ISSN 1977-0995

doi:10.3000/19770995.CE2014.088.dut

Publicatieblad

van de Europese Unie

C 88E

European flag  

Uitgave in de Nederlandse taal

Mededelingen en bekendmakingen

57e jaargang
27 maart 2014


Nummer

Inhoud

Bladzijde

 

IV   Informatie

 

INFORMATIE AFKOMSTIG VAN DE INSTELLINGEN, ORGANEN EN INSTANTIES VAN DE EUROPESE UNIE

 

Europees Parlement

 

SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAGEN MET ANTWOORD

2014/C 088E/01

Schriftelijke vragen van leden van het Europees Parlement en de antwoorden van instellingen van de Europese Unie

1

Bericht aan de lezer

Deze publicatie bevat schriftelijke vragen van leden van het Europees Parlement en de antwoorden op deze vragen van instellingen van de Europese Unie.

Iedere vraag en ieder antwoord wordt eerst in de oorspronkelijke taalversie getoond, vóór eventuele vertalingen.

Soms is het mogelijk dat het antwoord in een andere taal dan de vraag is geformuleerd. Dat hangt af van de werktaal van de commissie die de vraag beantwoordt.

Deze vragen en antwoorden worden overeenkomstig artikelen 117 en 118 van het Reglement van het Europees Parlement gepubliceerd.

Alle vragen en antwoorden kunnen worden geraadpleegd via de website van het Europees Parlement (Europarl), onder het kopje Parlementaire vragen:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/nl/parliamentary-questions.html

AFKORTINGEN VAN DE DIVERSE FRACTIES

PPE

Fractie van de Europese Volkspartij (Christendemocraten)

S&D

Fractie van de Progressieve Alliantie van Socialisten en Democraten in het Europees Parlement

ALDE

Fractie Alliantie van Liberalen en Democraten voor Europa

Verts/ALE

Fractie De Groenen/Vrije Europese Alliantie

ECR

Fractie Europese Conservatieven en Hervormers

GUE/NGL

Confederale Fractie Europees Unitair Links/Noords Groen Links

EFD

Fractie Europa van Vrijheid en Democratie

NI

Niet-ingeschrevenen

NL

 


IV Informatie

INFORMATIE AFKOMSTIG VAN DE INSTELLINGEN, ORGANEN EN INSTANTIES VAN DE EUROPESE UNIE

Europees Parlement

SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAGEN MET ANTWOORD

27.3.2014   

NL

Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie

CE 88/1


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB
SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAGEN MET ANTWOORD

Schriftelijke vragen van leden van het Europees Parlement en de antwoorden van instellingen van de Europese Unie

(2014/C 88 E/01)

Inhoud

E-007293/13 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Hungary criminalises the homeless

Version française

English version

E-009020/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Veneto region of Italy not eligible for EU funding to tackle youth unemployment

Versione italiana

English version

E-009021/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: EUR 1.5 billion in funding to Italy to combat youth unemployment

Versione italiana

English version

E-009023/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Subsidising agricultural production

English version

E-009024/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Fall in diabetes deaths

English version

E-009025/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Criminal convictions of trafficked persons

English version

E-009026/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Testing of lintels

English version

E-009027/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: European Alliance for Apprenticeships

English version

E-009028/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Number of skin cancer cases

English version

E-009029/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Murder of women

English version

E-009031/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Persecution of Christians in Sudan

English version

E-009032/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Child obesity

English version

E-009033/13 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: Treatments for children with cancer

English version

E-009034/13 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Attacks on LGBTI organisations and defenders in Cameroon

English version

E-009036/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energy in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-009037/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-009040/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-009042/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-009044/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-009038/13 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Versión española

English version

P-009045/13 by Bernd Posselt to the Commission

Subject: Trials of former Croatian Prime Minister Sanader

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009046/13 by Gay Mitchell to the Commission

Subject: Unlocking the consumer protection market

English version

E-009047/13 by Alyn Smith to the Commission

Subject: Follow up on Written Question E-002862/2013

English version

E-009048/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Decision by Greek court against Hellenic Competition Commission

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009049/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Insulting statements by director of Eurostat about the Greek judicial authorities

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009050/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Humanitarian situation in Syria and representation of minorities at Geneva Peace Conference

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009051/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: IMF report on European banks

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009053/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Why was the expensive solution chosen for ATE?

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009054/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Reporting subsidies on products in Greek public transport corporations and organisations

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009055/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Financing education in Greece

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009056/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Future haircut to Greek debt held by official sector

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009057/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Huge problems for citizens with cases pending before the OEK — cases in Achaia and Platy (Imathia)

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009058/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Alarming fish mortality in the Venice lagoon, due to possible water pollution

Versione italiana

English version

E-009059/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Employment of teachers in Portugal

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009060/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Spending cuts in education in Portugal

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009061/13 by Ismail Ertug to the Commission

Subject: Revision of the TSI Noise

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009062/13 by Cristiana Muscardini and Susy De Martini to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Importing doctors from Cuba

Versione italiana

English version

E-009063/13 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Closure to traffic of Via dei Fori Imperiali: possible infringement of public procurement legislation

Versione italiana

English version

E-009064/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Possible underestimation of the environmental impact of a project for a special waste disposal facility at Lughignano di Casale sul Sile (TV)

Versione italiana

English version

E-009065/13 by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy to the Commission

Subject: Warehousing and financial players

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009108/13 by Marc Tarabella to the Council

Subject: Cyber activists sentenced to 10 years in prison

Version française

English version

E-009109/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: Meeting between Commissioner Barnier and Gerry Grimstone

English version

P-011704/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: Failure to answer question on EU Funding of UK NGOs

English version

E-009110/13 by Jo Leinen, Chris Davies, Bas Eickhout, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Sabine Wils and Sirpa Pietikäinen to the Commission

Subject: Construction of illegal power plant in Opole, Poland (infringement proceedings against Poland for delay in the transposition of Directive 2009/31/EC)

Deutsche Fassung

Nederlandse versie

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-009111/13 by Seán Kelly to the Commission

Subject: Common charger for small electronic devices

English version

E-009112/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ I

English version

E-009113/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ II

English version

E-009114/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ III

English version

E-009115/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ IV

English version

E-009116/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ V

English version

E-009117/13 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Availability of funding for the ‘Progetto Telefono Blu’ (Blue Telephone Project)

Versione italiana

English version

P-009200/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Expected boost as a result of the EU-USA Trade Agreement

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009201/13 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Fracking

Versión española

English version

E-009202/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Environmental pollution in Galicia

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009203/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Economic developments in Bulgaria and their impact

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009204/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Economic problems in Croatia

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009205/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Economic developments in Romania and their impact

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009206/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: More net from the gross

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009207/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Corruption in Europe

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009208/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Inquiry into imported foodstuffs from the USA

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009209/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: IT — loss of confidence and effects on competitiveness

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009210/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations in Oman

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009211/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Drugs policy — new challenges

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009212/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Trisomy 21 blood test — medical ethical implications

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009213/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Flexible retirement model

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009214/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Cosmetics and consumer protection

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009215/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Genetically modified plants (Monsanto)

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009216/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Health hazard posed by electromagnetic fields — reassessment

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009217/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Situation in Congo

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009218/13 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Lost revenue in Greece

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009219/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Letter from the Commission to the Greek Government concerning Cosco

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009220/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Change in Greek law on collective redundancies

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009221/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: ROP for Western Greece — the Ionian Islands — the Peloponnese

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009222/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Progress in implementing the ‘Alexander Baltatzis’ Programme

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009223/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Clearance of EAGGF and EAFRD accounts

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009224/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Provision in the amendment to Regulation 562/2006 (Schengen Borders Code)

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009225/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Need for health studies for residents of the Fyli landfill area

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009226/13 by Rachida Dati to the Council

Subject: Need for swift agreement on the data protection package

Version française

English version

E-009228/13 by Esther de Lange to the Commission

Subject: Fines unpaid by diplomats

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009229/13 by Esther de Lange to the Commission

Subject: Dangerous swimming toys for babies and young children

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009230/13 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU plan to establish its own secret service

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009231/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Review of state aid rules for airports

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009266/13 by Claude Moraes to the Commission

Subject: World Health Organisation (WHO) report on air quality in cities

English version

E-009267/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Women journalists ‘abused’ by police

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009450/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Turkish Prime Minister to take legal action against The Times

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009268/13 by Arlene McCarthy to the Commission

Subject: Bank charges

English version

E-009269/13 by Catherine Stihler to the Commission

Subject: Protection of indigenous ladybird species in the EU

English version

E-009271/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Revamping of a special waste treatment plant in Marghera (Venice), authorised possibly in breach of Directive 2001/42/EC on Strategic Environmental Assessment

Versione italiana

English version

E-009272/13 by Roberta Angelilli and Aldo Patriciello to the Commission

Subject: Possible funding of the creation of an Interregional Archaeological and Environmental Park

Versione italiana

English version

E-009273/13 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Protests in Turkey (follow-up question)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009274/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for promoting small producers' products

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009275/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for modernising small local shops

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009276/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for projects publicising local businesses

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009277/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Funding of research centres

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009278/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Situation of Casa do Douro

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009279/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Local government

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009280/13 by Vladko Todorov Panayotov to the Commission

Subject: The 2013 Cypriot financial crisis and the impact of the Troika deal on the EU

българска версия

English version

E-009281/13 by Daniel Hannan to the Commission

Subject: Gibraltar

English version

E-009283/13 by Cornelis de Jong to the Commission

Subject: Discrimination against European consumers by companies requiring national registration numbers

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009284/13 by Franz Obermayr to the Commission

Subject: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009285/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Asbestos in the water supply of Ambelona in the municipality of Tyrnavos in Larissa Prefecture

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009286/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Uncontrolled dumping of waste and threat of environmental degradation of Lake Trichonida (Natura 2000 site GR 2310009)

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009287/13 by Constance Le Grip to the Commission

Subject: Commission's role as competition regulator

Version française

English version

E-009289/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Red label for Italian products sold in the United Kingdom

Versione italiana

English version

E-009290/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Less red tape for Italian wine growers

Versione italiana

English version

E-009291/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: EU swimming against the protectionist tide

Versione italiana

English version

E-009292/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Third countries targeting EU goods with protectionist policies

Versione italiana

English version

E-009293/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: EU protectionist policy

Versione italiana

English version

E-009294/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Horses whose slaughter is not permitted

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009295/13 by Saïd El Khadraoui to the Commission

Subject: Investment in commodities

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009439/13 by Anneli Jäätteenmäki to the Commission

Subject: Decline in Finnish forest reindeer populations

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-009440/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Minorities in Turkey tagged with ‘race codes’

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009441/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Marine seismic activities in the Mediterranean Sea

Versione italiana

English version

E-009442/13 by Emer Costello to the Commission

Subject: EU policy on Area C of the West Bank (I)

English version

E-009443/13 by Emer Costello to the Commission

Subject: EU policy on Area C of the West Bank (II)

English version

E-009444/13 by Emer Costello to the Commission

Subject: EU policy on Area C of the West Bank (III)

English version

E-009445/13 by Emer Costello to the Commission

Subject: EU policy on Area C of the West Bank (IV)

English version

E-009447/13 by Nessa Childers to the Commission

Subject: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and the Tobacco Products Directive

English version

E-009448/13 by Jürgen Creutzmann to the Commission

Subject: Possible conflict between German gambling law and EU competition rules

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009449/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Deterioration of Turkey's foreign policy

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009451/13 by Dubravka Šuica to the Commission

Subject: Pelješac bridge — ensuring Croatian/European territorial continuity

Hrvatska verzija

English version

E-009452/13 by Nigel Farage to the Commission

Subject: EU funding of NGOs in the UK

English version

E-009453/13 by Monika Panayotova to the Commission

Subject: EU-funded deinstitutionalisation of children in Bulgaria

българска версия

English version

E-009454/13 by Jutta Steinruck to the Commission

Subject: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Opinion for the Commission on new rules to limit pilots' hours of duty (Flight Time Limitations — FTL)

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009455/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Automated surveillance

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009456/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Manipulation in the raw materials sector

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009457/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Need for protection of beekeeping

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009458/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Use of the Moschopoulos reservoir project on the island of Corfu

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009460/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Increased concentrations of nitrates in water in villages in Rodopi

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009461/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Consequences for public health, in particular for patients with chronic diseases, of the closure of Western Attica General Hospital ‘Agia Varvara’

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009462/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: State of the environment of Lake Kastoria

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009463/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Increase in unemployment

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009464/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: European citizens living below the poverty threshold

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009465/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Privatisation of water

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009466/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Censorship of the poem ‘Niobe '74’

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009467/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Downward trend of Cyprus's economy

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009468/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Data collection for Eurobarometer

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009469/13 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: EU funding for Croatian border controls

Versione italiana

English version

E-009470/13 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: EU funding for Croatia under the SOLID programme

Versione italiana

English version

E-009471/13 by Aldo Patriciello to the Commission

Subject: Road accident in Monteforte Irpino and road safety in Europe

Versione italiana

English version

E-009472/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: EU funds inaccessible in Veneto due to malfunctioning of online application registration system

Versione italiana

English version

E-009473/13 by Fabrizio Bertot to the Commission

Subject: Problems arising from the introduction of new banknotes

Versione italiana

English version

E-009474/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Pakistan: abandoned babies offered as prizes in television show

Versione italiana

English version

E-009475/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Cattle die-off caused by botulism poisoning in Trebaseleghe (Padua): possible link to biogas digesters

Versione italiana

English version

E-009476/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Serious and repeated breaches of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) in Italy: WWF and LIPU report

Versione italiana

English version

E-009477/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: High concentrations of PFAS (perfluoroalkylated substances) in the drinking water of some 30 municipalities in the Veneto Region

Versione italiana

English version

E-009478/13 by Aldo Patriciello to the Commission

Subject: Railway accident in Santiago de Compostela and safety of the European railway system

Versione italiana

English version

E-009495/13 by Silvia-Adriana Ţicău to the Commission

Subject: Improved rail transport safety

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-009479/13 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Falcognana, Rome — possible opening of a new temporary landfill site‐ may be in breach of EC law

Versione italiana

English version

E-009480/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Commemoration on Monte Grappa of the centenary of the Great War: clarifications

Versione italiana

English version

E-009481/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Declining sales of footwear in Italy

Versione italiana

English version

E-009482/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Dangers posed to designations of origin by new Internet domains in the wine-growing industry

Versione italiana

English version

E-009483/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Threat to consumer health from Chinese rice

Versione italiana

English version

E-009484/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Beef cattle farming: protests by French and Italian stockbreeders

Versione italiana

English version

E-009485/13 by Kartika Tamara Liotard to the Commission

Subject: Authorisation of GMO products of animal origin

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009486/13 by Cornelis de Jong to the Commission

Subject: Adherence to case-law of the Court of Justice concerning air passengers' rights

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009487/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Best practices for more sustainable urban mobility

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009488/13 by Marek Henryk Migalski to the Commission

Subject: Arrest of a Catholic priest in Belarus

Wersja polska

English version

E-009489/13 by Marek Henryk Migalski to the Commission

Subject: Abduction of the daughter of a Belarusian opposition activist

Wersja polska

English version

E-009490/13 by Marek Henryk Migalski to the Commission

Subject: Sentencing of Russian opposition leader

Wersja polska

English version

E-009491/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs)

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009492/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for natural stone production

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009493/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Support for micro-enterprises in depressed areas

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009494/13 by Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Application for world heritage status for Alentejan song

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009496/13 by Silvia-Adriana Ţicău to the Commission

Subject: Stage reached in creating the European information and booking interface across transport modes

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-009497/13 by Paweł Zalewski to the Commission

Subject: Blocking and removal of online profiles and pages of the Turkish opposition by Facebook

Wersja polska

English version

E-009498/13 by Jorgo Chatzimarkakis to the Council

Subject: Teacher layoffs in Greece

Deutsche Fassung

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009499/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Exit of the IMF from the Troika

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009500/13 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Suspending the procedure for Kosovo's accession to the EU

Versione italiana

English version

E-009501/13 by Jill Evans to the Commission

Subject: Plucking feathers from live birds

English version

E-009502/13 by Theodoros Skylakakis to the Commission

Subject: Procedure for recruitment of staff for the new radio and television broadcasting entity in Greece

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009503/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Period of validity of student visas

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009513/13 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Eritrea — update

Versão portuguesa

English version

P-009516/13 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Execution of Afzal Guru

English version

E-009517/13 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Social and economic effects of zero-hours contracts

English version

E-009518/13 by Evelyne Gebhardt to the Commission

Subject: Transposition of the Patient Mobility Directive (2011/24/EU)

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-009519/13 by Rebecca Taylor to the Commission

Subject: Testing for GM content of all rice products imported from China

English version

E-009520/13 by Evelyne Gebhardt to the Commission

Subject: Elimination of discrimination in the pricing policies of public institutions/undertakings

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009521/13 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Fines for critical TV stations in Turkey (follow-up question)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009522/13 by Angelika Niebler to the Commission

Subject: Mandatory labelling for peeled asparagus

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009523/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Abolition of voluntary beef labelling — harmful to European producers and consumers

Versione italiana

English version

E-009524/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Turkish Government intimidations — missile launches against foreign vessels

Versione italiana

English version

E-009525/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Protection of children on the web — parents' permission to open accounts on social networks

Versione italiana

English version

P-009526/13 by Manfred Weber to the Commission

Subject: Police brutality in repression of peaceful protests in Bulgaria

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009527/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Abduction of Orthodox Metropolitans in Syria (2)

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009528/13 by Jill Evans to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Whaling in the Faroe Islands

English version

E-009529/13 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: Construction of a dam near the city of Hasankyef in Turkey, protection of cultural heritage and conduct of European enterprises

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009530/13 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: Impact of fiscal adjustment on the management bodies of protected areas and the protection of these areas

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009531/13 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: European Blue Card and EU competitiveness

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009532/13 by Martina Anderson to the Commission

Subject: Re-domiciled PLCs

English version

E-009533/13 by Martina Anderson to the Commission

Subject: Irish contribution to rebates

English version

E-009540/13 by Monika Hohlmeier to the Commission

Subject: EU funds for Bulgaria

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009541/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: 39 years of Turkish occupation of Famagusta

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009542/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Former CIA agent Edward Snowden's revelations on the British bases in Cyprus

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009543/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Continuing Turkish embargo on Cypriot ships and planes

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009544/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Abduction of Greek and Syrian Orthodox archbishops

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009545/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: British Government selling personal data to the US

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009546/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: US surveillance programme

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009547/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Global trade on the stock exchange

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

P-009548/13 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: IMF recommendations regarding minimum wages in Greece and EU assessment

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009549/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Cost of Muslim immigration to EU citizens

Versione italiana

English version

E-009550/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: ‘Empty prisons’ decree and risks for citizens

Versione italiana

English version

E-009551/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Transposition of Directive 2010/40/EU and use of intelligent transport systems in the Member States

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009552/13 by Josef Weidenholzer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Elections in Cambodia

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009553/13 by Jürgen Creutzmann to the Commission

Subject: Competition law — Municipal Code of Rhineland-Palatinate (water and energy supply and local public transport)

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009554/13 by Filip Kaczmarek to the Commission

Subject: Sanctions against Russia

Wersja polska

English version

E-009555/13 by Filip Kaczmarek to the Commission

Subject: Spread of animal diseases at the EU's eastern borders

Wersja polska

English version

P-009556/13 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Fire in a wax factory on 14 July 2013 — health and environmental emergency in the Agro Nolano area of Naples

Versione italiana

English version

P-009557/13 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Possibility of funding for the work of the local police

Versione italiana

English version

E-009558/13 by Philip Claeys to the Commission

Subject: Theft of aid supplies in Somalia and elsewhere

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009559/13 by Philip Claeys to the Commission

Subject: Representation of the OIC to the EU

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009560/13 by Philip Claeys to the Commission

Subject: Participation by Commissioners in the Bilderberg Conference (2)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009561/13 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Misuse of development aid by corrupt regimes

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009562/13 by Biljana Borzan to the Commission

Subject: TEN-T overhaul (Croatia)

Hrvatska verzija

English version

E-009563/13 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Labelling of all ingredients in medicines

Dansk udgave

English version

E-009564/13 by Paul Rübig to the Commission

Subject: Mobile phone bills: third-party billing fraud

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009565/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Directive 2005/32/EC on ecodesign requirements for energy-using products

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009566/13 by Pavel Poc to the Commission

Subject: Directive on industrial emissions 2010/75/EU (IED) — emission levels associated with the best available techniques

České znění

English version

E-009567/13 by Sophia in 't Veld to the Commission

Subject: Racist statements made by Greek MPs in the Greek Parliament

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009568/13 by Krzysztof Lisek to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — International cooperation between regions involving formal agreements, and settlement of disputes arising from these

Wersja polska

English version

E-009569/13 by Reinhard Bütikofer to the Commission

Subject: Warehousing and industrial activity by traders and financial institutions

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009570/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Progress of the ‘National Registry Office’ project

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009571/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Co-funded land registry projects in Greece

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009572/13 by Patricia van der Kammen to the Commission

Subject: Bankruptcies among European egg producers due to European rules

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009573/13 by Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Ryszard Antoni Legutko and Ryszard Czarnecki to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Political situation in Georgia

Wersja polska

English version

E-009574/13 by Peter van Dalen to the Commission

Subject: Strikes by German lock-keepers

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009575/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Mortgage loans — houseboats

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009576/13 by Tonino Picula to the Commission

Subject: Commission negotiations with CEFTA member countries

Hrvatska verzija

English version

E-009577/13 by Tonino Picula to the Commission

Subject: Protecting indigenous Croatian ‘Prošek’ and ‘Teran’ wines

Hrvatska verzija

English version

E-009578/13 by Bendt Bendtsen to the Commission

Subject: Commission involvement in Italy delaying public payments

Dansk udgave

English version

E-009579/13 by Karl-Heinz Florenz to the Commission

Subject: Amendments to Directive 2008/98/EC on waste and other legislation on waste

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009580/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Derogation from the ban on the aerial spraying of pesticides in the province of Treviso for 2013 — possibly in breach of Directive 2009/128/EC

Versione italiana

English version

E-009581/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: MOSE project — possible breach of EU guidelines on the monitoring of the project and supervision of the measures designed to limit its environmental impact

Versione italiana

English version

E-009582/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Danger for birds due to plan to build a wind farm on Mount Pizzoc in Fregona (TV) along an important bird migration route

Versione italiana

English version

E-009583/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Protection of Asiago PDO cheese — a ‘mountain product’- difficulties with the new Regulation No 1151/2012

Versione italiana

English version

E-009585/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: ‘Mountain products’- difficulties with the new Regulation No 1151/2012

Versione italiana

English version

E-009584/13 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Asiago PDO cheese and lack of protection on the US and Canadian markets

Versione italiana

English version

P-009586/13 by Georgios Koumoutsakos to the Commission

Subject: The Albanian state and the Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Albania: violent incidents and vandalism in Përmet

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

P-009606/13 by Maria Eleni Koppa to the Commission

Subject: Violence directed at the Orthodox community in Albania

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009587/13 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Refusal of entry to the USA

Dansk udgave

English version

E-009588/13 by Karl-Heinz Florenz to the Commission

Subject: Digital Agenda / abolition of roaming fees, cross-border commercial areas

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009589/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Withdrawal limit from banks which fail

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-009590/13 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: EU Waste Framework Directive

English version

E-009591/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Legality of Gibraltar border checks

English version

E-009593/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Zimbabwe elections

English version

E-009594/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Message of congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

English version

E-009595/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Increasing Internet access in the Member States

English version

E-009596/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of the House of European History project

English version

E-009597/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: EU funding for cancer research

English version

E-009598/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Impact of Directive 2011/82/EU

English version

E-009599/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Follow-up to Written Question E-007401/2013 on sow stall ban

English version

E-009600/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Commemoration of terrorism in Northern Ireland

English version

E-009601/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Impact of the abolition of milk quotas after 2015

English version

E-009602/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Fonterra

English version

E-009603/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Release of 26 Palestinian prisoners

English version

E-009604/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Land Parcel Information Systems (LPIS)

English version

E-009605/13 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Response to the horsemeat scandal

English version

P-009607/13 by Philippe Lamberts to the Commission

Subject: Planned obsolescence and consumer protection

Version française

English version

E-009608/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: ROP Macedonia — Thrace

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009609/13 by Julie Girling to the Commission

Subject: Withholding taxes on EU-funded projects

English version

E-009610/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Elimination of the gender pay gap in the EU

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009611/13 by Biljana Borzan to the Commission

Subject: Landmines in Croatia

Hrvatska verzija

English version

E-009612/13 by Adam Bielan to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Trade relations between Ukraine and Russia

Wersja polska

English version

E-009613/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Nuclear power plants — national subsidies and EIB loans

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009614/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Flood control by means of flood zones

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009615/13 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Security loophole in SIM cards

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009616/13 by Theodoros Skylakakis to the Commission

Subject: Smuggling of wolf pelts from Athens to Beijing

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

P-009617/13 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Bird flu epidemic of in north-eastern Italy and possible serious non-compliance by the local authorities — call to suspend bird hunting and bird fairs

Versione italiana

English version

E-009618/13 by Oldřich Vlasák to the Commission

Subject: Ban on medicines containing the active substance tetrazepam

České znění

English version

E-009619/13 by Rebecca Harms to the Commission

Subject: EIB funding for the Ptolemaida V lignite power station in Greece

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-009620/13 by Theodoros Skylakakis to the Commission

Subject: Verification of allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Syria

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009621/13 by Philippe De Backer to the Commission

Subject: Minimum surface areas (square metres) at the workplace

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009622/13 by Werner Langen to the Commission

Subject: Excise duty on wine in the United Kingdom

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009623/13 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Violation of doctors' working hours and the Commission's response

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009624/13 by Philip Claeys to the Commission

Subject: Subsidy for Europeade

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009625/13 by Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo to the Commission

Subject: Fishing dispute with Gibraltar

Versión española

English version

P-009626/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Tackling the increase of precarious work in the EU

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009627/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Funding of social policy projects in the EU

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009628/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Use of different poverty indicators by Member States

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009629/13 by Andrea Češková to the Commission

Subject: Rising threats from antimicrobial resistance — separation of the right to prescribe and the right to sell veterinary medicines

České znění

English version

E-009630/13 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Substances E 153 and E 171, often used as colourings in liquorice, contain nanoparticles

Dansk udgave

English version

E-009631/13 by Niki Tzavela to the Commission

Subject: Electricity link with the Greek islands

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009632/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Reducing the promotion of alcohol in sport (2)

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009633/13 by Julie Girling to the Commission

Subject: Vehicle defects and accidents

English version

E-009634/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Putting an end to LGBT bullying

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009635/13 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Mr Schulz' opinion on imports

Versión española

English version

E-009636/13 by Josef Weidenholzer to the Commission

Subject: Tracking MAC addresses for advertising purposes

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-009637/13 by João Ferreira and Inês Cristina Zuber to the Council

Subject: Repression of agrarian activists in Colombia

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-009638/13 by Charles Tannock to the Commission

Subject: Desirability of ending discriminatory pricing policies by utilities

English version

E-009639/13 by Charles Tannock to the Commission

Subject: Future of production within the common agricultural policy

English version

E-009640/13 by Charles Tannock to the Commission

Subject: Impact in the UK of supermarket pricing for milk on the objectives of the common agricultural policy

English version

E-009641/13 by Claudette Abela Baldacchino to the Commission

Subject: Simplifying visa procedures for business and leisure trips

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-009642/13 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: International competitiveness of European universities

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009643/13 by Philip Claeys to the Commission

Subject: Violent attacks on eurosceptic party in Germany

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009645/13 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Further haircut on Greek debt

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009646/13 by Daniël van der Stoep to the Council

Subject: Number of written questions tabled and their cost

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009647/13 by Daniël van der Stoep to the Commission

Subject: Number of written questions tabled and their cost

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009648/13 by Daniël van der Stoep to the Council

Subject: PCE/PEC — Number of written questions tabled and their cost

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-009649/13 by Daniël van der Stoep to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — number of written questions tabled and their cost

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-009650/13 by Sophocles Sophocleous to the Council

Subject: Possible use of British bases in Cyprus for launching airstrikes

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-009651/13 by Carlo Fidanza to the Commission

Subject: Clever-hotels.com platform — insolvency of the German company Navelar GmbH

Versione italiana

English version

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-007293/13

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 juin 2013)

Objet: La Hongrie criminalise ses SDF

Les avertissements ont beau se multiplier depuis trois mois, le premier ministre Viktor Orbán fait la sourde oreille. Les critiques portant sur le quatrième remaniement apporté à la Constitution hongroise il y a quelques semaines sont pourtant convergentes: ces nouveaux changements menacent le respect des droits fondamentaux dans ce pays.

1.

La Commission trouve-t-elle normales les dispositions permettant de criminaliser les sans-abri et de les exposer à des sanctions pénales?

2.

Compte-t-elle réagir fermement? Comment?

Réponse donnée par Mme Reding au nom de la Commission

(27 août 2013)

En vertu des traités sur lesquels se fonde l'Union européenne (1), la Commission n'a pas de compétences générales pour intervenir auprès des États membres en matière de droits fondamentaux. Elle ne peut le faire que lorsqu'il s'agit d'une question relevant du droit de l'Union européenne. La disposition relative aux sans-abri prévue à l'article XXII.3 de la Loi fondamentale hongroise ne semble pas être liée à la mise en œuvre du droit de l'Union européenne. Toutefois, la Commission a souligné dans le train de mesures sur les investissements sociaux (2), notamment dans le document de travail des services de la Commission concernant la lutte contre le problème des sans-abri (3), que les stratégies de criminalisation des sans-abri appliquées par les États membres, par exemple en cas d'utilisation de l'espace public ou d'actes de mendicité, semblent inefficaces, coûteuses et stigmatisantes, et ne permettent pas d'agir sur le contexte social du problème.

La Commission rappelle également que la Commission de Venise du Conseil de l'Europe, dans son avis rendu le 17 juin 2013 (4), a commenté la disposition relative aux sans-abri figurant à l'article XXII.3 de la Loi fondamentale hongroise. Selon le point de vue exprimé par la Commission de Venise dans son avis, les problèmes importants sont l'imprécision des critères ainsi que le niveau de réglementation. L'article XXII.3 de la Loi fondamentale est l'une des dispositions du quatrième amendement contenant des règles détaillées qui sont généralement régies par la loi et qui ne devraient pas figurer dans une Constitution. Selon la Commission de Venise, l'élévation de ces règles au niveau de la Constitution a pour effet d'empêcher un examen par la Cour constitutionnelle.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-007293/13

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 June 2013)

Subject: Hungary criminalises the homeless

Despite increasing warnings over the past three months, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has turned a deaf ear. Yet criticisms of the fourth reform to the Hungarian Constitution a few weeks ago arrive at the same conclusion: these new changes are a threat to respect for fundamental rights in this country.

1.

Does the Commission think these provisions, which criminalise the homeless and subject them to criminal penalties, are acceptable?

2.

Does the Commission intend to respond decisively? How?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(27 August 2013)

Under the Treaties on which the European Union is based (5), the Commission has no general powers to intervene with the Member States in the area of fundamental rights. It can only do so if an issue of European Union law is involved. The provision on homelessness enshrined in Article XXII.3 of the Hungarian Fundamental Law, does not appear to be related to the implementation of European Union law. However, the Commission emphasised in the Social Investment Package (6), notably in the Commission Staff Working Document on Confronting Homelessness in the European Union (7), that criminalising approaches towards homeless people by Member States, e.g. for public place use or begging, seem inefficient, costly, stigmatising and fail to address the social context of the problem.

The Commission also recalls that the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, in its opinion issued on 17 June 2013 (8), commented on the provision on homelessness in Article XXII.3 of the Hungarian Fundamental Law. From the point of view of the Venice Commission in the framework of its Opinion, important issues are the vagueness of the criteria as well as the level of regulation. Article XXII.3 of the Fundamental Law is one of the provisions of the Fourth Amendment that contains detailed rules which are usually regulated by law and should not be part of a Constitution. Raising such provisions to the level of the Constitution has the effect of preventing review by the Constitutional Court, according to the Venice Commission.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009020/13

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Esclusione della Regione Veneto dall'utilizzo dei fondi comunitari per la lotta alla disoccupazione giovanile

In occasione del vertice del 27 e 28 giugno, il Consiglio europeo ha stabilito lo stanziamento di 6 miliardi di euro a partire dal 1° gennaio 2014 per combattere la disoccupazione giovanile, secondo le linee guida dell'iniziativa a favore dell'occupazione giovanile (Youth Employment Initiative), e ha inoltre prospettato anche un possibile aumento della somma in questione a 8 miliardi di euro. Tuttavia, secondo quanto stabilito dal Consiglio stesso, solamente le regioni europee colpite da tassi di disoccupazione giovanile superiori al 25 % potranno beneficiare di tali risorse finanziarie.

La Commissione può confermare le informazioni precedentemente esposte, anche per quanto riguarda il fatto che le regioni europee con tassi di disoccupazione giovanile inferiori al 25 % verranno escluse dall'utilizzo dei fondi in questione?

In particolare, conferma che la regione italiana del Veneto, dove il numero di giovani disoccupati è pari a duecentomila, non potrà comunque beneficiare del fondo, in quanto il valore percentuale della disoccupazione giovanile è pari all'8,6 % e quindi inferiore alla soglia minima del 25 % stabilita dal Consiglio europeo?

Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione

(13 settembre 2013)

La Commissione conferma che il Consiglio europeo riunitosi a giugno ha stabilito, come condizione di ammissibilità per la concessione di un contributo finanziario nel quadro dell'iniziativa per l'occupazione giovanile (YEI — Youth Employment Initiative), una soglia minima pari al 25 % relativamente al tasso di disoccupazione giovanile regionale tra i giovani di età compresa tra i 15 ed i 24 anni. La Commissione conferma inoltre che il tasso di disoccupazione giovanile nella Regione Veneto è pari al 23,4 % (9) e non sembra quindi soddisfare detto criterio.

I parametri precisi per la YEI sono tuttavia ancora oggetto di discussione da parte del Consiglio e del Parlamento nell'ambito dei triloghi sui regolamenti concernenti il FSE e le norme comuni per i fondi.

La proposta della Commissione consentirebbe inoltre agli Stati membri di consacrare fino al 10 % dei loro stanziamenti a valere sulla YEI ai giovani residenti in sottoregioni in cui la disoccupazione giovanile è elevata e che non rientrano tra le le regioni ammissibili NUTS II. Gli Stati membri possono altresì utilizzare una parte degli stanziamenti complessivi del FSE ad essi destinati per promuovere l'integrazione dei giovani nel mercato del lavoro.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009020/13

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Veneto region of Italy not eligible for EU funding to tackle youth unemployment

At its meeting of 27 and 28 June 2013, the European Council agreed, in line with the Youth Employment Initiative guidelines, that EUR 6 billion should be made available from 1 January 2014 for action to combat youth unemployment. It also held out the possibility of increasing that sum to EUR 8 billion. At the same time, however, it decided that only European regions with youth unemployment rates of more than 25% would be eligible for the funding.

Can the Commission say whether the above information is correct? In particular, will European regions with youth unemployment rates of less than 25% not be eligible?

More specifically, can it confirm that the Veneto region of Italy, where 200 000 young people are without work, will not be eligible for the funding, in view of the fact that the region has a youth unemployment rate of 8.6%, which is below the 25% threshold set by the European Council?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The Commission confirms that the June European Council agreed on a regional youth unemployment rate threshold of 25% for the 15-to-24 age group as the condition for eligibility for a financial contribution under the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI). The Commission also confirms that the Veneto Region has a youth unemployment rate of 23.4% (10), and therefore would not meet this criterion.

However, the precise parameters for the YEI are still being discussed by Council and Parliament in the context of ongoing trilogues on ESF and CPR regulations.

Furthermore, the Commission proposal would allow the Member States to use up to 10% of their YEI allocations for young persons residing in sub-regions where youth unemployment is high and which fall outside eligible NUTS 2 regions. The Member States can also use part of their overall ESF allocations to promote young people’s integration into the labour market.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009021/13

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Stanziamento di 1,5 miliardi di euro per l'Italia per combattere la disoccupazione giovanile

Con il vertice del 27-28 giugno, il Consiglio europeo ha stabilito lo stanziamento di 6 miliardi di euro a partire dal primo gennaio 2014 per combattere la disoccupazione giovanile, secondo le linee guida dell'Iniziativa a favore dell'occupazione giovanile. Il Consiglio ha inoltre prospettato un possibile aumento della somma in questione a 8 miliardi di euro.

Può la Commissione confermare quanto segue:

una somma pari a 1,5 miliardi di euro verrà stanziata specificatamente per l'Italia;

una parte consistente di questi 1,5 miliardi verrà ricavata dal Fondo Sociale Europeo e non si tratterà quindi di uno stanziamento di fondi nuovi, bensì di un semplice dirottamento di fondi già previsti;

l'Italia non potrà accedere a questi fondi se non attraverso le consuete procedure di accesso al FSE.

Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione

(5 settembre 2013)

1.-2. Sulla base delle conclusioni del Consiglio europeo del 7-8 febbraio 2013, la Commissione ha adottato una proposta (11) al fine di attuare un'iniziativa per l'occupazione giovanile (YEI — Youth Employment Initiative), che è attualmente in discussione in sede di Parlamento e di Consiglio. Sulla base della proposta della Commissione e dei criteri di ammissibilità in essa previsti, all'Italia sarebbero destinati circa 530 milioni di EUR. A norma dell’articolo 15, vii, della proposta, il sostegno del Fondo sociale europeo (FSE) è almeno pari al sostegno da parte della dotazione specifica della YEI nelle regioni ammissibili.

3.

A norma dell’articolo 15, iii, della proposta, la YEI è integrata nella programmazione del FSE. Gli Stati membri stabiliscono le modalità per la programmazione della YEI nell'accordo di partenariato e nel programma operativo. Inoltre, la Commissione ha proposto alcune modifiche al progetto di regolamento recante disposizioni comuni per accelerare l'attuazione della YEI, tra cui quella di anticipare l'ammissibilità delle spese relative alle attività YEI al 1

o

settembre 2013 e la possibilità di adottare programmi operativi YEI specifici prima della presentazione dell'accordo di partenariato.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009021/13

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: EUR 1.5 billion in funding to Italy to combat youth unemployment

In its summit of 27-28 June, the European Council agreed to allocate EUR 6 billion, from

1 January 2014, in order to combat youth unemployment, according to the guidelines of the Youth Employment Initiative. The Council also suggested that the sum might possibly be increased to EUR 8 billion.

Can the Commission confirm the following:

that EUR 1.5 billion will be earmarked specifically for Italy;

that a substantial part of this 1.5 billion will come from the European Social Fund and will not, therefore, be new funding, but merely a diversion of funds for whichprovision had already been made;

that Italy will not be able to access these funds unless it goes through the usual proceduresrelating to access to the ESF?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

1 & 2. On the basis of the European Council Conclusions of 7-8 February 2013, the Commission adopted a proposal (12) in order to implement a Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) which is currently being discussed by Parliament and Council. On the basis of the Commission proposal and the eligibility criteria set therein, around EUR 530 million would be earmarked for Italy. According to Article 15 vii of the proposal, the European Social Fund (ESF) shall at least match the support from the specific allocation for the YEI in the eligible regions.

3.

According to Article 15 iii of the proposal, the YEI is integrated in the programming of the ESF. Member States shall set out the programming arrangements for the YEI in the partnership agreement and in the operational programme. In addition, the Commission has proposed amendments to the draft Common Provisions Regulation in order to speed up implementation of the YEI, including advancing the eligibility of expenditure related to YEI activities to 1 September 2013 and the possibility of adopting YEI dedicated operational programmes before the submission of the Partnership agreement.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009023/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Subsidising agricultural production

Can the Commission detail which countries outside the European Union presently subsidise agricultural production, and clarify the nature of the subsidies concerned?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

The Commission does not collect detailed information about subsidies to agricultural production outside the European Union. Available international data shows that every country manages a food and agriculture policy that covers a combination of different instruments as incentives for the farmers to best respond to the demand for food and public goods that agriculture provides.

In the World Trade Organisation, which requires its members to notify granted domestic support to agriculture, about 40% of non-EU countries indicated some sort of product-specific or non-product-specific support as part of Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS), usually lower than the subsidies provided through Green box, non-trade-distorting measures. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, in its recent Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation reports, showed that the support based on commodity outputs in OECD countries has been steadily decreasing and represented about 44% of total Producer Support Estimate (PSE), mostly attributed to Market Price Support. In Emerging Economies (Brazil, China, Russia, Ukraine, South Africa) the support based on commodity outputs as a share of PSE ranged from about 20% in South Africa to about 60% in China and Russia.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009024/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Fall in diabetes deaths

According to the results of a study published recently in Diabetologia, a medical journal, the likelihood of dying of people diagnosed with diabetes relative to those who do not suffer from the disease has decreased since the mid-1990s. However, it is still estimated that hundreds of patients will die prematurely in the United Kingdom as a result of diabetes every year.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following queries:

What steps have been taken at EU level to raise awareness and promote early prevention of diabetes, and to provide adequate and effective healthcare for people throughout the Member States who have been or may be diagnosed with the disease?

How many people across the EU have died as a result of suffering from diabetes in the past five years? Can the Commission break down this figure by: a) Member State, and b) age of the deceased?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(2 September 2013)

The Commission is keen to help address diabetes within its competencies. The Commission addresses the prevention of diabetes type II, by taking action on known risk factors such as nutrition and lack of physical activity, where the Commission has put in place a comprehensive strategy (13).

In addition, the Commission has supported a number of projects on the prevention, the diagnosis and other aspects of diabetes (14) through the Health programme.To further support the development of prevention and early diagnosis of diabetes type II, a joint action on chronic diseases has been developed between Member States and the Commission, which will be co-financed by the health programme. One part of the joint action is devoted to diabetes type II, to study barriers to prevention, screening and treatment of diabetes and to improve cooperation among Member States to act on diabetes.

The Commission further collects and provides data on causes of death at EU level by disease, age groups, gender and regional level (15) according to the International Classification of Diseases. In 2010, 106,398 Europeans died of Diabetes mellitus compared to 104,751 in 2006. In the United Kingdom, the figure of 6,439 deaths due to Diabetes mellitus in 2006 dropped slightly to 6,180 in 2010. This data is presented in annex per Member State and by age groups.

The prevention, as well as the provision of early diagnosis and care to people suffering from diabetes, is a health system management issue which falls under the responsibility of Member States.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009025/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Criminal convictions of trafficked persons

Three Vietnamese children who had been trafficked into the United Kingdom recently had their convictions for drug crimes carried out at the behest of their captors quashed by the Court of Appeal.

In this context, can the Commission detail what provisions exist at EU level to ensure that victims of human trafficking in the Member States are not held responsible for crimes committed while under duress?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(26 August 2013)

Addressing trafficking in human has been a priority area for the EU and its Member States for several years. This resulted in 2011 in the adoption by the Council and the European Parliament of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, with the transposition date of 6 April 2013. Article 8 of this directive provides for the Member States, in accordance with the basic principles of their legal systems, that competent national authorities are entitled not to prosecute or impose penalties on victims of trafficking in human beings for their involvement in criminal activities which they have been compelled to commit as a direct consequence of being subject to human trafficking. The aim of this such protection is to safeguard the human rights of victims, to avoid further victimisation and to encourage them to act as witnesses in criminal proceedings against the perpetrators.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009026/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Testing of lintels

Currently, under the Construction Products Regulation (CPR), lintels must be tested in line with harmonised EU standard EN 845-2:2003.

Can the Commission state whether there any plans to introduce, in the coming months, changes to this standard — and to the requirements set out therein — that could impact on manufacturers across the EU?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(29 August 2013)

According to the Construction Products Regulation (305/2011/EU; the CPR), the assessment (test) methods to be applied for the performance of construction products covered by harmonised standards are to be found in these standards.

Article 27(3) of the CPR also allows for the European standardisation bodies to establish threshold levels for such performance. However, in this context it should be noted that this provision foresees a given procedure to be followed in these situations, comprising the involvement of the Commission and the Standing Committee of the CPR.

By now, the Commission has not received any information from the European standardisation bodies, indicating any needs to launch such procedures, related to either this harmonised standard or any other standards.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009027/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: European Alliance for Apprenticeships

The European Alliance for Apprenticeships was launched earlier this month at the 2013 WorldSkills competition in Leipzig. It is a joint initiative by the European Commissioners for Education and Youth and for Employment, and it aims to tackle youth unemployment by improving capacity for apprenticeships across the EU.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following questions;

1.

How many apprenticeships were available for young people between the ages of 16 and 24 across the EU in the past five years? Could the Commission breakdown this figure by a) Member State and b) profession?

2.

Can the Commission detail how the Alliance intends to improve capacity for apprenticeships across the EU between 2014 and 2020?

3.

Does the Commission intend to form regional strategies with a view to realising an increased number of apprenticeship places under the Alliance?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2013)

The European Alliance for Apprenticeships brings together key stakeholders, including public authorities, businesses, social partners, chambers, VET (16) providers and youth organisations to strengthen the quality, supply and image of apprenticeships. The aims are to: (1) facilitate knowledge transfer and modernisation of apprenticeship systems; (2) promote the benefits of apprenticeships; and (3) make best use of EU funding and resources.

Although the Commission does not have detailed figures for the past five years, a report (17) shows that in 2009 approximately 3.7 million pupils in secondary education followed apprenticeships in a strict sense, while another 5.7 million students attended other apprenticeship-type schemes, mainly school-based VET training with some work-based training in companies (EU-27). The report also shows that the economic crisis led to an increased interest in VET studies, even as the number of apprenticeship places on offer in companies has decreased in Europe.

With youth unemployment rates at unacceptable levels, boosting apprenticeship supply, quality and reputation is of major importance. Success depends on the active engagement of stakeholders. Member States play an important role since education and training policies and reform are national responsibilities. Partnerships at the national, regional and bilateral level are encouraged. The Commission will steer the Alliance, monitor and report on developments, and facilitate peer learning, cooperation and information sharing.

In addition, a European Social Fund Technical Assistance Support Programme for the establishment of apprenticeship and traineeship schemes (18) provides strategic, operational and policy advice to Member States.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009028/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Number of skin cancer cases

According to research carried out by the Cancer Focus charity, 3 300 people develop skin cancer every year in my constituency, Northern Ireland. Cases of the most serious forms of the disease have more than doubled in the past twenty years.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following queries:

How many cases of skin cancer have been confirmed across the EU in the past 3 years? Can the Commission provide a breakdown of these figures by Member State?

What steps are being taken at EU level to address the causes of skin cancer, and in particular the issue of dangerous and prolonged exposure to the sun?

