) Visto el Tratado constitutivo de la Comunidad Europea, Visto el Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92 del Consejo, de 28 de diciembre de 1992, por el que se establece una tasa suplemen- taria en el sector de la leche y de los productos lácteos (1), cuya última modificación la constituye el Reglamento (CE) no 1256/ 1999 (2), y, en particular, el apartado 2 de su artículo 3 y el apartado 2 de su artículo 4, Considerando lo siguiente: (1) (2) (3) En el apartado 2 del artículo 3 del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92 se establece que las cantidades globales garanti- zadas para Finlandia podrán incrementarse para compensar a los productores «SLOM» hasta un máximo de 200 000 toneladas. De conformidad con el artículo 6 del Reglamento (CE) no 671/95 de la Comisión (3), modi- ficado por el Reglamento (CE) no 1390/95 (4), Finlandia ha comunicado las cantidades globales garantizadas correspondientes a la campaña 1999/2000. En el apartado 2 del artículo 4 del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92 se establece que la cantidad de referencia indi- vidual se incrementará o establecerá, previa solicitud del productor debidamente justificada, a fin de tener en cuenta las modificaciones que afecten a sus entregas o a sus ventas directas. El incremento o el establecimiento de una cantidad de referencia estarán supeditados a la reducción correspondiente o la supresión de la otra cantidad de referencia de la que dispone el productor. Estas adaptaciones no pueden entrañar para el Estado miembro en cuestión un aumento de la suma de las cantidades de las entregas y ventas directas contem- pladas en el artículo 3 del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/ 92. En caso de que se modifiquen definitivamente las cantidades de referencia individuales, las cantidades contempladas en el artículo 3 se adaptarán en conse- cuencia. (CE) De acuerdo con lo dispuesto en el tercer guión del artículo 8 del Reglamento (CEE) no 536/93 de la Comi- sión (5), cuya última modificación la constituye el Regla- no 1255/98 (6), Bélgica, Dinamarca, mento Alemania, España, Francia, los Países Bajos, Austria, Portugal, Finlandia y el Reino Unido han comunicado las cantidades modificadas definitivamente en virtud del párrafo segundo del apartado 2 del artículo 4 del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92. Irlanda, Italia, (5) (6) resulta oportuno adaptar las cantidades Así pues, globales aplicables para el período comprendido entre el 1 de abril de 1999 y el 31 de marzo de 2000 fijadas en el cuadro incluido en el apartado 2 del artículo 3 y, por consiguiente, las aplicables durante los períodos conse- cutivos fijados en el anexo del Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92. Las medidas previstas en el presente Reglamento se ajustan al dictamen del Comité de gestión de la leche y de los productos lácteos. HA ADOPTADO EL PRESENTE REGLAMENTO: Artículo 1 El Reglamento (CEE) no 3950/92 se modificará como sigue: 1) En el apartado 2 del artículo 3, el cuadro se sustituye por el cuadro incluido en el anexo I del presente Reglamento. 2) El anexo se sustituye por el anexo II del presente Regla- mento. Artículo 2 El presente Reglamento entrará en vigor el séptimo día siguiente al de su publicación en el Diario Oficial de las Comuni- dades Europeas. El presente Reglamento será obligatorio en todos sus elementos y directamente aplicable en cada Estado miembro. Hecho en Bruselas, el 11 de abril de 2000. Por la Comisión Franz FISCHLER Miembro de la Comisión (1) DO L 405 de 31. 12. 1992, p. 1. (2) DO L 160 de 26. 6. 1999, p. 73. (3) DO L 70 de 30. 3. 1995, p. 2. (4) DO L 135 de 21. 