What provisions exists at EU level to raise awareness among EU citizens of the risks associated with exposure to the sun and the use of tanning salons?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2013)

1.

The EU-funded EUCAN project of the International Agency for Research on Cancer

1.

The EU-funded EUCAN project of the International Agency for Research on Cancer

 (19)  (20)

2.

Research on skin cancers has been a priority in the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. So far, this programme has devoted EUR 67 million to diagnostic tools (e.g. MINERVA

2.

Research on skin cancers has been a priority in the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. So far, this programme has devoted EUR 67 million to diagnostic tools (e.g. MINERVA

 (21)  (22)

Under the 6th Framework Programme for Research, GenoMEL (Melanoma Genetics Consortium) created collaboration between melanoma researchers in the EU, identified several genes associated with greater melanoma risk and engaged in outreach and education (23). The project EUROSKIN (European network of skin cancer prevention) focused on primary prevention in children, on European certification standard for solaria, on epidermal stem cells and carcinoma and on screening.

Under the Health Programme, the project EUROSUN (Measuring the exposure of individuals and populations in Europe to UV radiation by using the data of meteorological satellites) (24) further developed prevention messages adapted to each Member State, and an atlas of UV irradiation. In addition, the EPIDERM project (European Prevention Initiative for Dermatological Malignancies) (25), covered skin cancer occurrence, risk factors, treatments and costs.

3.

The European Code Against Cancer recommends that

‘Care must be taken to avoid excessive sun exposure. It is specifically important to protect children and adolescents. For individuals who have a tendency to burn in the sun, active protective measures must be taken throughout life’.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009029/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Murder of women

According to research conducted by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine which examined over 500 000 deaths across 66 countries, women are six times more likely to be murdered by a partner than men.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following questions:

What steps have been and are currently being taken at EU level to ensure that domestic violence is detected and tackled across the EU at any early stage, so as to prevent escalation?

What provisions exist at EU level to provide support and assistance to individuals that have exited an abusive domestic environment?

How many women across the EU have been murdered in the past three years as a direct result of domestic violence?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

The Commission's full commitment to ending violence against women (VAW), including domestic violence, is seen particularly in the Women's Charter, the strategy for equality between women and men (2010-2015)  (26), the ‘victims' package’ and the work on the European Protection Order. Adoption of legislative measures when appropriate, fighting against discrimination and empowering women, improving knowledge and data collection, exchanging good practices, as well as raising awareness and funding are Commission's main priorities in order to prevent violence against women, protect victims and punish perpetrators.

The directive 2012/29/EU (27) will reinforce the assistance to victims by ensuring that women victims of violence benefit from common minimum standards of procedural rights during criminal proceedings, through a whole range of measures, including training to practitioners and support services. Moreover, the regulation no. 606/2013 on the mutual recognition of civil law protection measures (28) complements the directive on the European protection order (29) to ensure that victims of (in particular domestic) violence can still rely on restraint or protection orders issued against the perpetrator in their home country if they travel or move to another Member State.

There are no official and comparable data available at EU-level on VAW. In order to increase knowledge about the prevalence of this phenomenon, the Commission is exploring possibilities to exploit current Eurostat surveys and actively participates in the work of the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)  (30).

In the first quarter of 2014, the FRA's survey on women's experiences of violence (31) will publish comparable figures on VAW.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009031/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Persecution of Christians in Sudan

In April 2013, Sudan’s Minister of Guidance and Endowments, Mr Al-Fatih Taj El-sir, prohibited the issuance of licences for the building of new churches, claiming that since the secession of South Sudan worship had declined and more and more churches had been abandoned.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following questions:

What steps are being taken at EU level to promote the protection of fundamental rights in Sudan and South Sudan, including the freedoms of association, religion and speech?

What action has been taken at EU level to tackle the persecution of Christians in Sudan, which has in recent months seen the arrest, detention and deportation of many priests and pastors?

Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The HR/VP is deeply concerned about the situation of fundamental rights in Sudan, including increasing restrictions of the freedom of religion. The HR/VP has drawn attention to the difficult human rights situation in Sudan in a number of public statements that have been disseminated locally and internationally, and the EU refers to human rights in all public messages concerning Sudan. The protection of fundamental rights is also addressed regularly in contacts between EU representatives, in particular the EU Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan and the EU Delegation, with the Government of Sudan. Finally, the EU provides support to the promotion of human rights in Sudan through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

Since the beginning of 2013, against the background of increasing reports of harassment and discrimination against religious minorities in Sudan, in particular against Christian communities, learning centres and representatives, the EU has put a specific focus on the protection of the freedom of religion. In addition to silent diplomacy efforts in concrete cases, the EU has brought up the issue in several formal fora, including in the regular dialogue between EU Human Rights Counsellors and the Advisory Council on Human Rights (Ministry of Justice), as well as in the International Partners Forum on Human Rights (open to all diplomatic missions in Sudan, co-chaired by the EU and Canada). The latter meeting was particularly valuable in that it gave an opportunity to several African and Asian countries whose clerics and teachers in Christian schools are among the most concerned by non-renewal of residence permits, to publicly raise their concerns.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009032/13

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Child obesity

According to statistics compiled by doctors at Imperial College London, the number of children admitted to hospital due to obesity-related conditions has seen a fourfold increase in the past 10 years.

In this context, can the Commission respond to the following queries:

What steps have been and are being taken at EU level to tackle obesity among children across the EU?

What provisions exist at EU level to raise awareness of healthy eating and exercise as means of preventing children across the EU from becoming overweight?

What, if any, EU funding will be directed toward reducing cases of child obesity throughout the Member States in the 2014-2020 programming period?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2013)

The European Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-007019/2013 (32).

In addition, the Commission's proposal for the 2014-2020 Health Programme (33) foresees activities on obesity and nutrition. It is currently not possible to foresee how much funding will be used on childhood obesity, as the proposals are still under discussion and the annual work plans and the indicative budgets have therefore not yet been developed.

The Commission's proposal for Horizon 2020 — The framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) (34) will likely offer opportunities for research on obesity, nutrition and physical activity, among others, through the Societal Challenges ‘Health, Demographic Change and Well-being’ and ‘Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research and the bio-economy’.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009033/13

to the Commission

Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Treatments for children with cancer

Cancer is the biggest killer disease among children. Unless new treatments are introduced, children will continue to die.

The five-year report of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to the Commission on the application of the Paediatric Regulation, dated 8 July 2012 highlighted the need for change with regard to the process for granting class waivers. However, this was not included in the subsequent report on ‘Better Medicines for Children’ (COM(2013)0443) from the Commission to Parliament, dated 24 June 2013.

1.

Can the Commission explain why the class waiver issue was not included in its report to Parliament, when the EMA describes this as an opportunity

‘to recommend medicines development in paediatric conditions with unmet needs’?

2.

Will the Commission consider recommending that class waivers be based on a drug’s mechanism of action rather than on disease type?

3.

Given that paediatric oncology is an area the needs of which remain unmet to a large extent, what proposals will the Commission put forward to increase the availability of innovative treatments for children with cancer?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2013)

The conditions for granting class waivers are provided in Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (35). One of the three possible grounds to grant a waiver is evidence that the disease or condition for which the specific medicinal product or class is intended occurs only in adult populations.

Any decision by the EMA to grant new waivers or to modify or revoke granted waivers has to respect the grounds provided by Article 11.

The Commission's report on ‘Better Medicines for children’ acknowledges that criticism has been voiced as regards the impact of the regulation in the field of paediatric oncology. (36) However, at the same time around 10% of submitted paediatric investigation plans cover the therapeutic area of oncology.

Furthermore, given that all paediatric cancers are rare diseases, the Orphan Regulation (37) provides additional incentives to develop specific medicines for children with cancer.

The Seventh Framework Programme for Research (38) has funded research on childhood cancers to an amount of EUR 94 million, including risk factors, drug development and novel therapeutic strategies (e.g. off-patent medicines for paediatric cancer indications). Enhanced coordination efforts are developed through initiatives, such as ENCCA (39) (European Network for Cancer Research in Children and Adolescents), IRDiRC (40) (International Rare Diseases Research Consortium), and the creation of a pilot network of cooperation between paediatric oncology centres (41). The Commission's proposal for Horizon 2020 — The framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) (42) will offer opportunities to address research on childhood cancer.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009034/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Attacks on LGBTI organisations and defenders in Cameroon

The latest occurrence in a spate of attacks in Cameroon against LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex) organisations and defenders in Cameroon is the brutal murder of the prominent LGBTI rights activist and journalist Eric Lembembe earlier this month. In June 2013 an arson attack targeted Alternatives-Cameroun, the oldest LGBTI organisation in the country. Michel Togué, a lawyer who has taken on several high-profile cases defending women and men charged under Cameroon’s anti-gay laws, has also been targeted, as has the Réseau des Défenseurs des Droits Humains en Afrique Centrale (Central Africa Human Rights Defenders Network). This follows on from death threats and violence against the lawyer Alice Nkom for defending people accused of gay-related offences — as mentioned in the resolution of Parliament which I co-sponsored on violence against lesbians and the rights of LGBTI persons in Africa (2012/2701(RSP)).

1.

Can the VP/HR confirm that the EU delegation in Yaoundé is monitoring the situation regarding the safety of LGBTI/human rights defenders and is putting pressure on the Cameroonian authorities to ensure that they do all they can to bring those perpetrating violence to justice?

2.

Will the VP/HR recommend to the Commission the suspension of aid delivery to Cameroon if the Cameroonian authorities are found to be negligent in their investigation and prosecution of the above acts of violence, especially given that the Cameroonian government is overtly homophobic and has prosecuted dozens of people for consensual same-sex conduct since 2010?

Answer given by High-Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

1.

The EU Delegation in Yaoundé, working in close cooperation with the Embassies of EU Member States and other like-minded countries, has been actively following up this case in close contact with local civil society organisations and has explicitly urged the Cameroonian Authorities to investigate this hideous crime in a swift and thorough way to ensure that its authors are brought to justice.

2.

The present homophobic climate in Cameroon is a matter of serious concern to the EU. The HR/VP has voiced her strong concern with this situation and issued statement on LGBTI matters in Cameroon already twice, most recently on 17 July

2.

The present homophobic climate in Cameroon is a matter of serious concern to the EU. The HR/VP has voiced her strong concern with this situation and issued statement on LGBTI matters in Cameroon already twice, most recently on 17 July

 (43)

At the same time the EU prefers to stay engaged with Cameroon, having a better leverage with its ongoing cooperation, where the EU strongly advocates, in the framework of Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement, further progress on human rights, including those of LGBTI persons, such as decriminalisation of sexual activity between consenting adults of the same sex.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009036/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(24 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español IV

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio de 2009), la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, la Directiva 2009/28/CE, la Directiva 2012/27/UE y la «Estrategia Europa 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, por las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente los RD‐L 1/2012, RD‐L 13/2012, RD‐L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011 que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas y la industria del sector.

Hay consumidores que han decidido proveerse de vías alternativas, renunciando así a estar conectados a la red convencional. ¿Cree la Comisión que contradice alguna normativa europea el hecho de que exista una normativa española que obligue a los consumidores a estar conectados a la red eléctrica o de gas convencional?

¿No cree la Comisión que, para fomentar el ahorro energético a partir del autoconsumo eléctrico, sería conveniente que se fomentase el funcionamiento en isla, sin conexión directa a la red eléctrica convencional, disponiendo, eso sí, de una conexión de emergencia a la red convencional?

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009037/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio 2009), a la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (febrero 2004), la Directiva 2009/28/CE (abril 2009), la Directiva 2012/27/UE (octubre 2012) y la «Estrategia Europea 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, a raíz de las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente el RD-L 1/2012, RD-L 13/2012, RD-L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria.

Es preocupante la deriva legislativa sobre un aspecto clave de la política energética europea: el autoconsumo de energía. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011, de 18 de noviembre de 2011, que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas e industria del sector.

¿Cree la Comisión que el hecho de aumentar el término de potencia de la factura eléctrica (fijo, independientemente del consumo) y a la vez reducir el término de energía (variable, en función del consumo) fomentaría el ahorro y la eficiencia energética?

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009040/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio 2009), a la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (febrero 2004), la Directiva 2009/28/CE (abril 2009), la Directiva 2012/27/UE (octubre 2012) y la «Estrategia Europea 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, a raíz de las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente el RD-L 1/2012, RD-L 13/2012, RD-L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento, la pérdida de puestos de trabajo vinculados a la industria relacionada con las energías limpias y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria.

Es preocupante la deriva legislativa sobre un aspecto clave de la política energética europea: el autoconsumo de energía. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011, de 18 de noviembre de 2011, que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas e industria del sector.

¿Cree la Comisión que se contradice alguna normativa europea el hecho que un Estado miembro no esté regulando el «autoconsumo» eléctrico?

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009042/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio 2009), a la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (febrero 2004), la Directiva 2009/28/CE (abril 2009), la Directiva 2012/27/UE (octubre 2012) y la «Estrategia Europea 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, a raíz de las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente el RD-L 1/2012, RD-L 13/2012, RD-L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento, la pérdida de puestos de trabajo vinculados a la industria relacionada con las energías limpias y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria.

Es preocupante la deriva legislativa sobre un aspecto clave de la política energética europea: el autoconsumo de energía. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011, de 18 de noviembre de 2011, que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas e industria del sector.

¿Cree la Comisión que contradice alguna normativa europea el hecho que se pongan peajes a las instalaciones de «autoconsumo» eléctrico, aunque esta instalación disponga de elementos que impidan evacuar a la red eléctrica los excedentes que pueda haber, como cortafuegos para no afectar a la red eléctrica?

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009044/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio 2009), a la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (febrero 2004), la Directiva 2009/28/CE (abril 2009), la Directiva 2012/27/UE (octubre 2012) y la «Estrategia Europea 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, a raíz de las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente el RD-L 1/2012, RD-L 13/2012, RD-L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento, la pérdida de puestos de trabajo vinculados a la industria relacionada con las energías limpias y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria.

Es preocupante la deriva legislativa sobre un aspecto clave de la política energética europea: el autoconsumo de energía. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011, de 18 de noviembre de 2011, que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas e industria del sector.

¿Cree la Comisión que el sistema eléctrico español, que el invierno pasado tuvo que parar la construcción de parques eólicos y el 20 % de la generación eléctrica generada en centrales nucleares, no necesita sistemas de control de curva de demanda, como, por ejemplo, sistemas de almacenaje de electricidad doméstica para utilizar en «horas valle»?

Respuesta conjunta del Sr. Oettinger en nombre de la Comisión

(11 de octubre de 2013)

La Comisión remite a Su Señoría a la respuesta dada a la pregunta escrita E-009038/2013.

Si bien la Comisión se encuentra actualmente analizando la compatibilidad de las reformas en el sector de la energía español con el Derecho de la UE, comprendemos la preocupación manifestada por Su Señoría en cuanto a las posibles repercusiones negativas de una serie de medidas presentadas sobre las inversiones en energías renovables y eficiencia energética en España.

Como destacó recientemente la Comisión en su Comunicación sobre el mercado interior de la energía (44), la respuesta a la demanda, tan importante como la eficiencia energética, es una herramienta útil para influir sobre la curva de demanda de electricidad mediante la modulación de la demanda de energía en función de la situación del mercado, evitando de este modo picos de demanda costosos. La participación activa de los consumidores es necesaria para que los programas de respuesta a la demanda tengan éxito y podría permitir a los consumidores ahorrar dinero a la vez que aumentaría la eficacia y estabilidad del sistema eléctrico. Estos efectos positivos pueden verse realmente más reforzados si las medidas de respuesta a la demanda integran el uso del almacenamiento de energía.

La legislación de la UE sobre eficiencia energética (45) exige que la facturación de energía realizada por los distribuidores de energía, operadores de sistemas de distribución y empresas minoristas de venta de energía se base en el consumo real de energía, siempre y cuando esto sea técnicamente posible y se pueda justificar desde el punto de vista económico. Esta circunstancia no excluye la posibilidad de que las empresas de energía introduzcan determinados importes fijos, por ejemplo para reflejar los costes de mantenimiento de la conexión a la red de los usuarios finales. No obstante, esto se aplica a todos los usuarios finales, no únicamente a aquellos con un bajo consumo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009036/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(24 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energy in Spain

Following the publication of the third energy package (of the European Parliament and of the Council, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Directive 2009/28/EC, Directive 2012/27/EU and the Europe 2020 strategy, the current deadlock in Spain's renewable energy and cogeneration sector is a cause for concern. The paralysis is the result of the latest electricity sector reforms (primarily RD‐L 1/2012, RD‐L 13/2012 and RD‐L 9/2013), the legal uncertainty generated by retroactive measures affecting reimbursements for existing renewable energy installations, and a loss of competitiveness resulting from ever-increasing energy bills both for individuals and for industry. The law has been unclear in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011 was approved. Although the decree regulates the connection to the grid of small‐scale electricity producers, the matter of drawing up rules to govern the use of electricity produced on the grid by individuals for their own consumption, known as ‘self-supply’, is still unresolved (even though the decree says it should have been done within four months). Failing to draw up rules governing the administrative and economic requirements would lead to breaches of the aforementioned directives, undermine Spain’s chances of meeting its renewable energy quotas and CO2 emissions reductions objectives, hinder the country’s competitiveness, put a strain on household energy consumption, and have serious repercussions for businesses and industry in the sector.

Some consumers have opted for alternative means of energy supply, which do not require them to be connected to the standard grid. In the Commission’s view, does the fact that Spain requires consumers to be connected to the standard electricity grid or gas network run counter to EC law?

With a view to saving energy, does it not agree that people should be encouraged to produce electricity via the self-supply method without the need for a direct connection (only an emergency one) to the standard electricity grid?

Question for written answer E-009037/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Bearing in mind the third energy package (European Council and Parliament, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (February 2004), Directive 2009/28/EC (April 2009), Directive 2012/27/EU (October 2012) and the Europe 2020 strategy, it is extremely worrying to note the current state of paralysis in the Spanish renewable energy and cogeneration sector following recent reforms to the electricity sector (notably royal decree-laws 1/2012, 13/2012 and 9/2013), the legal uncertainty caused by retroactive measures affecting payments to functioning renewable energy facilities and the loss in competitiveness of the economy due to constant increases in energy prices both for the public and the industry.

It is worrying to note this legislative drift on such a key aspect of European energy policy as own consumption of energy. There has been a lack of legal clarity in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011, of 18 November 2011, was passed. Although this law regulates connection to small-scale electric energy production grids, it leaves unresolved (for a period of up to four months, according to the decree itself) the drafting of rules on the supply of electricity produced by a consumer's grid for their own use, which is known as own consumption. Without any regulation of the administrative and economic terms, the abovementioned directives are likely to be infringed, it will become difficult to achieve the goals of increasing renewable energy supply and reducing CO2 emissions, families’ domestic consumption and the necessary competitiveness of the national economy will be adversely affected and the impact on businesses and industries in the sector will be very harsh.

Does the Commission consider that increasing power charges (which are fixed, regardless of consumption) while at the same time reducing energy charges (which vary according to consumption) is likely to encourage energy saving and efficiency?

Question for written answer E-009040/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Bearing in mind the third energy package (European Council and Parliament, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (February 2004), Directive 2009/28/EC (April 2009), Directive 2012/27/EU (October 2012) and the Europe 2020 strategy, it is extremely worrying to note the current state of paralysis in the Spanish renewable energy and cogeneration sector following recent reforms to the electricity sector (notably royal decree-laws 1/2012, 13/2012 and 9/2013), the legal uncertainty caused by retroactive measures affecting payments to functioning renewable energy facilities, the loss of jobs linked to clean energy production and the decreasing competitiveness of the economy due to constant rises in energy prices for both the public and the industry.

It is worrying to note this legislative drift on such a key aspect of European energy policy as own consumption of energy. There has been a lack of legal clarity in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011, of 18 November 2011, was passed. Although this law regulates connection to small-scale electric energy production grids, it leaves unresolved (for a period of up to four months, according to the decree itself) the drafting of rules on the supply of electricity produced by a consumer's grid for their own use, which is known as own consumption. Without any regulation of the administrative and economic terms, the abovementioned directives are likely to be infringed, it will become difficult to achieve the goals of increasing renewable energy supply and reducing CO2 emissions, families’ domestic consumption and the necessary competitiveness of the national economy will be adversely affected and the impact on businesses and industries in the sector will be very harsh.

Does the Commission consider it to be an infringement of European law for a Member State to fail to regulate own consumption of electricity?

Question for written answer E-009042/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Bearing in mind the third energy package (European Council and Parliament, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (February 2004), Directive 2009/28/EC (April 2009), Directive 2012/27/EU (October 2012) and the Europe 2020 strategy, it is extremely worrying to note the current state of paralysis in the Spanish renewable energy and cogeneration sector following recent reforms to the electricity sector (notably royal decree-laws 1/2012, 13/2012 and 9/2013), the legal uncertainty caused by retroactive measures affecting payments to functioning renewable energy facilities, the loss of jobs linked to clean energy production and the decreasing competitiveness of the economy due to constant rises in energy prices for both the public and the industry.

It is worrying to note this legislative drift on such a key aspect of European energy policy as own consumption of energy. There has been a lack of legal clarity in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011, of 18 November 2011, was passed. Although this law regulates connection to small-scale electric energy production grids, it leaves unresolved (for a period of up to four months, according to the decree itself) the drafting of rules on the supply of electricity produced by a consumer's grid for their own use, which is known as own consumption. Without any regulation of the administrative and economic terms, the abovementioned directives are likely to be infringed, it will become difficult to achieve the goals of increasing renewable energy supply and reducing CO2 emissions, families’ domestic consumption and the necessary competitiveness of the national economy will be adversely affected and the impact on businesses and industries in the sector will be very harsh.

Does the Commission consider that any European law is being infringed by the levying of charges on electricity generating plants destined for own consumption, even when such installations are equipped with firebreak devices to prevent any excess energy being fed into the national grid, to ensure that it is not affected?

Question for written answer E-009044/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Bearing in mind the third energy package (European Council and Parliament, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (February 2004), Directive 2009/28/EC (April 2009), Directive 2012/27/EU (October 2012) and the Europe 2020 strategy, it is extremely worrying to note the current state of paralysis in the Spanish renewable energy and cogeneration sector following recent reforms to the electricity sector (notably royal decree-laws 1/2012, 13/2012 and 9/2013), the legal uncertainty caused by retroactive measures affecting payments to functioning renewable energy facilities, the loss of jobs linked to clean energy production and the decreasing competitiveness of the economy due to constant rises in energy prices for both the public and the industry.

It is worrying to note this legislative drift on such a key aspect of European energy policy as own consumption of energy. There has been a lack of legal clarity in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011, of 18 November 2011, was passed. Although this law regulates connection to small-scale electric energy production grids, it leaves unresolved (for a period of up to four months, according to the decree itself) the drafting of rules on the supply of electricity produced by a consumer's grid for their own use, which is known as own consumption. Without any regulation of the administrative and economic terms, the abovementioned directives are likely to be infringed, it will become difficult to achieve the goals of increasing renewable energy supply and reducing CO2 emissions, families’ domestic consumption and the necessary competitiveness of the national economy will be adversely affected and the impact on businesses and industries in the sector will be very harsh.

Does the Commission consider that the Spanish electrical system, which last winter had to halt the construction of wind farms and 20% of electricity generation in its nuclear power stations, has no need of systems to control the demand curve, including systems to store domestic energy for use during off-peak periods?

Joint answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2013)

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question E-009038/2013.

While the Commission is currently analysing the compatibility of the Spanish power sector reforms with EC law, we understand the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member about potential negative impacts of a number of measures tabled on investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency in Spain.

As the Commission recently highlighted in its communication on the Internal Energy Market (46), demand response, equally important as energy efficiency, is a useful tool to influence the electricity demand curve by modulating energy demand according to the situation on the market, thus avoiding costly peaks of demand. Active consumers' participation is necessary for successful demand response programmes and could allow consumers to save money while increasing the efficiency and stability of the electricity system. These positive effects can indeed be further enhanced if demand response measures integrate the use of energy storage.

The EU legislation on energy efficiency (47) requires that energy billing performed by energy distributors, distribution system operators and retail energy sales companies is based on actual energy consumption, where this is technically possible and economically justified. This does not exclude a possibility for energy companies to introduce certain fixed charges e.g. to reflect the costs of the maintenance of the grid connection for the final customers. However, this applies to all final customers, not just those with low consumption.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009038/13

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: Energías renovables en el Estado español

En referencia al «Tercer Paquete de la Energía» (Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, julio 2009), a la Directiva 2004/8/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo (febrero 2004), la Directiva 2009/28/CE (abril 2009), la Directiva 2012/27/UE (octubre 2012) y la «Estrategia Europea 2020», se ve con preocupación la actual situación de parálisis del sector de energías renovables y cogeneración en el Estado español, a raíz de las últimas reformas del sector eléctrico (principalmente el RD-L 1/2012, RD-L 13/2012, RD-L 9/2013), la inseguridad jurídica que suponen las medidas retroactivas que afectan a la retribución de las instalaciones de energías renovables en funcionamiento y la pérdida de competitividad de la economía debido al incremento constante del precio de la energía, tanto para los ciudadanos como para la industria.

Es preocupante la deriva legislativa sobre un aspecto clave de la política energética europea: el autoconsumo de energía. En el Estado español se sufre una falta de claridad legislativa desde 2011, cuando se aprueba el Real Decreto 1699/2011, de 18 de noviembre de 2011, que, si bien regula la conexión a la red eléctrica de producción de energía eléctrica de pequeña potencia, deja pendiente (hasta un máximo de cuatro meses según el mismo RD) la elaboración de la regulación del suministro de energía eléctrica producida en el interior de la red de un consumidor para su propio consumo, modalidad que llamamos «autoconsumo». No disponer de la regulación de las condiciones administrativas y económicas llevaría al incumplimiento de las Directivas antes referidas, pondría en riesgo el logro de los objetivos de penetración de energías renovables y reducción de emisiones de CO2, lastraría la necesaria competitividad de la economía del Estado y el consumo de las familias y tendría un impacto muy negativo en las empresas e industria del sector.

¿Cree la Comisión que el hecho de perjudicar el autoconsumo aplicando un «peaje de soporte» por la energía consumida, aunque no se inyecte directamente a la red convencional, fomentaría el ahorro y la eficiencia energética? ¿No cree la Comisión que este «peaje de soporte» sería necesario aplicarlo cuando los costes del sistema eléctrico (de transporte, distribución y generación) tendrían que ser pagados con el término de potencia fijo y la energía consumida de la red?

Respuesta del Sr. Oettinger en nombre de la Comisión

(11 de septiembre de 2013)

De acuerdo con la Directiva 2009/28/CE sobre fuentes de energía renovables (48), los Estados miembros tienen la responsabilidad y la obligación de establecer medidas de diseño eficiente para alcanzar el objetivo de 2020 y garantizar que la cuota de energía renovable se mantenga al menos al nivel de la trayectoria indicativa hacia el objetivo de 2020. En 2011, el Estado español se ajustaba a esa trayectoria (49).

Además, la Comisión es consciente de los recientes acontecimientos producidos en el sector eléctrico del Estado español y de la preocupación por el impacto de los cambios introducidos en el marco de apoyo, en particular para las instalaciones existentes, sobre el clima de inversiones en el sector de las energías renovables. En sus conversaciones con el Gobierno español, la Comisión ha manifestado en repetidas ocasiones la necesidad de garantizar que las reformas estructurales necesarias no pongan en peligro el desarrollo futuro de las energías renovables y la consecución del objetivo 2020. En este contexto, el fomento del autoconsumo de electricidad de producción nacional puede constituir un instrumento eficaz para promover proyectos de fuentes de energía renovables (FER) a pequeña escala. No obstante, el Derecho de la UE no incluye disposiciones específicas sobre el tratamiento del autoconsumo en la aplicación de gravámenes más allá de la prohibición general de discriminar la electricidad de fuentes de energía renovables a la hora de establecer las tarifas de transporte y distribución (50).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009038/13

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Renewable energies in Spain

Bearing in mind the third energy package (European Council and Parliament, July 2009), Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (February 2004), Directive 2009/28/EC (April 2009), Directive 2012/27/EU (October 2012) and the Europe 2020 strategy, it is extremely worrying to note the current state of paralysis in the Spanish renewable energy and cogeneration sector following recent reforms to the electricity sector (notably royal decree-laws 1/2012, 13/2012 and 9/2013), the legal uncertainty caused by retroactive measures affecting payments to functioning renewable energy facilities and the loss in competitiveness of the economy due to constant increases in energy prices both for the public and the industry.

It is worrying to note this legislative drift on such a key aspect of European energy policy as own consumption of energy. There has been a lack of legal clarity in Spain since 2011, when Royal Decree 1699/2011, of 18 November 2011, was passed. Although this law regulates connection to small-scale electric energy production grids, it leaves unresolved (for a period of up to four months, according to the decree itself) the drafting of rules on the supply of electricity produced by a consumer's grid for their own use, which is known as own consumption. Without any regulation of the administrative and economic terms, the abovementioned directives are likely to be infringed, it will become difficult to achieve the goals of increasing renewable energy supply and reducing CO2 emissions, families’ domestic consumption and the necessary competitiveness of the national economy will be adversely affected and the impact on businesses and industries in the sector will be very harsh.

Does the Commission believe that penalising own consumption by levying an additional charge on energy consumed, even where it is not being directly fed into the conventional grid, is likely to encourage energy saving and efficiency? Does the Commission not consider that this additional charge should be applied in cases where the costs of the electricity system (transportation, distribution and generation) need to be covered by the fixed power charge and energy consumption from the grid?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2013)

Under the Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC (51), it is the responsibility and obligation of the Member States to have in place efficiently designed measures to reach the 2020 target and to ensure that the share of renewable energy remains at least at the level of the indicative trajectory towards the 2020 target. In 2011, Spain was on track as regards this trajectory (52).

At the same time, the Commission is aware of recent developments in the electricity sector in Spain and concerns about the impact of changes to the support framework, including for existing installations, on the investment climate in the renewable energy sector. In its dialogue with the Spanish Government, the Commission has repeatedly stressed the need to ensure that the necessary structural reforms do not put at risk the further development of renewable energy and the achievement of the 2020 target. In this context promoting own consumption of domestically produced electricity of renewable sources can be an effective instrument to promote smaller scale Renewable Energy Sources (RES) projects. However, EC law does not contain any specific provisions on the treatment of own consumption when levying charges beyond the general prohibition to discriminate against electricity from renewable energy sources when setting transmission and distribution tariffs (53).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-009045/13

an die Kommission

Bernd Posselt (PPE)

(25. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Kroatische Gerichtsverfahren gegen den früheren Ministerpräsidenten Sanader

Die bisherigen Gerichtsverfahren gegen den früheren Ministerpräsidenten Sanader in Kroatien waren weder fair noch frei, da sie in einer Atmosphäre der Einschüchterung, auf der Grundlage von unglaubwürdigen Zeugenaussagen, unter willkürlicher Ausklammerung von Entlastungszeugen der Verteidigung, bei medialer Vorverurteilung und anderen schweren Mängeln stattfanden. Hinzu kommt, dass Urteile acht Monate, nachdem sie ergangen sind, noch nicht schriftlich ausgefertigt sind, obwohl dies laut kroatischem Gesetz binnen eines Monats zu geschehen hat, so dass jeder Einspruch unmöglich war, obwohl Sanader seitdem im Gefängnis sitzt.

Ist die Kommission über diese schwerwiegenden Mängel im Justizsystem, gerade auch in diesem Fall, informiert?

Hat Kroatien die europäischen Richtlinien im Rahmen der justiziellen Zusammenarbeit umgesetzt und ist das beschriebene Verfahren mit EU-Recht vereinbar?

Antwort von Frau Reding im Namen der Kommission

(30. September 2013)

Die EU hat sich vor kurzem auf mehrere Richtlinien über gemeinsame Mindestverfahrensrechte in Strafverfahren verständigt, nämlich auf die Richtlinie über das Recht auf Dolmetschleistungen und Übersetzungen in Strafverfahren (54), die Richtlinie über das Recht auf Belehrung und Unterrichtung in Strafverfahren (55) und eine Richtlinie zum Recht auf Rechtsbeistand in Strafverfahren (56). Wie alle anderen Mitgliedstaaten ist Kroatien verpflichtet, die gemeinsamen Mindestverfahrensrechte in nationales Recht umzusetzen. Die Kommission wird die Umsetzung dieser Richtlinien durch Kroatien genau verfolgen.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-009045/13

to the Commission

Bernd Posselt (PPE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Trials of former Croatian Prime Minister Sanader

The trials of former Prime Minister Ivo Sanader held to date in Croatia have been neither fair nor free. They have been conducted in an atmosphere of intimidation and on the basis of unreliable testimony, witnesses for the defence have been arbitrarily excluded, and there has been a backdrop of media prejudice, amongst other serious shortcomings. In addition, sentences issued eight months ago have still not been formalised in writing, although this should be done within one month under Croatian law. As a result, there has been no possibility to lodge an appeal, even though Sanader has been sitting in prison ever since.

Has the Commission been informed about these serious shortcomings in the judicial system, specifically in this case?

Has Croatia implemented the EU judicial cooperation directives, and are the proceedings described compatible with EC law?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2013)

The EU recently agreed on several Directives on common minimum procedural rights in criminal proceedings, namely the directives on interpretation and translation (57), on the right to information about rights (58) and on the right of access to a lawyer (59). Like all other Member States, Croatia will have to transpose these common minimum standards into their national law. The Commission will closely monitor the transposition of those instruments by Croatia.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009046/13

to the Commission

Gay Mitchell (PPE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Unlocking the consumer protection market

It has been argued that a new form of consumer protection debt waiver would unlock the consumer protection market and hugely increase the flow of credit into the economy.

ResPublica, a UK-based independent think-tank, contends that banks should be forced to insure loans to SMEs in order to guard against bankruptcies and encourage lending. The think-tank further believes that consumer lending should also be protected with insurance. Various studies in the EU and the US have highlighted how credit contraction has impacted on GDP growth — in the US, a 4% credit contraction has led to a fall in GDP of 0.6%, and, in the EU, a 5% contraction has led to a reduction of 1.6%.

Has the Commission ever considered the impact of an EU-wide form of consumer protection debt waiver, such as insurance, on our economy, and will it set out its position on the matter?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The insurance of consumer lending (except for mortgages) tends to be rather limited in terms of market size across the EU. The Commission is not aware of any public scheme in the Member States encouraging such insurance with the objective of increasing consumer lending. The Commission has no information on the impact on the economy of an EU-wide form of consumer protection debt waiver and is not planning initiatives in this respect in close future.

If the creditor makes any insurance compulsory for obtaining consumer credit, he is obliged by the directive 2008/48/EC (60) to include the cost of this insurance in the total cost of the credit and in the Annual Percentage Rate of charge in advertisements and pre-contractual information.

With regards to SMEs, the Commission is addressing their difficult access to credit through a variety of financial instruments. The loan guarantee facility of the current CIP programme 2007-2013 is made available to SMEs through financial intermediaries, such as banks and mutual guarantee societies. For the period 2014-2020, the Commission has put forward proposals for a new generation of financial instruments. The new COSME programme will include a loan guarantee facility which will consist of:

guarantees for debt financing (61) , which shall reduce the particular difficulties that viable SMEs face in accessing finance either due to their perceived high risk or their lack of sufficient available collateral;

securitisation of SME debt finance portfolios, which shall mobilise additional debt financing for SMEs under appropriate risk-sharing arrangements with the targeted institutions.

This facility will complement the one included in the new Horizon 2020 programme, which will support research and innovation.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009047/13

to the Commission

Alyn Smith (Verts/ALE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Follow up on Written Question E-002862/2013

The Veterinary Medicinal Products Directive (2001/82/EC), as amended lays down a series of controls on the manufacture, authorisation, marketing, distribution and post-authorisation surveillance of veterinary medicines applicable in all Member States.

In 2010 the Commission launched a public consultation on the legal framework for veterinary medicinal products. The stated aim of this public consultation was to provide sufficient information for the production of an impact assessment relating to a revision of the legal framework for veterinary medicinal products.

Can the Commission state when the impact assessment relating to a revision of the legal framework for veterinary medicinal products will be published?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(2 September 2013)

All impact assessments are published once the Commission has adopted the related proposals. The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it aims to adopt the proposal on the revision of veterinary medicines Directive by the end of 2013.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009048/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Απόφαση του ελληνικού δικαστηρίου κατά της Ελληνικής Επιτροπής Ανταγωνισμού

Με απόφασή του το Διοικητικό Εφετείο Αθηνών υποχρεώνει την Ελληνική Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού να καταβάλει το ποσό των 500 000 ευρώ, ως αποζημίωση σε επιχείρηση, επειδή αδικαιολόγητα καθυστερούσε να διερευνήσει συγκεκριμένη καταγγελία για την ύπαρξη καρτέλ στην αγορά του ξενόγλωσσου βιβλίου στην Ελλάδα.

Με δεδομένο ότι γινόμαστε συνεχώς δέκτες παραπόνων για καθυστερήσεις στις διαδικασίες διερεύνησης υποθέσεων που έχει αναλάβει η Ελληνική Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Υπάρχει προηγούμενο για χώρα της ΕΕ, εθνικό δικαστήριο να έχει επιβάλει αποζημίωση για αδικαιολόγητη καθυστέρηση στην εκδίκαση υποθέσεων; Ποιες είναι οι σχετικές βέλτιστες πρακτικές τις οποίες θα πρότεινε η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή να δεσμεύονται ότι θα εφαρμόσουν οι Εθνικές Αρχές Ανταγωνισμού;

Έχει πληροφορίες για το ποιες είναι οι υποθέσεις που χειρίζεται η Ελληνική Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού και για τις οποίες έχει ξεπεραστεί το εύλογο διάστημα διερεύνησης; Υπάρχει σχετικός κατάλογος;

Απάντηση του κ. Almunia εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(18 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι η απόφαση στην οποία αναφέρεται το Αξιότιμο Μέλος δεν είναι οριστική και ότι η Ελληνική Αρχή Ανταγωνισμού έχει ανακοινώσει την πρόθεσή της να προσβάλει την απόφαση (62). Περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες σχετικά με το θέμα αυτό παρέχονται στις απαντήσεις της Επιτροπής στις αναφορές 130/2007 και 338/2012.

Όσον αφορά τις επιπτώσεις παρόμοιων ενεργειών στην ΕΕ, τα κράτη μέλη δεν είναι υποχρεωμένα να ενημερώνουν την Επιτροπή με συστηματικό τρόπο.

Σε γενικές γραμμές, υπενθυμίζεται ότι η Επιτροπή και οι εθνικές αρχές ανταγωνισμού (ΕΑΑ) έχουν παράλληλες αρμοδιότητες όσον αφορά την εφαρμογή των κανόνων ανταγωνισμού της ΕΕ (άρθρα 101 και 102 της ΣΛΕΕ) και ότι συνεργάζονται στο πλαίσιο του Ευρωπαϊκού Δικτύου Ανταγωνισμού (ΕΔΑ), με στόχο να διασφαλισθεί η αποτελεσματική και συνεκτική εφαρμογή των κανόνων αυτών.

Ωστόσο, οι διαδικασίες των εθνικών αρχών ανταγωνισμού και οι σχετικές δυνατότητες νομικής προστασίας διέπονται από το δίκαιο του οικείου κράτους μέλους. Η εφαρμογή των εν λόγω εθνικών διατάξεων πρέπει να συμβιβάζεται με τις γενικές αρχές του δικαίου της ΕΕ, όπως την αρχή της αποτελεσματικότητας. Προς τούτο, το εθνικό πλαίσιο δεν πρέπει να καθιστά την επιβολή των κανόνων ανταγωνισμού της ΕΕ υπερβολικά δυσχερή ή πρακτικώς αδύνατη.

Η Επιτροπή σημειώνει ότι έχει δοθεί στην Ελληνική Αρχή Ανταγωνισμού το δικαίωμα να καθορίζει τις προτεραιότητές της βάσει του ελληνικού Νόμου 3959/2011 περί προστασίας του ελεύθερου ανταγωνισμού.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009048/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Decision by Greek court against Hellenic Competition Commission

The Athens Administrative Court of Appeal has ordered the Hellenic Competition Commission to pay the sum of EUR 500 000 in compensation to a company, because it delayed in investigating complaints of a cartel on the foreign language book market in Greece without good cause.

In view of the fact that we are constantly hearing reports of delays in investigations undertaken by the Hellenic Competition Commission, will the Commission say:

Is there a precedent in an EU Member State of a national court ordering compensation for unwarranted delays in hearing cases? What are the best practices which the European Commission would propose that the national competition authorities should undertake to apply.

Does it have information about which cases the Hellenic Competition Commission is handling and which have exceeded a reasonable investigation period? Is there a list?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

The Commission understands that the judgment referred to by the Honourable Member is not final and that the Greek competition authority has announced its intention to appeal (63). Additional detail about the subject can be found in the Commission's replies to Petitions 130/2007 and 338/2012.

Regarding the incidence of similar actions in the EU, Member States are not obliged to inform the Commission in a systematic manner.

In general terms, it is recalled that the Commission and the national competition authorities (NCAs) have parallel competences to apply the EU competition rules (Articles 101 and 102 TFEU) and that they cooperate in the European Competition Network (ECN) with a view to ensure effective and coherent application of these rules.

Notwithstanding, procedures of NCAs and related possibilities for legal redress are governed by the laws of the respective Member State. The application of such national provisions must be compatible with general principles of EC law, which include the principle of effectiveness. In this regard, the national framework must not make enforcement of the EU competition rules excessively difficult or practically impossible.

The Commission notes that the Greek Competition Authority has been given the right to set its priorities by virtue of Greek Law 3959/2011 on the Protection of Free Competition.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009049/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Προκλητικές δηλώσεις του διευθυντή της Eurostat για την ελληνική δικαιοσύνη

Ο διευθυντής της Ευρωπαϊκής Στατιστικής Υπηρεσίας (Eurostat) κ. Radermacher, σε συνέντευξή του στη βελγική εφημερίδα Le Soir για το Ελληνικό Στατιστικό Σύστημα, χαρακτήρισε ως «κόλαση του Δάντη» τις δικαστικές έρευνες που διεξάγονται από την ελληνική δικαιοσύνη σε βάρος του προέδρου της Ελληνικής Στατιστικής Αρχής (ΕΛΣΤΑΤ) κ. Γεωργίου, για το σκάνδαλο της παραποίησης των ελληνικών στατιστικών στοιχείων. Στην ίδια συνέντευξη ο διευθυντής της Eurostat αναφέρεται στα συναλλαγματικά swaps της Ελλάδας, κατηγορώντας τις ελληνικές αρχές ότι απέκρυπταν επί μακρόν τα επίμαχα στοιχεία, την ίδια στιγμή που οι έρευνες της Ευρωπαϊκής Κεντρικής Τράπεζας για τη χρήση των συναλλαγματικών swaps από τα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ παραμένει, μέχρι και σήμερα, κρυφή.

Με δεδομένο ότι οι ανακριτικές διαδικασίες για το σκάνδαλο παραποίησης των ελληνικών στατιστικών στοιχείων βρίσκονται σε εξέλιξη, και ότι ο διευθυντής της Eurostat όταν κλήθηκε από την Εξεταστική Επιτροπή της Βουλής σχετικά με το σκάνδαλο της παραποίησης των στατιστικών στοιχείων, αρνήθηκε να παραστεί ενώπιόν της ο ίδιος, αποστέλλοντας μόνο ένα υπόμνημα, χωρίς να υπάρχει η δυνατότητα να απαντήσει σε ερωτήσεις ελλήνων βουλευτών, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Αντιλαμβάνεται η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, υπό την εποπτεία της οποίας λειτουργεί η Eurostat, ότι με τη συνέντευξή του ο κ. Radermacher παρεμβαίνει στις διαδικασίες της ελληνικής δικαιοσύνης, χαρακτηρίζοντάς τες ως «κόλαση του Δάντη»; Πώς σχολιάζει αυτές τις αναφορές;

Ποια διαδικασία θα ακολουθηθεί από την Επιτροπή στην περίπτωση που κληθεί ο κ. Radermacher, ή άλλος υπάλληλός της, να καταθέσει στις ανακριτικές και δικαστικές ελληνικές αρχές για την υπόθεση της παραποίησης των στατιστικών στοιχείων; Θα απαντήσει και πάλι με υπόμνημα;

Έχουν υπόψη τους η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή και η Eurostat τα πορίσματα των ερευνών της Ευρωπαϊκής Κεντρικής Τράπεζας σχετικά με τη χρήση των swaps; Εάν ναι, μπορούν να τα δώσουν στη δημοσιότητα για να αποκαλυφθεί όλο το εύρος της υπόθεσης των swaps, τόσο για την Ελλάδα, όσο και για τις άλλες χώρες;

Απάντηση του κ. Šemeta εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(16 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

1.

Η Επιτροπή δεν θεωρεί ότι η συνέντευξη του κ.

Radermacher συνιστά παρέμβαση στο ελληνικό δικαστικό σύστημα. Τα στοιχεία που αναφέρονται και οι απόψεις που εκφράζονται στην εν λόγω συνέντευξη δεν υπαγορεύουν ούτε περιορίζουν τις ενέργειες που θα αποφασιστούν από τις ελληνικές δικαστικές αρχές στις διαδικασίες που εκκρεμούν ενώπιόν τους.

2.

Όλες οι δεόντως αιτιολογημένες προσκλήσεις που απευθύνονται σε υπάλληλο της Επιτροπής για να εμφανιστεί σε εθνικούς φορείς όσον αφορά την επαγγελματική δραστηριότητά του/της, είτε είναι δικαστικές αρχές είτε κοινοβουλευτικές επιτροπές διερεύνησης, αντιμετωπίζονται σε περιπτωσιολογική βάση, σύμφωνα με τις σχετικές διατάξεις του κανονισμού υπηρεσιακής κατάστασης. Η Επιτροπή δεσμεύεται να συμβάλλει εποικοδομητικά στην αποσαφήνιση των γεγονότων των ζητημάτων που εξετάζονται από αυτές τις αρχές και επιτροπές. Η συνεργασία αυτή μπορεί να λάβει διάφορες μορφές ύστερα από συζήτηση με το μέλος που απευθύνει την πρόσκληση. Η προσέγγιση αυτή εφαρμόστηκε επίσης το 2012 στην πρόσκληση που στάλθηκε στον κ.

Radermacher από την εξεταστική επιτροπή του ελληνικού κοινοβουλίου που εξετάζει τις αμφιβολίες σχετικά με τα στοιχεία του ελληνικού ελλείμματος του 2009. Σε συμφωνία με την επιτροπή, ο κ. Radermacher παρείχε λεπτομερείς γραπτές απαντήσεις σε όλες τις ερωτήσεις που υποβλήθηκαν.