6. 1995, p. 4. (5) DO L 57 de 10. 3. 1993, p. 12. (6) DO L 173 de 18. 6. 1998, p. 14. 12. 4. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 90/5 «Total de las cantidades de referencia aplicables del 1 de abril de 1999 al 31 de marzo de 2000 ANEXO I Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas (en toneladas) Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania (1) Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 152 062 4 454 411 27 768 016 629 817 5 469 725 23 816 298 5 236 758 9 703 974 268 098 10 990 667 2 563 309 1 862 977 2 396 730 3 300 000 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Reino Unido 14 394 532 195 515 (1) De las cuales 6 242 276 toneladas para las entregas de los productores en el territorio de los nuevos Estados federados y 11 091 toneladas para las ventas directas en los nuevos Estados federados. » L 90/6 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 12. 4. 2000 ANEXO II «ANEXO a) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2000 al 31 de marzo de 2001 c) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2002 al 31 de marzo de 2005 (en toneladas) (en toneladas) Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 152 062 4 454 411 27 768 016 674 617 5 819 725 23 816 298 5 332 758 10 087 974 268 098 10 990 667 2 563 309 1 862 977 2 396 730 3 300 000 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Reino Unido (1) 14 407 140 195 515 (1) Aumento específico de la cuota para su atribución a Irlanda del Norte. Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 152 062 4 454 411 27 768 016 699 817 6 019 725 23 816 298 5 386 758 10 303 974 268 098 10 990 667 2 563 309 1 862 977 2 396 730 3 300 000 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Reino Unido 14 414 232 195 515 b) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2001 al 31 de marzo de 2002 d) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2005 al 31 de marzo de 2006 (en toneladas) (en toneladas) Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 152 062 4 454 411 27 768 016 699 817 6 019 725 23 816 298 5 386 758 10 303 974 268 098 10 990 667 2 563 309 1 862 977 2 396 730 3 300 000 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Reino Unido (1) 14 414 232 195 515 Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 168 614 4 476 688 27 907 340 699 817 6 019 725 23 937 477 5 386 758 10 303 974 269 443 11 046 040 2 577 056 1 872 339 2 408 753 3 316 515 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 (1) Aumento específico de la cuota para su atribución a Irlanda del Norte. Reino Unido 14 487 182 195 515 12. 4. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 90/7 e) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2006 al 31 de marzo de 2007 f) Total de las cantidades de referencia contempladas en el apar- tado 2 del artículo 3 aplicable del 1 de abril de 2007 al 31 de marzo de 2008 (en toneladas) (en toneladas) Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Estados miembros Entregas Ventas directas Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 185 166 4 498 964 28 046 664 699 817 6 019 725 24 058 656 5 386 758 10 303 974 270 788 11 101 414 2 590 803 1 881 702 2 420 775 3 333 030 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Bélgica Dinamarca Alemania Grecia España Francia Irlanda Italia Luxemburgo Países Bajos Austria Portugal Finlandia Suecia 3 201 718 4 521 241 28 185 988 699 817 6 019 725 24 179 835 5 386 758 10 303 974 272 134 11 156 787 2 604 550 1 891 064 2 432 798 3 349 545 158 369 937 96 800 696 97 225 419 500 9 006 226 086 951 84 025 186 092 9 484 9 462 3 000 Reino Unido 14 560 132 195 515 Reino Unido 14 633 083 195 515»