3.

Η Επιτροπή δεν συμμετέχει στην έρευνα της ΕΚΤ σχετικά με τη χρήση συμφωνιών ανταλλαγής (swaps) από τα κράτη μέλη και δεν διαθέτει πληροφορίες σχετικά με το περιεχόμενο και τα αποτελέσματά της.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009049/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Insulting statements by director of Eurostat about the Greek judicial authorities

The director of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat), Mr Radermacher, speaking in an interview with the Belgian newspaper Le Soir on the Greek statistical system, used the term ‘Dante’s Inferno’ to describe the judicial investigations being conducted by the Greek judicial authorities against Mr Georgiou, president of the Hellenic Statistical Authority (EL.STAT), in connection with the scandal of falsified Greek statistics. In the same interview, the director of Eurostat referred to Greek currency swaps and accused the Greek authorities of having long concealed the data in question, at a time when enquiries by the European Central Bank into the use of currency swaps by EU Member States are still being conducted in secret.

In view of the fact that the investigation into the scandal of falsified Greek statistics is under way and that the director of Eurostat refused, when summoned, to appear in person before Parliament’s committee of inquiry into the scandal of falsified statistics and simply sent a memorandum, so that there was no opportunity for Greek MEPs to have their questions answered, will the Commission say:

Does the European Commission, under whose supervision Eurostat operates, consider that the interview given by Mr Radermacher constitutes interference in the Greek judicial system, which he called ‘Dante’s Inferno’? What is its view on these comments?

What procedure will the Commission apply in the event that Mr Radermacher or some other servant is summoned to testify before the Greek investigating and judicial authorities on the matter of falsified statistics? Will he again respond with a memorandum?

Are the European Commission and Eurostat aware of the conclusions of the investigation by the European Central Bank into the use of swaps? If so, can they publish them, in order to disclose the full extent of the use of swaps, in both Greece and other countries?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

1.

The Commission does not consider that Mr Radermacher’s interview constitutes interference in the Greek judicial system. The facts recalled and the views presented therein are not suggestive or limiting as regards the actions to be decided by the Greek judicial authorities in the proceedings before them.

2.

All duly justified invitations addressed to a Commission official to appear before national bodies in relation to his/her professional activity, be they judicial authorities or investigating parliamentary committees, are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Staff Regulations. The Commission is committed to constructively contributing to clarifying the facts of the matters considered by such authorities and committees. Such cooperation may take different forms following discussion with the inviting party. This approach was also applied in 2012 to the invitation sent to Mr Radermacher by the investigating committee of the Hellenic Parliament considering the doubts about 2009 Greek deficit data. In agreement with the committee, Mr Radermacher provided detailed written answers to all questions submitted.

3.

The Commission is not involved in the ECB’s investigation on the use of swaps by Member States and has no information on its content and results.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009050/13

προς την Επιτροπή (Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος)

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: VP/HR — Ανθρωπιστική κατάσταση στη Συρία και εκπροσώπηση μειονοτήτων στη Συνδιάσκεψη της Γενεύης για την Ειρήνη

Η εμφύλια σύρραξη στην Συρία έχει προκαλέσει τεράστια ανθρωπιστική κρίση, η οποία πλήττει και τις εθνικές και θρησκευτικές μειονότητες. Στις συριακές περιοχές των μειονοτήτων, ειδικά στα σύνορα με την Τουρκία, όπου έχουν εκτοπιστεί εκατομμύρια σύριοι (Εσωτερικά Εκτοπισμένα Άτομα) υπάρχουν έντονα παράπονα ότι «δεν φτάνει» η διεθνής ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια.

Ταυτόχρονα, διοργανώνεται στη Γενεύη «Συνδιάσκεψη για την ειρήνη στη Συρία» η οποία ανακοινώθηκε ότι θα λάβει χώρα τους αμέσως προσεχείς μήνες. Για την εν λόγω συνδιάσκεψη, το Συμβούλιο Υπουργών Εξωτερικών της ΕΕ, στις 27.5.2013, τόνισε ότι «καλωσορίζει την πρωτοβουλία για τη συνδιάσκεψη ειρήνης» και ότι «η ΕΕ θα καταβάλει κάθε προσπάθεια για να βοηθήσει στην επίτευξη των κατάλληλων συνθηκών για την επιτυχή έκβαση αυτής της Συνδιάσκεψης».

Με δεδομένα τα παραπάνω, ερωτάται η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος:

Πώς διασφαλίζει ότι η ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια που παρέχει η ΕΕ φτάνει σε όλες τις περιοχές και ειδικά σε αυτές των μειονοτήτων, που, πέρα από τους κατοίκους τους, φιλοξενούν και τεράστιο αριθμό εσωτερικά εκτοπισμένων ατόμων;

Με δεδομένο ότι η ισότιμη συμμετοχή των μειονοτήτων στις αποφάσεις είναι μεγάλης σημασίας, τόσο για την επιτυχή έκβαση, όσο και για την βιωσιμότητα μιας ενδεχόμενης συμφωνίας, και ότι έχουν εκφραστεί ανησυχίες εκ μέρους του κουρδικού στοιχείου για την αντιπροσωπευτική συμμετοχή τους στη Συνδιάσκεψη, τι μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος, προκειμένου να συμμετέχουν στη Συνδιάσκεψη οι πραγματικοί εκπρόσωποι αυτών των μειονοτήτων και όχι πρόσωπα που δεν αναγνωρίζονται ως εκπρόσωποι από τις ίδιες τις μειονοτικές ομάδες;

Απάντηση της Ύπατης Εκπροσώπου/Αντιπροέδρου κ. Ashton εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(23 Οκτωβρίου 2013)

Η ΕΕ παρέχει την ανθρωπιστική της βοήθεια σε αυτούς που τη χρειάζονται, ανεξάρτητα από το θρήσκευμα, την εθνικότητα ή άλλα χαρακτηριστικά ταυτότητας. Το σημερινό συνολικό ποσό της ενωσιακής ανθρωπιστικής και μη ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας, συμπεριλαμβανομένων και των συνεισφορών των κρατών μελών, ανέρχεται σε περίπου 2 δισεκατ. ευρώ. Το μεγαλύτερο μέρος της βοήθειας της ΕΕ στη Συρία έχει παρασχεθεί μέσω οργανισμών των Ηνωμένων Εθνών και διεθνών ΜΚΟ.

Η ΕΕ έχει ανέκαθεν επιμείνει στην ανάγκη το συριακό καθεστώς να παρέχει πρόσβαση για ανθρωπιστικούς λόγους σε όλα τα τμήματα της συριακής επικράτειας υπό τον έλεγχό της, καθώς και πέραν των γραμμών αντιπαράθεσης, στις περιοχές που ελέγχει η αντιπολίτευση. Ενόψει των συνεχιζόμενων δυσκολιών, η ΕΕ, καθώς και άλλοι παράγοντες, ενέτειναν τις προσπάθειές τους για την επίτευξη του εν λόγω στόχου.

Ήδη από την έναρξη της εξέγερσης, στις επαφές της με εκπροσώπους της συριακής αντιπολίτευσης και διαφόρων μειονοτήτων, η ΥΕ/ΑΠ τονίζει με έμφαση και υπογραμμίζει την ανάγκη η αντιπολίτευση να είναι κατά το δυνατόν ευρεία και αντιπροσωπευτική. Έχει επίσης καταστήσει σαφές ότι η ειρηνευτική διάσκεψη μπορεί να επιτύχει μόνον αν και οι δύο πλευρές επιθυμούν πραγματικά να διαπραγματευθούν και αν διαθέτουν ισχυρή και αντιπροσωπευτική εντολή· στην δε περίπτωση της αντιπολίτευσης, τούτο θα είναι δυνατό μόνον εφόσον εξασφαλιστεί επαρκές εύρος συμμετοχής.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009050/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Humanitarian situation in Syria and representation of minorities at Geneva Peace Conference

The civil conflict in Syria has caused a massive humanitarian crisis, which is also affecting ethnic and religious minorities. In minority areas of Syria, especially along the Turkish border, where millions of Syrians have been displaced (internally displaced persons), there are serious complaints that international humanitarian aid ‘is not enough’.

At the same time, a Geneva Peace Conference on Syria is being organised, which is apparently due to take place within the next few months. The Council of EU Foreign Ministers stressed on 27 May 2013 that it ‘welcomed the … call for a peace conference’ on Syria and that ‘the EU would spare no effort in helping to create the appropriate conditions for the Conference to be convened successfully’.

In view of the above, will the High Representative say:

How is she ensuring that the humanitarian aid provided by the EU is reaching all areas, especially minority areas which, in addition to their own inhabitants, are supporting a huge number of internally displaced persons?

Given that equal participation of minorities in decisions is of huge importance, both to the successful outcome and to the sustainability of an agreement, and that concerns have been expressed by the Kurdish element about its representation at the Conference, what measures does the High Representative intend to take in order to ensure that the Conference is attended by the real representatives of these minorities and not by persons who are not recognised as representatives by the minority groups themselves?

Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2013)

The EU provides its humanitarian aid to those in need regardless of their confession, ethnicity or other identity features. The current overall sum of EU humanitarian and non-humanitarian assistance, including contributions from Member States, stands at nearly EUR 2 billion. A major part of the EU assistance inside Syria has been provided through UN agencies and international NGOs.

The EU has consistently insisted on the need for the Syrian regime to provide humanatarian access to all parts of Syria under its control, as well as across front lines to the areas controlled by the opposition. In the face of persisting difficulties, the EU as well as other actors increased their efforts to achieve that goal.

In her contacts with representatives of the Syrian opposition and various minority groups, the HR/VP has since the beginning of the uprising been deliveriving strong messages to underline the necessity for the opposition to be as inclusive and representative as possible. She has also been making clear that a peace conference can only succeed if both sides are genuinely willing to negotiate and have strong and representative mandates, which will only be possible for the opposition if it can ensure sufficient inclusiveness.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009051/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Έκθεση του ΔΝΤ για τις ευρωπαϊκές τράπεζες

Σε πρόσφατη έκθεση του ΔΝΤ για το χρηματοοικονομικό σύστημα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση (European Union: Financial System Stability Assessment, March 2013), γίνεται αναφορά στον γερμανικό τραπεζικό τομέα, ο οποίος εκτιμάται ότι είναι ακόμα εκτεθειμένος σε απαιτήσεις σε κρατικά χρέη και ότι επιβαρύνεται από σοβαρούς κινδύνους (risk), λόγω θεσμικών βαρών και αβεβαιοτήτων (regulatory burden and regulatory uncertainty), ενώ ιδιαίτερη αναφορά γίνεται και στις Landesbanken, τις οποίες η έκθεση εμφανίζει ως πιο ευάλωτες σε σχέση με τις υπόλοιπες εμπορικές τράπεζες της χώρας.

Με βάση τα παραπάνω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Πώς σχολιάζει τα συμπεράσματα της έκθεσης του ΔΝΤ και, συγκεκριμένα, τα συμπεράσματα όσον αφορά την έκθεση σε «απαιτήσεις σε κρατικά χρέη» και τους κινδύνους (risk) λόγω «θεσμικών βαρών και αβεβαιοτήτων» του γερμανικού τραπεζικού συστήματος;

Μετά και την έκθεση του ΔΝΤ, αισθάνεται την ανάγκη η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή να ζητήσει την εισαγωγή και των Landsbanken στα επόμενα stress-tests;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(27 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Στην έκθεση του ΔΝΤ, του 2013, σχετικά με την αξιολόγηση της σταθερότητας του χρηματοπιστωτικού συστήματος, παράρτημα 9, παρατίθενται λεπτομερή στοιχεία για τα διάφορα προγράμματα αξιολόγησης του χρηματοπιστωτικού τομέα (ΠΑΧΤ) που υλοποίησε το ΔΝΤ από το 2011 σε διάφορα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ. Οι Landesbanken αναφέρονται στο πλαίσιο του προγράμματος αξιολόγησης του χρηματοπιστωτικού τομέα της Γερμανίας (ΔΝΤ, Ιούλιος 2011).

Το 2011 η Επιτροπή πραγματοποίησε παρόμοια ανάλυση του γερμανικού τραπεζικού τομέα, η οποία αντανακλάται στη σύσταση του Συμβουλίου της 12ης Ιουλίου 2011 σχετικά με το εθνικό πρόγραμμα μεταρρυθμίσεων του 2011 της Γερμανίας (64), η οποία εκδόθηκε βάσει σύστασης της Επιτροπής.

Προς το παρόν η εποπτεία των τραπεζών πραγματοποιείται από τις εθνικές εποπτικές αρχές και όχι σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο. Παρ' όλα αυτά, οι περισσότερες εκ των Landesbanken περιελήφθησαν στο φάσμα των τραπεζών που κάλυψε ο τελευταίος γύρος των δοκιμών αντοχής (stress-tests)· ανάλογα δε με την εμβέλεια των μελλοντικών γύρων, παρόμοιος αριθμός Landesbanken ενδέχεται να θεωρηθούν «εντός φάσματος». Το θέμα αυτό, ωστόσο, εμπίπτει στην αρμοδιότητα των αρμόδιων εποπτικών αρχών.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009051/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: IMF report on European banks

A recent IMF report on the financial system in the European Union (European Union: Financial System Stability Assessment, March 2013), refers to the German banking sector which, it considers, is still exposed to government claims and vulnerable to serious risks due to the regulatory burden and regulatory uncertainty, referring in particular to the Landesbanken, which appear to be more vulnerable than other commercial banks in the country.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

What are its comments on the conclusions drawn in the IMF report, especially the conclusions concerning exposure to ‘government claims’ and risks due to the ‘regulatory burden and regulatory uncertainty’ in the German banking system?

In the wake of the IMF report, does the European Commission feel the need to ask for the Landesbanken to be included in the next stress tests?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2013)

The IMF 2013 Financial System Stability Assesment (FSSA) details in its Annex 9 different Financial Sector Assessment Programs (FSAPs) that the IMF has performed since 2011 in various EU Member States. The Landesbanken are mentioned in the context of the IMF's July 2011 FSAP in Germany.

In 2011 the Commission performed a similar analysis of the German banking sector which was reflected in the Country Specific Council Recommendation of 12 July 2011 on the National Reform Programme 2011 of Germany (65), adopted on a recommendation of the Commission.

For the time being, bank supervision is performed by national supervisors and not at the European level. Nonetheless, most Landesbanken were within the scope of the last round of European stress tests and, depending on the size of future exercises, a similar number of Landesbanken are likely to be deemed ‘in scope’. This however falls under the responsibility of the relevant supervisory authorities.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009053/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Γιατί επιλέχθηκε η ακριβή λύση για την ΑΤΕ

Με βάση τα επίσημα απολογιστικά στοιχεία, τα οποία έχω ήδη παραθέσει στην ερώτησή μου Ε-005283/2013, αποδεικνύεται ότι η μεταβίβαση της «καλής» Αγροτικής Τράπεζας της Ελλάδας (ΑΤΕ) στην Τράπεζα Πειραιώς κόστισε στο ελληνικό δημόσιο, εν μέσω κρίσης, περισσότερα από 9 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ. Ωστόσο, οι εκτιμήσεις της Τράπεζας της Ελλάδος («Έκθεση για την Ανακεφαλαιοποίηση και Αναδιάταξη του Ελληνικού Τραπεζικού Τομέα», Δεκέμβριος 2012), ήταν ότι απαιτούνταν 4,9 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ για την ανακεφαλαιοποίηση της ΑΤΕ, τα οποία θα μπορούσαν να φτάνουν και μόλις σε 3,8 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ αν συνυπολογίζονταν και οι υπεραξίες των μετοχών και των ομολόγων. Αν λοιπόν δεν είχε επιλεγεί η μεταβίβαση της «καλής» ΑΤΕ στην Τράπεζα Πειραιώς, αλλά η ανακεφαλαιοποίηση της Τράπεζας, θα υπήρχε σημαντική οικονομία πόρων του Ταμείου Χρηματοπιστωτικής Σταθερότητας και του έλληνα φορολογούμενου.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Γιατί επιλέχθηκε η λύση της μεταβίβασης της ΑΤΕ στην Τράπεζα Πειραιώς, αφού ήταν η πιο ακριβή λύση; Πώς κρίνει η Επιτροπή την απόφαση αυτή;

Ποιος είχε την ευθύνη για αυτή την επιλογή;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(2 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Η αρχή εξυγίανσης στην Ελλάδα που είναι υπεύθυνη για την εκτέλεση των μέτρων εξυγίανσης είναι η Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος.

Η Αγροτική Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος εξυγιάνθηκε σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 63Δ του νόμου 3601/2007. Η Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος, ως αρμόδια αρχή εξυγίανσης προβαίνει σε μια αρχική εκτίμηση του χρηματοδοτικού κενού με βάση συντηρητικές παραδοχές. Εν συνεχεία, διορίζεται ελεγκτής για να εκτιμήσει το χρηματοδοτικό κενό κατά την ημερομηνία της εξυγίανσης. Η εξυγίανση της Αγροτικής Τράπεζας της Ελλάδος πραγματοποιήθηκε σύμφωνα με τις δεσμεύσεις που συμφωνήθηκαν από τις ελληνικές αρχές βάσει του προγράμματος οικονομικής προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα, στο πλαίσιο της εφαρμοζόμενης χρηματοπιστωτικής πολιτικής.

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή επιθυμεί να παραπέμψει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου στην Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος για πιο αναλυτικές πληροφορίες σχετικά με την πραγματοποίηση της συγκεκριμένης συναλλαγής. Συμπληρωματικές πληροφορίες σχετικά με το εν εξελίξει πρόγραμμα οικονομικής προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα δημοσιεύονται στον δικτυακό τόπο της ECFIN:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009053/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Why was the expensive solution chosen for ATE?

Based on official closing data, which I previously included in my question Ε-005283/2013, the transfer of the ‘good’ Agricultural Bank of Greece (ATE) to Piraeus Bank cost the Greek state over EUR 9 billion, in the midst of a crisis. However, according to the estimates by the Bank of Greece (Report on the recapitalisation and restructuring of the Greek banking sector, December 2012), EUR 4.9 billion was needed in order to recapitalise ATE or, if capital gains on shares and bonds were included, just EUR 3.8 billion. If a choice had been made not to transfer the ‘good’ ATE to Piraeus Bank and to recapitalise the bank, considerable savings would have been made for the Financial Stability Fund and Greek taxpayers.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Why was the choice made to transfer ATE to Piraeus Bank, as it was the more expensive solution? How does the Commission rate that decision?

Who was responsible for that choice?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(2 September 2013)

The Resolution Authority of Greece responsible for executing resolution measures is the Bank of Greece.

Agricultural Bank of Greece was resolved according to Article 63D of Law 3601/2007. As such, the Bank of Greece as the relevant Resolution Authority performs an initial estimation of the funding gap based on conservative assumptions. Sequentially, an auditor is appointed to estimate the funding gap at the date of the resolution. The resolution of Agricultural Bank of Greece was conducted in line with the commitments agreed by the Hellenic authorities under the Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece, as part of the ongoing Financial Sector policy.

The European Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member of the European Parliament to the Bank of Greece for more detailed information of the specific transaction that was carried out. Additional information on the ongoing Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece can be found on the ECFIN publication website:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009054/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Καταγραφή επιδοτήσεων προϊόντων στις ελληνικές συγκοινωνιακές ΔΕΚΟ

Σύμφωνα με τον Κανονισμό ESA95, αλλά και την απάντηση (Ε-003754/2013), οι επιδοτήσεις προϊόντων κατατάσσονται στα έσοδα μιας κρατικής επιχείρησης, εφόσον αυτή χρηματοδοτείται κυρίως από τις πωλήσεις του προϊόντος ή της υπηρεσίας που προσφέρει, σε «οικονομικά σημαντικές τιμές», εφαρμόζοντας το κριτήριο του 50%. Επίσης, σύμφωνα πάλι με τον Κανονισμό ESA95 (D.319), οι «επιδοτήσεις σε δημόσιες επιχειρήσεις και οιονεί επιχειρήσεις για αντιστάθμιση των συνεχών ζημιών τις οποίες υφίστανται, όσον αφορά τις παραγωγικές δραστηριότητές τους, επειδή χρεώνουν τιμές που είναι χαμηλότερες από το μέσο κόστος παραγωγής, λόγω συγκεκριμένης κρατικής ή ευρωπαϊκής οικονομικής και κοινωνικής πολιτικής» αποτελούν και αυτές επιδοτήσεις προϊόντων.

Με δεδομένα τα παραπάνω, αλλά και

α) τον ελληνικό νόμο 2669/1998 που στο άρθρο 5 (παράγραφος 5) ορίζει για τις συγκοινωνιακές δημόσιες επιχειρήσεις ότι «η διαφορά μεταξύ του λειτουργικού κόστους και του καθοριζόμενου κάθε φορά κομίστρου, όπως αυτό προσδιορίζεται με την τιμολογιακή πολιτική, αποτελεί κοινωνική παροχή, η οποία αντισταθμίζεται με την καταβολή της διαφοράς από τον Κρατικό Προϋπολογισμό», καθώς και

β) το νόμο 3920/2011, όπου στο άρθρο 6 (παράγραφος 6, δ) ορίζει ότι «Ο ΟΑΣΑ λαμβάνει επιδότηση από τον Κρατικό Προϋπολογισμό για την κάλυψη του συνολικού ετήσιου λειτουργικού ελλείμματος των εταιρειών του Ομίλου ΟΑΣΑ, με βάση το παραγόμενο συγκοινωνιακό έργο και δείκτες έργου, κόστους και ποιότητας, στους οποίους περιλαμβάνονται υποχρεωτικώς τα ελάχιστα προσφερθέντα οχηματοχιλιόμετρα, το ανώτατο επιτρεπτό λειτουργικό κόστος ανά οχηματοχιλιόμετρο και ο κατώτερος επιτρεπτός βαθμός ικανοποίησης πελατείας, καθώς και οποιοιδήποτε άλλοι δείκτες εφαρμόζονται διεθνώς στα συγκοινωνιακά δεδομένα», ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Για ποιο λόγο, στις 15 Νοεμβρίου 2010, ταξινομήθηκαν στη Γενική Κυβέρνηση οι τρεις συγκοινωνιακές κρατικές επιχειρήσεις του Ομίλου ΟΑΣΑ, δηλαδή, ΗΣΑΠ, ΗΛΠΑΠ και ΕΘΕΛ;

Έγιναν οι σχετικές έρευνες στους ισολογισμούς τους, ώστε να ερευνηθεί η ισχύς του κριτηρίου του 50% για τις κρατικές θεσμικές μονάδες; Εάν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο αντιμετωπίστηκαν οι κρατικές επιδοτήσεις, οι οποίες, σύμφωνα με τον ESA95 και τους ελληνικούς νόμους, αποτελούν χωρίς καμία αμφιβολία επιδοτήσεις προϊόντων και επομένως καταγράφονται στα έσοδα των επιχειρήσεων;

Μπορεί να τις κοινοποιήσει, με δεδομένο ότι όλοι οι ισολογισμοί των εν λόγω εταιρειών είναι δημοσιευμένοι στο διαδίκτυο και αποτελούν δημόσιες επιχειρήσεις; Εμμένει η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή στη δικαιολογία του «στατιστικού απορρήτου»;

Απάντηση του κ. Šemeta εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(6 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Το 2010 η ELSTAT, εφαρμόζοντας τους υφιστάμενους στατιστικούς κανόνες (66), ταξινόμησε 17 ελεγχόμενους από το δημόσιο οργανισμούς, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των αναφερόμενων εταιρειών, στην ελληνική γενική κυβέρνηση. Οι αναταξινομηθείσες εταιρείες δημόσιων μεταφορών θεωρήθηκε ότι είναι μονάδες γενικής κυβέρνησης, επειδή, σύμφωνα με το κριτήριο του 50%, οι πωλήσεις τους σε ποσοστό λειτουργικού κόστους δεν υπερέβησαν το κατώφλι του 50% για μια παρατεταμένη περίοδο πριν από το έτος αξιολόγησης.

Σύμφωνα με τη νομοθεσία της Ένωσης (67), «οι επιδοτήσεις προϊόντων είναι εκείνες οι επιδοτήσεις που καταβάλλονται ανά μονάδα ενός αγαθού ή μιας υπηρεσίας που παράγεται ή εισάγεται». Σύμφωνα με το κριτήριο του 50%, οι πωλήσεις περιλαμβάνουν τις πληρωμές που έγιναν από τη γενική κυβέρνηση, μόνο αν οι εν λόγω πληρωμές συνδέονται με τον όγκο ή την αξία του παραγόμενου έργου. Οι πωλήσεις δεν περιλαμβάνουν πληρωμές που έγιναν από την κυβέρνηση για να καλύψουν ένα γενικό έλλειμμα που πραγματοποιήθηκε έως το τέλος του οικονομικού έτους ή πληρώθηκε ως σταθερό ποσό εκ των προτέρων (68).

Ο όμιλος ΟΑΣΑ και οι θυγατρικές του έλαβαν επιδοτήσεις που υπολογίστηκαν με έναν ειδικό τύπο που ορίζεται από τον νόμο (69) ο οποίος προβλέπει τετραμηνιαίες προπληρωμές με βάση την προβλεπόμενη ζημία για το έτος. Οι εν λόγω πληρωμές παραμένουν αμετάβλητες και ούτε ο ΟΑΣΑ δικαιούται να ζητήσει περισσότερη χρηματοδότηση στην περίπτωση αποτυχίας επίτευξης των στόχων του ούτε και το ελληνικό κράτος μπορεί να τη μειώσει, εάν υπάρχει υπέρβαση στους προκαθορισμένους στόχους.

Σημειώνεται ότι ο τύπος αυτός δεν βασίζεται στην ποσότητα του παραγόμενου έργου (αριθμός επιβατών), αλλά στην πρόβλεψη του ελλείμματος της εταιρείας.

Στοιχεία που συλλέγονται για στατιστικούς σκοπούς, τα οποία επιτρέπουν τον προσδιορισμό του προσώπου ή οικονομικού παράγοντα τον οποίο αφορούν τα στοιχεία, είναι εμπιστευτικά και προστατεύονται σύμφωνα με την ενωσιακή νομοθεσία.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009054/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Reporting subsidies on products in Greek public transport corporations and organisations

According to the ESA95 Regulation and reply Ε-003754/2013, subsidies on products are reported as revenue by a public corporation, provided that it is financed mainly from sales of the product or service which it provides at ‘economically significant prices’, to which the 50% criterion applies. Again in accordance with ESA95 (D.319) ‘subsidies to public undertakings and quasi-undertakings to offset continual losses sustained from their productive activities, because they charge prices which are below average production costs, due to a specific State or European economic and social policy’ are also subsidies on products.

In view of the above and the fact that:

Article 5(5) of Greek law 2669/1998 states for public transport corporations that ‘the difference between operating costs and the fares set from time to time under pricing policies is a social benefit which is offset by payment of the difference from the national budget’ and

Article 6(6)(d) of Law 3920/2011 states: ‘OASA shall receive a subsidy from the national budget in order to cover the total annual operating deficit of OASA Group companies, based on the public transport services provided and service, cost and quality indicators, which must include the minimum number of vehicle/km offered, the maximum permissible operating cost per vehicle/km and the minimum permissible degree of customer satisfaction, together with any other indicators applied internationally in public transport data’, will the Commission say:

Why were the three State-owned companies in the OASA Group (namely ESAP, ELPAPand ETHEL) classed under general government on 15 November 2010?

Were their balance sheets examined, in order to ascertain if the 50% criteria applied tothe State-owned institutional units? If so, how did they report State subsidies which,according to ESA95 and Greek laws, are without any shadow of a doubt subsidies onproducts and are thus reported under the company’s revenue?

Can it disclose them, given that all the accounts of the companies in question arepublished online and they are public corporations? Will the European Commission insiston the excuse of ‘statistical confidentiality’?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

In 2010, applying the existing statistical rules (70) ELSTAT classified 17 publicly controlled entities, including the mentioned companies, into the Greek general government. The reclassified public transportation companies were deemed to be general government units because, in accordance with the 50% criterion, their sales to operating costs ratio failed to exceed the 50% threshold for an extended period preceding the assessment year.

According to Union legislation (71)‘subsidies on products are subsidies payable per unit of a good or service produced or imported’. In accordance with the 50% criterion, sales include payments made by general government only if these payments are linked to the volume or value of output. Sales do not include payments made by government to cover an overall deficit realised by the end of a financial year or paid as a fixed amount ex-ante. (72)

The company OASA and its subsidiaries received subsidies calculated with a specific formula defined by Law (73) that provides for quarterly pre-payments based on the projected loss for the year. These payments remain unchanged and neither is OASA entitled to request more funding in the event of failure to achieve its objectives, nor can the Greek State reduce it if there is an overrun in the pre-determined objectives.

It is noted that this formula is not based on the quantity of output (number of passengers), but instead on the forecast of the deficit of the company.

Data collected for statistical purposes, which allow the person or economic operator concerned by the data to be identified, are confidential and shall be protected in accordance with Union legislation.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009055/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Χρηματοδότηση της εκπαίδευσης στην Ελλάδα

Σύμφωνα με πρόσφατη ανακοίνωση της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής για την εκπαίδευση (Ανασχεδιασμός της Εκπαίδευσης, 20.11.2012, COM(2012)0669), πολλές χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης έχουν προχωρήσει σε περικοπές μισθών των εκπαιδευτικών και, γενικότερα, της χρηματοδότησης των εκπαιδευτικών συστημάτων. Πιο συγκεκριμένα στην ανακοίνωση της Επιτροπής αναφέρεται ότι «το 2012 οι περισσότερες χώρες διατήρησαν τις ρυθμίσεις τους όσον αφορά τη χρηματοδότηση των μηχανισμών υποστήριξης για μαθητές και φοιτητές και/ή για τις οικογένειές τους. Από τις χώρες που διαθέτουν σχετικά στοιχεία, μόνο η Ισπανία, η Κύπρος και η Πορτογαλία ανέφεραν μείωση της χρηματοδότησης των διαθέσιμων μηχανισμών για την υποστήριξη των εκπαιδευομένων».

Με βάση τα ανωτέρω, καθώς επίσης και το γεγονός ότι η Ελλάδα βρίσκεται στον τρίτο χρόνο οικονομικής προσαρμογής, με τεράστιες περικοπές στις δημόσιες δαπάνες, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της εκπαίδευσης, με αποτέλεσμα η πλειοψηφία των σχολείων και των πανεπιστημίων να υπολειτουργούν, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Γνωρίζει ποιες είναι οι σωρευτικές μειώσεις (2009-2012) στους μισθούς των εκπαιδευτικών στην Ελλάδα και για τους τρεις κλάδους της εκπαίδευσης (πρωτοβάθμια, δευτεροβάθμια, τριτοβάθμια); Ποια είναι η σωρευτική μείωση (2009-2012) στις δαπάνες για την εκπαίδευση γενικά;

Όσον αφορά τη μείωση της χρηματοδότησης των μηχανισμών υποστήριξης για τους μαθητές και τους φοιτητές, γνωρίζει η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή ποια είναι η μείωση της χρηματοδότησης στην Ελλάδα; Πώς είναι δυνατόν να μην αναφέρεται στην παραπάνω έκθεση η μείωση της χρηματοδότησης των διαθέσιμων μηχανισμών για την υποστήριξη των εκπαιδευομένων, όταν την ίδια στιγμή η Ελλάδα βρίσκεται σε ένα αδιανόητο για δημοκρατική χώρα καθεστώς εποπτείας, στο οποίο η ελληνική κυβέρνηση ζητά την άδεια από την Τρόικα για κάθε ανάληψη δράσης της ή/και πολιτικής της;

Απάντηση της κ. Βασιλείου εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(19 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή έχει πλήρη επίγνωση των επιπτώσεων της οικονομικής κρίσης στις δημόσιες δαπάνες για την εκπαίδευση στα κράτη μέλη, συμπεριλαμβανόμενης της Ελλάδας, στην οποία ο δείκτης δαπανών για την εκπαίδευση σε σχέση με το ΑΕγχΠ παρέμεινε σχεδόν σταθερός καθόλη τη διάρκεια της κρίσης (δεδομένα COFOG, περίπου 4% του ΑΕγχΠ για την περίοδο 2008-11) (74)· επειδή όμως η σωρευτική απώλεια του ΑΕγχΠ ανήλθε στο 25% περίπου, οι δαπάνες για την παιδεία μειώθηκαν σε ανάλογο ποσοστό.

Όσον αφορά τους μισθούς των εκπαιδευτικών, από πρόσφατη μελέτη της Εurydice (75) προκύπτει ότι το 2012 οι ελληνικές δαπάνες για το ανθρώπινο δυναμικό μειώθηκαν σε σύγκριση με το προηγούμενο έτος κατά 24%, ως συνέπεια διάφορων μέτρων που ελήφθησαν από το 2010.

Όσον αφορά τις μειώσεις της χρηματοδότησης των μηχανισμών υποστήριξης για τους μαθητές, στην έκθεση αναφέρεται ότι καταβάλλονται προσπάθειες να διατηρηθεί η υποστήριξη για επιδότηση στέγασης, γευμάτων ή μεταφοράς, αλλά η κρίση ενδέχεται να είχε σημαντικές επιπτώσεις σε τοπικό επίπεδο (π.χ. στην παροχή υπηρεσιών εστίασης από ορισμένους δήμους).

Η Επιτροπή κατανοεί το γεγονός ότι οι χαμηλές δημόσιες επενδύσεις δυσχεραίνουν την επίτευξη των εθνικών στόχων στο πλαίσιο της στρατηγικής «Ευρώπη 2020» (π.χ. σχετικά με την πρόωρη εγκατάλειψη του σχολείου, την φοίτηση στην τριτοβάθμια εκπαίδευση) και ότι, όπως επισημάνθηκε στην ετήσια επισκόπηση της ανάπτυξης (ΕΕΑ) τόσο του 2012 όσο και του 2013, οι επενδύσεις στην εκπαίδευση και επαγγελματική κατάρτιση είναι σημαντικές για τη στήριξη της μακροπρόθεσμης βιώσιμης ανάπτυξης στην Ελλάδα. Οι ελληνικές αρχές λαμβάνουν μέτρα για τον εξορθολογισμό και τη βελτίωση του συστήματός τους και για την αντιμετώπιση των προκλήσεων από την άποψη της ποιότητας, της αποτελεσματικότητας και της αποδοτικότητας με την εφαρμογή του σχεδίου δράσης για την παιδεία.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009055/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Financing education in Greece

According to a recent Commission communication on education (Rethinking Education, 20 November 2012, COM(2012)0669), numerous countries in the European Union have applied salary cuts for teachers and to funding in general for education systems. In fact, the Commission communication states that ‘in 2012, the majority of countries maintained their arrangements regarding the funding of support mechanisms for pupils and students and/or their families. From the countries with available data, only Spain, Cyprus and Portugal reported a decrease in the funding of available schemes for support of people in education’.

In view of the above and the fact that Greece is in its third year of economic adjustment, involving huge cuts to public spending, including on education, with the result that the majority of schools and universities are operating below par, will the Commission say:

Does it know what cumulative cuts (2009-2012) have been made to salaries for teachers in Greece in all three education sectors (primary, secondary, higher)? What is the cumulative cut (2009-2012) in spending on education in general?

As regards the cut to funding for support mechanisms for pupils and students, does the European Commission know what cut to funding has been made in Greece? Why does the above report not refer to cuts in funding for available mechanisms to support people in education when, at the same time, Greece is under a supervisory regime which is unheard of in a democratic country, with the Greek Government asking permission from the Troika every time it wishes to take action and/or adopt a policy?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2013)

The European Commission is fully aware of the impact of the economic crisis on public spending on education in Member States, including Greece. There the ratio of education expenditure to GDP remained almost stable throughout the crisis (COFOG data, ca. 4% of GDP for the period 2008-11) (76), but since the cumulative GDP loss was of ca. 25%, spending on education has decreased by a similar proportion.

As to teacher salaries, a recent Eurydice study (77) shows that in 2012 Greek spending on human resources compared with the previous year fell by 24%, reflecting a number of measures taken as of 2010.

As regards reductions in pupil support programmes, the report states that there has been an effort to maintain support for subsidised accommodation, meals or transport, but the crisis might have had an important impact locally (e.g. in the provision of catering services by some municipalities).

The Commission understands the fact that low public investment makes the achievement of national Europe 2020 strategy targets (e.g. on early school leaving, tertiary attainment) difficult and that, as pointed out in both the 2012 and 2013 Annual Growth Surveys (AGS) investment in education and training is crucial to support long-term sustainable growth in Greece. The Greek authorities are taking steps to rationalise and improve their system and to address challenges in terms of quality, effectiveness and efficiency through implementation of the action plan on education.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009056/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Μελλοντικό κούρεμα του ελληνικού χρέους που κατέχει ο επίσημος τομέας

Πολλά ερωτηματικά έχει προκαλέσει η «μυστική» έκθεση του ΔΝΤ που διέρρευσε σε μέσα ενημέρωσης το Μάιο του 2013, με την οποία παίρνει ουσιαστικά αποστάσεις από τις οικονομικές πολιτικές που επιβάλλει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση στο Πρόγραμμα Προσαρμογής της Ελλάδας. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, στην έκθεση αναφέρονται οι ανησυχίες που εξέφραζε το Ταμείο σχετικά με τη βιωσιμότητα του ελληνικού χρέους το 2010, επιρρίπτοντας ευθύνες στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή και στα κράτη μέλη της Ευρωζώνης για την καθυστερημένη λήψη της απόφασης για κούρεμα των ελληνικών ομολόγων.

Οι ίδιες ανησυχίες για τη βιωσιμότητα του ελληνικού χρέους εκφράζονται και σε νέα, επίσημη αυτή τη φορά, μελέτη του ΔΝΤ (Debt Sustainability Analysis — January 2013), στην οποία ζητά να ληφθούν συγκεκριμένα μέτρα από την ελληνική κυβέρνηση και τους επίσημους πιστωτές της, ώστε το 2022, το συσσωρευμένο κρατικό χρέος της Ελλάδας να βρίσκεται κάτω από 110% του ΑΕΠ, όταν, για το 2020, υπολογίζεται ότι θα φτάσει στο 124% του ΑΕΠ.

Απαντώντας στο ΔΝΤ ο Επίτροπος Οικονομικών και Νομισματικών Υποθέσεων, κ. Ρεν, ανέφερε ότι «δεν νομίζω ότι είναι δίκαιο το Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο να νίπτει τας χείρας του, πετώντας το βρόμικο νερό στους ευρωπαϊκούς ώμους».

Με δεδομένα τα παραπάνω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Έχουν εξεταστεί οι ανησυχίες που εκφράζονται από το ΔΝΤ για τη βιωσιμότητα του ελληνικού χρέους την επόμενη δεκαετία; Εάν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο θα επιτευχθεί η μείωση του συσσωρευμένου κρατικού χρέους κάτω από το 110% του ΑΕΠ το 2022; Εάν όχι, με ποιο τρόπο η Επιτροπή κάνει χρήση της λεγόμενης «τεχνογνωσίας» του ΔΝΤ σε προγράμματα οικονομικής προσαρμογής, για την οποία υποτίθεται ότι κλήθηκε να συνεισφέρει στην ελληνική και ευρωπαϊκή κρίση χρέους;

Έχει εξετάσει εναλλακτικά σενάρια για να καταστεί το ελληνικό χρέος βιώσιμο; Έχει μελετήσει το ενδεχόμενο κουρέματος του ελληνικού χρέους που κατέχει ο επίσημος τομέας (κράτη μέλη Ευρωζώνης, ESM, ΕΚΤ); Εάν όχι, προτίθεται να το πράξει μετά τις γερμανικές εκλογές;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(28 Αυγούστου 2013)

Η τρίτη αναθεώρηση του 2ου προγράμματος προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα, ολοκληρώθηκε τον Ιούλιο. Το Συμβούλιο διαπίστωσε ότι η δυναμική του χρέους της Ελλάδας είναι σε γενικές γραμμές αμετάβλητη σε σύγκριση με τον Δεκέμβριο του 2012. Ο δείκτης του χρέους προς το ΑΕΠ προβλέπεται να ακολουθήσει και πάλι πτωτική τροχιά το 2014 και να μειωθεί σε επίπεδα χαμηλότερα του 120% το 2021, εφόσον το πρόγραμμα οικονομικής προσαρμογής εξακολουθήσει να υλοποιείται στο ακέραιο. Τα σενάρια προσομοίωσης ακραίων καταστάσεων επιβεβαιώνουν ότι το χρέος θα μειωθεί αισθητά σε σχέση με τα σημερινά επίπεδα με βάση τα περισσότερα σενάρια. Σε περίπτωση συνδυασμού αρνητικών εξελίξεων το χρέος αρχικά θα μειωθεί, αλλά κατόπιν θα σταθεροποιηθεί σε ένα πολύ υψηλό επίπεδο.

Όπως αναφέρθηκε σε δήλωση της Ευρωομάδας στις 21 Φεβρουαρίου 2012, οι εταίροι της ζώνης του ευρώ είναι αποφασισμένοι να παράσχουν επαρκή στήριξη στην Ελλάδα τόσο κατά τη διάρκεια του τρέχοντος προγράμματος όσο και μετά το πέρας αυτού, έως ότου η χώρα αποκτήσει και πάλι πρόσβαση στην αγορά, με προϋπόθεση την πλήρη συμμόρφωση της Ελλάδας με τις απαιτήσεις και τους στόχους του προγράμματος προσαρμογής. Όπως αναφέρθηκε σε δήλωση της Ευρωομάδας τον Νοέμβριο του 2012, τυχόν πρόσθετα μέτρα θα πρέπει να ληφθούν «… όταν η Ελλάδα καταλήξει να έχει ετήσιο πρωτογενές πλεόνασμα, όπως προβλέπεται στο ισχύον ΜΣ, υπό την προϋπόθεση της πλήρους εφαρμογής όλων των όρων που περιλαμβάνονται στο πρόγραμμα …». Η Ευρωομάδα επανέλαβε τη δέσμευση αυτή τον Δεκέμβριο του 2012.

Ως εκ τούτου, μολονότι αναγνωρίζουμε ότι εξακολουθούν να υφίστανται κίνδυνοι, πιστεύουμε ότι είναι πρόωρο να συζητηθεί η περαιτέρω ελάφρυνση του χρέους της Ελλάδας σε αυτό το στάδιο. Αντίθετα, πρέπει να δοθεί έμφαση στον τρόπο με τον οποίο θα δημιουργηθούν ισχυρότερα κίνητρα για τις διαρθρωτικές μεταρρυθμίσεις που απαιτούνται για την προαγωγή της οικονομικής μεγέθυνσης και της απασχόλησης.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009056/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Future haircut to Greek debt held by official sector

The ‘secret’ IMF report leaked to the media in May 2013, in which it basically distances itself from the economic policies imposed by the European Union in the adjustment programme for Greece, has given rise to numerous questions. In fact, the report refers to the concerns expressed by the Fund about the sustainability of the Greek debt in 2010 and blames the European Commission and the Member States of the euro area for the delay in taking the decision to apply a haircut to Greek bonds.

The same concerns about the sustainability of the Greek debt are expressed in a new — official — IMF report (Debt Sustainability Analysis — January 2013), in which it calls for the Greek Government and its official creditors to take specific measures so that, by 2022, Greece’s accrued national debt is below 110% of GDP, when it is expected to be 124% of GDP in 2020.

In reply to the IMF, the Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, Mr Rein, said: ‘I don’t think that it’s fair for the International Monetary Fund to wash its hands and throw the dirty water on European shoulders’.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Have the concerns expressed by the IMF about the sustainability of the Greek debt over the coming decade been examined? If so, how will it achieve a reduction in the accrued national debt to below 110% of GDP in 2022?If not, how is the Commission making use of the IMF’s so-called ‘expertise’ in economic adjustment programmes, given that it supposedly contributed to the Greek and European debt crisis?

Has it examined alternative ways of making the Greek debt sustainable? Has it considered the possibility of a haircut to the Greek debt held by the official sector (Member States of the euro area, ESM, ECB)?If not, does it intend to do so after the German elections?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(28 August 2013)

The 3rd review of the 2nd adjustment programme for Greece was concluded in July. It established that Greece's debt dynamics is broadly unchanged compared to December 2012. The debt-to-GDP ratio is forecast to resume a declining path in 2014 and should become lower than 120% by 2021, assuming that the economic adjustment programme continues to be fully implemented. The stress-test scenarios confirm that the debt would perceptibly decline from its current levels in most scenarios. Under a combined negative shock the debt would decline initially, but stabilise at a very high level.

As was stated by the Eurogroup on February 21, 2012, euro area partners are committed to providing adequate support to Greece during the life of the program and beyond until Greece has regained market access, provided that Greece fully complies with the requirements and objectives of the adjustment program. As stated by the Eurogroup in November 2012, any additional measure should be taken ‘… when Greece reaches an annual primary surplus, as envisaged in the current MoU, conditional on full implementation of all conditions contained in the programme …’. The Eurogroup reaffirmed this commitment in December 2012.

Hence, while we do recognise that risks remain, we believe that it is premature to discuss further debt relief for Greece at this stage. By contrast, the focus should be on how to create stronger incentives for structural reforms which are needed to promote economic growth and employment.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009057/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Tεράστια προβλήματα για τους πολίτες που είχαν εκκρεμείς υποθέσεις με τον ΟΕΚ — Περιπτώσεις στην Αχαΐα και στο Πλατύ Ημαθίας

Το Μάρτιο του 2012, με το Μνημόνιο μεταξύ Ελλάδας και Τρόικας επιβλήθηκε, μεταξύ άλλων, και η κατάργηση του Οργανισμού Εργατικής Κατοικίας (ΟΕΚ). Σε προηγούμενες ερωτήσεις μου (P-002348/2012, P-002379/2012) η Επιτροπή απάντησε ρητά ότι «θα τηρηθούν οι υφιστάμενες συμβατικές υποχρεώσεις» και ότι «οι ελληνικές αρχές έχουν συστήσει μια προσωρινή επιτροπή που είναι αρμόδια για τον καθορισμό των κανόνων διευθέτησης των εκκρεμών υποχρεώσεων και δικαιωμάτων καθώς και οποιουδήποτε άλλου νομικού κεκτημένου των δύο καταργηθέντων φορέων».

Όμως, ενάμιση χρόνο μετά, τα προβλήματα που έχουν δημιουργηθεί είναι τεράστια για τους πολίτες που είχαν εκκρεμείς υποθέσεις με τον ΟΕΚ. Αναφέρω ενδεικτικά τις εξής περιπτώσεις:

Όσο ο ΟΕΚ ήταν εν λειτουργία, εγκρίθηκαν επισκευαστικά δάνεια τα οποία, προκειμένου ο οργανισμός να δανειοδοτήσει, ζήτησε με έξοδα των ενδιαφερομένων να εγγραφούν υποθήκες στο δανειοδοτούμενο ακίνητο, υπέρ του οργανισμού και στο ύψος του αιτούμενου δανείου. Όταν ξαφνικά έπαυσε η λειτουργία του ΟΕΚ, βρέθηκαν πολίτες που, ενώ δεν είχαν δανειοδοτηθεί, έχουν υποθηκευμένες τις περιούσιες υπέρ του ΟΕΚ. Μόνο στην Αχαΐα έχουν καταμετρηθεί επτά (7) περιπτώσεις. Μέχρι σήμερα δεν υπάρχει, τουλάχιστον για την Πάτρα, οποιαδήποτε Αρχή που να μπορεί αρμοδίως να εκδώσει βεβαίωση που να πιστοποιεί ότι δεν οφείλουν στον οργανισμό, ώστε να αρθούν οι υποθήκες.

Στο Πλατύ Ημαθίας είχαν κατασκευαστεί 80 εργατικές κατοικίες και σχετικοί κοινόχρηστοι χώροι με προϋπολογισμό 6 976 250 ευρώ. Παρά το γεγονός ότι, από το τέλος του 2008, έχουν επιλεγεί οι οικογένειες στις οποίες θα εδίδοντο οι κατοικίες αυτές, μέχρι σήμερα δεν τους έχουν αποδοθεί. Ενώ λοιπόν τα σπίτια έχουν ολοκληρωθεί, παραμένουν ακατοίκητα, με αποτέλεσμα να υφίστανται συνεχώς φθορές και βανδαλισμούς.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Γνωρίζει τα παραπάνω; Γνωρίζει αν η προσωρινή επιτροπή έχει στην πράξη αναλάβει τα καθήκοντά της και αν διευθετεί τις νομικές εκκρεμείς υποχρεώσεις απέναντι στους πολίτες;

Προτίθεται να παρέμβει προς την ελληνική κυβέρνηση;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(26 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει τη δυσχερή οικονομική κατάσταση των νοικοκυριών στην Ελλάδα και τη σημασία της στέγασης για την ευημερία των νοικοκυριών. Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει ότι κατ' αρχήν οι υφιστάμενες συμβατικές υποχρεώσεις του ΟΕΚ θα εξακολουθούν να τηρούνται ακόμη και εάν δεν αναληφθούν νέες δεσμεύσεις. Η Επιτροπή δεν γνωρίζει τις λεπτομέρειες για τις δραστηριότητες της προσωρινής επιτροπής που είναι αρμόδια για τον καθορισμό των εκκρεμών υποχρεώσεων και δικαιωμάτων, καθώς και οποιουδήποτε άλλου νομικού κεκτημένου ή συμβατικής σχέσης του ΟΕΚ. Ειδικά ερωτήματα σχετικά με τις δραστηριότητες της επιτροπής μπορούν να απευθύνονται στις ελληνικές αρχές.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009057/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Huge problems for citizens with cases pending before the OEK — cases in Achaia and Platy (Imathia)

Under the Memorandum with Greece dated March 2012, the Troika insisted, among other things, on the abolition of the Social Housing Organisation (OEK).The Commission expressly stated, in reply to previous questions by me (P-002348/2012 and P-002379/2012), that ‘existing contractual obligations will be respected’ and that ‘the Greek authorities have set a temporary administrative committee in charge of setting the operational modalities for rules for the settlement of outstanding operational obligations and rights, as well as of any other necessary and vested legal relationship of the two abolished entities’.

However, eighteen months later, huge problems have arisen for citizens with cases pending before the OEK. The following are examples:

While the OEK was operational, when loans for repairs were approved, the organisation asked interested parties to register a mortgage on the property for which a loan was approved at their own expense, for the benefit of the organisation and for the amount of the loan requested. When the OEK suddenly ceased to operate, there were some citizens who had no loans but who had mortgaged their property for the benefit of the OEK. In Achaia alone, seven (7) cases have been reported. To date, there is no Authority, at least not for Patras, which has powers to issue confirmation that they have no debt to the organisation, so that the mortgages can be deleted.

In Platy (Imathia), 80 social dwellings and associated common parts have been constructed at a cost of EUR 6 976 250.Despite the fact that the families allocated to these homes were selected by the end of 2008, they have yet to take possession. The homes have been completed but are still unoccupied and are deteriorating and being vandalised.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Is it aware of this problem? Does it know if the temporary committee has in fact assumed its responsibilities and if it is settling outstanding legal obligations towards these citizens?

Does it intend to intervene with the Greek Government?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the difficult financial situation of households in Greece and of the importance of housing can be for the well-being of households. The Commission is aware of the principle that the existing contractual obligations of OEK would still be respected even if no new commitments would be assumed. The Commission is not aware of the detailed activities carried out by the temporary administrative committee in charge of setting the outstanding operational obligations and rights, as well as of any other necessary and vested legal or contractual relationship of OEK. Specific questions on the activities carried out by the committee can be addressed to the Greek authorities.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009058/13

alla Commissione

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(25 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Allarmante moria di pesci verificatasi nella laguna di Venezia a causa di un possibile inquinamento delle acque

Da circa metà luglio 2013 a Venezia si è iniziato a percepire un odore terribile e l'acqua della laguna ha acquistato un colore marrone, quasi nero (78). In un primo momento il fenomeno si è manifestato all'altezza del ponte della Libertà, il ponte che collega Venezia alla terraferma, poco distante da Porto Marghera. Dalla notte fra venerdì 19 luglio 2013 e sabato 20 luglio 2013 tale fenomeno si è ulteriormente diffuso e sono stati avvistati migliaia di pesci morti galleggianti in alcune aree della laguna centrale. Nella mattinata del 20 luglio 2013 numerosissimi pesci in decomposizione, compresi anguille e granchi, sono apparsi nei canali interni del centro storico della città, incluso il Canal Grande (79). Significativo il fatto che nemmeno i gabbiani mangino questi pesci, benché costituiscano il loro cibo abituale. I pescatori locali, che sono stati i primi ad accorgersi dell'anomalia, dichiarano di non aver mai visto un fenomeno simile (80).

I cittadini veneziani riportano uno spettacolo terrificante, con un odore insopportabile diffuso la mattina del 21 luglio 2013 ed avvistamenti di pesci galleggianti con le interiora esposte. Il 21 luglio, tuttavia, l'acqua della laguna appare abbastanza «pulita» poiché nel frattempo sono raccolte 5 tonnellate di pesce marcio da parte di Veritas (Veneziana energia risorse idriche territorio ambiente servizi S.p.A.), l'azienda erogatrice di servizi ambientali al Comune di Venezia, ma l'odore e il nero dell'acqua restano. Altri 10 quintali di pesce marcio sono raccolti da Veritas il 22 luglio 2013.

Il Comune di Venezia e l'Agenzia regionale per la prevenzione e protezione ambientale del Veneto (ARPAV) hanno invitato la popolazione alla calma, in quanto il fenomeno sarebbe legato a cause naturali: la proliferazione anomala di alghe allogene, dovuta a fattori ambientali quali abbondanti piogge primaverili e caldo, con conseguente anossia (81). La popolazione però è perplessa, vista l'entità del fenomeno, e alcuni cittadini hanno già avviato una raccolta di fondi per commissionare privatamente le analisi di campioni di pesce morto e dell'acqua della laguna (82). Nel frattempo, la Procura della Repubblica di Venezia ha aperto un fascicolo d'inchiesta.

1.

La Commissione è al corrente di questo grave caso di inquinamento e della moria di pesci a Venezia?

2.

La Commissione non intende chiedere tempestivamente chiarimenti alle autorità locali venete su tale scempio ambientale, scongiurando così ogni possibile ripercussione sulla salute dei cittadini e sull'ecosistema, ed evitando il propagarsi di questo preoccupante fenomeno?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(18 settembre 2013)

La Commissione non era stata informata della recente moria di pesci a Venezia riferita dall'onorevole deputato. Prende atto dell'iniziativa della Procura veneziana di avviare un'inchiesta sul presente fenomeno e attende l'esito di tale inchiesta per valutare se saranno necessari ulteriori interventi.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009058/13

to the Commission

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Alarming fish mortality in the Venice lagoon, due to possible water pollution

Since around mid-July 2013 Venice has begun to notice an awful smell and the water of the lagoon has turned a brown colour that is almost black (83). At first, the problem occurred at the Ponte della Libertà, the bridge that connects Venice to the mainland, not far from Porto Marghera. From the night between Friday, 19 July 2013 and Saturday, 20 July 2013, the problem spread further and thousands of dead fish were seen floating in certain areas of the central lagoon. On the morning of 20 July 2013, numerous decaying fish, including eels and crabs, appeared in the internal channels of the city’s historic centre, including the Grand Canal (84). It is significant that not even the seagulls are eating these fish, even though they are their usual food. Local fishermen, who were the first to notice the problem, say they have never seen anything like it. (85)

Venetian citizens have reported a horrific sight, with an overpowering smell which spread throughout the city on the morning of 21 July 2013 and sightings of fish floating with their innards exposed. On 21 July, however, the water of the lagoon appeared to be fairly ‘clean’ because, in the meantime, Veritas (Veneziana energia risorse idriche territorio ambiente servizi S.p.A.) — the company which provides environmental services to the City of Venice — had collected 5 tonnes of rotting fish, but the smell and the black water remained. Another 1000 kg of rotting fish were collected by Veritas on 22 July 2013.

The City of Venice and the Veneto Regional Agency for Environmental Prevention and Protection (ARPAV) have appealed for calm, since the phenomenon is apparently due to natural causes: the abnormal proliferation of alien algae, due to environmental factors such as abundant spring rains and heat, resulting in anoxia (oxygen deficiency) (86). The locals, however, are puzzled, given the extent of the phenomenon, and some people have already started raising funds in order to privately commission tests on samples of dead fish and on the water of the lagoon (87). Meanwhile, the Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Venice has opened an investigation.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this serious case of pollution and fish die-offs in Venice?

2.

Will the Commission not promptly ask the local authorities in Venice for clarification on this environmental destruction, to avoid any possible repercussions on public health and the ecosystem, and to prevent the spread of this worrying phenomenon?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

The Commission has not been informed about this recent fish death incident in Venice. It takes note of the public prosecutor's initiative to launch an investigation into the present incident and will await the results of the investigation before assessing the need for further action.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009059/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(25 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Contratação de professores em Portugal

Os dados disponíveis sobre professores contratados indicam-nos que existem 37 565 professores contratados com 4 ou mais anos de serviço e 11 526 com 10 ou mais anos de serviço. Como é sabido, estes professores trabalham ano após ano com vínculos precários, sem certezas em relação à sua contratação após um ano e em condições desfavoráveis em relação aos professores que estão no quadro, nomeadamente no que se refere aos níveis salariais, opções de escolha do horário de trabalho, proteção social, entre outros aspetos.

Esta semana foi anunciado que, no âmbito do concurso nacional externo de contratação de professores, apenas 3 professores conseguiram lugar nos quadros, num universo de 45 431 professores candidatos.

A Diretiva 1999/70/CE de 28 de junho de 1999 estabelece um acordo relativo a contratos de trabalho a termo, tendo estabelecidos princípios de não discriminação (artigo 4.°) e disposições para evitar os abusos (artigo 5.°).

Os números supracitados demonstram que o recrutamento de professores contratados é efetuado para assegurar necessidades permanentes das instituições de ensino.

Assim, pergunto à Comissão que análise faz da situação, nomeadamente à luz da leitura da Diretiva supramencionada.

Resposta dada por László Andor em nome da Comissão

(5 de setembro de 2013)

Remete-se o Senhor Deputado para a resposta da Comissão à pergunta escrita E-1291/2013 (88). A Comissão já enviou uma carta de notificação para cumprir às autoridades portuguesas em 30 de setembro de 2011. E, em 1 de outubro de 2012, foi enviada uma carta de notificação para cumprir complementar, abrangendo outras questões que surgiram durante as investigações dos serviços da Comissão. Os serviços estão a concluir a análise das respostas prestadas pelas autoridades nacionais, bem como o material contido em várias queixas e uma petição. Uma vez concluída a avaliação, serão tomadas as medidas adequadas no quadro das competências da Comissão, a fim de garantir a correta aplicação do direito da UE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009059/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Employment of teachers in Portugal

Available data on contract teachers in Portugal show that 37 565 teachers have been on temporary contracts for four or more years and that 11 526 have been similarly employed for 10 or more years. These teachers work year after year in precarious circumstances, without any certainty that their contracts will be renewed at the end of each year and under less favourable conditions than permanent teachers, particularly with regard to salaries, social protection and being able to choose their working hours, among other aspects.

This week it was announced that only three teachers obtained permanent teaching posts in this year’s national external competition for the admission of teachers, out of a total of 45 431 teachers who applied.

Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 establishes an agreement on fixed-term contracts, laying down principles of non-discrimination (Article 4) and provisions to prevent abuse (Article 5).

The figures quoted above show that contract teachers are employed in order to cover permanent needs in the educational system.

How does the Commission view this situation, particularly in light of the abovementioned directive?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

The Honourable Member is referred to the answer by the Commission to Written Question E-1291/2013 (89). The Commission already sent a letter of formal notice to the Portuguese authorities on 30 September 2011. A supplementary letter of formal notice, covering further issues arising during the Commission services' investigations, was sent on 1 October 2012. The services are completing their analysis of the replies provided by the national authorities together with the material contained in various complaints and a petition. Upon completion of this assessment, the appropriate action will be taken in line with the competence of the Commission in ensuring the correct application of EC law.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009060/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(25 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Cortes financeiros na educação em Portugal

Na resposta de 5 de julho dada pela Comissária Vassiliou à pergunta E-005273/2013, é afirmado que «a Comissão considera que há que salvaguardar um nível adequado de investimento na qualidade da educação e da formação, especialmente em tempos de dificuldade económica. E que, no respetivo processo de consolidação orçamental, os Estados-Membros devem privilegiar e, sempre que possível, reforçar o investimento em domínios que contribuem para o crescimento, tais como a educação, a investigação, a inovação e a energia».

No acordo negociado entre o Governo português e a troica para o futuro corte da despesa pública de 4 700 milhões de euros, prevê-se o despedimento de dezenas de milhares de trabalhadores da função pública, entre os quais, previsivelmente, professores e outros funcionários do setor da educação.

Nos últimos dois anos saíram das escolas portuguesas mais de 25 mil professores do ensino básico e secundário, entre aposentações e despedimentos de docentes contratados, resultantes dos cortes na educação acordados entre o governo nacional e a troica. Esses professores não estão a ser substituídos, o que está a provocar um défice na qualidade da educação e a criar difíceis condições para o funcionamento das escolas.

Desta modo, pergunto à Comissão se, na próxima avaliação da troica em Portugal, defenderá mais cortes na área da educação.

Resposta dada por Olli Rehn em nome da Comissão

(30 de setembro de 2013)

A Comissão considera a educação um instrumento fundamental que contribui não só para reduzir as desigualdades, mas constitui igualmente o principal fator subjacente a um crescimento económico sustentável a longo prazo.

Segundo diversas fontes internacionais, o rácio aluno/professor nos ensinos primário e secundário em Portugal continua a ser baixo quando comparado com outros países da UE (90), embora os professores portugueses trabalhem praticamente o mesmo número de horas por semana do que a média na UE (91). Além disso, a despesa pública global com a remuneração dos empregados na educação em relação ao rendimento per capita em Portugal continua a ser uma das mais elevadas na UE.

No que respeita aos resultados do sistema de ensino português, tem havido melhorias notáveis, por exemplo nas competências básicas (92) e ao nível da redução do abandono escolar precoce.

Continua a existir no entanto, uma grande margem para introduzir melhorias (93), e o sistema de ensino em Portugal ainda necessita, portanto, de reformas. Os custos devem ser controlados de perto e reforçada a eficiência do conjunto do sistema. No quadro do Programa de Ajustamento Económico, está a ser implementada uma série de reformas essenciais a um ritmo satisfatório.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009060/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Spending cuts in education in Portugal

In her answer to Written Question E-005273/2013, dated 5 July 2013, Commissioner Vassiliou said that ‘the Commission believes that maintaining an adequate level of investment in quality education and training needs to be safeguarded, especially in times of economic difficulty; and that in conducting fiscal consolidation, Member States should give priority to, and strengthen where possible, investment in growth-friendly areas such as education, research, innovation and energy’.

The agreement reached between the Portuguese Government and the Troika on EUR 4.7 billion in public spending cuts calls for the dismissal of tens of thousands of workers from the public sector, a measure which is likely to include teachers and other education sector employees.

During the last two years, Portuguese schools have lost over 25 000 primary and secondary teachers as a result of retirement and termination of contracts arising from the education cuts agreed between the Portuguese Government and the Troika. These teachers are not being replaced, a situation which is affecting the quality of education and making it difficult for schools to function properly.

I therefore wish to ask the Commission whether it intends, in the context of the Troika’s next review of the situation in Portugal, to call for further cuts in education.

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2013)

The Commission considers education an essential instrument which not only contributes to a reduction in inequalities but is also a main factor behind sustainable economic long-term growth.

According to information from several international data sources, the student/teacher ratio in primary and secondary schools in Portugal continues to be low when compared with other EU countries (94), while teachers in Portugal teach a similar amount of hours per week than, on average, in the EU. (95) In addition, overall public expenditure on compensation of employees in education relative to per capita income in Portugal is still one of the highest in the EU.

With regard to the outcomes of the Portuguese education system, there have been remarkable improvements, for example in basic skills (96) and in the reduction of early school leaving.

However, the scope for improvement remains large (97), and the education system in Portugal therefore continues to be in need of reform. Costs must be closely controlled and the efficiency of the overall system needs to be increased. In the framework of the economic adjustment programme, a number of crucial reforms are being implemented at a satisfactory pace.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009061/13

an die Kommission

Ismail Ertug (S&D)

(25. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Überarbeitung der TSI Lärm

Im Rahmen der aktuellen Überarbeitung der TSI Lärm hat die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur im Februar 2013 einen ersten Entwurf veröffentlicht.

1.

Wie bewertet die Kommission den aktuellen Stand der Geräuschgrenzwertentwicklung im vorliegenden Entwurf?

2.

Gibt es im Rahmen der von der Kommission im Mai 2013 veranlassten Studie bereits Ergebnisse darüber, ob sich der Anwendungsbereich der TSI Lärm auf existierende Fahrzeuge ausweiten lässt?

3.

Teilt die Kommission die Auffassung, dass ein akuter Bedarf besteht, die Lärmschutzpolitik viel stärker in die europäische Schienengesetzgebung einzubinden?

4.

Wie bewertet die Kommission den Vorschlag, Geräuschgrenzwerte im Schienenverkehr, ähnlich wie bei Straßenfahrzeugen, im Rahmen des ordentlichen Gesetzgebungsverfahrens zu erlassen?

Antwort von Herrn Kallas im Namen der Kommission

(10. September 2013)

1.

Die Kommission ist über die Arbeiten der Europäischen Eisenbahnagentur zur anstehenden Änderung der technischen Spezifikation für die Interoperabilität über Lärmemissionen (TSI

„Lärm“) unterrichtet. Sie wird die diesbezügliche Empfehlung der Agentur aber erst dann bewerten, wenn sie offiziell vorgelegt wurde.

2.

Die Studie befindet sich noch im Anfangsstadium und die Frage einer eventuellen Ausweitung des Anwendungsbereichs der TSI

„Lärm“ auf bereits existierende Fahrzeuge ist bisher noch nicht behandelt worden. Bei der Studie und der aktuellen Überarbeitung der TSI „Lärm“ handelt es sich um zwei verschiedene Vorgänge.

3.

Die Kommission stellt fest, dass der Schienenlärm in einigen Mitgliedstaaten ein akutes Problem darstellt, in anderen dagegen kaum oder gar keine Rolle spielt. Die infrage 2 angesprochene Studie soll dabei helfen, unter Berücksichtigung dieser Unterschiede Aufschluss darüber zu geben, welcher Ansatz auf EU-Ebene am ehesten verfolgt werden sollte.

4.

„Lärm“ ist ein zu den Teilsystemen gehörender Bereich, in dem im Rahmen der Eisenbahninteroperabilitätsrichtlinie (98) die technischen Parameter von Schienenfahrzeugen harmonisiert werden. Wie bei den übrigen Teilsystemen erfolgt die Regelung im Wege von Rechtsakten der Kommission. Diese werden nach dem Regelungsverfahren mit Kontrolle erlassen, das nach Auffassung der Kommission gut funktioniert.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009061/13

to the Commission

Ismail Ertug (S&D)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Revision of the TSI Noise

In February 2013, the European Railway Agency presented a first draft in the context of the current revision of the TSI Noise.

1.

What is the Commission’s assessment of the current state of play with regard to developing limit values for noise in the Agency’s draft?

2.

Has the study which the Commission commissioned in May 2013 already yielded any findings as to whether the scope of the TSI Noise can be extended to existing rolling stock?

3.

Does the Commission agree that there is an acute need to assign noise control policy a far greater role in European rail legislation?

4.

What is the Commission’s assessment of the proposal that noise limit values for rail transport should be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, as is the case for road vehicles?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 2013)

1. The Commission is aware of the ongoing work of the European Railway Agency on the future revision of the technical specification for interoperability relating to noise (TSI Noise) but will assess the Agency's recommendation on this subject once it is officially submitted.

2.

The study is at an early stage of its development and, as of today, the question of the possible extension of the scope of TSI Noise to existing rolling stock has not been touched upon. The study and the ongoing revision of TSI Noise are two separated processes.

3.

The Commission observes that the rail noise problem is acute in some Member States, while it is marginal or non-existing in the other ones. The study referred to in question 2 was commissioned to help to assess what should be the most relevant EU-wide approach, taking into account the abovementioned differences.

4.

Noise is an area of harmonisation of parameters of railway vehicles under the railway interoperability directive

4.

Noise is an area of harmonisation of parameters of railway vehicles under the railway interoperability directive

 (99)

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009062/13

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR) e Susy De Martini (ECR)

(25 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Esportazione di medici cubani

Numerosi organi di stampa riportano che, in occasione della «Confederation Cup» di calcio svoltasi nei giorni scorsi in Brasile, il governo brasiliano abbia velocizzato i negoziati con la dittatura cubana per l'invio di 6 000 medici nelle zone svantaggiate del paese, garantendo in cambio 176 milioni di dollari ai fratelli Castro per l'ammodernamento delle infrastrutture dell'isola. Il Brasile infatti non ha un numero sufficiente di medici e invia quelli cubani dove i dottori brasiliani non vogliono andare, nelle aree più sperdute del paese. Allo stesso tempo, però, i medici brasiliani hanno protestato contro questa decisione, parallelamente alle varie proteste avvenute proprio in concomitanza con la manifestazione sportiva che lamentavano il malgoverno della Presidente Rousseff. A Cuba invece i medici migliori vengono inviati all'estero, come si è già verificato in numerosi altri casi, lasciando la popolazione nelle mani di medici inesperti o giovani praticanti e mettendo in serio pericolo la vita dei cittadini cubani.

Può il Vicepresidente della Commissione/Alto Rappresentante rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:

È al corrente della presenza di medici cubani in Europa e di eventuali programmi di scambio con Stati membri?

Non ritiene di dovere richiedere spiegazioni al governo cubano a tutela dei turisti e dei lavoratori cittadini dell'Unione Europea che si trovano sull'isola, e che rischiano di non ricevere cure mediche adeguate in caso di bisogno?

È in grado di certificare che eventuali fondi europei di solidarietà stanziati a Cuba e al Brasile non siano utilizzati per implementare programmi di scambio di questo tipo?

È al corrente di casi di malasanità legati a questo programma di scambio che abbiano arrecato danni ai cittadini dell'Unione Europea?

Risposta dell’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione

(20 settembre 2013)

L’UE monitora regolarmente la situazione politica, economica e sociale di Cuba, attraverso la sua delegazione a L’Avana.

Nessun fondo dell’UE concesso a Cuba e al Brasile è stato utilizzato per stringere accordi volti a inviare medici all’estero. Ci risulta inoltre che i negoziati tra Brasile e Cuba per distaccare medici cubani in regioni remote del Brasile non siano sfociati in un accordo.

La Commissione sostiene gli Stati membri nell’attuazione del codice globale di condotta per il reclutamento internazionale di personale sanitario dell’OMS (WHO Global Code of Practice for the International recruitment of Health Personnel), che invita gli Stati membri dell’organizzazione (tra cui Cuba e il Brasile) ad astenersi da politiche attive di assunzione di personale sanitario proveniente da paesi che devono gestire gravi carenze di lavoratori in questo settore.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009062/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR) and Susy De Martini (ECR)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Importing doctors from Cuba

According to media reports, in the run-up to the Confederations Cup held recently in Brazil the Brazilian Government speeded up negotiations with the Cuban dictatorship on sending 6000 Cuban doctors to disadvantaged parts of Brazil, with, in exchange, USD 176 million being handed over to the Castro brothers for infrastructure modernisation projects in Cuba. Brazil does not have enough doctors, and the idea was to send to the Cuban doctors to the most remote parts of the country, where Brazilian doctors refuse to go. Brazil’s doctors took issue with this decision, joining their voices to the cacophony of protest against President Rousseff's poor governance that surrounded the holding of the Confederations Cup in the country.

Given that, as a result of Cuba’s best doctors being sent abroad (similar arrangements have been made with other countries in the past), people on the island are left in the hands of inexperienced or trainee doctors, which places their lives at risk, will the Vice-President/High Representative say whether:

she is aware of any arrangements having been made between Cuba and Member States to bring Cuban doctors to Europe?

she should not seek clarifications from the Cuban Government, with a view to making sure that proper medical care is available to EU nationals on holiday or working in Cuba?

she can provide assurances that no EU funds provided to Cuba and Brazil have been used for arrangements of this kind?

she is aware of any harm being caused to EU citizens by substandard healthcare provision brought about by such arrangements?

Answer given by High-Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2013)

The EU regularly monitors the political, economic and social situation in Cuba via its Delegation in Havana.

No EU funds provided to Cuba and Brazil have been used for arrangements concerning the sending abroad of doctors. To the best of our knowledge, the negotiations between Brazil and Cuba on the posting of Cuban doctors in remote regions of Brazil did not result in an agreement.

The Commission supports EU Member States in implementing the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Code of Practice for the international recruitment of health personnel that calls upon WHO Members States — which include both Cuba and Brazil — to discourage active recruitment of health personnel from countries facing critical shortages of health workers.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009063/13

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(25 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Chiusura del traffico di via dei Fori Imperiali: possibile violazione della normativa sugli appalti pubblici

L'amministrazione comunale di Roma Capitale nei giorni scorsi ha dato avvio alle procedure relative alla chiusura del traffico dell'arteria di via dei Fori Imperiali per promuovere la pedonalizzazione dell' area circostante.

Tale intervento impone il dirottamento verso altre arterie di un ingente traffico privato, comportando l'estensione della zona a traffico limitato, con relative opere ed interventi di viabilità, con un costo stimato tra i 1,5 e 2 milioni di euro.

La stessa amministrazione, tramite la Conferenza dei Servizi, ha individuato in Roma Metropolitane, per il tramite di METRO C, il soggetto attuatore di tale progetto.

Tale decisione, confermata dalla stessa Roma Metropolitane, e i relativi costi saranno imputati alla voce «cantierizzazioni» della METRO C, senza però alcun tipo di programmazione economica preventiva, in quanto tale decisione dell'amministrazione comunale non era presente tra le opere previste nell'ambito della cantierizzazione.

Ciò comporterà un aumento dei costi relativi alla METRO C, infrastruttura strategica cofinanziata dal governo nazionale tramite fondi CIPE, oltre che una variazione d'uso di fondi già stanziati e assegnati, il cui ammontare è allo stato totalmente provvisorio.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:

Come valuta il modus operandi dell'amministrazione di Roma capitale?

Tale comportamento dell'amministrazione comunale è in linea con la legislazione relativa agli appalti pubblici?

Sono stati rispettati i principi di efficacia, efficienza ed economicità, e sono state rispettate tutte le procedure in termini di analisi economica e programmazione finanziaria?

Quali sono le conseguenze contabili e l'incidenza di tale operazione rispetto ai lavori relativi alla METRO C?

Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione

(9 settembre 2013)

La Commissione ringrazia l'Onorevole deputata per averle segnalato l'eventualità che il progetto del Comune di Roma Capitale volto alla pedonalizzazione di Via dei Fori imperiali non sia compatibile con le norme dell'UE sugli appalti pubblici.

Sulla scorta delle limitate informazioni comunicate dall'Onorevole deputata, la Commissione non è in grado di stabilire la fondatezza dei timori manifestati in tal senso. Si rilevi al riguardo che la direttiva 2004/18/CE relativa al coordinamento delle procedure di aggiudicazione degli appalti pubblici si applica esclusivamente agli appalti di lavori di valore superiore a 5 milioni di euro. Per gli appalti che non raggiungono tale soglia, come il progetto in questione, i principi generali di trasparenza e trattamento equo risultanti dal TFUE si applicano laddove sia dimostrato che l'appalto presenta un interesse transfrontaliero.

Poiché, stante alle informazioni comunicate dall'Onorevole deputata, il progetto non sembra coinvolgere fondi dell'UE, spetta all'amministrazione aggiudicatrice e alle competenti autorità nazionali valutare tutti gli aspetti inerenti alle implicazioni finanziarie del progetto a fronte dei principi di efficacia, efficienza ed economicità.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009063/13

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Closure to traffic of Via dei Fori Imperiali: possible infringement of public procurement legislation

Rome City Council recently launched a procedure to close to traffic an arterial road in the capital — the Via dei Fori Imperiali — with a view to pedestrianising the surrounding area.

This will force very large numbers of private vehicles onto other arterial roads and involve the extension of the ‘restricted traffic zone’. The cost of the road works and other operations has been put at between EUR 1.5 million and EUR 2 million.

Rome City Council has given Roma Metropolitane the responsibility for running the project, and the work is to be carried out by the METRO C firm.

This arrangement has been confirmed by Roma Metropolitane, and the costs involved will be charged to the budget for the METRO C line, despite the fact that the project was not included among the works initially planned.

Not only will this will entail higher costs for METRO C, a strategic infrastructure project which is being co‐financed by the national government with CIPE (Interministerial Committee for Economic Planning) funding, but it will also involve a change in the use of funds which have already been earmarked and allocated, although the precise amount involved is not yet clear.

1.

What view does the Commission take of the approach adopted by Rome City Council?

2.

Is the local authority’s behaviour consistent with public procurement legislation?

3.

Have the principles of effectiveness, efficiency and value for money been adhered to and have proper financial planning procedures been followed?

4.

What financial implications will this decision have and what will be the impact on the METRO C project?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(9 September 2013)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for drawing its attention to possible concerns related to the compatibility of the Rome city council’s project to pedestrianize Via dei Fori Imperiali with EU rules on public procurement.

On the basis of the limited information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission cannot establish whether the award of the project might raise such concerns. In this regard, it has to be noted that directive 2004/18/EC on the coordination of procedures for the award of public contracts applies only to works contracts with a value higher than EUR 5 million. For works contracts below this threshold, such as the one at stake, the general principles deriving from the TFEU of transparency and equal treatment apply if it can be proved that the contract has a certain cross-border interest.

Since according to the information provided by the Honourable Member no EU funds seem to be involved in the project, all aspects related to its financial implications in relation with the principles of effectiveness, efficiency and value for money lie within the remit of the contracting authority and the responsible national authorities.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009064/13

alla Commissione

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(25 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Possibile sottovalutazione dell'impatto ambientale del progetto di una discarica per rifiuti speciali a Lughignano di Casale sul Sile (TV)

La Commissione VIA (Valutazione Impatto Ambientale) della Regione del Veneto, organo competente per la consultazione in materia di adempimenti ambientali, in data 24.4.2013 ha espresso parere favorevole in merito al progetto di realizzazione di una discarica per rifiuti speciali a Lughignano di Casale sul Sile (TV) (100). Il progetto, presentato da un consorzio di imprese, riguarda la realizzazione di un impianto per lo smaltimento dei rifiuti prodotti dalle stesse nei rispettivi impianti produttivi e di recupero; la capacità di stoccaggio complessiva prevista è pari a circa 315 000 metri cubi di rifiuti, equivalenti a 320 000 tonnellate.

La valutazione dell'impatto ambientale sulla base della quale è stato formulato il parere della Commissione VIA, tuttavia, risalirebbe al 2006, e si baserebbe sul S.I.A. (Studio Impatto Ambientale) presentato dal consorzio proponente nel 2005. Il parere, pertanto, avrebbe avuto a oggetto il solo progetto preliminare, che ha successivamente subìto numerose modifiche e integrazioni. Secondo la giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia CE, qualora il diritto nazionale dello Stato membro preveda che il procedimento di autorizzazione di un progetto si articoli in più fasi, nel caso in cui la valutazione dell'impatto ambientale possa essere effettuata esclusivamente nel corso della fase iniziale del procedimento, e non nel corso di una fase successiva, vi sarebbe contrasto con quanto previsto dalla direttiva «VIA» 85/337/CEE (ora 2011/92/UE) (101).

L'impianto, inoltre, verrà realizzato a ridosso del Parco naturale regionale del fiume Sile, area tutelata quale SIC (ai sensi della direttiva «Habitat» 92/43/CEE) e ZPS (ai sensi della direttiva «Uccelli» 2009/147/CE); ciononostante, le pesanti interferenze ecosistemiche che l'opera potrebbe produrre non sono state tenute in considerazione alcuna nella formulazione di detto parere, nonostante i rilievi puntualmente formulati dall'«Ente Parco naturale regionale del fiume Sile» (102).

Alla luce di quanto precede, la Commissione non ritiene opportuno contattare le autorità competenti per verificare la regolarità della consultazione ambientale svoltasi, presumibilmente affetta da violazioni della normativa ambientale dell'UE comportanti la sottostima delle conseguenze negative sull'ambiente che l'impianto potrebbe andare a produrre?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(18 settembre 2013)

Sulla base delle informazioni trasmesse dall’onorevole deputato e in assenza di prove chiare e sostanziali della presenza di errori nelle valutazioni ambientali svolte dalle autorità competenti, la Commissione non è stata in grado di riscontare nessuna violazione delle disposizioni della direttiva 2011/92/UE (103) concernente la valutazione dell’impatto ambientale di determinati progetti pubblici e privati (direttiva VIA), della direttiva Habitat (104) e della direttiva Uccelli (105), poiché non è stata fornita alcuna prova di una modifica sostanziale del progetto che comportasse effetti negativi sull’ambiente. La Commissione potrà svolgere ulteriori accertamenti nel caso in cui riceverà prove concrete di un’eventuale violazione della normativa UE in materia ambientale.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009064/13

to the Commission

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Possible underestimation of the environmental impact of a project for a special waste disposal facility at Lughignano di Casale sul Sile (TV)

On 24 April 2013, the EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) Committee of the Veneto Region, the body responsible for consultation on environmental compliance, expressed its approval of a project to create a disposal facility for special (hazardous) waste in Lughignano di Casale sul Sile (TV) (106). The project, submitted by a consortium of companies, concerns the construction of a facility for the disposal of waste produced by those companies in their respective factories and recovery plants. The overall storage capacity is expected to be approximately 315 000 cubic metres of waste, equivalent to 320 000 tonnes.

The environmental impact assessment on the basis of which the EIA Committee's opinion was delivered, however, dates back to 2006 and is allegedly based on the EIS (Environmental Impact Study) submitted by the consortium in 2005. The opinion, therefore, concerned only the preliminary project, which subsequently underwent numerous changes and additions. According to the case law of the EU Court of Justice, where the national law of a Member State provides that the procedure for authorising a project may be carried out in several stages, if the environmental impact assessment can be conducted only during the initial phase of the proceedings, and not at a later stage, this would be in breach of the provisions of the EIA Directive 85/337/EEC (now 2011/92/EU) (107).

The waste disposal facility, moreover, will be built near the River Sile Regional Natural Park, a protected area ‐– a site of Community importance (SCI) under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC and an SPA (special protection area) under the Birds Directive 2009/147/EC. Despite that, the substantial impact that the work could have on the ecosystem has not been taken into account at all in the wording of the opinion, even though this issue was specifically pointed out by the River Sile Regional Natural Park Authority (108).

In the light of the above, should the Commission not contact the relevant authorities to ascertain whether the environmental consultation was carried out properly, since it appears to have been in breach of EU environmental law in that it may have underestimated the adverse impact that the waste disposal plant could have on the environment?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

From the information provided by the Honourable Member, and in the absence of clear and substantial evidence of error within the environmental assessments carried out by the competent Authorities, the Commission could not identify a breach of the directive 2011/92/EU (109) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA), Habitats Directive (110) and Birds Directive (111), as no evidence of a substantial change of the project, having significant adverse effects on the environment, has been provided. This would not preclude the Commission services investigating the matter further should they receive concrete evidence of a possible breach of the EU environmental law.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009065/13

aan de Commissie

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(25 juli 2013)

Betreft: Opslag en financiële spelers

In februari 2013 gaf de Commissie in haar antwoord op indieners vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P‐011351/2012 (112) aan op de hoogte te zijn van de bestaande opslagpraktijken waarbij eigenaars van opslaghuizen, inclusief financiële spelers, blijkbaar kunstmatige schaarste creëren voor de levering van metalen om hun winsten te maximaliseren.

Ziet de Commissie potentiële problemen voor de financiële spelers die de opslag en het vervoer van grondstoffen controleren? Zo ja, kan zij aangeven welke problemen kunnen ontstaan?

Is de Commissie van mening dat financiële spelers door opslaghuizen te controleren belangrijke informatie verkrijgen over de markt, die zij bij de handel in grondstoffen kunnen gebruiken?

Acht de Commissie het belangrijk dat banken die actief zijn op grondstofmarkten, bijvoorbeeld de aluminiummarkt, hun opslagfaciliteiten duidelijk gescheiden houden van hun bankactiviteiten? Zo ja, hoe zorgt de Commissie ervoor dat banken de verschillende activiteiten gescheiden houden?

In de VS wordt momenteel een uitvoerig debat gevoerd over de rol van financiële spelers op de grondstofmarkt. Werkt de Commissie met de Amerikaanse regelgevingsinstanties samen om de beste manier te vinden om de problemen in verband met opslag aan te pakken?

Onlangs gaf de New York Times aan dat de door opslagpraktijken kunstmatig opgedreven aluminiumprijzen de Amerikaanse consumenten de laatste 3 jaar meer dan 5 miljard USD hebben gekost (113). Kan de Commissie een raming geven van de kostenstijgingen die er kunnen zijn voor de Europese industrie? Zo nee, waarom niet?

Antwoord van de heer Almunia namens de Commissie

(16 september 2013)

De Commissie is bekend met de berichten waarover het geachte Parlementslid het in zijn vraag heeft. De Commissie geeft zich rekenschap van het belang van de grondstoffenmarkten voor de economie als geheel. Zij volgt dan ook het debat dat wordt gevoerd over het belangenconflict dat kan ontstaan wanneer financiële spelers de opslag en het vervoer van grondstoffen controleren.

De Commissie werkt regelmatig samen met de toezichthouders in de VS en in andere jurisdicties rond mededingingskwesties die verband houden met de industrie in het algemeen en de grondstoffenmarkten in het bijzonder. Om echter het rechtmatige belang van derden en de integriteit van haar monitoring‐ en handhavingsactiviteiten te beschermen, acht de Commissie het in dit stadium niet passend zich uit te laten over maatregelen die in Europa of de in de Verenigde Staten zouden kunnen worden genomen.

De Commissie is momenteel nog niet in staat om in te schatten hoe groot de eventuele schade is die de activiteiten van financiële spelers hebben veroorzaakt, of een raming te geven van de mogelijke kostenstijgingen die daardoor voor de Europese industrie zijn ontstaan. Wel wil de Commissie hier beklemtonen dat zij deze kwesties zeer ernstig neemt en dat zij niet zal aarzelen om passende maatregelen te nemen wanneer zij denkt dat de mededingingsregels zijn geschonden.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009065/13

to the Commission

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(25 July 2013)

Subject: Warehousing and financial players

In February 2013 the Commission indicated (114) in its answer to my written question (P-011351/2012) that it was aware of the current warehousing practices in which owners of warehouses, including financial players, seem to be creating artificial shortages in the supply of metals in order to maximise their profits.

Does the Commission see any potential problems for financial players controlling the storage and shipment of commodities? If so, could the Commission indicate what problems could arise?

Does the Commission believe that by controlling warehouses financial players gain important market intelligence, which they can use when trading commodities?

Does the Commission believe that it is important that banks operating in commodities markets such as the aluminium market keep their storage facilities well separated from their banking activities? If so, how does the Commission ensure that banks keep these different practices at arm’s length?

In the US there is currently a wide-ranging debate on the role of financial players in the commodity market. Does the Commission cooperate with US regulators in order to identify the best ways of addressing the problems related to warehousing?

Recently the New York Times indicated that inflated aluminium prices resulting from warehousing practices have cost American consumers more than USD 5 billion over the last 3 years (115). Can the Commission provide an estimate of possible cost increases to European industry? If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the reports referred to in the Honourable Member's question. The Commission is mindful of the importance of the commodity markets for the economy as a whole and is conscious of the debate surrounding the alleged conflict of interest brought about when financial players control the storage and shipment of commodities.

The Commission regularly cooperates with US regulators and with regulators from other jurisdictions regarding antitrust matters relating to all industries and to the commodity markets in particular. However, in order to protect the legitimate interest of third parties and the integrity of its monitoring and enforcement activities, the Commission believes that it would not at this stage be appropriate to comment on any action that might be taken in either Europe or the United States.

The Commission is not at this stage in a position to judge whether any harm has been caused by the activities of financial players or to estimate any potential cost increases for European industry. Nonetheless, the Commission would stress that it takes these issues extremely seriously and will not hesitate to take appropriate action if it believes that the antitrust rules may have been infringed.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-009108/13

au Conseil

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(26 juillet 2013)

Objet: Cybermilitants condamnés à 10 ans de prison

Sept cybermilitants saoudiens ont été condamnés à des peines de 5 à 10 ans de prison pour «incitation à des manifestations» sur facebook.

1.

Comment se positionne votre institution sur cette décision qui va totalement à l'encontre de la liberté d'expression?

2.

L'Union européenne va-t-elle dénoncer ces mesures?

3.

L'Union compte-t-elle entamer des pourparlers avec les autorités du pays sur cette violation?

Réponse

(30 septembre 2013)

Le Conseil a été informé du cas soulevé par l'Honorable Parlementaire concernant le Royaume d'Arabie saoudite.

La Haute Représentante et ses services continueront de recourir, en toute occasion, à l'ensemble des outils dont ils disposent pour évoquer régulièrement la question des Droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales, en public ou non, dans le cadre de leurs contacts avec les autorités saoudiennes.

En l'absence d'accord bilatéral entre l'UE et le Royaume d'Arabie saoudite et donc de dialogue politique bilatéral au niveau institutionnel avec ce pays sur le thème des Droits de l'homme, l'UE continuera d'évoquer ces questions avec ses interlocuteurs saoudiens par tous les moyens dont elle dispose.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009108/13

to the Council

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(26 July 2013)

Subject: Cyber activists sentenced to 10 years in prison

Seven Saudi Arabian cyber activists have been sentenced to between five and 10 years in prison for ‘inciting protests’ on Facebook.

1.

What is your institution’s position on this decision, which is in complete violation of the freedom of expression?

2.

Will the European Union denounce these measures?

3.

Does the European Union intend to enter into talks with the country’s authorities with regard to this violation?

Reply

(30 September 2013)

The Council is aware of the case raised by the Honourable Member of the European Parliament with regard to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

The High Representative and her services will continue to use the full range of opportunities and instruments available to raise human rights and fundamental freedoms regularly both in public and outside the public eye in their contacts with Saudi authorities.

While there are currently no bilateral agreements between the EU and the KSA and there is not therefore any institutional bilateral political dialogue on human rights with the KSA, the EU will continue to raise these issues with its Saudi interlocutors, making full use of the opportunities at its disposal.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009109/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(26 July 2013)

Subject: Meeting between Commissioner Barnier and Gerry Grimstone

We note with interest that on 21 February 2013 Commissioner Barnier met formally with Gerry Grimstone, chairman of TheCityUK.

Will the Commission confirm whether minutes of this meeting were taken, and disclose the contents of those minutes in full? If not, why not? If the Commission is unwilling or unable to disclose the minutes themselves, can it state the purpose of the meeting, summarise all topics discussed and decisions taken or agreed either at or as a result of the meeting?

Please confirm whether Commissioner Barnier and Mr Grimstone speak on the telephone or exchange emails or other correspondence, and state the frequency and duration of the calls or correspondence. On what other occasions have they met whilst Commissioner Barnier has held his office? In any of the correspondence or meetings between them (or between their respective offices), is there discussion of: a) audit-related matters (in particular, but not limited to, mandatory auditor rotation and provision of non-audit services); b) the activities or future activities of TheCityUK; c) the timing of announcements or press releases by or on behalf of the Commission.

Please confirm whether the Commission provides TheCityUK with any direct or indirect funding or assistance.

Please disclose any direct or indirect relationship or interaction between the Commission and the directors or officers of Standard Life within the last two years.

Please confirm whether the Commission (or to its knowledge any EU institution) currently pays anything directly (or indirectly) or will do so in the future (e.g. pensions) to any of the directors of TheCityUK, and if so, please disclose the names of the recipients. For your ease of reference, we understand the directors of TheCityUK to be: Gerry Grimstone, Mark Boleat, Chris Cummings, Alan Houmann, Sir Andrew Cahn, Rachel Lomax, Sushill Saluja, Robert Gray, Sir Thomas Harris, Sean McGovern, Jeremy Wilson, Gary Campkin, Dan Torjussen-Proctor, Howard Miller, Juliet Carey, Marcus Scott, Kit Malthouse, Nick Sandall, Peter Mann, Nick Studer, Doug Barrow, Craig Donaldson, Lindsay J’Afrai-Pak, and Robert Elliott.

Question for written answer P-011704/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(15 October 2013)

Subject: Failure to answer question on EU Funding of UK NGOs

On 26 July 2013 I asked parliamentary Question E-009109/13 on EU funding of UK NGOs, with particular reference to a meeting between Commissioner Barnier and the chairman of TheCityUK on 21 February 2013.

The above parliamentary question was tabled under and in accordance with Rule 117, but I have not received a reply within the six weeks required by paragraph 4 of that rule.