title: WRITTEN QUESTION E-1149/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority.

eurovoc_concepts:
European social policy
food safety
nuclear accident
radioactive pollution

formats: html pdf print

text: 20. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 53 E/89 (2001/C 53 E/118) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1162/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (12 April 2000) Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food safety. Some consumers want to know where their food comes from (section 103). Little is known about the costs of systems guaranteeing this or about the practical possibilities. 1. Will the Commission propose labelling identical ingredients derived from GMOs? If not, why does the Commission not think it necessary to include on labels identical ingredients derived from GMOs in view of their (cid:145)relationship(cid:146) to GMOs and in view of consumers(cid:146) right to be informed? If so, in what way will the Commission make this a legal obligation? 2. What labelling does the Commission want for additives and flavourings produced by GMOs in addition to the labelling rules for such substances which were adopted in January 2000? Joint answer to Written Questions E-1122/00, E-1127/00, E-1128/00, E-1140/00, E-1141/00, E-1142/00, E-1143/00, E-1144/00, E-1145/00, E-1146/00, E-1147/00, E-1148/00, E-1150/00, E-1151/00, E-1152/00, E-1153/00, E-1155/00, E-1156/00, E-1157/00, E-1158/00, E-1160/00, E-1161/00 and E-1162/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (9 June 2000) The issues raised by the Honourable Member are being studied with a view to bringing forward proposals for legislation according to the time scale set out in the white paper on food safety. It would be inappropriate at this stage to anticipate the details of each proposal. (2001/C 53 E/119) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1149/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (11 April 2000) Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food safety. Is there a scenario at EU level with measures in the event of a nuclear accident occurring in or in the vicinity of the EU? If so, what is the main thrust of these measures? If not, will the Commission draw up an action programme for nuclear accidents? Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission (14 June 2000) Food of animal and vegetable origin carries inherent risks of microbiological and chemical contamination, including radioactivity. The White Paper on Food Safety (1) confirms how important it is to adopt a proactive attitude to all types of contamination and to continue close monitoring of the situation following the Chernobyl nuclear accident. C 53 E/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 2. 2001 foodstuffs and of Among the measures the Community took after Chernobyl, as early as 1987 it adopted Council Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87 of 22 December 1987 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of feedingstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency (2), as amended by Council Regulation (Euratom) No 2218/89 of 18 July 1989 (3) and supplemented by regulations (4). Article 2 of Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87 provides that in the event of the Commission receiving (cid:129) in particular according to either the Community arrangements for the early exchange of information established pursuant to Council Decision 87/600/Euratom of 14 Decem- ber 1987 on Community arrangements for the early exchange of information in the event of a radiological emergency (2), or under the International Atomic Energy Agency Convention of 26 September 1986 on information on accidents or on any other case of early notification of a nuclear accident (cid:129) official radiological emergency, substantiating that the maximum permissible levels in the Annex to Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87 are likely to be reached or have been reached, immediately adopt a regulation rendering those maximum permissible levels applicable. This regulation will be of limited duration (no more than three months). Within that time the Commission will present to the Council a for a regulation confirming the action taken or if necessary adapting the levels to the proposal requirements of the accident, taking economic and social factors into account where appropriate. it will (1) COM(1999) 719 final. (2) OJ L 371, 30. 12. 1987. (3) OJ L 211, 27. 7. 1989. (4) Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 944/89 of 12 April 1989 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination in minor foodstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency (cid:129) OJ L 101, 13. 4. 1989. Council Regulation (EEC) No 2219/89 of 18 July 1989 on the special conditions for exporting foodstuffs and feedingstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency (cid:129) OJ L 211, 27. 7. 1989. Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 770/90 of 29 March 1990 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of feedingstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency (cid:129) OJ L 83, 30. 3. 1990. (2001/C 53 E/120) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1168/00 by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission (10 April 2000) Subject: Monitoring the process of liberalisation of air transport The main objective of the liberalisation of air transport undertaken on the Community(cid:146)s initiative was to improve access to that means of transport for EU citizens. It was believed that liberalisation would lead to a marked increase in competition among air transport operators, resulting in: (cid:129) more airlines operating on each route (more choice for users), (cid:129) greater frequency (offering more possibilities for choosing flights at convenient times), (cid:129) generalised reduction in prices and improvement in the quality of service. After a promising initial phase in which it appeared that these objectives might be achieved, distortions have gradually become apparent which are compromising the desired results. The process of alliances between operators, through mergers, code-sharing or other commercial agree- ments, is gradually giving rise to more serious situations of dominant position than were seen previously, and the consequences are highly detrimental to the interests of passengers


title: WRITTEN QUESTION E-1108/00 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. UN 2000 Millennium General Assembly and Summit Meeting.