I recognise that four weeks of August have intervened, but it is now eleven weeks since my question was received by the Commission and there is still not a word of response. Please explain the delay and the failure of your office to answer on the points I set out therein.

What should we infer from your silence?

Are you afraid of transparency being applied to your meetings with UK non-governmental organisations?

Do you hope to delay an answer for sufficient time that you are out of office before I receive a reply?

Do you accept that I can properly expect an answer on each and every one of my points, and not delay, obfuscation and avoidance?

Joint answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 2013)

Commissioner Barnier met Mr Grimstone on 21 February 2013. On the same day, Mr Grimstone also met Commissioner De Gucht. Both meetings were at Mr Grimstone’s request as the newly appointed chairman of TheCityUK. As the Commissioners exchanged general considerations with Mr Grimstone, no formal minutes were taken of either meeting.

Commissioner Barnier and Mr Grimstone discussed the Commission’s financial regulatory initiatives and the legislative measures announced by the Commission. Commissioner Barnier and Mr Grimstone have had no further contact.

Commissioner Barnier has not been in contact with any of the other people mentioned. There have, however, been meetings between Commission staff, Cabinet members and Standard Life representatives. For example, on 20 June 2013, a meeting took place between DG Internal Market staff, Mr Singh, Chief Risk Officer and Mr Porteous, Head of Solvency 2 Regulatory Development to discuss Solvency 2. A Member of Commissioner Barnier’s Cabinet met Mr Porteous on 25 September 2013 to discuss the latest developments with regard to Solvency 2 and the Omnibus 2 negotiations, and Vice-President Reding met David Nish, Chief Executive of Standard Life on 24 April 2013, during a Roundtable discussion with members of the Association of British Insurers. A Standard Life representative is a member of DG Justice's Insurance Contract Law Expert Group. She participates in meetings and makes observations on relevant documents. In line with the Commission’s rules and procedures, this expert was reimbursed expenses for attending a meeting on 17 April 2013.

The Commission does not currently pay anything to the individuals mentioned by the Honourable Member. Two of them have, in the past, held temporary positions within the Commission. They do not have any pension rights from the Commission.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009110/13

an die Kommission

Jo Leinen (S&D), Chris Davies (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL) und Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Bau illegaler Kraftwerke in Opole, Polen (Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen Polen aufgrund von Verzögerungen bei der Umsetzung der Richtlinie 2009/31/EG)

1.

Die Richtlinie 2009/31/EG sollte von den Mitgliedstaaten bis zum 25. Juni 2011 umgesetzt werden. Im Juli 2011 leitete die Kommission ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen Polen aufgrund von Verzögerungen bei der Umsetzung ein. Hat die polnische Regierung auf das Aufforderungsschreiben der Kommission reagiert, und, falls ja, war die Antwort zufriedenstellend? Wurde der polnischen Regierung, falls sie nicht reagiert hat, eine begründete Stellungnahme vorgelegt?

2.

Wie lange wird die Kommission warten, ob Polen die Richtlinie 2009/31/EG ordnungsgemäß umsetzt, bevor der Fall an den Gerichtshof verwiesen wird?

3.

Ist sich die Kommission bewusst, dass Polen nicht dafür gesorgt hat, dass entweder die zuständige Behörde oder der Anlagenbetreiber die Eignung der zwei geplanten neuen Anlagen des Kraftwerks in Opole, die jeweils 900 MW erzeugen können, für die umweltverträgliche Abscheidung und geologische Speicherung von CO

2

(CCS-Fähigkeit) gemäß Artikel 33 der Richtlinie bewertet haben?

4.

Ist die Kommission mit dem polnischen regionalen Verwaltungsgericht und dem Obersten Verwaltungsgericht einer Meinung, dass weder die zuständige Behörde noch die Investoren aufgrund der mangelnden Umsetzung der Richtlinie 2009/31/EG in polnisches Recht verpflichtet sind, die CCS-Fähigkeit einer neuen Verbrennungsanlage zu bewerten, auch wenn diese die in Artikel 33 der Richtlinie genannten Kriterien erfüllt?

5.

Ist sich die Kommission bewusst, dass der polnische Ministerpräsident Donald Tusk den Baubeginn für diesen Sommer angekündigt hat, obwohl die von der Polska Grupa Energetyczna (PGE) geplante Investition in das Kraftwerk in Opole (für den Bau von zwei neuen Anlagen mit jeweils 900 MW) nicht die Anforderungen der Richtlinie erfüllt (da nicht bewertet wurde, ob die neuen Anlagen CCS-fähig sind) und somit vor Ort eine Sachlage geschaffen wird, die unwiderruflich gegen das EU-Recht verstößt?

6.

Sind der Kommission andere Verbrennungsanlagen bekannt, die geplant sind oder sich bereits im Bau befinden und die gegen die Bestimmungen der Richtlinie in Bezug auf die Bewertung der CCS-Fähigkeit verstoßen?

Antwort von Frau Hedegaard im Namen der Kommission

(25. September 2013)

1./2. Im Juli 2011 hat die Kommission in der Tat Vertragsverletzungsverfahren wegen Nichtmitteilung der nationalen Umsetzungsmaßnahmen für die CCS‐Richtlinie (116) gegen Polen und 25 weitere Mitgliedstaaten eingeleitet. Nach vollständiger Mitteilung der Umsetzungsmaßnahmen konnten neun Fälle inzwischen abgeschlossen werden, während andere Fälle, in denen die Umsetzungsmaßnahmen bis Juli 2013 mitgeteilt wurden, derzeit von der Kommission noch auf Vollständigkeit überprüft werden. Der polnischen Regierung wurde bisher noch keine mit Gründen versehene Stellungnahme wegen Polens Verletzung der CCS-Richtlinie zugeleitet. Die Kommission ist nicht in der Lage, weitere Einzelheiten ihres Austauschs mit den Mitgliedstaaten über laufende Vertragsverletzungsverfahren bekanntzugeben (117).

3./5. Bei der Kommission ist diesbezüglich eine Beschwerde eingegangen, und sie trägt derzeit Informationen zusammen, um den Sachverhalt und die Rechtsvorschriften, die die zwei geplanten neuen Feuerungsanlagen des Kraftwerks in Opole betreffen, zu klären.

4.

EU-Richtlinien müssen bis zu ihrer Umsetzungsfrist umgesetzt sein. Die Mitgliedstaaten und ihre zuständigen Behörden sind auch im Fall einer Nichtumsetzung nicht von ihrer Verpflichtung entbunden, die Richtlinienbestimmungen anzuwenden.

6.

Der Kommission ist nicht bekannt, dass weitere Feuerungsanlagen, die nicht im Einklang mit Artikel 9a der Richtlinie 2001/80/EG

6.

Der Kommission ist nicht bekannt, dass weitere Feuerungsanlagen, die nicht im Einklang mit Artikel 9a der Richtlinie 2001/80/EG

 (118) 2 2

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009110/13

aan de Commissie

Jo Leinen (S&D), Chris Davies (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL) en Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: Bouw van een illegale energiecentrale in Opole, Polen (inbreukprocedure tegen Polen wegens vertraging bij de omzetting van Richtlijn 2009/31/EG)

1.

Richtlijn 2009/31/EG moest uiterlijk op 25 juni 2011 door de lidstaten in nationale wetgeving omgezet zijn. In juli 2011 startte de Commissie een inbreukprocedure tegen Polen wegens vertraging bij deze omzetting. Heeft de Poolse overheid op de schriftelijke aanmaning van de Commissie geantwoord? Zo ja, heeft dit antwoord de Commissie tevredengesteld? Zo nee, heeft de Poolse overheid een met redenen omkleed advies ontvangen?

2.

Hoe lang is de Commissie bereid te wachten op de correcte omzetting door Polen van Richtlijn 2009/31/EC alvorens de zaak voor het Hof van Justitie te brengen?

3.

Is de Commissie zich ervan bewust dat Polen heeft nagelaten erop toe te zien dat de bevoegde instantie of de exploitant van de centrale nagaan of de twee geplande nieuwe units in de energiecentrale van Opole, die elk 900 MW kunnen opwekken, klaar zijn voor de milieuverantwoorde opvang en geologische opslag van CO

2

(„CCS-klaar”), conform de vereiste in artikel 33 van de richtlijn?

4.

Deelt de Commissie de mening van de regionale administratieve rechtbank en het administratieve hooggerechtshof van Polen dat de bevoegde instantie en de investeerders als gevolg van de niet-omzetting van Richtlijn 2009/31/EC in de Poolse wetgeving wettelijk niet verplicht zijn om te evalueren of een nieuwe verbrandingsinstallatie CCS-klaar is, zelfs als de installatie aan de in artikel 33 van de richtlijn genoemde criteria beantwoordt?

5.

Is de Commissie ervan op de hoogte dat de Poolse premier, Donald Tusk, heeft aangekondigd dat de bouwwerkzaamheden deze zomer zullen beginnen, ongeacht het feit dat de investering die de Polska Grupa Energetyczna (PGE) in de energiecentrale van Opole wil doen (voor de bouw van twee units met elk een capaciteit van 900 MW) niet conform is met de bepalingen van de richtlijn (aangezien er niet is beoordeeld of de nieuwe units CCS-klaar zijn of niet), en beseft ze dat er zo in de praktijk een situatie wordt gecreëerd die onherroepelijk in strijd zal zijn met de EU-wetgeving?

6.

Heeft de Commissie kennis van geplande of aan de gang zijnde bouwwerkzaamheden voor andere verbrandingsinstallaties die niet in overeenstemming zijn met de bepalingen van de richtlijn inzake evaluaties van de CCS-paraatheid?

Antwoord van mevrouw Hedegaard namens de Commissie

(25 september 2013)

1./2. In juli 2011 heeft de Commissie inderdaad een inbreukprocedures tegen Polen en 25 andere lidstaten ingeleid wegens niet-mededeling van nationale maatregelen tot omzetting van de CCS-richtlijn (119). Tot nu toe werden negen zaken afgesloten omdat er mededeling van de volledige omzettingsmaatregelen had plaatsgevonden, terwijl de Commissie in de andere zaken, voor zover de omzettingmaatregelen zijn meegedeeld tot juni 2013, momenteel de volledigheid ervan controleert. Er is bij de Poolse regering nog geen met redenen omkleed advies ingediend in verband met de inbreuk van dat land op de CCS-richtlijn. De Commissie kan geen nadere details verstrekken over haar contacten met de lidstaten over lopende inbreukprocedures. (120)

3./5. De Commissie heeft een klacht over deze kwestie ontvangen en verzamelt nu feitelijke en juridische informatie over de zaak van de geplande twee nieuwe units in de energiecentrale van Opole.

4.

De EU‐richtlijnen moeten worden omgezet binnen de daarvoor vastgestelde  termijn. Indien zij niet worden omgezet, ontslaat dit de lidstaten en hun bevoegde autoriteiten niet van de verplichting om ze toe te passen.

6.

De Commissie is niet op de hoogte van geplande of lopende bouwwerkzaamheden van andere stookinstallaties die niet aan artikel 9 bis van Richtlijn 2001/80/EG voldoen

6.

De Commissie is niet op de hoogte van geplande of lopende bouwwerkzaamheden van andere stookinstallaties die niet aan artikel 9 bis van Richtlijn 2001/80/EG voldoen

 (121) 2 2

(Suomenkielinen versio)

Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-009110/13

komissiolle

Jo Leinen (S&D), Chris Davies (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL) ja Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)

(29. heinäkuuta 2013)

Aihe: Laittoman voimalan rakentaminen Opoleen Puolaan (rikkomusmenettely Puolaa vastaan direktiivin 2009/31/EY täytäntöönpanon viivästymisestä )

1.

Jäsenvaltioiden olisi pitänyt panna direktiivi 2009/31/EY täytäntöön 25. kesäkuuta 2011 mennessä. Heinäkuussa 2011 komissio käynnisti rikkomusmenettelyn Puolaa vastaan täytäntöönpanon viivästymisestä. Onko Puolan hallitus vastannut komission viralliseen huomautukseen? Jos on, oliko vastaus tyydyttävä? Jos ei ollut, onko Puolan hallitukselle toimitettu perusteltu lausunto?

2.

Kuinka pitkään komissio on valmis odottamaan, että Puola varmistaa direktiivin 2009/31/EY sisällyttämisen oikeusjärjestykseensä, ennen kanteen nostamista tuomioistuimessa?

3.

Onko komissio tietoinen, että Puola ei ole varmistanut, että toimivaltainen viranomainen tai laitoksen

toiminnanharjoittaja on arvioinut, onko Opolen voimalan suunnitelluissa kahdessa uudessa yksikössä, joiden kummankin sähköntuotantokapasiteetti on 900 MW, valmiudet ympäristön kannalta turvalliseen hiilidioksidin talteenottoon ja geologiseen varastointiin (CCS-valmius) direktiivin 33 artiklan vaatimusten mukaisesti?

4.

Onko komissio samaa mieltä Puolan alueellisen hallinto-oikeuden ja korkeimman hallinto-oikeuden kanssa siitä, että direktiivin 2009/31/EY täytäntöönpanon laiminlyömisen takia toimivaltainen viranomainen tai investoijat eivät ole oikeudellisesti velvollisia arvioimaan, onko uudella polttolaitoksella CCS-valmius, vaikka se täyttäisi direktiivin 33 artiklassa luetellut vaatimukset?

5.

Onko komissio tietoinen, että vaikka Polska Grupa Energetycznan (PGE) suunnittelema investointi Opelen voimalaan (kahden uuden 900 MW:n yksikön rakentamiseksi) on vastoin direktiivin vaatimuksia (koska ei ole tehty arviota siitä, onko uusissa yksiköissä CCS-valmius), Puolan pääministeri Donald Tusk on ilmoittanut, että rakennustyöt alkavat tänä kesänä, jolloin syntyy uusi tilanne, joka on peruuttamattomasti EU:n lainsäädännön vastainen?

6.

Onko komissio tietoinen muiden sellaisten polttolaitosten suunnitelluista tai käynnissä olevista rakennustöistä, joissa rikotaan direktiivin säännöksiä CCS‐valmiutta koskevan arvion tekemisestä?

Connie Hedegaardin komission puolesta antama vastaus

(25. syyskuuta 2013)

1./2. Komissio todellakin käynnisti heinäkuussa 2011 rikkomismenettelyt Puolaa ja 25:tä muuta jäsenvaltiota vastaan, jotka eivät olleet ilmoittaneet kansallisista toimenpiteistä CCS-direktiivin (122) täytäntöönpanemiseksi. Tähän mennessä 9 näistä menettelyistä on päätetty, koska niiden osalta on ilmoitettu täytäntöönpanotoimenpiteet täysimääräisesti. Muiden osalta komissio suorittaa parhaillaan heinäkuuhun 2013 mennessä ilmoitettujen täytäntöönpanotoimenpiteiden täydellisyystarkastusta. Puolalle ei ole vielä osoitettu CCS-direktiivin rikkomisen vuoksi perusteltua lausuntoa. Komissio ei voi antaa enempää tietoa yhteydenpidostaan niiden jäsenvaltioiden kanssa, joita koskevat rikkomismenettelyt ovat kesken (123).

3./5.Komissio on vastaanottanut asiaa koskevan valituksen ja kerää parhaillaan tietoja Opolen voimalaan suunniteltuja kahta yksikköä koskevista seikoista ja lainsäädännöstä.

4.EU-direktiivit on saatettava osaksi kansallista lainsäädäntöä säädetyssä määräajassa. Tämän tekemättä jättäminen ei vapauta jäsenvaltioita ja niiden viranomaisia velvollisuudesta soveltaa direktiivejä.

6.Komissio ei ole tietoinen muista direktiivin 2001/80/EY 9 a artiklan (124) vastaisista mahdollisesti suunnitelluista tai käynnissä olevista polttolaitosten rakennustöistä. Kyseisen artiklan mukaan jäsenvaltioiden on varmistettava, että kaikkien sellaisten polttolaitosten toiminnanharjoittajat, joiden nimellinen sähköntuotantoteho on vähintään 300 megawattia, ovat arvioineet hiilidioksidin talteenoton jälkiasentamisen tekniset ja taloudelliset edellytykset. Jos arvioinnin tulos on myönteinen, hiilidioksidin talteenottoon ja paineistukseen tarvittaville laitteille on varattava sopiva tila laitosalueella.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009110/13

to the Commission

Jo Leinen (S&D), Chris Davies (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL) and Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Construction of illegal power plant in Opole, Poland (infringement proceedings against Poland for delay in the transposition of Directive 2009/31/EC)

1.

Member States should have transposed Directive 2009/31/EC by25 June 2011. In July 2011 the Commission launched infringement proceedings against Poland for delay in the transposition. Has the Polish Government replied to the Commission’s letter of formal notice, and, if so, was its reply satisfactory? If not, has a reasoned opinion been submitted to the Polish Government?

2.

How long is the Commission prepared to wait for Poland to ensure the proper transposition of Directive 2009/31/EC before referring the case to the Court of Justice?

3.

Is the Commission aware that Poland has failed to ensure that either the competent authority or the plant operator has assessed whether the planned two new units at the Opole power plant, each capable of generating 900 MW, are ready for the environmentally safe capture and geological storage of CO

2

(CCS-ready), as required by Article 33 of the directive?

4.

Does the Commission share the opinion of the Polish Regional Administrative Court and Supreme Administrative Court that, owing to the non-transposition of Directive 2009/31/EC into Polish law, neither the competent authority nor the investors are legally obliged to conduct an assessment of whether a new combustion plant is CCS-ready, even if it meets the criteria listed in Article 33 of the directive?

5.

Is the Commission aware that, despite the fact that the investment planned by the Polska Grupa Energetyczna (PGE) at the Opole power plant (for the construction of two new units, 900 MW each) is non-compliant with the requirements of the directive (given that no assessment has been made of whether the new units are CCS-ready), Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has announced that construction is to begin this summer, thereby creating facts on the ground that will irreversibly be in breach of EC law?

6.

Is the Commission aware of any planned or ongoing construction of other combustion plants that do not comply with the directive’s provisions regarding CCS-readiness assessments?

Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2013)

1./2. In July 2011 the Commission did indeed launch infringement cases for non-communication of national measures transposing the CCS Directive (125) against Poland and 25 other Member States. While 9 cases were closed to date due to notification of complete transposing measures, for other cases, where the transposition measures have been notified until July 2013, the Commission is currently performing the completeness check. A reasoned opinion has not been yet submitted to the Polish Government in relation to Poland's infringement of the CCS Directive. The Commission is not in a position to provide further details of its communication with the Member States on infringement proceedings which are ongoing. (126)

3./5.The Commission has received a complaint on this issue and is currently gathering information to determine facts and law concerning the case of the planned two new units at the Opole power plant.

4.EU Directives must be transposed by the deadline for their transposition. Member States and their competent authorities are not relieved from the obligation to apply them in case of failure to transpose them.

6.The Commission is not aware of any planned or ongoing construction of other combustion plants that do not comply with Article 9a of Directive 2001/80/EC  (127). According to that Article the Member States need to ensure that operators of combustion plants with a rated electrical output of 300 MW or more have assessed technical and economic conditions necessary to retrofit for CO2 capture. Where the assessment is positive, suitable space on the installation site for the equipment necessary to capture and compress CO2 has to be set aside.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009111/13

to the Commission

Seán Kelly (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Common charger for small electronic devices

Could the Commission outline what progress, if any, has been made in harmonising charging devices for small electronic goods — such as mobile phones, digital cameras and tablets — since the expiry in 2012 of its Memorandum of Understanding with mobile phone manufacturing companies?

Could the Commission clarify the current position of these mobile phone manufacturing companies with regard to this initiative, and could it confirm whether or not they will continue to work with the Commission to achieve a common charger for small electronic devices?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

The latest progress report provided by the signatories of the memorandum of understanding (MoU) has shown that more than 90% of the new devices put on the market by the end of 2012 supported the common charging capability.

The voluntary agreement based on the micro-USB technology has proved successful in delivering benefits for both industry and citizens without any particular need for stricter legislation.

The Commission has launched a study to evaluate the results achieved with the MoU and to consider options for appropriate follow-up activity including voluntary agreement and legislation. The study will take into account technological innovations and will consider a possible extension of the harmonisation of chargers initiative to new categories of products, such as the new generation of mobile phones and other small portable electronic devices like digital cameras, tablets and music players.

The outcomes of the study will be available by the first semester of 2014.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009112/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ I

Thank you for your answer to Written Question E-002638/2013 (EUROGENFOR X) in which you referred to ‘the competent Commission services’ and the security measures that they provide, which ‘can range from discreet monitoring actions up to a more visible close protection scheme’. Please confirm the name of those competent Commission services, and confirm and explain in respect of each such service:

when it was established and under what treaty provision;

the Committee of the European Parliament to which the service is accountable and what additional or alternative democratic oversight is in place for their activities;

the number, rank (and salaries by rank) of their personnel;

the budget from which the salaries and other costs of the competent Commission service are paid; and

the gross amount spent by the service in each year since its establishment (up to the most recent year for which figures are available and stating each year).

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2013)

The Security Service of the European Commission was established on the 6th October 1958 by Regulation (Euratom) n° 3, implementing Article 24 of the Treaty, establishing the European Atomic Energy Community and is nowadays a directorate of the Commission's DG for Human Resources and Security.

Its mandate is defined in Commission Decision C(94)2129 of 8th September 1994 and it develops policy and guidelines, implements organisational and technical measures and offers security services. The Commission provides security for members of the Commission, staff and other servants, personnel and visitors in all its premises according to the operational requirements stemming from a formal threat assessment.

As a directorate of the DG for Human Resources and Security, it falls under the political responsibility of the Vice-President responsible for Inter-Institutional Relations and Administration and operates under the management and supervision of its Director General.

Central Commission security services comprise around 185 officials and other servants whose salaries are determined by the Staff Regulations. Every Directorate-General has also appointed a ‘Local Security Officer’ who act as contact person and coordinator for all matters related to security in their department.

The salaries and mission costs of the staff of the Security Directorate are financed by the Commission's Administrative Budget.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009113/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ II

Thank you for your answer to Written Question E-002638/2013 (EUROGENFOR X) in which you referred to ‘the competent Commission services’ and the security measures that they provide, which ‘can range from discreet monitoring actions up to a more visible close protection scheme’. Please confirm the name of those competent Commission services, and confirm and explain in respect of each such service:

whether and to whom their personnel swear an oath of office, or otherwise owe allegiance;

whether they liaise formally or informally with EuroGendFor;

whether they liaise formally or informally with Europol;

the decision-making process for requesting, approving and implementing their deployment; and

whether any of their personnel are also members of national reserves, armed forces, security services, police forces (military or civilian) of Member States, EuroGendFor, Europol or Interpol.

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

The competent Commission service is the Directorate-General for Human Resources and Security which has a Directorate for security. This directorate is an internal administrative service responsible for protecting Commission personnel, buildings and information.

Staff of this directorate have to comply with the obligations of the Staff Regulations of Officials and Conditions of employment of other servants of the Europan Union, see Articles 11 and following.

Commission services may liaise with other institutions, bodies and government administrations when appropriate and necessary in the performance of their tasks. Since the Directorate General for Human Resources and Security has no particular competencies with regard to third persons or activities outside the Commission premises, it must rely on cooperation with national law enforcement authorities.

Security measures are management decisions driven by the security requirements of the person, the building or the information in need of protection.

Staff of the European institutions may be on leave on personal grounds from national administrations or may belong to reserve forces of a member state army, see Article 42 (3) of the Staff Regulations, while fully respecting their obligations resulting from the Staff Regulations.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009114/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ III

Thank you for your answer to Written Question E-002638/2013 (EUROGENFOR X) in which you referred to ‘the competent Commission services’ and the security measures that they provide, which ‘can range from discreet monitoring actions up to a more visible close protection scheme’. Please confirm the name of those competent Commission services, and confirm and explain in respect of each such service:

the number and rank (title of office) of individuals for whom the service could be provided as protection;

the number and rank (title of office) of individuals for whom the service has been provided as protection;

the number of occasions on which the ‘close protection service’ has been provided and their duration;

whether personnel of the service have operated in the United Kingdom; and

whether such operations in the United Kingdom included personnel carrying firearms.

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

DG Human Resources and Security may provide close protection to Commissioners, high-level visitors and officials when required so by a personalised threat assessment.

The Commission cannot provide operational security information which, if made public, could increase risks to Commissioners, visitors and officials who currently benefit or have benefited from such protection.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009115/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ IV

Thank you for your answer to Written Question E-002638/2013 (EUROGENFOR X) in which you referred to ‘the competent Commission services’ and the security measures that they provide, which ‘can range from discreet monitoring actions up to a more visible close protection scheme’. Please confirm the name of those competent Commission services, and confirm and explain in respect of each such service:

the type and number of weapons available to them;

the transport equipment (whether by land, sea or air) owned or operated by them, and

the transport costs (including travel expenses and capital expenditure) for each of the last five years.

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

The Commission cannot provide, for the purpose of answering a written question, operational security information which, if made public, could increase risks to Commissioners, visitors and staff who currently benefit or have benefited from specific protection measure since this information could be useful to potential wrongdoers.

The Commission cannot undertake, for the purpose of answering a written question, the lengthy and costly research that would be required to provide the Honourable Member with the requested information on costs for each of the last five years.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009116/13

to the Commission

Nigel Farage (EFD)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: The Commission's ‘close protection service’ V

Thank you for your answer to Written Question E-002638/2013 (EUROGENFOR X) in which you referred to ‘the competent Commission services’ and the security measures that they provide, which ‘can range from discreet monitoring actions up to a more visible close protection scheme’. Please confirm the name of those competent Commission services, and confirm and explain in respect of each such service:

whether their personnel operating in Member States are subject to all the laws of that Member State;

whether their personnel have any immunity from arrest or prosecution and the nature, duration and territorial extent of that immunity; and

whether, and in what circumstances, any such immunity has been exercised or invoked.

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

Officials and other servants of the European are subject to the laws of the member state in which they operate and their immunities are governed by Articles 17 and 18 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union.

Immunity — as is necessary for the performance of their tasks — is granted to officials and other servants of the European Union on the territory of members states. Immunity of an official or other servant of the European Union may be lifted — upon request of a competent national authority — when such decision is not deemed to be against the interest of the Union.

Immunity was — in the context of the tasks of the security services — neither exercised nor invoked in the last decade.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009117/13

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(29 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Possibili finanziamenti per la realizzazione del «Progetto Telefono Blu»

Una società è impegnata da circa 30 anni nell'elaborazione, implementazione e realizzazione di progetti finalizzati al miglioramento delle relazioni interpersonali anche attraverso metodologie internazionali la cui validità scientifica è stata ampiamente convalidata nelle diverse applicazioni realizzate. Di conseguenza, una concreta iniziativa denominata «Progetto Telefono Blu» si impegna a garantire un'efficiente assistenza, con la collaborazione di avvocati, medici, psicologi ed operatori qualificati che faranno di questa linea telefonica un importante sostegno, offrendo un utile supporto morale, psicologico e giuridico che sarà fondamentale per la prevenzione ed il miglioramento di fenomeni violenti quali il femminicidio, lo stalking e conflitti relazionali. L'iniziativa sarà estesa sul territorio della Regione Lazio, con la collaborazione del Comune di Roma (Assessorato alla Sanità) e dei rispettivi Ministeri della Sanità e delle Politiche Sociali.

Alcuni dei punti principali che il progetto mira a conseguire sono:

un protocollo d'intesa con strutture di accoglienza e sostegno da creare ad hoc presso siti ospedalieri;

una mirata selezione del personale, garantendo una parallela ed eccellente attività di formazione, che rafforzerà negli operatori impegnati la capacità di creare un'efficiente comunicazione con qualsiasi interlocutore disagiato.

Tutto ciò premesso, può la Commissione:

far sapere se vi è la possibilità di ricevere un finanziamento per tale progetto che garantirebbe, inoltre, occupazione e nuovi posti di lavoro?

far sapere se sono presenti analoghe iniziative europee riguardanti tale disagio e, se sì, quali?

fornire un quadro generale della situazione?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(28 ottobre 2013)

Il programma Daphne III prevede finanziamenti per i progetti transnazionali volti a prevenire e a combattere la violenza contro le donne. Sono attualmente aperti inviti a presentare proposte (128).

La direttiva 2012/29/UE (129) («direttiva sulla protezione delle vittime») garantirà che le donne vittime di violenze beneficino di norme minime comuni per quanto riguarda i diritti procedurali nei procedimenti penali. Verrà predisposta inoltre tutta una serie di misure speciali, fra cui la formazione degli operatori della giustizia per proteggere e sostenere le vittime fra cui le donne vittime ad esempio di reati di natura sessuale o di violenza nelle relazioni strette (130). Anche i finanziamenti del programma «Giustizia penale» riguardano attività in quest'area (131).

La relazione dell'Istituto europeo per l'uguaglianza di genere (132) fornisce a sua volta una panoramica dei servizi a sostegno delle vittime di violenza domestica nell'UE.

Nell'aprile 2013, la Commissione ha organizzato uno scambio di pratiche per discutere le esperienze riguardanti i servizi di sostegno alle vittime della violenza di genere (133).

Inoltre, per il sostegno alle vittime esistono le linee armonizzate di assistenza telefonica al numero 116 (134). I servizi sono forniti da organizzazioni pubbliche o private selezionate localmente da ogni Stato membro. In questo contesto, il numero 116 006 serve a fornire assistenza alle vittime di reati. Lo Stato membro può anche chiedere la predisposizione della linea 116 016 per fornire specifiche informazioni e aiuto alle vittime della violenza di genere.

Infine il progetto, quale descritto, non sembra rientrare nel campo d'applicazione del Fondo sociale europeo (FSE) (135).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009117/13

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Availability of funding for the ‘Progetto Telefono Blu’ (Blue Telephone Project)

A company has been involved for some 30 years in devising and carrying out projects which use internationally proven methods to improve interpersonal relationships. To take one example, the ‘Progetto Telefono Blu’ aims, with the involvement of lawyers, doctors, psychologists and other professionals to prevent and improve the response to phenomena such as femicide, stalking and violence within couples and to provide effective moral, psychological and legal support for the individuals concerned. The project will cover the Lazio region and will involve Rome City Council (Health Department) and the Ministries of Public Health and Social Policy.

The project will be based on an agreement to set up reception and support facilities in hospitals, and the staff involved will be selected carefully and provided with appropriate training in order to improve their ability to communicate effectively when taking calls from persons in difficulty.

1.

Can the Commission say whether funding would be available for a project of this kind, which would, moreover, safeguard jobs and create new ones?

2.

What, if any, similar projects are being carried out in Europe?

3.

Can the Commission provide any other information relevant to this matter?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 2013)

Funding for transnational projects aimed at preventing and combating violence against women is available under the Daphne III Programme, where a call for proposals is currently open (136).

The directive 2012/29/EU (137) (‘Victims' Directive’) will ensure that women victims of violence benefit from common minimum standards of procedural rights during criminal proceedings. A whole range of special measures will be further put in place, including training to practitioners and support services, in order to protect and support victims, including women victims of e.g. sexual crime or violence in close relationship (138). Funding from the Criminal Justice Programme has also been covering activities in this area (139).

Moreover, the report of the European Institute for gender equality (140) gives an overview of national services which support victims of domestic violence in the EU.

In April 2013, the Commission organised an exchange of practices aimed at discussing experiences related to support services for victims of gender based violence (141).

Furthermore, harmonised 116 helplines exist for victim support (142). The services are provided by public or private organisations selected locally by each Member State. In this context, the 116 006 helpline aims at providing assistance to victims of crime. The Member States could also consider requesting the establishment of the helpline 116 016 for providing specific information and assistance to victims of gender-based violence.

Finally, the project as described does not seem to fall within the scope of the European Social Fund (ESF) (143).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-009200/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Erwarteter Aufschwung durch das Handelsabkommen EU-USA

Angesichts des offenbar nicht enden wollenden Budgettiefs erwarten sich die USA laut jüngsten Medienberichten durch das geplante Freihandelsabkommen einen nicht unerheblichen Handelsaufschwung.

1.

In welcher Größenordnung bewegen sich diese Erwartungen, und erachtet die Kommission diese Erwartungen für realistisch?

2.

Welche konkreten Vorteile erwartet die Kommission insbesondere unter dem Aspekt der noch immer allgegenwärtigen Wirtschaftskrise für die Europäische Union/Eurozone?

3.

Welche Auswirkungen auf den Haushaltsplan der Europäischen Union werden erwartet?

Antwort von Herrn De Gucht im Namen der Kommission

(21. August 2013)

Die EU und die USA handeln täglich mit Waren und Dienstleistungen im Wert von 2 Mrd. EUR und unterhalten damit die umfangreichsten Handelsbeziehungen der Welt. In der im März 2013 veröffentlichten unabhängigen Studie (144) wurden die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen eines Handels‐ und Investitionsabkommens sowohl für die EU als auch für die USA umrissen. Der Studie zufolge könnte sich der gesamtwirtschaftliche Gewinn für die EU auf 119 Mrd. EUR pro Jahr belaufen — dies entspricht einem Zusatzeinkommen von 545 EUR für einen Vier-Personen-Haushalt in der EU. Da sich die EU und der Euroraum nur langsam von der Rezession erholen, könnte dieser Beitrag durchaus beträchtlich sein. Die US-amerikanische Wirtschaft könnte aus dem Abkommen einen Gewinn von 95 Mrd. EUR pro Jahr ziehen, so dass jede amerikanische Familie 655 EUR mehr zur Verfügung hätte. Diesem Nutzen stünden sehr geringe Kosten gegenüber, da er aus der Abschaffung von Zöllen sowie unnötigen Regelungen und bürokratischen Hürden resultieren würde, die derzeit Käufe und Verkäufe über den Atlantik hinweg erschweren.

Das erwartete zusätzliche Wirtschaftswachstum durch die Transatlantische Handels‐ und Investitionspartnerschaft (TTIP) wird jedermann zugutekommen. Die Belebung des Handels ist ein probates Mittel zur Stimulierung der jeweiligen Volkswirtschaften, da sie Nachfrage und Angebot verstärkt, ohne dass die öffentliche Hand ihre Ausgaben oder ihre Kreditaufnahme erhöhen muss. Die einzigen Haushaltskosten für die EU wären der Einnahmenverlust durch den Wegfall der Zölle, der aber der unabhängigen Analyse zufolge auf 5,4 Mrd. EUR begrenzt bliebe. Er wird durch die Verbreiterung der Steuerbemessungsgrundlage infolge der erhöhten Wirtschaftstätigkeit indessen ausgeglichen. Den Berechnungen der Studie zufolge ergäbe sich der wirtschaftliche Nutzen der TTIP bis zu 80 % aus dem Abbau von unnötigen Kosten und Bürokratie aufgrund unterschiedlicher Vorschriften sowie aus der Liberalisierung des Dienstleistungsverkehrs und der öffentlichen Ausschreibungen. Dies wird dazu beitragen, die EU‐Wirtschaft dynamischer und wettbewerbsfähiger zu machen. Insgesamt dürfte das BIP der EU um rund 0,5 % steigen, wenn das Abkommen erst einmal in vollem Umfang angewandt wird.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-009200/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Expected boost as a result of the EU-USA Trade Agreement

According to recent media reports, the USA expects to enjoy a considerable boost to trade as a result of the impending Trade Agreement, at a time when there is no end in sight to the budget slump.

1.

What order of magnitude is meant here by

‘considerable’? Does the Commission think that these are realistic expectations?

2.

What specific advantages does the Commission expect to see for the EU / the eurozone, given the continued persistence of the economic crisis?

3.

What is the expected impact on the EU budget?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(21 August 2013)

The EU-US trade relationship is the biggest in the world, every day we trade goods and services worth EUR 2 billion. The independent study released in March 2013 (145) outlined the economic effects of a trade and investment agreement for both the EU and the US. According to the study, the EU's economy could benefit by EUR 119 billion a year ‐ equivalent to an extra EUR 545 for a family of four in the EU. As the EU and euro area slowly emerge from the recession, this contribution has the potential to be significant. The US economy could gain an extra EUR 95 billion a year or EUR 655 per American family. These benefits would cost very little as they would result from removing tariffs and unnecessary rules and bureaucratic hurdles that make it difficult to buy and sell across the Atlantic.

The extra economic growth that is expected to come from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will benefit everyone. Promoting trade is a good way of boosting our economies by creating increased demand and supply without having to increase public spending or borrowing. The only budgetary cost for the EU would be the loss in revenue associated with tariff elimination, which the independent analysis concludes to be limited to EUR 5.4 billion. This will be offset by the expansion of the tax base associated with the increased economic activity. The study also calculates that up to 80% of the economic benefits of the TTIP would come from reducing unnecessary costs and red tape stemming from divergent regulations, and from liberalising trade in services and government tenders. This will contribute to make the EU economy more dynamic and competitive. Overall, the EU’s GDP would be boosted by around 0.5%, once the deal will be fully implemented.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009201/13

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(29 de julio de 2013)

Asunto: «Fracking»

Los estudios sobre repercusiones de la extracción de gas y petróleo de esquisto mediante fractura hidráulica «(fracking)» en el medio ambiente y la salud humana ponen de manifiesto los elevados riesgos que comporta esta técnica minera, dada su toxicidad, potencial sismicidad y limitada capacidad técnica existente para la prevención de tales riesgos. Sin embargo, y a pesar de ello, en Castilla y León, el Gobierno español ha autorizado un proyecto de investigación para un futuro campo de explotación en la cabecera de la cuenca del río Jalón, denominado «Cronos», que afectaría a las aguas de este río a nivel superficial y a la red de acuíferos subterráneos de dicha cuenca. Además de las afecciones directas al LIC de los Sabinares del Jalón y las ZEPA de Monteagudo de las Vicarías, Páramo de Layna y Parameras de Maranchón, hoz del Mesa y Aragoncillo, son de destacar las afecciones a la agricultura y ganadería de la zona, así como el enorme impacto que supondría para esa zona el que se malograse la actividad de los balnearios aragoneses de Paracuellos de Jiloca, Jaraba (Sicilia, La Virgen y Serón), Alhama de Aragón (Pallarés) y de las tres plantas embotelladoras de agua mineral (Lunares, Fontjaraba y Fontecabras) que se encuentran en la Comunidad de Calatayud. Todo ello, en un contexto general de enormes dificultades económicas resultaría demoledor e irreversible para unas comarcas rurales que luchan contra la despoblación, el envejecimiento y el abandono con actividades económicas alternativas.

¿Cree la Comisión que estos proyectos son compatibles con la legislación europea en materia de aguas, con la preservación de la Red Natura 2000, con las actividades económicas (turismo, termalismo, comercialización de agua mineral, ganadería, agricultura, etc.) existentes en esa zona y con la preservación de la seguridad y la salud humanas?

Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión

(19 de septiembre de 2013)

La Comisión no lleva a cabo un seguimiento pormenorizado de las operaciones concretas de exploración o explotación de gas de esquisto en lugares o regiones específicos. Incumbe a los Estados miembros garantizar, a través de evaluaciones adecuadas, regímenes de concesión de autorizaciones y licencias y actividades de supervisión e inspección, que todas las exploraciones o explotaciones de fuentes de energía, incluidas las que utilizan la técnica de la fractura hidráulica, cumplan los requisitos establecidos en el marco jurídico existente en la EU. Ello incluye, entre otras cosas, las disposiciones en materia de evaluaciones de impacto ambiental y participación pública (146), protección de las aguas superficiales y las aguas subterráneas (147), gestión de los residuos (148) y conservación de los hábitats naturales (149).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009201/13

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Fracking

Studies on the environmental and public health repercussions of extracting oil and gas from shale rock by hydraulic fracturing (a process commonly known as ‘fracking’) have brought to light the high risks associated with the technique, which include its use of toxic chemicals, its potential to cause seismic activity and the fact that existing technical capabilities to prevent such risks are limited. However, despite the risks, the Spanish Government has authorised a project to explore a future extraction area known as ‘Cronos’ in the headwaters of the Jalón river in the region of Castilla y León. If extraction were to go ahead it would affect both the surface water of the river and the network of aquifers underneath the basin. In addition to the direct effect it would have on Sabinares del Jalón, a site of Community importance, and the Special Protection Areas of Monteagudo de las Vicarías, Páramo de Layna and Parameras de Maranchón, Hoz de Mesa y Aragoncillo, it is worth highlighting the effect on local farming (both arable and livestock) and the huge impact it would have were it to disrupt operations at the Aragonese thermal baths in Paracuellos de Jiloca, Jaraba (Sicilia, La Virgen and Serón) and Alhama de Aragón (Pallarés) and the three mineral water bottling plants (Lunares, Fontjaraba and Fontecabras) in the municipality of Calatayud. Given the enormous economic difficulties that people are facing at the moment, these repercussions would prove devastating and irreversible for some rural communities which are struggling to deal with declining and ageing populations and the disappearance of alternative forms of economic activity.

Does the Commission believe that these projects are compatible with EU legislation on water, with the preservation of the Natura 2000 network, with existing economic activity in the area (tourism, the spa industry, mineral water production, farming, etc.) and with the need to safeguard people’s health and security?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2013)

The Commission does not follow in detail specific shale gas exploration or exploitation operations in individual locations or regions. It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure — via appropriate assessments, licensing and permitting regimes as well as monitoring and inspections activities — that any exploration or exploitation of energy sources, including those using hydraulic fracturing, complies with the requirements of the existing legal framework in the EU. This includes, inter alia,provisions on environmental impact assessments and public participation (150), the protection of surface and groundwater (151), on waste management (152) and on the conservation of natural habitats (153).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009202/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Umweltverschmutzung in Galicien

Die Lebensbedingungen in Galicien werden zunehmend schlechter. Die Besorgnis über die Gesundheit und Sicherheit der einheimischen Bevölkerung wächst.

Die Medien melden, dass für die Wiederherstellung der Flussufer der „Ría de Ferrol“ EU-Gelder widmungswidrig für die Herstellung eines Weges entlang der Küste verwendet wurden.

1.

Ist dieser Umstand der Kommission bekannt?

2.

Kann die Kommission dazu gegebenenfalls Details nennen? (Um ausführliche Erläuterung wird gebeten)

3.

Wie wurden die EU-Fördergelder, die zur Wiederherstellung des Flussufers gedacht waren, in der Tat genutzt? Gebeten wird um eine entsprechende Auflistung der jeweiligen Haushaltslinien und ihrer Details.

4.

Hat die Kommission gegebenenfalls Kenntnis, ob es einen Zusammenhang zwischen den Korruptionsvorwürfen gegen die spanische Regierung und den Vorfällen in Galicien gibt?

Antwort von Johannes Hahn im Namen der Kommission

(25. September 2013)

1.-2. Der Kommission ist weder bekannt, dass die für die Wiederherstellung des Flussufers der Ría de Ferrol vorgesehenen EU-Gelder angeblich für den Bau einer Straße entlang der Küste verwendet wurden, noch kennt sie entsprechende Medienberichte oder die Grundlage für derartige Behauptungen.

3.

Umweltschutzmaßnahmen wie Kanalisations‐ und Abwasserbehandlungarbeiten sind eine wichtige Priorität der galicischen Programme. Daher wurden mehrere Projekte aus dem Europäischen Fonds für regionale Entwicklung finanziell unterstützt. Gemäß den geltenden nationalen und den EU-Vorschriften sind nach dem Grundsatz der geteilten Verwaltung allein die Mitgliedstaaten und die nationalen Behörden für die Auswahl, Verwaltung und Durchführung von Projekten im Rahmen der Programme verantwortlich. Die Kommission legt der Frau Abgeordneten daher nahe, sich direkt mit den Verwaltungsbehörden in Verbindung zu setzen.

Ministerio de Economía y Hacienda — Madrid, España

Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios

Subdirección General de Administración del FEDER

Paseo de la Castellana, 162

28071 Madrid

Spanien

http://www.dgfc.sepg.minhap.gob.es/sitios/DGFC/es-ES/Paginas/inicio.aspx

4.

Die Kommission kann hierzu keine Angaben machen, da ihr zu der von der Frau Abgeordneten angesprochenen Frage keinerlei Informationen vorliegen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009202/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Environmental pollution in Galicia

Living conditions in Galicia are getting steadily worse. Concern about the health and safety of the local population is growing.

According to media reports, EU money to restore the banks of the Ría de Ferrol is being used to build a road along the coast.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2.

Can the Commission provide any details on this? Please provide a comprehensive explanation.

3.

How has EU aid for the restoration of the river bank actually been used? Please provide a list with details of individual budget headings.

4.

Does the Commission know if there is any connection between the complaints of corruption against the Spanish Government and the incidents in Galicia?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2013)

1-2. The Commission is not aware of the use of EU money for building a road along the coast instead of restoring the banks of the Ria de Ferrol, nor of the media reports referred to in the question or the basis for such allegations.

3.

Environmental works including sanitation and waste water treatment are an important priority of programmes for Galicia. Therefore, several projects have been supported by European Regional Development Fund financing. Within the framework of the shared management principle, the responsibility for the selection, management and implementation of projects within the programmes lies solely with the Member States and the national authorities, in full compliance with applicable EU and national legislation. Therefore, the Commission suggests that the Honourable Member contact directly the managing authority of the programmes:

Ministerio de Economía y Hacienda — Madrid, España

Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios, Subdirección General de Administración del FEDER

Paseo de la Castellana, 162

28071 Madrid

http://www.dgfc.sepg.minhap.gob.es/sitios/DGFC/es-ES/Paginas/inicio.aspx

4.

As the Commission has no information concerning the issue raised by the Honourable Member, it is unable to comment further.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009203/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Wirtschaftliche Entwicklung Bulgariens und deren Auswirkungen

Es wird zuletzt vermehrt berichtet, dass Bulgarien zu wenig im Kampf gegen Korruption und andere Missstände, wie beispielsweise die mangelhaften demokratischen Standards, unternimmt. Viele wichtige Reformen würden dort nicht umgesetzt werden. Des Weiteren wird berichtet, dass Minderheiten (u. a. Roma) auf Gebieten wie Bildung, Arbeit und Gesundheitsversorgung unvermindert andauernd diskriminiert werden.

1.

Wie bewertet die Kommission diese Vorwürfe?

2.

Wie bewertet die Kommission die Entwicklungen zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt des EU-Beitritts von Bulgarien sowohl kurz‐ als auch langfristig?

3.

Wie werden EU-Gelder (Kohäsionsfonds / Strukturfonds / Entwicklungsfonds), die zur Förderung der Infrastruktur bzw. Wirtschaft eingesetzt werden sollten, in der Tat nun genutzt? (Mit der Bitte um eine entsprechende Auflistung der jeweiligen Projekte, Haushaltslinien und ihrer Details)?

4.

Sind der Kommission gegebenenfalls Korruptionsfälle und Verletzungen gegen die Menschenrechte, wie im Fall der Roma, bekannt? Wenn ja, wie gedenkt sie in der Tat konkret bei der Bekämpfung von Korruption und der Verteidigung der Menschenrechte in diesem Land vorzugehen?

Antwort von Herrn Šefčovič im Namen der Kommission

(16. September 2013)

Beim EU-Beitritt Bulgariens wurde eingeräumt, dass noch immer Unzulänglichkeiten bei der Justizreform sowie bei der Bekämpfung von Korruption und organisierter Kriminalität bestanden. Es wurde vereinbart, einen Kooperations‐ und Überprüfungsmechanismus zur Unterstützung Bulgariens und zur Überwachung der Fortschritte in diesen Bereichen einzurichten. Im Rahmen dieses Mechanismus führen die Kommission und die bulgarischen Behörden einen kontinuierlichen Dialog über alle einschlägigen Fragen, wie die Bekämpfung von Korruption und organisierter Kriminalität. Sowohl durch regelmäßige Kontakte in Brüssel als auch durch eine ständige Präsenz in Sofia ist gewährleistet, dass die Kommission stets über die neuesten Entwicklungen im Land informiert ist. Die Kommission organisiert im September eine ihrer regelmäßigen Expertenmissionen nach Bulgarien, die unter anderem das Thema Korruptionsbekämpfung zum Gegenstand haben wird. Die Kommission wird Ende dieses Jahres über die Fortschritte Bulgariens im Rahmen des Kooperations‐ und Überprüfungsmechanismus Bericht erstatten. Sie erhält eine Vielzahl von Informationen über Korruptions‐ und Menschenrechtsfragen, die von Fall zu Fall bewertet werden.

Mit den EU-Strukturfonds werden unterschiedlichste Maßnahmen in Bulgarien unterstützt, unter anderem Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der Lage von Minderheiten, vor allem der Roma. Dazu zählen auch der Wiederaufbau und die Instandsetzung bildungsbezogener, sozialer, sanitärer und städtischer Infrastrukturen. Die mangelnde öffentliche Unterstützung für solche Initiativen stellt eines der größten Hindernisse für die erfolgreiche Umsetzung der Integrationspolitik für Roma dar. Die Kommission kann der Frau Abgeordneten direkt zusätzliche Auskünfte zu diesem Thema geben. Ausführliche Informationen zu spezifischen Projekten im Rahmen der verschiedenen operationellen Programme in Bulgarien sind auf folgender Website zu finden: http://www.eufunds.bg/

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009203/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Economic developments in Bulgaria and their impact

We are increasingly hearing reports recently that Bulgaria is doing too little in the fight against corruption and other problems, such as the lack of democratic standards. Numerous important reforms have not been implemented. There are also reports that minorities (including the Roma) are still subject to persistent discrimination in areas such as education, work and healthcare.

1.

How does the Commission assess these complaints?

2.

What is the Commission’s prognosis for the post-accession situation in Bulgaria in the short and in the long term?

3.

How is EU money to support infrastructure and the economy (Cohesion Fund/Structural Funds/Regional Development Fund) actually being used on the ground? Please provide a list with details of projects and budgetary headings.

4.

Is the Commission aware of cases of corruption and human rights violations, as in the case of the Roma? If so, what specific measures does it intend to take to combat corruption and defend human rights in this country?

Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

When Bulgaria acceded to the European Union, it was acknowledged that shortcomings remained concerning the reform of the judiciary and the fight against corruption and organised crime. It was agreed to set up a Cooperation and Verification Mechanism in order to support Bulgaria and to monitor progress in these areas. Under the CVM, the Commission and the Bulgarian authorities carry out a continuing dialogue on all CVM related matters, including progress in the fight against corruption and organised crime. Both through regular contacts in Brussels, as well as through a permanent presence in Sofia, it is ensured that the Commission is informed of the latest developments in the country. The Commission will organise one of its regular expert missions to Bulgaria in September where the issue of the fight against corruption will also be covered. The Commission will report on progress in Bulgaria under the CVM at the end of this year. The Commission receives a variety of information concerning corruption and human rights issues, which are assessed on a case by case basis.

EU structural funds have supported a wide variety of actions in Bulgaria, including improving the situation of minorities, in particular Roma. This includes reconstruction and renovation of educational, social, health and urban infrastructure. The lack of public support for such initiatives is one of the main barriers for the successful implementation of Roma integration policy. The Commission can provide further details directly to the Honourable Member. Detailed information regarding specific projects covered by the different Operational Programmes in Bulgaria can also be found on the website: http://www.eufunds.bg/.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009204/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Wirtschaftsprobleme in Kroatien

Kroatien ist nach Slowenien das zweite EU-Mitgliedsland aus dem ehemaligen Jugoslawien.

Es wird immer wieder über Probleme berichtet, die in dieser Region aufgrund der historischen Entwicklungen noch heute bestehen.

So sei die Wirtschaft schwer angeschlagen, die Industrie liege am Boden, die Sozialsysteme stünden unter Druck, und die öffentliche Verwaltung müsste modernisiert werden.

1.

Wie bewertet die Kommission diesen Umstand nach dem Beitritt kurz‐ als auch langfristig?

2.

Wie gedenkt die Kommission gegebenenfalls die schwerwiegenden Probleme wie etwa die hohe Arbeitslosigkeit und das niedrige Lohnniveau anzugehen? Gibt es dazu insbesondere konkrete Lösungsansätze für die budgetären Auswirkungen auf die EU wie auch auf die Eurozone? (Mit der Bitte um ausführliche Erklärung)

3.

Sind der Kommission konkrete Korruptionsfälle im Land bekannt? Falls ja, welche Strategien werden zur Bekämpfung dieser Fälle zur Lösung in Erwägung gezogen?

4.

Wie werden EU-Gelder, die zur Förderung der Wirtschaft gedacht sind, genutzt? Um welche Beträge aus den verschiedenen Fonds (Kohäsions-/Struktur-/Regionalfonds) handelt es sich? (Mit der Bitte um entsprechende Auflistung der Projekte/Haushaltslinien)

Antwort von Herrn Hahn im Namen der Kommission

(24. September 2013)

1.

Laut der Frühjahrsprognose der Kommission wird das BIP im Jahr 2013 um 1 % sinken. Kurzfristig besteht die größte Herausforderung darin, einen arbeitsplatzintensiven Aufschwung zu bewerkstelligen und gleichzeitig den Haushalt zu konsolidieren. Mittelfristig geht es um die Umsetzung der Strukturreformen, die Förderung der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und die Verbesserung der Wachstumsaussichten.

2.

In der Arbeitsunterlage der Kommissionsdienststellen

2.

In der Arbeitsunterlage der Kommissionsdienststellen

 (154)

Die Auswirkungen des EU-Beitritts Kroatiens auf den Haushalt und den Euroraum sind kein Thema, da Kroatien kein Programmland ist.

3.

Bei der Umsetzung der EU-Fonds für regionale Entwicklung wird besonderes Augenmerk auf eine wirtschaftliche Haushaltsführung gelegt. Bis Januar 2013 unterlag die Verwaltung der EU-Finanzmittel einer strengen Überwachung und Ex-ante-Kontrolle durch die EU-Delegation in Kroatien. Bisher wurden keine größeren Fälle von Betrug oder Korruption aufgedeckt.

4.

Im Entwurf des EU-Legislativpakets für den Zeitraum 2014-2020 sind die Investitionsprioritäten der EU-Fonds auf die Kernziele von

„Europa 2020“ ausgerichtet, so dass die Finanzmittel vor allem für das Erreichen der nationalen und europäischen sozioökonomischen Ziele eingesetzt werden.

Die laufenden Programme für den Zeitraum 2007-2013, die im Rahmen des Instruments für Heranführungshilfe in den Bereichen regionale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, Verkehr, Umwelt und Humanressourcen angenommen wurden, werden im Rahmen der Kohäsionspolitik eine neue Mittelzuweisung in Höhe von 450 Mio. EUR (155) erhalten. Kroatien bereitet derzeit den neuen Programmplanungszeitraum 2014-2020 vor (8 Mrd. EUR).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009204/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Economic problems in Croatia

Croatia is the second Member State from the former Yugoslavia, after Slovenia, to join the EU.

We are repeatedly hearing reports of persistent problems caused by historical developments.

For example, the economy is in dire straits, industry has collapsed, social systems are under pressure and the public administration needs to be modernised.

1.

What is the Commission’s prognosis for this post-accession situation, in both the short and the long term?

2.

How does the Commission think serious problems such as high unemployment and low wages should be addressed? Have any specific approaches been considered for resolving the budgetary impact on the EU and on the euro area? Please provide a detailed explanation.

3.

Does the Commission know of specific cases of corruption in this country? If so, what strategies are being considered as solutions to combat such cases?

4.

How is EU money intended to support the economy actually being used? What amounts from the various funds (Cohesion Fund/Structural Funds/Regional Development Fund) are involved? Please list relevant projects/budget headings.

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2013)

1.

According to the Commission spring forecast,

GDP will contract by 1% in 2013. In the short term, a key challenge is to kickstart a job-rich growth, while ensuring fiscal consolidation. In the medium term, it is implementing structural reforms, promoting competitiveness and improving growth prospects.

2.

The Commission's 2013 Staff Working Document

2.

The Commission's 2013 Staff Working Document

 (156)

The budgetary impact of Croatia's accession on the EU and the euro area is not an issue; Croatia is not a programme country.

3.

In the implementation of EU funds for regional development, particular attention is being paid to sound financial management. Until January 2013, EU fund management was under close supervision and

ex-ante

control of the EU Delegation in Croatia. So far, no major fraud or corruption cases were found.

4.

The EU draft legislative package for the 2014-20 period aligns the key investment priorities from EU funds with the Europe 2020 headline targets, channelling funds towards national and EU socioeconomic goals.

The ongoing 2007-13 programmes adopted under the Instrument for Pre-Accession for regional competitiveness, transport, environment and human resources benefit from a new allocation of EUR 450 million (157) under cohesion policy. Croatia is currently preparing for the 2014-20 period (EUR 8 billion).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009205/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Wirtschaftliche Entwicklung Rumäniens und deren Auswirkungen

Rumänien sei schwer von der Wirtschaftskrise angeschlagen, wird vielerorts berichtet. Gerade dort wachse der Unmut in der Bevölkerung, denn das Land unterziehe sich einem eisernen Sparprogramm.

Korruption und Bürokratie seien bis heute Alltag im Geschäftsleben Rumäniens. Die schlechte Wirtschaftslage Rumäniens führe bereits zu einer Massenflucht von Arbeitskräften. Millionen Menschen gingen in den letzten Jahren nach Westeuropa, zum Beispiel nach Spanien oder Italien.

1.

Wie bewertet die Kommission die eingangs beschriebenen Umstände nach dem Beitritt Rumäniens kurz‐ und langfristig?

2.

Wie wirkt sich dieser Auswanderungsstrom sowohl budgetär als auch soziopolitisch auf die Mitgliedstaaten aus angesichts der Tatsache, dass sich die weitere Entwicklung in Rumänien nicht verbessern würde?

3.

Hat die Kommission Detailkenntnisse zur finanziellen und wirtschaftlichen Lage Rumäniens, und wie werden die EU-Gelder für die Förderung der Wirtschaftslage vor Ort in der Tat genutzt? (Mit der Bitte um ausführliche Auflistung der jeweiligen Projekte, Haushaltslinien und ihrer Details)

4.

Sieht die Kommission es als fiskalpolitisches Alarmsignal, dass der Mittelstand im Rückgang begriffen ist und die Armut generell zunimmt? Wenn ja, welche Maßnahmen gedenkt sie zu empfehlen und gegebenenfalls auf europäischer Ebene zu ergreifen?

Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission

(7. Oktober 2013)

Seit Ausbruch der Finanzkrise hat sich die Wirtschaftslage Rumäniens dank zweier Zahlungsbilanzprogramme verbessert. Das Wachstum dürfte im Jahr 2013 bei 1,6 % und im Jahr 2014 bei 2,2 % liegen (158). Damit wird das geschätzte Wachstumspotenzial von 2,1 % bzw. 2,6 % nicht ausgeschöpft, was teils auf die verzögerte Umsetzung der geplanten Reformen, unzureichende Verwaltungskapazitäten und eine unzulängliche Prioritätensetzung bei den öffentlichen Investitionen zurückzuführen ist.

Der Arbeitsmarkt in Rumänien zeigt sich solide (159) mit einer Erwerbslosenquote, die deutlich niedriger ist als der EU-Durchschnitt (160).

Für den Zeitraum 2007-2013 wurden Rumänien fast 20 Mrd. EUR im Rahmen des Ziels „Konvergenz“ (161) zugewiesen. Mit diesen Mitteln sollen Projekte in den Bereichen Verkehrs‐ und Umweltinfrastruktur, Forschung, KMU-Unterstützung, Energie, Entwicklung der Humanressourcen und Verbesserung der Verwaltungskapazität gefördert werden (162). Für das rumänische Nationale Programm für ländliche Entwicklung wurden weitere Mittel in Höhe von 8 Mrd. EUR bereitgestellt, die der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der Agrar‐ und Ernährungswirtschaft und der Diversifizierung der ländlichen Wirtschaft zugutekommen. Die Durchführung der Programme verläuft nur schleppend. Der Rat hat Rumänien 2013 in einer länderspezifischen Empfehlung (163) aufgefordert, die Verwaltungskapazitäten zu stärken, um die Inanspruchnahme von EU-Mitteln zu beschleunigen.

Die Kommission widmet wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Entwicklungen große Aufmerksamkeit. Die Verbesserung des wirtschaftlichen Umfelds für KMU war Teil der letzten beiden Programme (siehe Arbeitsunterlage der Kommissionsdienststellen für eine Gesamtbewertung (164)), gehörte zu den länderspezifischen Empfehlungen und ist geplanter Bestandteil des von den rumänischen Behörden beantragten Zahlungsbilanzprogramms 2013-2015. Der vorsichtig austarierte Konsolidierungspfad für Rumänien ist auf Defizitabbau und nachhaltiges Wachstum angelegt.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009205/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Economic developments in Romania and their impact

Romania has been hit hard by the economic crisis, as reported in numerous media. Resentment at the harsh austerity programme imposed on the country is growing among the population.

Corruption and bureaucracy are daily occurrences in Romania’s commercial life. Romania’s weak economy has already resulted in a mass exodus of workers. Millions of people have left in recent years for Western European countries such as Spain or Italy.

1.

What is the Commission’s prognosis for this post-accession situation in Romania, in both the short and the long term?

2.

What impact is this migratory movement having on the budgets and social policy of the Member States, assuming that the situation in Romania does not improve?

3.

Does the Commission have detailed information on the financial and economic situation in Romania and on how EU money to support the economy is actually being used on the ground? Please provide a comprehensive list with details of projects and budgetary headings.

4.

Does the Commission view the fact that small and medium-sized enterprises are declining and poverty in general is increasing as an alarm bell in terms of fiscal policy? If so, what measures is it thinking of recommending and, where necessary, applying at European level?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2013)

Since the financial crisis and with the support of two BoP (165) programmes, Romania has improved its economic stance. Growth is projected at 1.6% in 2013 and 2.2% in 2014. (166) This is still below potential growth, estimated at 2.1% and 2.6%, respectively, in part due to delayed implementation of planned reforms, weak administrative capacity and insufficient prioritisation of public investment.

Romania's own labour market performs well (167), with an unemployment rate markedly lower than the EU average (168) .

For 2007-13, Romania has been allocated almost EUR 20 billion under the Convergence Objective (169) supporting projects for transport and environment infrastructure, research, SMEs support, energy, human resources development and improvement of the administrative capacity. (170) The Romanian National Rural Development Programme has an allocation of an additional EUR 8 billion which contributes to promoting competitiveness in the agri-food sector and diversification of the rural economy. Implementation of the programmes has been slow. The Council recommendation (CSRs) addressed to Romania in 2013 (171) called for the strengthening of administrative capacity, in order to accelerate the absorption of EU funds.

The Commission pays close attention to business and social developments. Improving the business environment for SMEs was part of the past two programmes (see the Commission’s services paper for an overall assessment (172)), was part of the CSRs, and would be part of the 2013-2015 BoP programme requested by the Romanian authorities. The fiscal adjustment path for Romania is cautiously balanced to achieve deficit reduction and sustained growth.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009206/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Mehr Netto vom Brutto

In vielen Mitgliedstaaten stellt sich die Frage nach „mehr Netto vom Brutto“.

So soll es laut Medienberichten künftig eine seriöse Form der Gegenfinanzierung geben, wenn man sich eine reine Abgabensenkung zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt wegen der Haushaltslage nicht leisten könne.

1.

Wie bewertet die Kommission das Konzept?

2.

Erwägt die Kommission, gegebenenfalls die Umsetzung in den Mitgliedstaaten zu unterstützen, und wenn ja, wie?

Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission

(12. September 2013)

In ihrem Jahreswachstumsbericht 2013 forderte die Kommission eine effizientere, gerechtere und wachstumsfreundlichere Ausgestaltung der Steuersysteme. Entsprechend sollte die Besteuerung des Faktors Arbeit dort, wo sie vergleichsweise hoch ist, der Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen entgegensteht und sich nachteilig auf die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit auswirken könnte, deutlich gesenkt werden. Damit etwaige Reformen aufkommensneutral sind, könnten im Gegenzug Steuern, die als weniger wachstumsschädlich gelten, wie beispielsweise Verbrauchsteuern, Grundsteuern oder Umweltsteuern, angehoben werden.

Auf der Grundlage einer Überprüfung der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Entwicklungen in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten sowie der im Jahreswachstumsbericht dargelegten EU-weiten Handlungsprioritäten hat die Kommission im Mai 2013 an jeden Mitgliedstaat länderspezifische Empfehlungen gerichtet. Diese Empfehlungen wurden im Juni 2013 vom Europäischen Rat gebilligt und im Juli 2013 vom Rat förmlich verabschiedet. Eine der für mehrere Mitgliedstaaten genannten Reformprioritäten ist die Eindämmung der Steuer‐ und Abgabenbelastung des Faktors Arbeit. Ziel ist es, Arbeitsanreize zu setzen und die relativ hohen Arbeitskosten, insbesondere für geringqualifizierte Arbeitskräfte, zu reduzieren. Zur Gewährleistung tragfähiger öffentlicher Finanzen müssen derartige Steuer‐ und Abgabensenkungen gegenfinanziert werden.

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/annual-growth-surveys/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/country-specific-recommendations/index_de.htm

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009206/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: More net from the gross

In many Member States the issue of ‘more net from the gross’ is being raised.

Media reports are claiming that we should in future have a reliable form of reciprocal financing if we cannot afford a pure tax cut at the present time on account of the budgetary situation.

1.

What is the Commission’s view of this idea?

2.

Is it considering supporting its implementation in the Member States, where appropriate, and if so, how?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2013)

In its 2013 Annual Growth Survey (AGS), the Commission calls for tax systems to be made more effective, fairer and less detrimental to growth. In this respect, the tax burden on labour should be substantially reduced in countries where it is comparatively high and hampers job creation and could pose a drag on competitiveness. To ensure that reforms are revenue neutral, taxes considered less detrimental to growth, such as consumption tax, recurrent property tax and environmental taxes could be increased.

Based on the review of each Member State's economic and social performance, and the EU-wide priorities for action set out in the abovementioned AGS, the Commission adopted a set of country-specific recommendations for each Member State in May 2013. The recommendations were endorsed by the European Council in June 2013 and formally adopted by the Council in July 2013. A reform priority identified for several Member States was to limit labour taxation in order to raise incentives to work and to reduce the relatively high cost of labour, in particular for low-skilled workers. In order to ensure sound public finances, such tax cuts need then to be compensated financially.

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/annual-growth-surveys/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/country-specific-recommendations/index_en.htm

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009207/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Korruption in Europa

Laut diverser Medienberichte soll die Korruption im Geschäftsleben von Slowenien zu 96 %, in Griechenland zu 84 % und in Spanien zu 61 % an der Tagesordnung sein.

Die Wirtschaftskrise verschärfe die Situation in vielen Ländern Europas, weil die Unternehmen trotzdem unter Druck stünden, mit Umsatz‐ und Gewinnzuwächsen zu glänzen.

1.

Ist dieser Umstand der Kommission bekannt?

2.

Wenn ja, wie ist der aktuelle Stand der Situation in den jeweiligen Ländern?

3.

In welchen Höhen bewegen sich die Summen, die den Mitgliedstaaten in den Bereichen Kohäsionsfonds/Strukturfonds/Regionalfonds durch Korruption verloren gehen?

4.

Zu wie viel Prozent kann die Kommission durch Korruption verlorene Gelder wieder

„zurückgewinnen“?

Antwort von Frau Malmström im Namen der Kommission

(30. September 2013)

Der Kommission sind die zahlreichen Medienberichte über die Korruption in einigen Mitgliedstaaten bekannt.

Sie erstellt derzeit den ersten Antikorruptionsbericht der EU, der noch dieses Jahr angenommen werden soll. Ziel ist es, den Stand der Korruptionsbekämpfung in der Europäischen Union in regelmäßigen Abständen zu untersuchen sowie bewährte Verfahren der Korruptionsbekämpfung zu fördern und den politischen Willen hierzu in den Ländern und Bereichen, in denen entschiedener gegen Korruption vorgegangen werden muss, zu stimulieren. Nachfolgend soll auf Grundlage von der Kommission vorliegenden Informationen alle zwei Jahre ein entsprechender Bericht zur Situation in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten herausgegeben werden.

Im Oktober 2013 wird die Kommission Schätzungen zu den Kosten der Korruption im Rahmen der öffentlichen Auftragsvergabe publizieren, die auf einer von einem Beratungsunternehmen für das Europäische Amt für Betrugsbekämpfung (OLAF) durchgeführten Studie basieren.

Für die Wiedereinziehung rechtsgrundlos gezahlter Beträge zu Lasten des EU-Haushalts im Wege einer angemessenen Strafverfolgung sind in erster Linie die Mitgliedstaaten verantwortlich.

Ferner verweist die Kommission die Frau Abgeordnete auf den letzten Jahresbericht über den Schutz der finanziellen Interessen der Europäischen Union — Betrugsbekämpfung (173) und auf den Jahresbericht des OLAF (174).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009207/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Corruption in Europe

According to various media reports, corruption affects 96% of business life in Slovenia, 84% in Greece and 61% in Spain.

The economic crisis is exacerbating the situation in numerous countries in Europe, because companies are under pressure to perform by increasing sales and profits.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2.

If so, what is the current situation in each individual country?

3.

How much money are the Member States losing to corruption through the Cohesion Fund, the Structural Funds and the Regional Development Fund?

4.

What percentage of money lost due to corruption can the Commission

‘recover’?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the numerous reports concerning corruption in particular in some Member States.

The Commission is currently drafting the first EU Anti-Corruption Report, to be adopted later in 2013. The objective is to periodically assess the situation in the Union regarding the fight against corruption promote good practices and stimulate political will in those countries and sectors where corruption needs to be addressed more vigorously. Subsequent reports will follow every two years.

Based on the information which is available to the Commission, the situation for each Member State will be set out in the abovementioned report.

On the basis of a study conducted by a consultancy firm for OLAF, the Commission will publish estimates of the costs of corruption in public procurement in October 2013.

The Member States are in the first instance responsible for the recovery of sums unduly paid affecting the EU Budget through appropriate judicial prosecution.

The Commission would further refer the Honourable Member to its recent annual report on the Protection of the EU's financial interests — Fight against fraud (175) and to the OLAF annual report (176).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009208/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Anfrage zu der Einfuhr von Lebensmitteln aus den USA

Aufgrund der derzeitigen Verhandlungen über die Freihandelszone zwischen der EU und den USA werden Befürchtungen über die Einfuhr von „Chlorhuhn“ und „Klonfleisch“ laut. Eine reine Kennzeichnung der Lebensmittel reiche nicht aus, wird vielfach geäußert. Wenn Hühner wie in den USA zur Desinfizierung beim Schlachten durch ein Chlorbad gezogen würden, dann sei der Anreiz für hohe Hygienestandards in Ställen wohl eher gering.

Während in Europa beispielsweise genveränderte Lebensmittel bei Verbrauchern und Politikern auf breite Ablehnung stoßen, verhält es sich in den USA völlig anders: 90 % des verwendeten Mais, der Sojabohnen und der Zuckerrüben sind gentechnisch verändert und werden akzeptiert. In Amerika gibt es auch keine Kennzeichnungspflichten.

Dementsprechend ist es schwer nachvollziehbar, welche Inhaltsstoffe verwendet wurden und wie das Produkt produziert wurde. Beispiele sind hormonbelastetes Rindfleisch und Hähnchen, die mit Chlor desinfiziert werden.

1.

Hat die Kommission entsprechende Detailkenntnisse, und wie lautet ihre Beurteilung? (Bitte um ausführliche Erläuterung)

2.

Wird es Handelsschranken für Lebensmittel aus den USA geben, oder werden diese nur entsprechend den EU-Standards in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten gekennzeichnet?

3.

Wie verhält sich die länderspezifische Situation?

4.

Welche Standards müssen die einzuführenden Lebensmittel erfüllen?

5.

Wird es in der Folge bestimmte Regelungen bei der Produktion der Güter geben?

6.

Ist sich die Kommission der Folgen einer möglichen Preiserhöhung bei heimischen Produkten bewusst?

Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission

(6. September 2013)

Einige in den Vereinigten Staaten relativ übliche Lebensmittelproduktionsverfahren sind in der EU tatsächlich nicht zugelassen. Daher dürfen Lebensmittel, die auf diese Weise produziert werden, nicht auf den EU‐Markt gelangen. In die EU eingeführte Lebensmittel müssen entsprechend den Anforderungen der EU oder zumindest solchen, die die EU als gleichwertig erachtet, hergestellt werden. Die US‐Behörden müssen diese Bestimmungen einhalten. Die Einhaltung der Vorschriften wird von den zuständigen Behörden des Ausfuhrlandes überwacht, vom Lebensmittel‐ und Veterinäramt der Kommission regelmäßig kontrolliert und bei der Einfuhr von Produkten in die EU von den EU‐Grenzkontrollstellen überprüft. Gleichermaßen müssen aus der EU in die Vereinigten Staaten ausgeführte Lebensmittel die Anforderungen der USA oder solche, die als gleichwertig erachtet werden, erfüllen.

Bei den Verhandlungen zur transatlantischen Handels‐ und Investitionspartnerschaft stehen grundlegende Rechtsvorschriften zum Verbraucherschutz in der EU nicht zur Debatte. EU‐Standards für sichere Lebensmittel gelten für alle Lebensmittel in der EU, ungeachtet dessen, ob diese von einem Mitgliedstaat oder von einem Drittland produziert werden. Die EU ist eine Einheit mit einem Gemeinsamen Markt und harmonisierten Einfuhrvorschriften. Daher haben alle 28 Mitgliedstaaten dieselben gesundheitspolizeilichen Einfuhrvorschriften.

Die Kommission möchte die Frau Abgeordnete auf die Antworten auf die Anfragen E‐1348/2013 (177) und E‐002504/13 (1) bezüglich GVO aufmerksam machen.

Bezüglich der Frage nach den Auswirkungen auf die inländischen Produktionskosten ist es unwahrscheinlich, dass ein Freihandelsabkommen mit den Vereinigten Staaten eine Preissteigerung inländischer EU‐Produkte zur Folge hätte.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009208/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Inquiry into imported foodstuffs from the USA

In the light of current negotiations on a free trade area between the EU and the USA, fears are being expressed about imports of chlorine-washed poultry and meat from cloned animals. Simple labelling of foodstuffs does not suffice, as has been explained on many occasions. If poultry are pulled through a chlorine disinfection bath during slaughter, as in the USA, then there is less incentive to maintain hygiene standards in cages.

Whereas in Europe, for example, consumers broadly reject genetically-modified foodstuffs, things are very different in the USA: 90% of the maize, soya beans and sugar beet used is genetically modified, and that is accepted. Nor are there any labelling requirements in the USA.

Therefore it is hard to track what ingredients are used and how products are produced. Hormone-loaded beef and chlorine-disinfected poultry are examples of this.

1.

Does the Commission have any details on this, and what is its assessment? Please provide a detailed explanation.

2.

Will there be trade restrictions on foodstuffs from the USA, or will they simply be labelled in keeping with EU standards in the individual Member States?

3.

What is the situation in each country?

4.

What standards must imported foodstuffs meet?

5.

Will specific production regulations be adopted?

6.

Does the Commission know what the impact would be of a possible increase in the price of domestic products?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

Some food production methods that are rather common in the US are indeed not allowed in the EU. Therefore, food produced according to these methods cannot enter the EU market. Food imported in the EU must be produced according to the EU requirements, or at least with requirements that the EU has considered to be equivalent, and US authorities must ensure the respect of these provisions. The respect of these conditions is overseen by the competent authorities of the country of export, regularly audited by the Commission's Food and Veterinary Office and verified by the EU Border Inspection Posts when products enter the EU. In a similar manner, food exported from the EU to the US must be in line with the US requirements or at least with requirements which are considered equivalent to them.

With regards to the negotiation on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, basic legislation protecting EU consumers will not be up for negotiation. EU standards on safe food apply to all foodstuffs circulating within the EU, either produced in an EU Member State or imported from a third country. The EU is a single entity, thus it has a single market and harmonised import rules. Therefore, the sanitary import conditions are the same for each of the 28 Member States.

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Question E-1348/2013 (178) and to Question E-002504/131 as regards GMO.

With reference to the question on the impact on the domestic production cost, it is unlikely that a free trade agreement with the US would increase the price of EU domestic products.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009209/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: IT-Vertrauensverlust — Auswirkungen auf die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit

Im Zuge der aktuellen Entwicklungen um den sogenannten „Abhörskandal“ fühlen sich die EU-Bürgerinnen und EU-Bürger zunehmend überwacht und empfinden ihre Datentransfers im Internet nicht mehr als sicher (erste einzelstaatliche Studien weisen auf einen Vertrauensverlust bei bis zu zwei Dritteln der BenutzerInnen hin).

1.

Wie beurteilt die Kommission den oben beschriebenen Vertrauensverlust im demokratiepolitischen Zusammenhang, insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Tatsache, dass es sich dabei um eine staatliche Überwachung handelt (entweder durch die Staaten selbst oder durch Informationsweitergabe)?

2.

Wie beurteilt die Kommission den oben beschriebenen Vertrauensverlust im ökonomischen Zusammenhang, insbesondere im Hinblick auf einen möglichen Verlust der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der IT-Wirtschaft?

3.

Welche Maßnahmen würden nach Ansicht der Kommission diesem Vertrauensverlust entgegenwirken?

4.

Sind derartige Maßnahmen geplant?

Antwort von Frau Reding im Namen der Kommission

(7. Oktober 2013)

Die Kommission ist äußerst besorgt über die jüngsten Medienberichte über Programme wie PRISM, die es offenkundig ermöglichen, in großem Umfang auf personenbezogene Daten zuzugreifen und diese zu verarbeiten.

Die digitale Welt bietet uns allen große Chancen, für Meinungsäußerung, Kreativität und Geschäftstätigkeit. Für ihre Entwicklung und ihr Wachstum muss aber das Vertrauen gegeben sein, dass die Grundrechte eingehalten werden. Der Schutz personenbezogener Daten ist ein solches Grundrecht. Ein solider Rahmen für den Datenschutz ist daher in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft weder ein Hindernis noch ein Luxus, sondern vielmehr eine Notwendigkeit.

Die Reform des Datenschutzes (179), die von der Kommission im Januar 2012 vorgeschlagen wurde, wird dazu beitragen, den Trend des sinkenden Vertrauens in die Art des Umgangs mit Daten vonseiten der Unternehmen, denen die Daten anvertraut wurden, umzukehren. Mit der vorgeschlagenen Reform wird das bestehende hohe Datenschutzniveau in der EU durch die Aktualisierung der Rechte von Einzelpersonen verstärkt. Sie wird die Pflichten und Zuständigkeiten der Verarbeiter sowie der für die Verarbeitung Verantwortlichen klären. Eindeutige und solide Vorschriften zum freien Verkehr personenbezogener Daten werden auch zum Wachstum von Unternehmen innerhalb eines vertrauenswürdigen Datenschutzrahmens beitragen.

Gemeinsam mit dem Vorsitz des Rates der EU hat die Kommission ferner eine hochrangige ad-hoc-EU-US-Arbeitsgruppe zum Datenschutz eingesetzt, um die durch Programme wie PRISM aufgeworfenen Fragen genauer zu prüfen. Auf der Grundlage der somit erlangten Informationen wird die Kommission dem Europäischen Parlament und dem Rat im Oktober Bericht erstatten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009209/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: IT — loss of confidence and effects on competitiveness

During the course of current developments surrounding the so-called ‘bugging scandal’, EU citizens have come to feel that they are under increasing surveillance and that their online data transmissions are no longer secure (initial national studies indicate that user confidence has fallen by up to two-thirds).

1.

How does the Commission rate the above loss of confidence in a democratic context, especially in light of the fact that this was government surveillance (either by a State itself or in the form of information transfer)?

2.

How does the Commission rate the above loss of confidence in an economic context, especially in light of the potential loss of confidence in the IT economy?

3.

What measures does the Commission consider would counter this loss of confidence?

4.

Are any such measures planned?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2013)

The Commission is very concerned regarding the recent media reports about programmes such as PRISM which appear to enable access and processing, on a large scale, of personal data.

The digital world presents great opportunities for us all, for expression, for creativity, and for business. But in order for it to develop and grow, there must be trust that fundamental rights are respected. The protection of personal data is such a fundamental right. A strong framework for data protection is therefore neither a constraint nor a luxury but a necessity in a democratic society.

The Data Protection Reform (180) proposed by the Commission in January 2012 will help reverse the trend of falling trust in the way in which data is handled by companies to which it is entrusted. The proposed reform will strengthen the current high level of data protection in the EU by updating individual’s rights. It will clarify obligations and responsibilities on processors as well as data controllers. Clear and robust rules for the free movement of personal data will also help businesses grow within a data protection framework that can be trusted.

In addition, the Commission has set up, together with the Presidency of the Council of the EU, an ad-hoc high-level EU-US working group on data protection to examine the issues raised by programs such as PRISM further. Based on the information gathered, the Commission will report back to the European Parliament and the Council in October.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009210/13

an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Oman

Es häufen sich die Meldungen über Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Oman, insbesondere was freie Meinungsäußerung und friedlichen zivilen Protest angeht. Derartige Meldungen sind bereits seit längerem — unter anderen in Medienkreisen und Politik — bekannt und werden auch im Bericht von Amnesty International von 2013 zur weltweiten Lage der Menschenrechte erwähnt.

1.

Sind der Hohen Vertreterin die oben genannten Fakten bekannt, und inwiefern wirken sie sich auf die internationalen Beziehungen zwischen der Europäischen Union und dem Oman aus?

2.

Inwiefern wirken sich die Menschenrechtsverletzungen auf die internationalen Beziehungen zwischen der Europäischen Union und dem Kooperationsrat der Arabischen Staaten des Golfes (GCC) aus?

3.

Gibt es Pläne und Maßnahmen der Europäischen Union, die Lage der NGOs und von verhafteten Menschenrechtsaktivisten im Oman zu verbessern?

Antwort von Frau Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission

(24. September 2013)

Der Hohen Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin sind die von der Frau Abgeordneten in Bezug auf Oman genannten Fakten bekannt. Die EU-Delegation in Riad (in Oman akkreditiert) und die diplomatischen Vertretungen der EU in Maskat verfolgen die Menschenrechtslage einschließlich der Entwicklungen in Zusammenhang mit der freien Meinungsäußerung im Rahmen ihrer regelmäßigen Berichterstattung aufmerksam.

Derzeit gibt es keine bilateralen Abkommen zwischen der EU und Oman und somit keinen institutionellen bilateralen politischen Dialog, auch nicht zum Thema Menschenrechte.

Im Verlauf des Ministertreffens zwischen der EU und dem Golfkooperationsrat vom 30. Juni 2013 in Manama hob die EU in ihren Beiträgen die zentrale Bedeutung der Menschenrechte in den Beziehungen der EU mit Drittpartnern hervor.

Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin der Kommission und ihre Dienststellen werden weiterhin die gesamte Palette verfügbarer Möglichkeiten und Instrumente nutzen, darunter öffentliche Erklärungen und diplomatische Demarchen, um in ihren Kontakten mit Beamten Omans und des Golfkooperationsrates die Themen Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten regelmäßig zur Sprache zu bringen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009210/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations in Oman

Reports of human rights violations in Oman are piling up, especially in connection with freedom of expression and peaceful civil protect. Such reports have been common knowledge for a long term, including in media and political circles, and are also mentioned in the 2013 Amnesty International report on the state of the world’s human rights.

1.

Is the High Representative aware of these facts? What impact are they having on international relations between the European Union and Oman?

2.

What impact are human rights violations having on international relations between the European Union and the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC)?

3.

Does the European Union have plans and measures to improve the situation of NGOs and detained human rights activists in Oman?

Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2013)

The HR/VP is well aware of the issues raised by the Honourable Member with regard to Oman. The EU Delegation in Riyadh (accredited to Oman) and EU diplomatic missions in Muscat are closely following the human rights situation, including developments related to freedom of expression, as part of their regular reporting.

There are currently no bilateral agreements between the EU and Oman and thus no institutional bilateral political dialogue, inlcuding on Human Rights.

EU interventions during the EU-GCC Ministerial meeting of 30 June 2013 in Manama emphasised the central importance of Human Rights in EU relations with third partners.

The HR/VP and her services will continue to use the full range of opportunities and instruments available, including public statements and diplomatic demarches, to raise human rights and fundamental freedoms regularly in their contacts with Omani and GCC officials.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009211/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Drogenpolitik — neue Herausforderungen

In Europa konsumieren 85 Millionen Menschen illegale Drogen; damit befindet sich der Drogenkonsum auf einem außergewöhnlich hohen Stand; zusätzlich gab es Entwicklungen im Hinblick auf den Variantenreichtum der angebotenen Substanzen, der eklatant gestiegen ist. Ebenso problematisch sind sogenannte „legal highs“; hierbei werden noch nicht verbotene Berauschungsmittel auf den Markt gebracht und vertrieben. Für die Behörden ist ein Erfassen und Verbieten nur mit erheblicher Zeitverzögerung möglich.

1.

Sind bereits Maßnahmen geplant, die speziell auf

„legal highs“ eingehen und derartige Substanzen erfassen und deren Konsum eindämmen?

2.

Gibt es Vorschläge, die Erfassung von neuen Substanzen zeitnaher zu ermöglichen?

3.

Teilt die Kommission die Ansicht, dass der Anstieg der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit und die Kürzung der Sozialleistungen im Zuge der Wirtschaftskrise Ursachen für den Anstieg des Drogenkonsums darstellen?

Antwort von Frau Reding im Namen der Kommission

(11. September 2013)

Der Kommission ist bekannt, dass in der EU zunehmend neue psychoaktive Substanzen auftreten und vor allem immer mehr junge Menschen solche Substanzen konsumieren. Die rasche Ausbreitung neuer psychoaktiver Substanzen, die häufig als legale Alternativen zu international überwachten Drogen wie Kokain oder Amphetamin vermarktet werden, und die Unkenntnis ihrer akuten und langfristigen Risiken, stellt eine Gefahr für die öffentliche Gesundheit dar.

Die Kommission beabsichtigt, Legislativvorschläge zur Verschärfung der geltenden EU-Vorschriften für neue psychoaktive Substanzen vorzulegen. Mit den Vorschlägen, die auf eine Überarbeitung des bisherigen EU-Instruments, d. h. den Beschluss 2005/387/JI des Rates betreffend den Informationsaustausch, die Risikobewertung und die Kontrolle bei neuen psychoaktiven Substanzen hinauslaufen (181), soll ein schnelleres, wirksameres und angemesseneres Eingreifen auf EU-Ebene ermöglicht werden. Die Vorlage dieser Vorschläge ist im zweiten Halbjahr 2013 geplant.

Wie aus dem Europäischen Drogenbericht 2013 (182) der Europäischen Beobachtungsstelle für Drogen und Drogensucht (EMCDDA) hervorgeht, ist die Drogensituation in Europa in den letzten Jahren relativ stabil geblieben. Dem Bericht zufolge verbleibt der Drogengebrauch in der EU im historischen Vergleich zwar weiterhin auf hohem Niveau, doch sind auch positive Entwicklungen zu erkennen; so geht insbesondere der Konsum von Heroin, Kokain und Cannabis zurück. Die Berichte der Beobachtungsstelle zeigen zudem, dass infolge des wirtschaftlichen Abschwungs weniger Mittel für drogenbedingte Gesundheitsrisiken sowie Maßnahmen zur Wahrung der öffentlichen Ordnung und Sicherheit bereitgestellt werden (183) (wenngleich es erhebliche länderspezifische Unterschiede gibt), was sich ebenfalls auf die Drogensituation auswirken kann.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009211/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Drugs policy — new challenges

In Europe, 85 million people use illegal drugs; in other words drug use is at very high levels. The number of variations on the substances available has also spiralled. So-called ‘legal highs’ are equally problematic. What are still legal intoxicants are being marketed and sold and it is only after considerable delay that the authorities are able to seize and ban them.

1.

Have measures already been planned to deal specifically with

‘legal highs’, seize such substances and curtail their use?

2.

Have proposals been made so that new substances can be seized more quickly?

3.

Does the Commission share the view that the increase in youth unemployment and cutbacks in social security benefits during the economic crisis have caused an increase in drug use?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the increasing emergence of new psychoactive substances in the EU, and of the growing use of such substances, particularly among young people. The rapid spread of new psychoactive substances, which are often marketed as legal alternatives to controlled substances, such as cocaine or amphetamine, and the lack of knowledge about their acute and long term risks, pose a threat to public health.

The Commission is planning to table legislative proposals to strengthen the EU response to new psychoactive substances. The aim of the proposals, which will revise the existing EU instrument, Council Decision 2005/387/JHA on the information exchange, risk-assessment and control of new psychoactive substances (184), will be to enable swifter, more effective and more proportionate action at EU level. The Commission is planning to present these legislative proposals in the second half of 2013.

The 2013 European Drug Report (185) from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) shows that the drugs situation has remained relatively stable in Europe in recent years. According to this report, while drug use remains high by historical standards in the EU, positive changes can be seen, notably a reduction in heroin injection, cocaine consumption and cannabis smoking. EMCDDA reports also indicate that the economic downturn has affected the budgets dedicated to drug-related health, public order and safety measures (186) (although there are considerable variations between countries), which can have an impact on the drugs situation.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009212/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Bluttest für Trisomie 21 — medizinethische Implikationen

Ein umstrittener Gentest zur Feststellung von Trisomie 21 während der Schwangerschaft (pränataldiagnostisches Verfahren) wird — insbesondere von Verbänden von Menschen mit Behinderung — in Politik und Medien diskutiert.

1.

Sind der Kommission die oben genannten Tatsachen bekannt und gibt es bereits eine offizielle Stellungnahme zu diesem Thema, oder ist eine derartige Stellungnahme geplant?

2.

Im Zuge der oben genannten Diskussion wird häufig die fehlende Sensibilität von medizinischem Fachpersonal (insbesondere in Erstberatungen) kritisiert. Gibt es in diesem Bereich bereits eine EU-weite Zusammenarbeit zur Aus‐ und Weiterbildung von Fachpersonal?

3.

Außerdem wird auf die positive Wirkung von umfassender Frühaufklärung über die möglichen Folgen und Ergebnisse des Bluttests hingewiesen. Gibt es in diesem Bereich bereits Sensibilisierungskampagnen?

4.

Kritiker des Tests betrachten ihn als Möglichkeit zur Diskriminierung von Menschen mit Behinderung und als (Be-)Wertung von Leben. Welchen Standpunkt vertritt die Kommission dazu?

5.

Wie bewertet die Kommission die Prognose, dass es durch diesen Bluttest vermehrt zu Abtreibungen von Föten mit Behinderung kommen wird?

Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission

(12. September 2013)

Die Kommission verweist die Frau Abgeordnete auf ihre Antworten zu den schriftlichen Anfragen E-005106/2011, E-002976/2012 und E-000340/2013 zum selben Thema (187).

Die Kommission unterstützt im Übrigen seit vielen Jahren Arbeiten zur Überwachung angeborener Anomalien. Aus dem EU-Gesundheitsprogramm wird derzeit die gemeinsame Maßnahme der Mitgliedstaaten EUROCAT (188) gefördert, die ein spezielles Arbeitspaket zum pränatalen Screening, zum Down-Syndrom (Trisomie 21) und zu genetischen Syndromen umfasst. Im Rahmen von EUROCAT arbeiten die Mitgliedstaaten bei der Schulung von medizinischem Fachpersonal zusammen, das direkt mit der Diagnose und dem Screening angeborener Anomalien zu tun hat.

EUROCAT hat bisher keine Stellungnahme zum nichtinvasiven Test anhand zellfreier fetaler DNA (cffDNA) für Trisomie 21 abgegeben.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009212/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Trisomy 21 blood test — medical ethical implications

A controversial genetic test for trisomy 21 during pregnancy (prenatal diagnostic procedure) has triggered political and media debate, especially among associations for the disabled.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this and does it already have an official position on this issue or is it planning to take such a position?

2.

The lack of sensitivity on the part of medical specialists (especially during initial consultations) is a subject of frequent criticism in the discussions mentioned above. Is there currently any EU-wide cooperation on the training (and further training) of specialists in this sector?

3.

Also, it has been pointed out that explaining the possible consequences and the results of the blood test in detail early on can have a positive effect. Are awareness-raising campaigns already under way in this area?

4.

Critics of the test see it as an opportunity to discriminate against people with disabilities and as a (value) judgment on life. Where does the Commission stand on this?

5.

What is the Commission’s opinion of the prognosis that this blood test will lead to an increase in the number of abortions of foetuses with disabilities?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2013)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written Questions E‐007591/2012 and E-7428/2013on the same subject (189).

In addition, the Commission has supported work on the surveillance for Congentrial Anomalies for many years. Currently the EU Health Programme is supporting a Joint Action with the Member States EUROCAT (190) which includes a specific Work Package on prenatal screening, Down's syndrome (trisomy 21), and genetic syndromes. Within EUROCAT, Member States cooperate on training of health staff directly related to diagnosis and screening of congenital anomalies.