eurovoc_concepts:
UN General Assembly
UNO
common foreign and security policy
competence of the institution
peace
poverty
sustainable development

text: 20. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 53 E/39 So far the Commission has only been informed about the existence of one non-priority butterfly species under Directive 92/43/EEC, without any proof by scientific literature, information about population size, importance of the area or compensation or mitigation measures which are already foreseen. According to this information, it is not possible to draw a conclusion on whether the area has to be proposed as a site of Community importance according to Directive 92/43/EEC. Nor can it be said at the moment whether the authorities have not respected Community legislation in this specific case. The conservation of the two butterfly species mentioned by the Honourable Member might be possible on parts of the golf course if they are maintained and managed for the conservation of their habitats and if the appropriate compensation or mitigation measures are applied. Given the information available so far, an infringement of Community legislation cannot be proved. The Honourable Member is invited to provide specific and detailed information on the site to enable the Commission to assess the case fully. (1) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (2001/C 53 E/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/00 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (25 March 2000) Subject: Millennium Forum, Summit and Assembly in New York What steps is the Commission taking to ensure that the proposals that will be put forward by the Millennium Forum in May this year will be seriously considered by the Millennium Summit and Assembly later in the year and also to ensure that the proposals become plans for actions and do not remain merely talking points with good intentions? (2001/C 53 E/044) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1108/00 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (11 April 2000) Subject: UN 2000 Millennium General Assembly and Summit Meeting Does the Commission recognise the opportunity offered by the United Nations 2000 Millennium General Assembly and Summit Meeting to address shared international concerns for peace, environmental sustainability and poverty reduction? Will the Commission clarify how it intends to reform and strengthen the UN on the principles of greater efficiency and greater accountability? Joint answer to Written Questions E-0918/00 and E-1108/00 given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (15 May 2000) The Commission expects that the proposals to be made by the Millennium Forum in May 2000 will be presented at the Millennium Summit by a spokesman for the Forum. The Commission also expects that such proposals will be discussed in the (cid:145)round-table(cid:146) discussions, the reports of which will be annexed to the Millennium Summit declaration. C 53 E/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 2. 2001 The Commission fully recognizes the opportunity offered by the 2000 Millennium General Assembly and Summit Meeting of the United Nations to address shared international concerns for peace, sustainable development and poverty reduction. The Commission is of course open to taking on board such proposals to the extent that they are compatible with Community policies and within the limits of the Commission(cid:146)s competences. With regard to the organisational aspects of reform and strengthening the United Nations to increase efficiency and accountability, the Commission plays its role in the coordination with regard to Community decision-making in this area, as well as in the external representation of the Community(cid:146)s position on these issues. (2001/C 53 E/045) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0923/00 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission (29 March 2000) Subject: Funding application The group Research into Ageing were promised an EU grant almost 4 years ago? They have yet to receive the funding which they were promised. The reference numbers of the agreements are SOC 96 102180 and SOC 97 101790. Research into Ageing ws subsequently informed that the grants could not be made until the judgment on case C-239/96 was received from the European Court of Justice. This case challenged the Commission(cid:146)s call for applications for grants from budget line B3-4104, concerning elderly people. The UK withdrew case C-239/96 in October 1998. The grants made conditional on the outcome of the case (including SOC 96 102180 and SOC 97 101790) have yet to be paid. When will the Research into Ageing group receive its funding pursuant to SOC 96 102180 and SOC 97 101790? Surely, this is contrary to the established Community principle of (cid:145)legitimate expectation(cid:146)? Will the Commission please give general clarification as to when the grants made conditional on the outcome of C-239/96 will be paid? What action does the Commission intend to take in light of the withdrawal of C-239/96? Will all conditional grants now be paid out and how does the Commission intend to avoid similar unacceptable delays in the future? Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission (26 May 2000) The two agreements mentioned by the Honourable Member were only concluded conditionally, following cases brought by the United Kingdom (cases C-239/96 and C-240/96) and in accordance with the consequent order made by the President of the Court of justice. These cases challenged the Commission(cid:146)s call for applications for grants from two budget lines, concerning elderly people (B3-4104) and social exclusion (B3-4103) respectively. These challenges were made on similar grounds to case C-106/96 also brought by the United Kingdom, where on 12 May 1998 the Court found against the Commission. This ruling was followed by the Inter-Institutional Agreement of 13 October 1998 between the Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the legal bases and implementation of the Community budget (1). Having regard to these considerations and in particular to the very close similarity between the expenditure contemplated by the above-mentioned conditional agreement and that in case C-106/96, the Commission was regrettably left with no choice but to refrain from making the payments concerned. The Commission is writing to Research into Ageing and all organisations with similar agreements to inform them of the position