No position has been reached by EUROCAT on the non-invasive test based on cell-free foetal DNA (cffDNA) for trisomy 21.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009213/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Flexible Rentenzeitmodelle

Momentan ist die Diskussion um eine Anhebung des Rentenalters in ganz Europa aufgeflammt; Interessenverbände und Betroffene wehren sich gegen eine festgelegte Arbeitszeitgrenze, die als einzigen Faktor das Lebensalter der ArbeitnehmerInnen miteinbezieht. Studien zufolge arbeiten ältere ArbeitnehmerInnen ebenso produktiv wie ihre jüngeren Kollegen und Kolleginnen, sind in vielen Bereichen sogar grundlegend für Know-how-Transfer und Ausbildung. Ein vielfältiges Lösungscluster trägt auch individuellen Lebensentwürfen und gesundheitlichen Möglichkeiten Rechnung und erlaubt durch Modelle wie Teilzeit, Berater auf Honorarbasis, Vertretung und viele mehr einen geregelten Übergang aus dem Berufsleben.

1.

Gibt es bereits Überlegungen, Empfehlungen für eine Rentenuntergrenze statt einer Obergrenze und einen generell freieren individuell-fallbasierten Übergang in die Rente (auch mit zeitlichen Staffelungssystemen wie beispielsweise Altersteilzeit) auszusprechen?

2.

Wenn nicht, gibt es bereits rentenbezogene Initiativen, dem Fachkräftemangel zu begegnen (auch und besonders durch eine Ausbildungsfunktion von älteren Arbeitnehmern)?

3.

Gibt es bereits Empfehlungen an Unternehmen, Strukturen und Abläufe in höherem Ausmaß an ältere Arbeitnehmer anzupassen und generell eine andere Personalpolitik zu fokussieren?

4.

Sieht die Kommission ein höheres Renteneintrittsalter als Mittel, der Finanz‐ und Wirtschaftskrise zu begegnen, insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Tatsache, dass eine Mehrbeschäftigung zu Wirtschaftswachstum führt und dementsprechend auch Arbeitsplätze für Jugendliche schafft?

Antwort von Herrn Andor im Namen der Kommission

(13. September 2013)

In ihrem Weißbuch über Renten und Pensionen (191) legt die Kommission ihren Standpunkt zum Renteneintrittsalter und zur Verrentungspraxis dar. Dies wird im Europäischen Semester weitergeführt, indem auf Rentenprobleme in den Jahreswachstumsberichten (192) und länderspezifischen Empfehlungen (193) eingegangen wird.

Wenn die Kommission empfiehlt, das Rentenalter entsprechend der Lebenserwartung (194) anzuheben, so bezieht sie sich auf das niedrigste Alter, mit dem eine volle Rente bezogen werden kann. Sie unterstützt indessen auch Arbeitsplatz‐ und Rentenmaßnahmen, die es den Menschen ermöglichen und ihnen Anreize geben, länger zu arbeiten und später in Rente zu gehen (195).

Seit den späten 1990er Jahren wird in den beschäftigungspolitischen Leitlinien (196) und den Initiativen für aktives Altern (197) ein angemessener Zugang zu Aus‐ und Weiterbildung für ältere Arbeitnehmer sowie die Anpassung der Arbeitsplätze und der Arbeitsorganisation empfohlen. Die länderspezifischen Empfehlungen für 2013 enthalten den Rat, die Beschäftigungsquote und das Erwerbsaustrittsalter durch Verbesserung der Beschäftigungsfähigkeit älterer Arbeitnehmer zu erhöhen, unter anderem mit Maßnahmen (198) für lebenslanges Lernen und aktives Altern.

Die Kommission teilt die Meinung, dass eine Anhebung des tatsächlichen Renteneintrittsalters helfen kann, der Finanz‐ und Wirtschaftskrise entgegenzuwirken, weil die Beschäftigung gefördert wird und der Renteneintritt später erfolgt. Die Kommission verweist die Frau Abgeordnete auch auf die Antworten auf die Fragen E‐4640/2013 und E‐6529/2013.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009213/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Flexible retirement model

Debate about a higher retirement age is currently raging throughout Europe. Interest groups and those who would be affected are resisting the introduction of a fixed working age limit based solely on the worker’s age. Studies illustrate that older workers are just as productive as their younger colleagues and are actually vital to the transfer of knowhow and training in numerous areas. A multifaceted cluster solution would also take account of individual lifestyles and health-related issues and, with models such as part-time work, fee-based consultancy, agency work and more, would allow for a regulated transition to retirement.

1.

Is the possibility being considered of recommending a minimum retirement age, rather than a maximum retirement age, and generally a freer, more individualised transition to retirement (including under graduated time-based systems, such as partial retirement)?

2.

If not, have pension-related initiatives already been taken to address the lack of specialised workers (especially by giving older workers training responsibilities)?

3.

Have recommendations already been made to companies to gear structures and processes more towards older workers and generally to focus on a different staffing policy?

4.

Does the Commission see a higher retirement age as a way of countering the financial and economic crisis, especially in light of the fact that higher employment leads to economic growth and thus also create jobs for young people?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The Commission's White Paper on pensions (199) sets out its position on the pensionable age and retirement practice. This is followed up through the European Semester by paying attention to retirement issues in the annual growth surveys (200) and country-specific recommendations (201) (CSRs).

When the Commission recommends raising the pensionable age in line with life expectancy (202), it is referring to the lowest age at which a full pension can be drawn. However, it also supports workplace and pension scheme measures that allow people, and offer them incentives, to continue working to a higher age and defer taking up their pensions (203).

Since the late 1990s, the Employment Guidelines (204) and Active Ageing initiatives (205) have recommended adequate access to training and upgrading for older workers and the adaptation of work places and work organisation. The 2013 CSRs advise raising the employment rate and the exit age by improving older workers’ employability, including through lifelong learning and active ageing measures (206).

The Commission agrees that increasing the effective retirement and pension take-up ages can help counter the financial and economic crisis by boosting employment and delaying pension take-up. It would also refer the Honourable Member to its answers to questions E-4640/2013 and E-6529/2013.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009214/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Kosmetik — Verbraucherschutz

Verbraucherschutzorganisationen, NGOs und Medien warnen zunehmend häufiger und dringlicher vor schädlichen Stoffen in Kosmetika; das Thema gewinnt an Brisanz, besonders im Hinblick auf die Verabschiedung der Kosmetik-Verordnung. Diese Warnungen beschäftigen sich vor allem mit einzelnen möglicherweise gefährlichen Stoffen wie Parabenen, allergieauslösenden Substanzen wie dem Konservierungsmittel Methylisothiazolinon (MI) und hormonell wirkenden Chemikalien.

1.

Wird ein Verbot der oben genannten Stoffe erwogen?

2.

Werden auch Möglichkeiten zur Vermeidung bestimmter Stoffe angedacht, wie beispielsweise alternatives Verpackungsdesign, das den Kontakt zu möglichen Verunreinigungen verringert und dementsprechend teilweise die biozide Wirkung der Konservierungsstoffe ersetzen kann?

3.

Welche Ansichten vertritt die Kommission zum sogenannten

„Cocktaileffekt“? Wie gedenkt sie mit der Tatsache zu verfahren, dass es zu diesem immens alltagsrelevanten Phänomen kaum wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen gibt und dementsprechend die Sicherheit der Stoffe in ihrem Zusammenspiel nicht garantiert werden kann?

4.

Wie gedenkt die Kommission mit hormonell wirksamen Stoffen zu verfahren; wird ein Verbot in Kinderprodukten erwogen (insbesondere im Hinblick auf die möglichen Nebenwirkungen, wie ein verfrühtes Einsetzen der Pubertät)?

Antwort von Herrn Mimica im Namen der Kommission

(12. September 2013)

1.

Das Verbot schädlicher Stoffe ist gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1223/2009 über kosmetische Mittel

1.

Das Verbot schädlicher Stoffe ist gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1223/2009 über kosmetische Mittel

 (207)

Was Methylisothiazolinon anbelangt, so arbeitet die Kommission derzeit an einer Beschränkung der Verwendung dieses Stoffs in Mischung mit Chlormethylisothiazolinon und hat den SCCS um eine neue Sicherheitsbewertung ersucht. Die Kommission arbeitet ferner am Verbot bestimmter Parabene, für die Sicherheitsdaten fehlen, sowie an der Einschränkung der Verwendung von Butyl‐ und Propylparabenen im Allgemeinen; bei Kindern unter drei Jahren soll die Verwendung in auf der Haut verbleibenden Mitteln im Windelbereich verboten werden.

2.

Die Unternehmen sind aufgefordert, alternative Verpackungsformen in Erwägung zu ziehen, die den Kontakt mit möglichen Kontaminanten verringern, so dass der Einsatz von Konservierungsstoffen minimiert werden kann. Allerdings kann im Hinblick auf den Schutz der Gesundheit der Bevölkerung im Kosmetikbereich nicht vollkommen auf Konservierungsstoffe verzichtet werden.

3.

Was Cocktaileffekte betrifft, möchte die Kommission die Frau Abgeordnete auf ihre Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-003913/2013 verweisen

3.

Was Cocktaileffekte betrifft, möchte die Kommission die Frau Abgeordnete auf ihre Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-003913/2013 verweisen

 (208)

4.

Zu

4.

Zu

 (209)  (210)

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009214/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Cosmetics and consumer protection

Consumer associations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media are issuing more frequent and more urgent warnings about harmful substances in cosmetics; this is becoming an explosive issue, especially in light of the new Cosmetics Regulation. These warnings mainly concern individual substances that are potentially harmful, such as parabens, allergy-triggering substances such as the preservative methylisothiazolinone (MIT) and endocrine disruptors.

1.

Is a ban on the above substances being considered?

2.

Are ways of avoiding certain substances being considered, such as alternative packaging designs that reduce contact with potential contaminants and can thus partly replace the biocidal effect of preservatives?

3.

What is the Commission’s view on the so-called

‘cocktail effect’? How does it intend to address the fact that hardly any scientific investigations have been carried out into this phenomenon — which is hugely relevant to people’s daily lives — and thus the safety of interacting substances cannot be guaranteed?

4.

How does the Commission intend to deal with endocrine disruptors? Is it considering a ban on these in children’s products (especially in light of possible side effects such as early onset of puberty)?

Answer given by Mr Mimica on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2013)

1.

The ban of harmful substances is possible under Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic products

1.

The ban of harmful substances is possible under Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic products

 (211)

For methylisothiazolinone, the Commission is in the process of restricting its use as part of the mixture with methylchloroisothiazolinone and has asked the SCCS to carry out a new safety assessment. The Commission is also in the process of banning certain parabens for which safety data is missing, and restricting the use of butyl and propylparabens in general, while banning them in leave-on products for the nappy area of children less than three years old.

2.

Companies are invited to consider alternative packaging designs that reduce contact with potential contaminants in order to minimise the use of preservatives. However, it is impossible to do away with preservatives in cosmetics, while still preserving public health.

3.

Regarding cocktail effects, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to the Written Question E-003913/2013.

3.

Regarding cocktail effects, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to the Written Question E-003913/2013.

 (212)

4.

Regarding

4.

Regarding

 (213)  (214)

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009215/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Genveränderte Pflanzen (Monsanto)

Der amerikanische Großkonzern Monsanto hat sein Vorhaben aufgegeben, weitere genmanipulierte Pflanzen für den europäischen Markt zulassen zu wollen. Allerdings wird eine Verlängerung der Zulassung für die Maissorte MON810 angestrebt.

Welche Haltung vertritt die Kommission zu einer Verlängerung dieser Zulassung?

Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission

(13. September 2013)

Die Kommission äußert sich nicht zu internen Entscheidungen von Unternehmen und hat zu der Verlautbarung der Entscheidung von Monsanto, nach und nach die Anträge auf Anbau gentechnisch veränderter Organismen in der EU zurückzuziehen, nichts zu bemerken. Zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt liegen vier Anträge von Monsanto auf GVO-Anbau vor, zu denen die EFSA befürwortende Stellungnahmen abgegeben hat und über deren Zulassung zu entscheiden ist.

Gemäß den internen Verfahren setzt die Kommission die Bearbeitung ausstehender Zulassungen für den Anbau von GVO, einschließlich MON 810, fort.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009215/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Genetically modified plants (Monsanto)

The US conglomerate Monsanto has abandoned its attempt to get further genetically modified plants approved for the European market. It is, however, seeking an extension of the approval for its MON810 maize.

Where does the Commission stand with regard to extension of this approval?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The Commission does not comment on companies' internal decisions and has no comment to make regarding the announcements made by Monsanto on its decision to progressively withdraw GM applications for cultivation in the EU. At this stage there are four Monsanto cultivation files with favourable EFSA opinion and awaiting a decision for authorisation.

In line with the internal procedures, the Commission is continuing to deal with pending authorisations for cultivation, including MON 810.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009216/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Gesundheitsgefährdung durch elektromagnetische Felder — Neubewertung

Im Juni 2012 hat die Kommission in ihrer Antwort auf die Anfrage E-004785/2012 angemerkt, dass SCENIHR um „eine Neu-Überprüfung aller wissenschaftlichen Nachweise ersucht“ wurde, die im Zusammenhang mit der Gefährdung durch extrem niederfrequente elektrische und magnetische Felder stehen. Der Hintergrund ist die Gefährdung vor allem von Kindern durch Leukämie.

1.

Wie weit ist diese Überprüfung fortgeschritten?

2.

Gibt es zwischenzeitlich bereits erste Ergebnisse, bzw. zu welchen Resultaten ist die Überprüfung gelangt?

Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission

(2. September 2013)

1.

Der unabhängige Wissenschaftliche Ausschuss

1.

Der unabhängige Wissenschaftliche Ausschuss

 (215)

2.

Der Ausschuss ist für die wissenschaftliche Bewertung neuer Erkenntnisse zuständig. Es ist nicht vorgesehen, vor Annahme der Stellungnahme Zwischenergebnisse zu veröffentlichen. Unbeschadet der Meinung des SCENIHR ist jedoch zu sagen, dass es kaum neue Daten über den Zusammenhang zwischen extrem niederfrequenten Feldern und der Gefahr von Leukämie bei Kindern gibt.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009216/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Health hazard posed by electromagnetic fields — reassessment

In June 2012, the Commission stated in its answer to Question E-004785/2012 that the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) had been asked to carry out ‘a new review of all the scientific evidence’ relating to the risk from extremely low frequency fields. The background to this is the risk of children in particular suffering from leukaemia.

1.

How much progress has been made on this review?

2.

Are there any initial results available already, or what findings have been obtained by the review?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(2 September 2013)

1.

The independent Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) has a standing mandate to evaluate potential risks related to electromagnetic fields. The latest Opinion was published in 2009

1.

The independent Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) has a standing mandate to evaluate potential risks related to electromagnetic fields. The latest Opinion was published in 2009

 (216)

2.

Scientific assessment of new evidence is the responsibility of the Committee. It is not planned to release interim findings before the adoption of the opinion. Without prejudice to the views of SCENIHR, however, it can be noted that little new data is available on the association between extremely low frequency fields and the risk of childhood leukaemia.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009217/13

an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Situation im Kongo

Der Krieg im Kongo währt mittlerweile seit rund zwei Jahrzehnten; der Einsatz der UN wird vor allem von der ansässigen Bevölkerung immer wieder heftig kritisiert.

1.

Inwiefern ist die Union in humanitäre Hilfsaktionen im Land involviert? (Mit der Bitte um eine Auflistung der konkreten Einsätze von 2009 bis heute.) Welche finanziellen Mittel wurden für die entsprechenden Missionen bereitgestellt?

2.

Welche Kosten tragen die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten für den Einsatz im Kongo jährlich?

3.

Wie bewertet die Hohe Vertreterin den Einsatz der Friedenstruppen? Sieht die Hohe Vertreterin andere oder zusätzliche Möglichkeiten, um den Frieden in der Region wiederherzustellen?

Antwort von Frau Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission

(30. September 2013)

1.

Die EU ist seit zwanzig Jahren einer der wichtigsten Geber humanitärer Hilfe in der Demokratischen Republik Kongo. Im Jahr 2013 belief sich die humanitäre Hilfe der EU für die Demokratische Republik Kongo auf 59 Millionen EUR. Eine Aufstellung der von der Kommission seit 2009 für die humanitäre Hilfe bereitgestellten Mittel ist im Anhang beigefügt, der der Frau Abgeordneten sowie dem Generalsekretariat des Europäischen Parlaments direkt übermittelt wird.

2.

Jeder Mitgliedstaat der Vereinten Nationen ist verpflichtet, sich nach einem im Voraus festgelegten Verteilungsschlüssel an der Finanzierung von Friedensmissionen zu beteiligen. Insgesamt beliefen sich die Mittel für Friedensmissionen in aller Welt im vergangenen Jahr (2012-2013) auf 7,33 Milliarden USD. Die 28 EU-Mitgliedstaaten haben zusammen rund 37 % des Gesamtbudgets beigetragen. Die MONUSCO verfügte im gleichen Zeitraum über 1,347 Milliarden USD.

3.

Die MONUSCO spielte (und spielt weiterhin) eine grundlegende Rolle im Stabilisierungsprozess, durch den die regionalen Konflikte der 90er Jahre im Gebiet der Großen Seen beendet und die Institutionen des Landes wieder aufgebaut wurden. Ihre Beteiligung am Schutz der Bevölkerung muss unterstützt werden. Auch die Schaffung einer Einsatztruppe zur Bekämpfung der Rebellengruppen im Osten der Demokratischen Republik Kongo ist ein wichtiger Bestandteil der Strategie zur Wiederherstellung des Friedens und der Umsetzung der Zusagen, die die Demokratische Republik Kongo und die Länder der Region im Hinblick auf die Überwindung der Krise gemacht haben. Der MONUSCO-Einsatz muss durch einen politischen Prozess sowie durch Maßnahmen ergänzt werden, die die Konfliktursachen angehen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009217/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Situation in Congo

The war in Congo has been waging for around twenty years now and the UN mission is attracting increasingly severe criticism, especially from the local population.

1.

To what extent is the Union involved in humanitarian relief operations in the country? Please list specific missions since 2009. What funds have been provided for the missions in question?

2.

What are the annual costs borne by the individual Member States for the mission in Congo?

3.

What is the High Representative’s assessment of the mission of the peace troops? Does the High Representative see any other or any additional ways of restoring peace in the region?

(Version française)

1.

L'UE est l'un des plus importants contributeurs en matière d'aide humanitaire en RDC

1.

L'UE est l'un des plus importants contributeurs en matière d'aide humanitaire en RDC

 (217)

2.

Chaque État membre des Nations Unis a une obligation de contribuer au financement des missions de maintien de la paix selon une clé de répartition préétablie. Le budget global pour les opérations de maintien de la paix dans le monde pour l'année écoulée (2012-2013) a été de 7,33 milliards d'USD. Les 28 États membres de l'UE y ont apporté une contribution globale d'environ 37 % du total. Le Budget de la Monusco pour la même période a été de 1,347 milliard d'USD.

3.

La Monusco a joué (et continue de jouer) un rôle essentiel dans le processus de stabilisation qui a mis fin aux conflits régionaux des années 90 dans les Grands Lacs et remis en place les institutions du pays. Son implication en matière de protection des populations doit être encouragée. Par ailleurs, la mise en place d'une Brigade d'intervention pour combattre les groupes rebelles à l'est de la RDC est un élément important dans la stratégie pour y ramener la paix et mettre en œuvre les engagements pris par la RDC et les pays de la région afin de surmonter la crise. L'action de la Monusco doit être complétée par un processus politique et des mesures visant à faire face aux racines du conflit.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009218/13

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29. Juli 2013)

Betrifft: Entgangene Einnahmen in Griechenland

Angesichts der umfangreichen Enthüllungen über Steueroasen und „Steuerflüchtlinge“ stellt sich die Frage, inwiefern das hoch verschuldete Griechenland vom Kapitalverlust durch ausländische Anlagen betroffen ist.

1.

Hat die Kommission Informationen darüber, ob und falls ja, wie viel Geld aus Griechenland in Folge der sich fortsetzenden Krise ins Ausland verbracht wurde?

2.

Ist des Weiteren einzuschätzen, in welcher Höhe sich die möglichen Steuereinnahmen bewegen, die dem griechischen Staat auf diese Weise entgehen?

Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission

(5. September 2013)

Informationen der Bank of Greece zufolge haben sich die Finanzströme 2013 dank eines besseren Vertrauens in die Wirtschaft stabilisiert.

Von Januar bis Mai 2013 verzeichneten die Direktinvestitionen einen Nettozufluss von 1,1 Mrd. EUR im Vergleich zu einem Nettoabfluss in Höhe von 224 Mio. EUR im Vergleichszeitraum 2012.

Während des gleichen Zeitraums verzeichneten die Portfolio-Investitionen einen Nettoabfluss von 11,1 Mrd. EUR verglichen mit einem Nettoabfluss in Höhe von 71,9 Mrd. EUR im Vergleichszeitraum 2012.

Die Bankguthaben stiegen wieder an: Nach einem Einbruch von 240 Mrd. EUR im Januar 2010 auf 159 Mrd. EUR im Juni 2012 erreichten die Bankguthaben im Mai 2013 wieder ein Volumen von 176 Mrd. EUR.

Eine Einschätzung der Auswirkungen der veränderten Finanzströme auf die Steuererhebung ist schwierig, da die Finanzströme — im Gegensatz zu dem aus ihnen abgeleiteten Einkommen oder Verbrauch — keine wesentliche Steuergrundlage darstellen. Die Bekämpfung der Steuerflucht ist von großer Bedeutung und ein wesentlicher Bestandteil des Anpassungsprogramms.

Die laufenden Reformen der Steuerverwaltung und der Steuerpolitik sind auschlaggebend, wenn es um eine Stärkung der öffentlichen Finanzen und die Förderung von Fairness und Annahme der Reformbemühungen in der Gesellschaft geht.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009218/13

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Lost revenue in Greece

In view of the substantial revelations concerning tax havens and ‘tax refugees’, the question arises as to what extent Greece, which is heavily indebted, is affected by loss of capital as a result of foreign investments.

1.

Does the Commission have any information on whether any money from Greece has been taken abroad as a result of the continuing crisis, and if so how much?

2.

Is it also possible to estimate how much potential tax revenue is lost in this way by the state in Greece?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

Information from the Bank of Greece suggests that financial flows have stabilised in 2013 as confidence in the economy has picked up.

From January to May 2013, direct investment showed a net inflow of EUR 1.1 billion, compared to a net outflow of EUR 224 million in the same period of 2012.

Over the same period, portfolio investment recorded a net outflow of EUR 11.1 billion, compared to a net outflow of EUR 71.9 billion in the same period of 2012.

Bank deposits are recovering: after declining from EUR 240 billion in January 2010 to EUR 159 billion in June 2012, bank deposits reached EUR 176 billion in May 2013.

Estimating the impact of changes in financial flows on tax collection is difficult, as financial flows are not a major tax base but instead the income or consumption derived from them.

Importantly, fight against tax evasion is a critical element of the economic adjustment programme.

The ongoing reforms of tax administration and tax policy are essential to bolster public finances and the fairness and social acceptability of the reform efforts.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009219/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Επιστολή Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής σε ελληνική κυβέρνηση για Cosco

Σύμφωνα με δημοσιογραφικές πληροφορίες, η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή απέστειλε στην ελληνική κυβέρνηση επιστολή 23 σημείων, ζητώντας απαντήσεις σχετικά με τις διαπραγματεύσεις που γίνονται μεταξύ της εταιρίας «Σταθμός Εμπορευματοκιβωτίων Πειραιά ΑΕ» (θυγατρική του ομίλου Cosco) και του Οργανισμού Λιμένος Πειραιά ΑΕ, για την ανάληψη κατασκευής της επέκτασης του προβλήτα ΙΙΙ στο λιμάνι του Πειραιά.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Μπορεί να διευκρινίσει ποιο είναι το περιεχόμενο και σε τι συνίσταται η επιστολή της; Ποια είναι τα 23 σημεία στα οποία αναφέρονται τα δημοσιεύματα;

Απάντηση του κ. Almunia εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(26 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Διεξάγονται συζητήσεις μεταξύ των υπηρεσιών της Επιτροπής και των ελληνικών αρχών σχετικά με τα σημεία που ανέφερε το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου. Ωστόσο, η Επιτροπή δεν μπορεί να δώσει διευκρινίσεις όσον αφορά ενδεχόμενη αίτηση για πληροφορίες των οποίων τα στοιχεία παραμένουν απόρρητα στον βαθμό που η διαδικασία προκαταρκτικής εξέτασης είναι εν εξελίξει.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009219/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Letter from the Commission to the Greek Government concerning Cosco

According to press reports, the Commission has sent a letter to the Greek Government containing 23 points, requesting answers to questions about the negotiations taking place between the company ‘Piraeus Container Terminal’ (a Cosco subsidiary) and Piraeus Port Authority regarding the construction of the extension to Quay III in the port of Piraeus.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Can it explain the content of the letter and say what it consists of? What are the 23 points to which the reports refer?

(Version française)

Des discussions sont en cours entre les services de la Commission et les autorités grecques concernant les éléments mentionnés par l'Honorable Parlementaire. Toutefois, la Commission ne peut apporter des précisions sur une éventuelle demande de renseignements dont les éléments restent confidentiels pour autant que la procédure d'examen préliminaire et en cours.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009220/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Αλλαγή του ελληνικού νόμου περί ομαδικών απολύσεων

Σύμφωνα με δημοσιεύματα του ελληνικού Τύπου (3.7.2013), η Τρόικα ζητά από την ελληνική κυβέρνηση να αλλάξει το νομικό πλαίσιο που διέπει τις ομαδικές απολύσεις, στην κατεύθυνση της αύξησης του ορίου που θέτει για τον αριθμό των ομαδικών απολύσεων ανά μήνα, αλλά και της κατάργησης του δικαιώματος βέτο των αρμόδιων αρχών.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Έχουν υπάρξει σχετικές συζητήσεις με την ελληνική κυβέρνηση; Μπορεί να επιβεβαιώσει ή να διαψεύσει η Επιτροπή τα ανωτέρω δημοσιεύματα;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(19 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Ως μέρος των όρων πολιτικής που συνδέονται με το πρόγραμμα οικονομικής προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα, η ελληνική κυβέρνηση συμφώνησε να προβεί στην αναθεώρηση της ισχύουσας εργασιακής νομοθεσίας. Στόχος είναι ο καθορισμός μέτρων τα οποία, με βάση τις πρόσφατες μεταρρυθμίσεις, μπορούν να συμβάλουν στην προσέλκυση επενδύσεων και στη στήριξη της δημιουργίας θέσεων εργασίας, με ταυτόχρονη ευθυγράμμιση της Ελλάδας με βέλτιστες πρακτικές άλλων χωρών και τη διασφάλιση του δικαιώματος στην εργασία. Το εν λόγω εγχείρημα αναμένεται να συμπεριλάβει τη συγκριτική αναθεώρηση ρυθμιστικών θεμάτων που αφορούν την αναδιάρθρωση εταιρειών και τις ομαδικές απολύσεις ώστε να εξασφαλιστεί η ισορροπία μεταξύ της διευκόλυνσης της αναγκαίας προσαρμογής και ενός δίκαιου επιμερισμού του βάρους της προσαρμογής μεταξύ εργαζομένων, εταιρειών και της κυβέρνησης (218).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009220/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Change in Greek law on collective redundancies

According to reports in the Greek press (3 July 2013), the Troika is urging the Greek Government to change the legal framework governing collective redundancies so as to increase the limit for the number of collective redundancies per month and also to remove the power of veto of the competent authorities.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Have there been any discussions on this matter with the Greek government? Can it confirm or deny the above reports?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2013)

As part of the policy conditionality attached to the economic adjustment programme for Greece, the Greek Government agreed in carrying out a review of existing labour regulations. The objective is to identify measures that, building on recent reforms, can contribute to attract investment and support job creation while aligning Greece with best practices in other countries and safeguarding the right to work. This exercise is expected to include a comparative review of regulatory issues concerning the re-structuring of companies and collective dismissals to ensure a balance between facilitating necessary adjustment and a fair sharing of the burden of adjustment between workers, firms and the Government (219).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009221/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: ΠΕΠ Δυτικής Ελλάδας-Ιονίων Νήσων-Πελοποννήσου

Η ελληνική οικονομία διανύει την 5η χρονιά συνεχόμενης ύφεσης, με την ανεργία να φτάνει σε επίπεδα ρεκόρ και τις ελληνικές περιφέρειες να καταστρέφονται οικονομικά και κοινωνικά. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, για την Περιφέρεια Δυτικής Ελλάδας, για τα Ιόνια Νησιά και για την Πελοπόννησο, σύμφωνα με τα στοιχεία της Eurostat, η ανεργία ανήλθε σε 25,5%, 14,7% και 19,9%, αντίστοιχα.

Με δεδομένα τα παραπάνω, αλλά και το γεγονός ότι η αξιοποίηση και η καλύτερη χρήση των κοινοτικών κονδυλίων και συγκεκριμένα των Περιφερειακών Επιχειρησιακών Προγραμμάτων θα μπορούσαν να βοηθήσουν στην ανάσχεση της οικονομικής κατάρρευσης των ελληνικών περιφερειών, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποιο είναι το ποσοστό απορροφητικότητας του ΠΕΠ Δυτικής Ελλάδας-Ιονίων Νήσων-Πελοποννήσου της περιόδου 2007-2013 για κάθε χωρική ενότητα και για τους αντίστοιχους Άξονες Προτεραιότητας; Ποιοι από αυτούς τους άξονες παρουσιάζουν τα μεγαλύτερα προβλήματα και καθυστερήσεις, και γιατί; Διαθέτει σχετικούς πίνακες;

Ποια είναι, κατά τη γνώμη της Επιτροπής, τα σημαντικότερα έργα που παρουσιάζουν καθυστερήσεις και τι μέτρα προτείνει για την αύξηση της απορροφητικότητας του συγκεκριμένου ΠΕΠ; Έχουν δρομολογηθεί αλλαγές στη δομή και την κατεύθυνσή του, ώστε να συνάδει με τις νέες οικονομικές και κοινωνικές ανάγκες των συγκεκριμένων περιφερειών;

Απάντηση του κ. Hahn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(16 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

1.

Στο παράρτημα επισυνάπτονται για τον κ. βουλευτή σχετικές πληροφορίες από τον Αύγουστο του 2013 όσον αφορά την απορρόφηση ανά περιφέρεια και άξονα για το επιχειρησιακό πρόγραμμα

DEPIN. Τον Αύγουστο 2013 το ποσοστό απορρόφησης της Ελλάδας ανερχόταν στο 67,46%, ενώ ο μέσος όρος της ΕΕ ανέρχεται σε 56,10%.

Οι καθυστερήσεις στα διάφορα έργα στις περισσότερες περιπτώσεις οφείλονται στις χρηματοπιστωτικές δυσκολίες των τελικών δικαιούχων που προκάλεσε η οικονομική κρίση, στη διαδικασία υποβολής προσφορών για συμβάσεις και στις χρονοβόρες διαδικασίες απαλλοτρίωσης ή σε θέματα αδειοδότησης.

2.

Η Επιτροπή έχει ήδη λάβει μέτρα για να αντισταθμίσει τις αρνητικές επιπτώσεις της κρίσης στην Ελλάδα, όπως η αύξηση του ποσοστού συγχρηματοδότησης στο 85% και η περαιτέρω συμπλήρωση της χρηματοδότησης κατά 10% που ισχύει από το 2013 και η Επιτροπή προτείνει να ισχύει μέχρι τη λήξη της περιόδου επιλεξιμότητας και το οποίο αποτελεί ένα μέσο για την επίσπευση της ροής κονδυλίων προς την Ελλάδα. Επιπλέον, τον Δεκέμβριο του 2012 πραγματοποιήθηκε αναθεώρηση των περιφερειακών επιχειρησιακών προγραμμάτων. Ο κύριος στόχος της αναθεώρησης είναι η ενίσχυση των αξόνων ανταγωνιστικότητας μέσω στοχοθετημένων ενεργειών που βελτιώνουν την υποστήριξη των ΜΜΕ.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009221/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: ROP for Western Greece — the Ionian Islands — the Peloponnese

The Greek economy is in its fifth consecutive year of recession, with unemployment reaching record levels and the Greek regions being destroyed economically and socially. More specifically, according to Eurostat data, in the Region of Western Greece, the Ionian Islands and Peloponnese unemployment has risen to 25.5%, 14.7% and 19.9%, respectively.

Given the above, and the fact that the utilisation or better use of EU funds, in particular the Regional Operational Programmes, could help check the economic collapse of the Greek regions, will the Commission say:

What is the take-up rate for the ROP Western Greece — the Ionian Islands — the Peloponnese in 2007-2013 for each territorial unit and the corresponding Priority Axes? Which of these axes faces the greatest problems and delays and why? Does it have any tables on this matter?

What, in the Commission's opinion, are the most important projects facing delays and what measures does it propose to increase the take-up rate for this specific ROP? Have any changes been initiated in the structure and orientation of this programme in order to reflect the new economic and social needs of specific regions?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

1. The Honourable Member will find attached in the annex relevant information as of August 2013 of the absorption per region and axis for the Operational programme DEPIN. In August 2013 the absorption rate of Greece stands at 67,46% while the EU average is at 56,10%.

The reasons for the delays in the various projects are in most cases mainly due to the financial difficulties of the final beneficiaries caused by the economic crisis, the tender procedure for contracts and the long procedures of expropriations or licencing issues.

2.

The Commission has already taken measures to counter balance the negative effects of the crisis in Greece, such as the increase of the co-financing rate to 85% and a further top up of 10% which applies up to 2013 and the Commission proposes to apply up to the end of the eligibility period and which is a facility to accelerate the flow of funds to Greece. In addition, in December 2012 a revision of the Regional Operational Programmes took place took place. The main objective of the revision is to reinforce the axes of competitiveness through targeted actions that enhance support to SMEs.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009222/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Πορεία υλοποίησης του Προγράμματος «Αλέξανδρος Μπαλτατζής»

Το συγχρηματοδοτούμενο από το Ευρωπαϊκό Γεωργικό Ταμείο Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης, Πρόγραμμα Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης της Ελλάδας για την περίοδο 2007-2013, «Αλέξανδρος Μπαλτατζής», αποτελεί τη μοναδική δυνατότητα επενδύσεων στον αγροτικό τομέα. Ωστόσο, η ιδιαίτερα δυσμενής κατάσταση της ελληνικής οικονομίας και, κατ' επέκταση, των παραγωγών γεωργικών και κτηνοτροφικών προϊόντων, η αύξηση του κόστους παραγωγής και η συνεχής πτώση του διαθέσιμου εισοδήματος, έχουν δημιουργήσει ένα τοπίο κάθε άλλο παρά ευοίωνο για τον αγροτικό κόσμο της Ελλάδας.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποια είναι η μέχρι σήμερα πορεία υλοποίησης (νομικές δεσμεύσεις — απορρόφηση) του προγράμματος «Αλέξανδρος Μπαλτατζής» ανά μέτρο και άξονα; Ποια είναι τα συγκριτικά στοιχεία με τα υπόλοιπα κράτη μέλη; Ποια είναι τα σημαντικότερα προβλήματα στην ομαλή εκτέλεση και απορρόφηση του προγράμματος;

Απάντηση του κ. Cioloș εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(5 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Την 1η Αυγούστου 2013, το ποσοστό εκτέλεσης του ελληνικού προγράμματος αγροτικής ανάπτυξης (ΠΑΑ) 2007-2013 ήταν 52,94 %:

Συνολική συνεισφορά του ΕΓΤΑΑ

σε ευρώ

Προκαταβολές σε ευρώ

Ενδιάμεσες πληρωμές σε ευρώ

Ποσοστό εκτέλεσης

3 906 228 424

273 435 990

1 794 707 792

52,94%

Το μέσο ποσοστό εκτέλεσης των ΠΑΑ-EΕ27 είναι 69,06% και περιλαμβάνει τις προκαταβολές.

Το ποσοστό εκτέλεσης του ελληνικού ΠΑΑ δεν προχωρά τόσο γρήγορα όσο τα υπόλοιπα ΠΑΑ της ΕΕ-27 το 2013. Αυτό οφείλεται κυρίως στην επιβράδυνση του ενδιαφέροντος για τις επενδύσεις στην Ελλάδα, καθώς και στη στενότητα πιστώσεων στη χώρα που επηρεάζει επίσης τους επενδυτές του ελληνικού ΠΑΑ. Τα δημόσια έργα και τα έργα των οργανισμών τοπικής αυτοδιοίκησης εκτελούνται με βραδύτερο ρυθμό και, κατά συνέπεια, υπάρχουν λιγότερες αιτήσεις για πληρωμές στο πλαίσιο του ελληνικού ΠΑΑ. Από την άλλη πλευρά, τα πολυετή μέτρα του προγράμματος, κυρίως αγροπεριβαλλοντικού χαρακτήρα, προχωρούν αρκετά ικανοποιητικά.

Στο παράρτημα I παρατίθεται το ποσοστό εκτέλεσης ανά μέτρο για το ελληνικό ΠΑΑ και τα ΠΑΑ της ΕΕ-27. Το ποσοστό εκτέλεσης ενός μέτρου εξαρτάται από πολλούς παράγοντες (μεταξύ άλλων, από τη δομή παράδοσης, το θεσμικό πλαίσιο, τις εθνικές διαδικασίες, τα συμφέροντα των δικαιούχων, την πρόσβαση σε πιστώσεις), οι οποίοι ποικίλλουν σημαντικά μεταξύ των περιφερειών και των κρατών μελών.

Οι εκθέσεις προόδου που εκπονούνται ετησίως από τη διαχειριστική αρχή περιγράφουν, μεταξύ άλλων, τα προβλήματα υλοποίησης και τις προτεινόμενες λύσεις. Όσον αφορά την Ελλάδα, οι εκθέσεις αυτές είναι διαθέσιμες στον δικτυακό τόποhttp://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/index.php?obj=c731077c04035ac9

Δεν υπάρχουν διαθέσιμα στοιχεία σε επίπεδο Επιτροπής σχετικά με νομικές δεσμεύσεις σε επίπεδο προγράμματος.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009222/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Progress in implementing the ‘Alexander Baltatzis’ Programme

The ‘Alexander Baltatzis’ Rural Development Programme for Greece for the period 2007-2013, which is co-funded by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, constitutes the sole possibility for investing in the agricultural sector. However, the particularly unfavourable state of the Greek economy and, by extension, the plight of producers of agricultural and livestock products, increasing production costs and the steady decline in disposable income have created a climate that is anything but propitious for the rural world in Greece.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

What progress has so far been made in implementing (legal commitments — take-up) the ‘Alexander Baltatzis’ Programme by measure and axis? What are the comparative data in other Member States? What are the main problems in the smooth implementation and take-up of the programme?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

The Greek 2007-13 Rural Development Programme (GR-RDP) had an implementation rate of 52.94% on 1 August 2013:

Total EAFRD allocation (EUR)

Payment on Account (EUR)

Interim Payments (EUR)

Implementation rate

3 906 228 424

273 435 990

1 794 707 792

52.94%

The average implementation rate of the EU-27-RDPs is 69.06% and include payments on account.

The GR-RDP implementation rate has not been advancing as fast as for other RDPs of the EU-27 in 2013. This is mostly due to the slowdown of the interest for investments in Greece as well as to the credit crunch in the country which also affects investors of the GR-RDP. Public projects and projects of local authorities are being implemented at a slower rhythm and hence present fewer requests for payments to the GR-RDP. On the other hand multiannual measures of the programme, mostly agrienvironmental, are advancing quite well.

Annex I shows the implementation rate per measure for the GR-RDP and the EU-27-RDPs. The implementation rate of a measure depends on many factors (amongst others, delivery structure, institutional framework, national procedures, interest of beneficiaries, access to credit), which vary considerably between Regions and Member States.

Progress reports prepared annually by the Managing Authority describe amongst others, the implementation problems and solutions proposed. For Greece, these reports can be consulted at: http://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/index.php?obj=c731077c04035ac9

No information is available at Commission level on legal commitments at programme level.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009223/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Στοιχεία εκκαθάρισης λογαριασμών ΕΓΤΕ/ΕΓΤΑΑ

Στην ερώτησή μου Ε-009030/2012, σχετικά με τα στοιχεία εκκαθάρισης λογαριασμών του Ευρωπαϊκού Γεωργικού Ταμείου Ενισχύσεων (ΕΓΤΕ) και του Ευρωπαϊκού Γεωργικού Ταμείου Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΓΤΑΑ), η Επιτροπή είχε απαντήσει ότι, με την απόφαση C(2012)4293 της 28.6.2012, είχε αποφασίσει την αναβολή της εκτέλεσης των δημοσιονομικών διορθώσεων, σύμφωνα με το αίτημα της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης τον Μάιο του ίδιου χρόνου, μέχρι την 31.12.2013.

Στην ίδια απάντηση, η Επιτροπή σημείωνε ότι, μέχρι το τέλος του 2013 «θα προκύψουν συνολικά 392 εκατ. ευρώ από αναβληθείσες δημοσιονομικές διορθώσεις (μη συμπεριλαμβανομένων των τυχόν πρόσθετων διορθώσεων οι οποίες θα περιληφθούν σε άλλες αποφάσεις συμμόρφωσης που θα εκδοθούν ενδιάμεσα)».

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποια είναι τα συνολικά ποσά δημοσιονομικών διορθώσεων/παρακρατήσεων που έχουν γίνει για κάθε κράτος μέλος από το 2007 μέχρι και σήμερα;

Ποιο είναι το ύψος των ποινών που έχουν βεβαιωθεί ανά καθεστώς ενίσχυσης, σε ποιο έτος αναφέρεται η κάθε ποινή και ποιοι ήταν οι λόγοι της επιβολής της;

Έχουν εκδοθεί πρόσθετες αποφάσεις στο διάστημα από την απάντηση της Επιτροπής στην ερώτηση Ε-009030 μέχρι και σήμερα; Σε ποια καθεστώτα αναφέρονται; Ποιο είναι το ύψος των ποινών που έχει βεβαιωθεί; Βρίσκονται κάποιες από αυτές σε στάδιο διαβούλευσης της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης με την επιτροπή των γεωργικών ταμείων, σύμφωνα με τη δυνατότητα που παρέχεται στο άρθρο 11 παρ. 4 του 885/2006/ΕΚ, όπως τροποποιήθηκε από τον Εκτελεστικό Κανονισμό ΕΕ αριθ. 375/2012; Ποιες είναι αυτές;

Τι μειώσεις έχουν εκτελεστεί συνολικά για την Ελλάδα από το 2007 μέχρι και σήμερα;

Απάντηση του κ. Cioloş εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(24 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

<NOT.NUMBERED>1. και 2.</NOT.NUMBERED> Από το 2007, η Επιτροπή έλαβε 19 αποφάσεις για τον αποκλεισμό από τη χρηματοδότηση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης ορισμένων δαπανών που προκύπτουν για τα κράτη μέλη στο πλαίσιο του Τμήματος Εγγυήσεων του Ευρωπαϊκού Γεωργικού Ταμείου Προσανατολισμού και Εγγυήσεων (ΕΓΤΠΕ), του Ευρωπαϊκού Γεωργικού Ταμείου Εγγυήσεων (ΕΓΤΕ) και του Ευρωπαϊκού Γεωργικού Ταμείου Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΓΤΑΑ).

Η Επιτροπή αποστέλλει απευθείας στο Αξιότιμο Μέλος και στη γραμματεία του Κοινοβουλίου λεπτομερή στοιχεία για τις δημοσιονομικές διορθώσεις για κάθε κράτος μέλος και τον κατάλογο των Επίσημων Εφημερίδων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στις οποίες δημοσιεύθηκαν οι αποφάσεις για τις δημοσιονομικές διορθώσεις.

3.

Μετά την απάντηση στην ερώτηση

3.

Μετά την απάντηση στην ερώτηση

 (220)  (221)  (222)

4.

Ο δημοσιονομικός αντίκτυπος των διορθώσεων που επιβλήθηκαν στην Ελλάδα από το 2007 ανέρχεται σε 1 298,3 εκατ. ευρώ.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009223/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Clearance of EAGGF and EAFRD accounts

In its answer to my Question E-009030/2012 on clearance of European Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) accounts, the Commission stated that through Decision C (2012) 4293 of 28.6.2012 it had decided to defer, until 31.12.2013, the execution of the financial correction in accordance with the request made by the Greek Government in May.

In the same answer, the Commission had noted that, by the end of 2013 ‘there will be a total of EUR 392 million in deferred financial corrections (not including any additional corrections which will be included in other conformity decisions which will be adopted in the meantime).’

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

What are the total amounts of financial corrections / deductions that have been made for each Member State since 2007?

What are the penalties that have been imposed per aid scheme, to which year does each penalty apply and what were the reasons for the imposition of the penalty?

Have any additional decisions been issued since the Commission's answer to Question E-009030? If so, to which schemes do they apply? What is the amount of the penalties? Are any of them the subject of consultations between the Greek Government and the Committee on the Agricultural funds, in accordance with the option provided in Article 11, paragraph 4, of 885/2006/EC, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation EU No 375/2012? If so, what are they?

What deductions have been made overall in respect of Greece since 2007?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2013)

1 and 2. Since 2007, the Commission has taken 19 decisions on excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD).

The Commission is sending directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament secretariat the details of the financial corrections by Member States and the list of Official Journals of the European Union where the decisions on financial corrections have been published.

3.

Since the reply to the Question E-009030/2012 three conformity clearance decisions have been adopted: Decisions 40

3.

Since the reply to the Question E-009030/2012 three conformity clearance decisions have been adopted: Decisions 40

 (223)  (224)  (225)

4.

The financial impact of the corrections imposed on Greece since 2007 amounts to EUR 1 298.3 million.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009224/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Πρόβλεψη στην τροποποίηση του κανονισμού 562/2006 (κώδικας συνόρων του Σένγκεν)

Στο προοίμιο της τροποποίησης του Κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 562/2006, του κανονισμού Σένγκεν, όπως εγκρίθηκε από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στις 12.6.2013, προβλέπεται ότι «Σε περιπτώσεις εμμενουσών σοβαρών ανεπαρκειών … του κεκτημένου Σένγκεν] … θα πρέπει να θεσπισθεί ένας ευρωπαϊκός μηχανισμός για την επαναφορά προσωρινής και κατ' εξαίρεσιν άσκησης συνοριακού ελέγχου στα εσωτερικά σύνορα …, η Επιτροπή θα πρέπει να διαβιβάζει στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και το Συμβούλιο σύσταση όπου θα αξιολογείται η ανάγκη της επαναφοράς της άσκησης συνοριακού ελέγχου στα εσωτερικά σύνορα ως έσχατο μέτρο.».

Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και το Συμβούλιο θα πρέπει να υποβάλουν τις γνωμοδοτήσεις τους εντός ενός μηνός από την παραλαβή της σύστασης της Επιτροπής, διάστημα μετά το οποίο η Επιτροπή θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση να αποφασίσει για την επαναφορά της άσκησης συνοριακού ελέγχου στα εσωτερικά σύνορα μέσω εκτελεστικών πράξεων, σύμφωνα με τον κανονισμό (ΕΕ) αριθ. 182/2011 «Βάσει των όρων του άρθρου 2 παράγραφος 2 στοιχείο β) σημείο iii) του εν λόγω κανονισμού, για την έγκριση των εκτελεστικών αυτών πράξεων θα πρέπει να χρησιμοποιείται η διαδικασία εξέτασης.».

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Μπορεί να εξηγήσει πώς αντιλαμβάνεται την παραπάνω πρόβλεψη; Όταν ισχύσει η εν λόγω τροποποίηση, η Επιτροπή θα είναι σε θέση να αποφασίσει για την επαναφορά της άσκησης συνοριακού ελέγχου στα εσωτερικά σύνορα κρατών μελών μέσω εκτελεστικών πράξεων ακόμα και με την αντίθετη γνώμη των κρατών αυτών;

Απάντηση της κ. Malmström εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(25 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Το νομοθετικό ψήφισμα που ενέκρινε το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στις 12 Ιουνίου 2013 αναφέρει στο άρθρο 26 ότι «σε εξαιρετικές περιστάσεις, όταν η συνολική λειτουργία του χώρου χωρίς ελέγχους στα εσωτερικά σύνορα, τίθεται σε κίνδυνο, ως αποτέλεσμα των συνεχιζόμενων σοβαρών αδυναμιών που συνδέονται με τον έλεγχο των εξωτερικών συνόρων […], και στο μέτρο που αυτές οι περιστάσεις αποτελούν σοβαρή απειλή για τη δημόσια τάξη ή την εσωτερική ασφάλεια εντός του χώρου χωρίς εσωτερικά σύνορα ή τμήματα αυτών, ο έλεγχος στα εσωτερικά σύνορα μπορεί να επανεισαχθεί […] (226)».

Όσον αφορά τη διαδικασία, το «Συμβούλιο μπορεί να συστήσει σε ένα ή περισσότερα συγκεκριμένα κράτη μέλη να αποφασίσουν την επαναφορά των ελέγχων σε όλα ή συγκεκριμένα τμήματα των εσωτερικών συνόρων τους. Η σύσταση του Συμβουλίου στηρίζεται σε πρόταση της Επιτροπής. […].

Σε περίπτωση που η σύσταση δεν εφαρμοστεί από κράτος μέλος, το εν λόγω κράτος μέλος ενημερώνει αμέσως την Επιτροπή γραπτώς σχετικά με τους λόγους του».

Οι εκτελεστικές αρμοδιότητες, συνεπώς, δεν έχουν ανατεθεί στην Επιτροπή, γεγονός που αντικατοπτρίζεται και στην αιτιολογική σκέψη 8α, η οποία αναφέρει ότι «λόγω του πολιτικά ευαίσθητου χαρακτήρα των μέτρων αυτών που αφορούν τις εθνικές εκτελεστικές και τις εξουσίες επιβολής του νόμου όσον αφορά τον έλεγχο στα εσωτερικά σύνορα, οι εκτελεστικές αρμοδιότητες ως προς την έγκριση συστάσεων στο πλαίσιο της παρούσας ειδικής διαδικασίας σε επίπεδο Ένωσης θα πρέπει να ανατεθούν στο Συμβούλιο, αποφασίζοντας μετά από πρόταση της Επιτροπής».

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009224/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Provision in the amendment to Regulation 562/2006 (Schengen Borders Code)

The preamble to the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006, the Schengen Regulation, as adopted by the European Parliament on 12.6.2013, provides that: ‘For cases of persistent serious deficiencies … of the Schengen acquis] …, a European mechanism for the reintroduction of temporary and exceptional border control at internal borders should be established. Under that mechanism, the Commission should transmit to the European Parliament and to the Council a recommendation assessing the necessity for the reintroduction of border control at internal borders as a measure of last resort.’

The European Parliament and the Council should present their opinions within one month of receipt of the Commission's recommendation, after which the Commission should be able to decide on the reintroduction of border control at internal borders by way of implementing acts, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. ‘In view of the terms of Article 2(2)(b)(iii) of that regulation, the examination procedure should be used for the adoption of those implementing acts.’

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Can it explain how it understands the above provision? When this amendment enters into effect, will the Commission be able to decide on the reintroduction of border controls at the internal borders of Member States by means of implementing acts even if the States in question disagree?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2013)

The legislative resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 12 June 2013 states in its Article 26 that ‘in exceptional circumstances where the overall functioning of the area without internal border controls is put at risk as a result of persistent serious deficiencies related to external border control […], and insofar as these circumstances constitute a serious threat to public policy or internal security within the area without internal border controls or parts thereof , border control at internal borders may be reintroduced […] (227)’.

As far as the procedure is concerned, ‘the Council may […] recommend for one or more specific Member States to decide to reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders. The Council's recommendation shall be based on a proposal from the Commission. […].

In the event that the recommendation is not implemented by a Member State, that Member State shall without delay inform the Commission in writing of its reasons’.

The implementing powers have thus not been entrusted to the Commission, which is also reflected in Recital 8a, which states that ‘in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures which touch on national executive and enforcement powers regarding the control at internal borders, implementing powers to adopt recommendations under this specific Union-level procedure should be conferred on the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission’.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009225/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Ανάγκη μελέτης της κατάστασης υγείας των κατοίκων στην περιοχή του ΧΥΤΑ Φυλής

Στην Αττική, στην περιοχή της Φυλής, λειτουργεί χώρος «δήθεν» Υγειονομικής Ταφής απορριμμάτων (ΧΥΤΑ), όπου αποτίθενται σύμμικτα τα απορρίμματα όλης της Αττικής για πολλές δεκαετίες.

Οι κάτοικοι της περιοχής Φυλής και Άνω Λιοσίων παρατηρούν για χρόνια την αύξηση περιστατικών καρκίνου και την υποβάθμιση της κατάστασης της υγείας των κατοίκων και των εργαζομένων της περιοχής.

Ταυτόχρονα, εμφανίζονται μελέτες και έρευνες από τις οποίες προκύπτει ότι, πέριξ του ΧΥΤΑ, σε μεγάλη διασπορά, καταγράφονται σε υψηλές συγκεντρώσεις, καρκινογόνα και άλλα επικίνδυνα στοιχεία που οφείλονται στην λειτουργία του ΧΥΤΑ. Μεταξύ των ερευνών είναι και αυτή της Ειδικής Υπηρεσίας Επιθεωρητών Περιβάλλοντος (19.9.2012), που καταγράφει «υψηλές συγκεντρώσεις εξασθενούς χρωμίου».

Οι κάτοικοι ζητούν επίμονα εδώ και χρόνια την διενέργεια τοξικολογικών, υγειονολογικών, επιδημιολογικών ερευνών-μελετών, προκειμένου να μελετηθεί η επίπτωση στην υγεία τους από την λειτουργία του ΧΥΤΑ. Μέχρι τώρα, οι αρμόδιες αρχές, δεν δίνουν καμία απάντηση στα συνεχή αιτήματα, γεγονός που έχει δημιουργήσει την πεποίθηση στους κατοίκους ότι η διενέργεια των εν λόγω μελετών δεν είναι επιθυμητή και ότι αποκρύπτονται στοιχεία.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Γνωρίζει αν υπάρχουν ή αν έχουν χρηματοδοτηθεί στο παρελθόν μελέτες, για την περιοχή, που να συνδέονται με το ανωτέρω ζήτημα;

Αν όχι, υπάρχουν διαθέσιμα κονδύλια τα οποία θα μπορούσαν να ζητηθούν από τις αρχές ή άλλους φορείς προκειμένου να πραγματοποιηθούν μελέτες σχετικά με τις επιπτώσεις στην υγεία των κατοίκων από την λειτουργία του χώρου ταφής και των λοιπών δραστηριοτήτων διαχείρισης απορριμμάτων;

Απάντηση του κ. Potočnik εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(18 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Δεν υπάρχει πρόσφατη μελέτη η οποία να έχει χρηματοδοτηθεί ή συγχρηματοδοτηθεί από την Επιτροπή όσον αφορά προβλήματα υγείας των κατοίκων που εικάζεται ότι οφείλονται στον χώρο υγειονομικής ταφής απορριμμάτων στην περιοχή της Φυλής.

Δεν υπάρχουν χρηματοδοτικά μέσα της ΕΕ τα οποία να επιτρέπουν τη χρηματοδότηση τέτοιου είδους μελετών που διεξάγονται από τις εθνικές αρχές ή άλλους φορείς.

Σύμφωνα με τους κανονισμούς των διαρθρωτικών ταμείων, ο σχεδιασμός, η προετοιμασία, η εφαρμογή, η παρακολούθηση, ο έλεγχος και η αξιολόγηση συγχρηματοδοτούμενων παρεμβάσεων στο πλαίσιο των επιχειρησιακών προγραμμάτων εμπίπτουν στην αρμοδιότητα των εθνικών αρχών, στο πιο κατάλληλο γεωγραφικό επίπεδο και σύμφωνα με το θεσμικό σύστημα κάθε κράτους μέλους.

Έτσι, με βάση την αρχή της επικουρικότητας και τους κανόνες επιλεξιμότητας για τα διαρθρωτικά ταμεία, οι ελληνικές αρχές είναι αρμόδιες να εξασφαλίζουν τη διενέργεια κατάλληλων μελετών σε συνδυασμό με την κατασκευή υποδομών συγχρηματοδοτούμενων από το ΕΤΠΑ ή το Ταμείο Συνοχής.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009225/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Need for health studies for residents of the Fyli landfill area

Fyli in Attica is the site of a supposedly hygienic landfill where composite waste from all over Attica has been dumped for many decades.

Local residents of Fyli and Ano Liosia have for years seen an increase in the incidence of cancer and a deterioration of their health and that of workers in the area.

At the same time, studies and surveys have appeared showing that high concentrations of carcinogenic and other dangerous substances resulting from the operation of the landfill are widely dispersed around the landfill site. One such survey is that of the Special Environmental Inspectorate (19 September 2012) which records ‘high concentrations of hexavalent chromium’.

For years, residents have been persistently demanding toxicological, health and epidemiological surveys and studies in order to study the impact on health of the operation of the landfill. So far the competent authorities have failed to respond to these repeated demands, which has convinced residents that such studies are undesirable and that information is being withheld.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

Does it know whether any relevant studies exist for this area or whether any such studies have been funded in the past?

If not, are any funds available which could be requested by the authorities or other bodies in order to commission studies on the impact on residents' health of the operation of the landfill and other waste management activities?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

There is no recent study funded or co-funded by the Commission related to human health issues allegedly caused by the Fyli landfill area.

There are no EU financial instruments which allow financing of this type of studies to be carried out by national authorities or other bodies.

Under the Structural Funds Regulations, the design, preparation, implementation, monitoring, audit and evaluation of co-funded interventions under the operational programmes fall under the responsibility of the national authorities, at the most appropriate territorial level and according to the institutional system of each Member State.

As such, on the basis of the subsidiarity principle and the eligibility rules for structural funds, the Greek authorities are responsible for ensuring that appropriate studies associated with infrastructures co-financed by the ERDF or the Cohesion Fund are undertaken.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-009226/13

au Conseil

Rachida Dati (PPE)

(29 juillet 2013)

Objet: Pour un accord rapide sur le paquet «protection des données»

Les récentes révélations sur l'existence du programme américain de transfert des données «PRISM», et sur l'utilisation qui en serait faite par les autorités américaines, rappellent que le respect de la vie privée est une question qui interpelle tout particulièrement les Européens.

C'est aussi une source d'inquiétude pour les entreprises européennes qui dépendent de la confiance de leurs clients dans la collecte de données.

Après les questions qui se sont posées dans le cadre des accords SWIFT et PNR et alors que nous entamons des négociations importantes pour l'avenir et la compétitivité de l'Europe, PRISM ne doit pas être une cause d'érosion de la confiance des Européens en notre partenaire américain. Il s'agit, bien au contraire, de trouver un juste équilibre entre sécurité et utilisation des données privées.

Mme Reding a très rapidement invité le Parlement et le Conseil à accélérer les négociations sur le paquet législatif révisant le régime de protection des données. À cette invitation le Parlement européen n'a pas tardé à réagir: la commission des libertés civiles a lancé une enquête pour évaluer l'impact des activités de surveillance sur les droits fondamentaux des citoyens, et une résolution a été adoptée en séance plénière, demandant au Conseil de traiter d'urgence le paquet «protection des données».

Réunis en Conseil informel «justice et affaires intérieures» les 18 et 19 juillet 2013, les États membres avaient la possibilité de parvenir à un accord sur le nouveau régime de protection des données. La France et l'Allemagne ont réclamé une action ambitieuse et rapide en matière de protection des données. Malgré ce signal fort, le dossier est toujours bloqué.

Par respect pour les Européens, nous devons mener à leur terme, et en toute transparence, les négociations sur le paquet «protection des données» et, dans la foulée, parvenir à un accord‐cadre sur la protection des données avec les États-Unis.

Le Conseil pourrait-il nous éclairer sur les points qui font encore débat?

Réponse

(30 septembre 2013)

Depuis que la Commission a soumis sa proposition fin janvier 2012, la négociation de ce paquet a toujours constitué une priorité législative pour le Conseil. Au cours de la précédente présidence du Conseil, les groupes de travail ont consacré à ce paquet pas moins de 27 journées de réunion pendant le premier semestre de cette année.

Lors de la session du Conseil qui s'est tenue les 6 et 7 juin 2013 à Luxembourg, toutes les délégations ont reconnu les avancées importantes réalisées sur ce dossier législatif majeur mais il a également été souligné que des progrès rapides ne devaient pas se faire au détriment de la qualité de la législation. La présidence du Conseil a fait savoir qu'il y avait une volonté de poursuivre, de la façon la plus dynamique possible, les négociations sur le projet de règlement dans l'intérêt à la fois des citoyens et des entreprises, notamment les PME.

Le Conseil n'est pas en mesure de prévoir la durée ni l'issue des négociations sur ce dossier.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009226/13

to the Council

Rachida Dati (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Need for swift agreement on the data protection package

The public reaction to the recent revelations concerning the existence of the US Prism data mining programme and the use to which the data are allegedly being put by the US authorities has shown once again that privacy is a matter about which Europeans feel very strongly.

It is also a matter of concern for European companies, which need their customers’ trust in order to collect data.

Given the questions raised during the talks on the SWIFT and PNR agreements, and the fact that we are now embarking on negotiations of key importance to Europe’s future and its continuing competitiveness, the Prism affair cannot be allowed to undermine Europeans' trust in our US partners. Rather, what we must do is strike an appropriate balance between the need for security and the right to privacy.

Commissioner Reding lost no time in calling on Parliament and the Council to step up the negotiations on the legislative package to revise the data protection regime. Parliament was quick to respond to those calls, with the Committee on Civil Liberties launching an inquiry into the impact of surveillance activities on citizens' fundamental rights, and Parliament adopting a resolution in plenary, calling on the Council to treat the data protection package as a matter of urgency.

The informal Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting of 18 and 19 July 2013 provided an ideal opportunity for the Member States to reach an agreement on a new data protection regime. However, despite the calls from France and Germany for swift, ambitious action on data protection, there is still deadlock on the issue.

Out of respect for the people of Europe, we need to bring the negotiations on the data protection package to a conclusion — while ensuring full transparency at all times — and subsequently to conclude a framework agreement on data protection with the United States. Can the Council say what the outstanding issues are?

Reply

(30 September 2013)

The negotiation of this package has been a legislative priority for the Council ever since the Commission made the proposal at the end of January 2012. Under the previous Council Presidency no less than 27 Working Party meeting days were devoted to this package in the course of the first half of this year.

At the Council meeting of 6-7 June 2013 in Luxembourg, all delegations acknowledged the important progress which had been achieved on this major legislative file, but it was also highlighted that rapid progress should not be at the expense of the quality of legislation. The Chair of the Council indicated that there is a willingness to continue negotiations on the draft Regulation as dynamically as possible in the interests of both citizens and the business community, including small and medium-sized enterprises.

The Council is not in a position to foresee the duration or outcome of the negotiations on this file.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009228/13

aan de Commissie

Esther de Lange (PPE)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: Niet betaalde boetes diplomaten

In Nederland is gebleken dat buitenlandse diplomaten meer dan de helft van de verkeersboetes niet betalen. In 2012 werden in totaal 4 056 (verkeers)boetes uitgedeeld aan buitenlandse diplomaten. Diplomaten moesten vorig jaar in totaal 289 399 euro aan boetes in Nederland betalen. Hiervan is 141 755 euro nog niet betaald.

Is de Commissie bekend met het feit dat er diplomaten zijn die openstaande verkeersboetes niet betalen en dat — door de onschendbaarheid die zij genieten — er geen dwangmiddelen zijn om diplomaten hun openstaande boetes te laten betalen?

Is de Commissie met het CDA van mening dat iedereen zich moet houden aan de regels die in Europa gelden? En dus ook diplomaten?

Is de Commissie op de hoogte van het aantal verkeersboetes van diplomaten van de Europese Dienst voor extern optreden (EDEO)?

Wat is het totale bedrag van de verkeersboetes van diplomaten en worden deze boetes allemaal betaald?

Is de Commissie op de hoogte van het aantal verkeersboetes van Eurocommissarissen?

Wat is het totale bedrag van de verkeersboetes van commissarissen en worden deze boetes allemaal betaald?

Is de Commissie met het CDA van mening dat, als EU-diplomaten derde landen oproepen regels en de rechtsstaat te handhaven, zij dit ook zelf in de praktijk moeten brengen door verkeersboetes te betalen?

Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie

(11 oktober 2013)

Het personeel van de instellingen van de Europese Unie dat in Brussel werkt en de commissarissen worden niet door diplomatieke onschendbaarheid gedekt overeenkomstig het Verdrag van Wenen inzake Diplomatiek Verkeer (1961) (228). Evenzeer worden EDEO-personeelsleden van nationale diplomatieke diensten niet door het Verdrag van Wenen gedekt, wanneer ze in Brussel werken.

De Commissie is ervan op de hoogte dat ingevolge artikel 31 van het Verdrag van Wenen inzake Diplomatiek Verkeer een diplomatieke ambtenaar immuniteit geniet ten aanzien van de strafrechtelijke rechtsmacht van de ontvangende staat en ook ten aanzien van zijn burgerlijke en administratieve rechtsmacht, behalve in de speciale, opgesomde gevallen. Artikel 41 lid 1 van het Verdrag van Wenen bepaalt dat alle personen die privileges en onschendbaarheid genieten, de plicht hebben om de wetten en de voorschriften van de ontvangende staat te respecteren.

Personeel van de Europese Unie en leden van de Commissie genieten onschendbaarheid in overeenstemming met het 7e Protocol betreffende de Voorrechten en Immuniteiten, gehecht aan het VWEU betreffende de werking van de Europese Unie ten aanzien van de door hen in hun officiële hoedanigheid uitgevoerde handelingen.

Zelfs al worden wagens voor officiële doeleinden gebruikt, toch roept de Commissie, en dan alleen voor veiligheids‐ of andere, te rechtvaardigen redenen, niet meer dan ongeveer tweemaal per jaar onschendbaarheid betreffende overtredingen op het verkeersregelement in.

Commissarissen, directeurs-generaal, chauffeurs van de commissarissen en elke andere chauffeur van officiële auto's van de Commissie betalen persoonlijk hun verkeersboetes. Derhalve beschikt de Commissie niet over administratie van deze boetes.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009228/13

to the Commission

Esther de Lange (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Fines unpaid by diplomats

In the Netherlands, it has been established that foreign diplomats fail to pay more than half of their traffic fines. In 2012, a total of 4 056 (traffic) fines were imposed on diplomats. Altogether, diplomats should have paid EUR 289 399 in fines in the Netherlands last year. Of this total, EUR 141 755 has not yet been paid.

Is the Commission aware that there are diplomats who fail to pay their traffic fines and that — because of the inviolability that they enjoy — no coercive measure is available to compel diplomats to pay their fines?

Does the Commission agree with the CDA that everyone should abide by the rules which apply in Europe? And that this includes diplomats?

Is the Commission aware of the number of traffic fines payable by diplomats belonging to the European External Action Service (EEAS)?

What is the total amount of the traffic fines imposed on diplomats, and are all these fines paid?

Does the Commission know how many traffic fines are imposed on European Commissioners?

What is the total amount of the traffic fines imposed on European Commissioners, and are all these fines paid?

Does the Commission agree with the CDA that if EU diplomats call upon third countries to abide by rules and adhere to the rule of law, they should also practise what they preach by paying traffic fines?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2013)

Staff of the European Union institutions working in Brussels and Commissioners are not covered by diplomatic immunity as set out in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) (229). Equally, EEAS staffs from national diplomatic services are not covered by the Vienna Convention when working in Brussels.

The Commission is aware that under Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a diplomatic agent enjoys immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State and also from its civil and administrative jurisdiction, except in the special cases enumerated. Article 41 (1) of the Vienna Convention stipulates that all persons enjoying privileges and immunity have the duty to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state.

European Union staff and Members of the Commission enjoy immunity according to the 7th Protocol on Privileges and Immunities, annexed to the TFEU in respect of acts performed by them in their official capacity.

However, even when cars are used for official purpose, the Commission does not invoke immunity concerning traffic code violations, unless for security or other justifiable reasons — about twice a year.

Commissioners, Directors General, Commissioners' drivers and any other drivers of Commission official cars personally pay their traffic fines. Therefore, the Commission does not have accounting of these fines.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009229/13

aan de Commissie

Esther de Lange (PPE)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: Gevaarlijk zwemspeelgoed voor baby's en kleine kinderen

TÜV Rheinland heeft onderzoek gedaan naar strandspeelgoed en babyzwemzitjes die verkocht worden in vakantieoorden in Duitsland, Spanje, Italië, Griekenland, België en Nederland. In totaal werden 50 producten onderzocht, waaronder opblaasbare zwemdieren en luchtmatrassen uit souvenirwinkels en strandkiosken. Hieruit bleek dat 20 van de 50 zwemartikelen aan geen enkele veiligheidsvoorwaarde voldeden. De onderzoekers van TÜV Rheinland vonden zes zwemstoeltjes waarbij het risico bestaat op kapseizen of dat de baby's en kleine kinderen eruit kunnen glijden. Daarnaast werden ook in sommige artikelen te grote hoeveelheden giftige stoffen zoals weekmakers gevonden.

Is de Commissie ervan op de hoogte dat een groot deel van het waterspeelgoed en de babyzwemzitjes die in Europese vakantieoorden worden verkocht, niet aan de veiligheidsvoorwaarden voldoen en dat ze daarnaast in sommige gevallen te hoge concentraties giftige stoffen bevatten zoals kankerverwekkende weekmakers?

Is de Commissie het ermee eens dat ouders worden misleid doordat de vermeend veilige zwemstoeltjes in werkelijkheid levensgevaarlijk blijken te zijn?

Welke maatregelen neemt de Commissie om ervoor te zorgen dat waterspeelgoed en babyzwemzitjes die in Europese vakantieoorden worden verkocht, veilig zijn?

Hoe kan de Commissie ervoor zorgen dat de bovengenoemde levensgevaarlijke zwemstoeltjes zo spoedig mogelijk van de Europese markt verdwijnen?

Antwoord van de heer Tajani namens de Commissie

(17 september 2013)

De Commissie heeft de resultaten van het door TÜV Rheinland verrichte onderzoek via de pers vernomen. Volgens TÜV Rheinland ging het bij de meeste geteste producten om speelgoed, waarvoor derhalve de speelgoedrichtlijnrichtlijn (230) en de Reach-bepalingen inzake speelgoed (231) gelden. Andere producten, zoals zwemzitjes, vallen onder de richtlijn algemene productveiligheid (232). De veiligheid van zwemzitjes voor kinderen tot 36 maanden is het voorwerp van Europese norm EN 13138-3 (233) betreffende ontwerp, afmetingen, materiaal, sterkte en prestaties in en op het water alsmede bepalingen inzake keurmerk en informatieverstrekking.

Volgens het verslag van TÜV Rheinland voldeden 20 van de 50 geteste producten niet aan de toepasselijke eisen. De meeste vastgestelde gebreken betroffen de waarschuwingen op de verpakking van speelgoed (15 gevallen), te hoge gehalten aan chemische stoffen in speelgoed (6 gevallen) en de aanwezigheid in speelgoed van kleine onderdelen die kunnen worden ingeslikt (5 gevallen).

De Commissie hecht veel belang aan het informeren van de consumenten over de aankoop van veilig speelgoed. Op de website van de Commissie (234) zijn in 22 talen tips voor veilig speelgoed te vinden.

Het toezicht op de naleving van de EU-wetgeving inzake niet-conforme en dus onveilige producten is de taak van de markttoezichtautoriteiten van de lidstaten. Een van de instrumenten waarover zij beschikken is de bevoegdheid om producten uit de handel te nemen, en corrigerende maatregelen met betrekking tot producten die ernstig gevaar opleveren moeten worden gerapporteerd aan het Europese systeem voor snelle uitwisseling van informatie (Rapex). De voorstellen die worden gedaan in het wetgevingspakket van de Commissie over productveiligheid en markttoezicht (235) zijn bedoeld om er verder toe bij te dragen dat de nationale markttoezichtautoriteiten beter samenwerken met het oog op dezelfde concurrentievoorwaarden voor alle ondernemingen en veiligere producten voor consumenten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009229/13

to the Commission

Esther de Lange (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Dangerous swimming toys for babies and young children

TÜV Rhineland has investigated beach toys and baby swim seats on sale in holiday resorts in Germany, Spain, Italy, Greece, Belgium and the Netherlands. Altogether, 50 products were examined, including inflatable animals and lilos from souvenir shops and beach kiosks. It was found that 20 of the 50 articles did not comply with any safety standards. TÜV Rhineland’s researchers found six swim seats which were liable to capsize or allow babies and small children to fall out. In addition, some of the products contained excessive levels of toxins such as plasticisers.

Is the Commission aware that many water toys and baby swim seats on sale in European holiday resorts do not comply with safety requirements and that moreover in some cases they contain excessive concentrations of toxins, such as carcinogenic plasticisers?

Does the Commission agree that parents are misled because swim seats which they assume to be safe are in reality life-threatening?

What measures will the Commission take to ensure that water toys and baby swim seats on sale in European holiday resorts are safe?

How can the Commission ensure that the abovementioned life-threatening swim seats are removed from the European market as quickly as possible?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2013)

The Commission was made aware of the results of TÜV Rheinland’s investigation through the press. According to TÜV Rheinland, most of the tested items were toys and thus subject to the Toy Safety Directive (236) and toy-related provisions of REACH (237). Other items, such as swim seats, are subject to the General Product Safety Directive (238). The safety of swim seats intended for children up to 36 months is covered by European Standard EN 13138-3 (239) regarding design, sizing, materials, strength and in-water performance as well as provisions for marking and information supply.

TÜV Rheinland reported 20 out of the 50 items tested not to meet applicable requirements. Most reported failures concerned warnings on toy packaging (15 cases), excessive levels of chemicals in toys (6 cases) and the presence in toys of small parts that could be swallowed (5 cases).

The Commission attaches high importance to informing consumers on how to buy safe toys. Toy Safety Tips for consumers are available in 22 languages on the Commission’s website (240).

Enforcement of EU legislation on non-compliant and therefore unsafe products is the responsibility of the market surveillance authorities in the Member States. The tools at their disposal include powers to withdraw products from the market, and corrective actions on products posing a serious risk have to be reported to the European rapid alert system RAPEX. The proposals made in the Commission’s Product Safety and Market Surveillance package (241) are intended to further help national market surveillance authorities to cooperate better to ensure a level playing field for businesses and safer products for consumers.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009230/13

aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter / Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)

Laurence J. A. J. Stassen (NI)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: VP/HR — EU wil eigen geheime dienst

De Europese Commissie (EC) en de Europese Dienst voor extern optreden (EDEO), onder leiding van vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger Ashton, hebben het voornemen een eigen Europese geheime dienst op te richten, die zelfs de beschikking zou moeten hebben over drones en vliegtuigen.

Woordvoerders van de EC en de EDEO hebben medegedeeld dat het voornemen een tegenreactie is op de Amerikaanse en Britse afluisterpraktijken in de EU.

1.

Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger bekend met het bericht

1.

Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger bekend met het bericht

 (242)

2.

Hoe legitimeert de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de oprichting van een Europese geheime dienst? Deelt zij de mening dat de EC en de EDEO deze bevoegdheid helemaal niet hebben? Zo neen, op welke Verdragsartikelen baseert de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger zich dan?

3.

Deelt de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de mening dat het ongehoord is wanneer de EC en de EDEO door middel van een eigen geheime dienst de Nederlandse resp. Europese burgers gaan bespioneren? Zo neen, welke positieve uitwerkingen verwacht de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger dan van deze ordinaire spionage?

4.

Deelt de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de mening dat het oprichten van een Europese geheime dienst geen tegenreactie is op de Amerikaanse en Britse afluisterpraktijken in de EU, maar een juist daardoor geïnspireerd voornemen om de Nederlandse resp. Europese burgers, zoals in een politiestaat, continu in de gaten te houden — onder het mom

„Big Brother is watching you”? Zo neen, hoe valt het met elkaar te rijmen dat de EC en de EDEO de praktijken die zij de Amerikanen en de Britten zozeer verwijten, nu zelf  ter hand willen gaan nemen?

5.

Deelt de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de mening dat het oprichten van een Europese geheime dienst een opmaat is naar een militaire organisatie op EU-niveau onder leiding van de EC en de EDEO? Zo neen, hoe ziet de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger dit dan wel?

6.

Deelt de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de mening dat het oprichten van een Europese geheime dienst een ongehoorde aantasting is van de privacy van de Nederlandse resp. Europese burgers? Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger er dan ook toe bereid te voorkomen dat een Europese geheime dienst er daadwerkelijk gaat komen? Zo neen, waarom niet?

Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie

(6 september 2013)

1.

De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter is niet op de hoogte van enig voornemen van de EU om drones of gevechtsvliegtuigen aan te schaffen of in te zetten. De lidstaten voorzien in dergelijke vermogens via hun nationale capaciteit voor operaties of missies in het kader van het gemeenschappelijk buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid, wanneer hiertoe is besloten door een consensus van EU-lidstaten.

2-6. De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter noch de Commissie heeft plannen om een Europese geheime dienst op te richten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009230/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — EU plan to establish its own secret service

The Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS), headed by Vice-President/High Representative Ashton, intend to set up their own European secret service, which would even be equipped with drones and aircraft.

Spokespersons for the Commission and the EEAS have indicated that the plan is a response to the eavesdropping practices of the Americans and the British in the EU.

1.

Is the Vice-President/High Representative familiar with the report

1.

Is the Vice-President/High Representative familiar with the report

 (243)

2.

How does the Vice-President/High Representative justify the establishment of a European secret service? Does she agree that the Commission and EEAS have absolutely no power to pursue such a plan? If not, on what Treaty articles does the Vice-President/High Representative base her view?

3.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative agree that it would be outrageous for the Commission and the EEAS to spy on Dutch/European citizens by means of its own secret service? If not, what positive effects does the Vice-President/High Representative expect from this disreputable spying?

4.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative agree that establishing a European secret service is not a response to the American and British eavesdropping practices in the EU but a plan which, on the contrary, is inspired by precisely those practices with the aim of continuously monitoring Dutch/European citizens, as in a police state, on the pretext that

‘Big Brother is watching you’? If not, how can the contradiction be accounted for that the Commission and EEAS now themselves wish to adopt the very practices which they so strongly object to when employed by the Americans and the British?

5.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative agree that establishing a European secret service is a preliminary to a military organisation at EU level directed by the Commission and EEAS? If not, how else does the Vice-President/High Representative view the matter?

6.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative agree that establishing a European secret service is an outrageous infringement of the privacy of Dutch/European citizens? Will the Vice-President/High Representative therefore prevent the establishment of a European secret service? If not, why not?

Answer given by High-Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2013)

1.

The HR/VP is unaware of any EU plan to own and operate either drones or combat airplanes. All such capabilities are provided by Member States for Common Foreign and Security Policy operations/missions, from their respective national resources, when operations/missions are authorised by a consensus of EU Member States.

2-6. The HR/VP nor the Commission have any plans to create a European secret service

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009231/13

aan de Commissie

Philippe De Backer (ALDE)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: Herziening staatssteunregels voor luchthavens

Op 3 juli 2013 lanceerde de Europese Commissie een publieke consultatie over de ontwerprichtsnoeren voor staatssteun aan luchthavens en luchtvaartmaatschappijen. Die richtsnoeren impliceren strengere regels voor overheidssteun aan de luchtvaart. Dit moet de transparantie vergroten en het misbruik van belastingsgeld stoppen.

Onlangs werd ook het onderzoek naar staatssteun aan de luchthaven van Charleroi opnieuw geopend.

In verband hiermee volgende vragen:

Is de Commissie van plan om onderzoeken tegen andere (regionale) luchthavens op Belgisch grondgebied te starten?

Indien de Commissie positief antwoordt op de eerste vraag, welke Belgische luchthavens zouden onderzocht worden en op welke basis?

Antwoord van de heer Almunia namens de Commissie

(18 september 2013)

De Commissie heeft geen enkel ander onderzoek naar Belgische luchthavens ingesteld dan het onderzoek naar staatssteun aan de luchthaven van Charleroi. In dit verband zij erop gewezen dat de Commissie te allen tijde een onderzoek naar staatssteun kan openen, met name naar aanleiding van een klacht of van andere marktinformatie waaruit blijkt dat staatssteun is of zal worden verleend.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009231/13

to the Commission

Philippe De Backer (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Review of state aid rules for airports

On 3 July 2013, the Commission launched a public consultation process on the draft guidelines for state aid to airports and airlines. Those guidelines entail stricter rules for state aid to aviation. This is intended to increase transparency and stop the misuse of tax revenue.

Recently, the investigation into state aid to Charleroi airport was also reopened.

1.

Does the Commission intend to launch investigations into other airports (particularly regional airports) in Belgium?

2.

If so, which Belgian airports are to be investigated and on what basis?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

The Commission has not initiated any investigations into Belgian airports other than the one concerning state aid to Charleroi airport. It should be mentioned in this context that the Commission can initiate a state aid investigation at any time, in particular following a complaint or other market information indicating that state aid was or will be granted.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009266/13

to the Commission

Claude Moraes (S&D)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: World Health Organisation (WHO) report on air quality in cities

Is the Commission aware that according to the final technical report on the ‘Review of evidence on health aspects of air pollution — REVIHAAP’ recently published by the WTO, the health effects of air pollution have been gravely underestimated?

Particulate matter and other sources of air pollution are believed to be the cause of 4 300 early deaths per year in my constituency of London alone. The report also draws new links between air pollution and diabetes, still births and adverse effects on the cognitive development of children born to mothers exposed to even small levels of air pollution.

Can the Commission comment on what action it will take in light of this new scientific information, and how it will affect current or possible future proceedings against Member States which have not yet complied with the limits set in Directive 2008/50/EC (the Air Quality Directive)?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2013)

The Commission has issued two grant agreements to the WHO European Centre for Environment and Health to provide a review of the evidence on health aspects of air pollution (REVIHAAP). The information contained in it is one of the key elements in the Commission's review of EU air quality policy, as is illustrated on its webpage (244).

In light of the scientific evidence the Commission intends to ensure full implementation of existing air policy legislation by 2020 and this may include legal proceedings against Member States who have not yet complied with the requirements of Directive 2008/50/EC (245).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009267/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(29 Ιουλίου 2013)

Θέμα: Κακομεταχείριση γυναικών δημοσιογράφων από την αστυνομία

Σύμφωνα με την Hurriyet Daily News (Τουρκία) δύο γυναίκες δημοσιογράφοι κατηγόρησαν την αστυνομία για κακομεταχείριση κατά τη διάρκεια επιδρομής στον τόπο εργασίας τους, το πρακτορείο ειδήσεων Etkin, στα πλαίσια της κάλυψης των διαδηλώσεων στο πάρκο Γκεζί στην Κωνσταντινούπολη. Περίπου 44 αξιωματικοί ενεπλάκησαν, στους οποίους συμπεριλαμβανόταν μόνο μία γυναίκα.

Μία από τις δημοσιογράφους υποστηρίζει ότι η γυναίκα αξιωματικός την μετέφερε στην τουαλέτα και την υπέβαλε σε σωματικό έλεγχο κατόπιν απογύμνωσης αφού η ίδια αρνήθηκε να βγάλει τα ρούχα της.

Η άλλη δημοσιογράφος υποστηρίζει ότι κάτι παρόμοιο συνέβη και σε αυτήν, και ότι την άγγιξαν ανάμεσα στο στήθος και στα γεννητικά της όργανα.

Οι δύο δημοσιογράφοι υποστηρίζουν ότι η αστυνομία απομάκρυνε σχεδόν όλα τα αρχεία σχετικά με τις διαδηλώσεις στο πάρκο Γκεζί. Ανέμεναν ότι κάτι τέτοιο θα συνέβαινε, καθώς οι επιδρομές της αστυνομίας στο πρακτορείο ειδήσεων Etkin πραγματοποιούνται σε ετήσια βάση και κατάσχονται τα αρχεία τους λόγω της καίριας τους σημασίας για την κυβέρνηση.

Δεδομένου ότι αυτές οι κατηγορίες εναντίον της αστυνομίας και της κυβέρνησης είναι πολύ συχνές στην Τουρκία:

Σε τι είδους ενέργειες σκοπεύει να προβεί η ΕΕ με σκοπό την αποφυγή αυτών των παραβιάσεων και κατασχέσεων αρχείων των ΜΜΕ, τα οποία παρεμποδίζουν τόσο την ελευθερία του Τύπου όσο και την ελευθερία έκφρασης;

Γιατί η ΕΕ δεν μπορεί να σταματήσει την συνεχή παρενόχληση των δημοσιογράφων από την τουρκική κυβέρνηση, δεδομένου ότι παρόμοιες κατηγορίες έχουν διατυπωθεί από διεθνείς οργανώσεις ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων όπως είναι η Διεθνής Αμνηστία και η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση Δημοσιογράφων;

Τι συγκεκριμένα μέτρα θα λάβουν οι αρμόδιοι Επίτροποι για την διεύρυνση, τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και τη δικαιοσύνη προκειμένου να εξασφαλίσουν ότι η Τουρκία και η τουρκική αστυνομία συμμορφώνεται με το κοινοτικό κεκτημένο, για την κατοχύρωση των δικαιωμάτων των πολιτών και των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων των γυναικών και των δημοσιογράφων και τη διασφάλιση ότι τέτοιες προκλητικές πράξεις από αξιωματικούς της αστυνομίας διερευνούνται διεξοδικά;

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009450/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(5 Αυγούστου 2013)

Θέμα: Ο Τούρκος πρωθυπουργός κινεί νομικές διαδικασίες κατά της εφημερίδας The Times

Ο Τούρκος πρωθυπουργός Ρεσέπ Ταγίπ Ερντογάν απείλησε ότι θα κινήσει νομικές διαδικασίες κατά της βρετανικής εφημερίδας The Times, κατόπιν της δημοσίευσης μιας ανοικτής επιστολής, η οποία καταδικάζει τις πράξεις του Τούρκου πρωθυπουργού και της κυβέρνησής του εναντίον των διαδηλωτών στο Γκεζί και περιγράφει τις εν λόγω πράξεις ως «δικτατορικό καθεστώς».

Επομένως ζητούμε από την Επιτροπή να σχολιάσει:

τη συμπεριφορά του κ. Ερντογάν προς τις εφημερίδες, εντός και εκτός της Τουρκίας· και

τη συμμόρφωση της Τουρκίας με το κοινοτικό κεκτημένο, την Ευρωπαϊκή Σύμβαση των Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων, και ιδιαίτερα το δικαίωμα στην ελευθερία έκφρασης.

Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(26 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει τα γεγονότα που αναφέρει ο αξιότιμος κ. ευρωβουλευτής και τον παρακαλεί να ανατρέξει σε απαντήσεις της σε προηγούμενες ερωτήσεις που υποβλήθηκαν από τον ίδιο και από άλλα μέλη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου σχετικά με την ελευθερία της έκφρασης στην Τουρκία, όπως στην ερώτηση αριθ. E-008312/2013 (246).

Τον Οκτώβριο του 2013, η Επιτροπή θα υποβάλει εκτενή έκθεση στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και στο Συμβούλιο στο πλαίσιο της ετήσιας έκθεσης προόδου σχετικά με τις εξελίξεις στην Τουρκία, στην οποία θα εξετάζεται μεταξύ άλλων η τήρηση του δικαιώματος ελευθερίας της έκφρασης και η προστασία της πολυφωνίας και της ελευθερίας των μέσων ενημέρωσης.

Επιπλέον, η προαγωγή των ευρωπαϊκών αξιών πέραν των συνόρων της ΕΕ εξετάστηκε και στο πλαίσιο των συστάσεων της ανεξάρτητης ομάδας υψηλού επιπέδου για την ελευθερία και την πολυφωνία των μέσων ενημέρωσης που συγκροτήθηκε από τον αρμόδιο για το ψηφιακό θεματολόγιο Επίτροπο. Μετά την παρουσίαση της έκθεσης από την εν λόγω ομάδα, η Επιτροπή δρομολόγησε δύο δημόσιες διαβουλεύσεις, μία σχετικά με τις συστάσεις της ομάδας και μία ειδικά για την ανεξαρτησία των εθνικών ρυθμιστικών αρχών του οπτικοακουστικού τομέα. Τα αποτελέσματα των διαβουλεύσεων θα ληφθούν υπόψη σε κάθε απόφαση σχετικά με τις πιθανές μεταγενέστερες ενέργειες εντός των ορίων των αρμοδιοτήτων της ΕΕ.

Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί επίσης το αίτημα του Κοινοβουλίου σχετικά με την εφαρμογή δοκιμαστικού σχεδίου για το «Ευρωπαϊκό κέντρο ελευθερίας του Τύπου και των μέσων ενημέρωσης» το οποίο θα λειτουργεί ως «κέντρο υποδοχής» ευρωπαϊκού επιπέδου για δημοσιογραφικούς οργανισμούς ή ιδιώτες και μέσα ενημέρωσης από τα κράτη μέλη και από τις υποψήφιες για προσχώρηση χώρες.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009267/13

to the Commission

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Women journalists ‘abused’ by police

According to the Hurriyet Daily News (Turkey), two women journalists have accused police of abusing them during a raid on their place of work, the Etkin News Agency, in connection with their coverage of the Gezi Park protests in Istanbul. Some 44 officers were involved, only one of whom was a woman.

One of the journalists claims that the woman officer took her to the bathroom and strip-searched her after she had refused to take her clothes off.

The other journalist claims that something similar happened to her, and that she was touched between her breasts and on her genitalia.

The two journalists say that the police took away almost all their archives relating to the Gezi Park protests. They were expecting it to happen, as the police raid the Etkin News Agency on a yearly basis and confiscate its archives because it is critical of the government.

As such accusations against the police and the government are very common in Turkey:

What action does the EU intend to take with a view to preventing such violations and confiscations of media archives, which suppress both freedom of the press and freedom of expression?

Why is the EU failing to stop this persistent harassment of journalists by the Turkish Government, given that similar accusations have been made by international human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and the European Union of Journalists?

What specific action will be taken by the Commissioners responsible for enlargement, human rights and justice to ensure that Turkey and the Turkish police comply with the acquis communautaire, upholding citizens’ rights and the human rights of women and journalists and ensuring that such provocative acts by police officers are closely investigated?

Question for written answer E-009450/13

to the Commission

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(5 August 2013)

Subject: Turkish Prime Minister to take legal action against The Times

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has threatened to take legal action against UK newspaper The Times, following its publication of an open letter condemning the actions of the Turkish Prime Minister and his government against the Gezi protesters and describing those actions as ‘dictatorial rule’.

We therefore ask the Commission to comment on:

Mr Erdoğan’s behaviour towards newspapers, within and outside Turkey; and

Turkey’s compliance with the acquis communautaire, the European Convention on Human Rights, and in particular the right to freedom of expression.

Joint answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the events raised by the Honourable Member. The Commission refers to its answers to previous questions by the Honourable Member and other Members of the European Parliament on freedom of expression in Turkey, such as question number E-008312/2013 (247).

In October 2013, the Commission will extensively report to Parliament and to the Council in its annual Progress Report on developments in Turkey, including observance of the right to freedom of expression and the protection of media freedom and pluralism.

Moreover the promotion of European values beyond EU borders has also been addressed by the recommendations of the independent High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism set up by the Commissioner responsible for Digital Agenda. Following the presentation of the report by this group, the Commission launched two public consultations, one on the recommendations of the group and one specifically on the independence of national audiovisual regulatory authorities. Any decision on possible follow-up actions within the limits of the competences of the EU will take account of the responses to the consultations.

The Commission also follows up on the request by Parliament to implement a pilot project for a European Centre for Press and Media Freedom acting as a European-level ‘drop-in centre’ for journalistic organisations or individuals and media from the Member States and from the Candidate Countries.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009268/13

to the Commission

Arlene McCarthy (S&D)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Bank charges

In a single market with a common currency there should be no discrimination against citizens travelling between Member States and paying for services. A constituent from the north west of England who regularly travels to the Netherlands from the UK, when taking the train from Amsterdam airport is only able to pay for the ticket with a Dutch bank card. As he does not live in the Netherlands, he does not have a Dutch bank card. The only way for him to buy a ticket with a non-Dutch card is to incur a fee. The situation also exists in other Member States, including Belgium and Germany.

Does the Commission intend to take action against those Member States still allowing payment providers to accept only domestic bank cards, thereby discriminating against other EU nationals who want to pay by card but who do not have a bank card in that Member State?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

According to the understanding of the Commission, a passenger buying a rail ticket at Amsterdam airport may pay both with a card issued nationally and with a card issued in any other Member State. Depending on the card scheme used, a fee (a surcharge) may be added to the bill. These differences are based on the different costs of acceptance of different card brands for the merchant (the rail company) and are not linked to the country where the card is issued. A payment by a Dutch-issued Visa or MasterCard card should incur exactly the same fee as a payment by a Visa or MasterCard issued in, for example, the UK or France.

According to Article 52(3) of the Payment Services Directive (248) fees (surcharges) may be demanded by merchants for the use of payment instruments (e.g. cards), though Member States may decide to limit or forbid such fees. This means that there are no harmonised internal market rules on this matter at this point. However, in its proposal for a revision of the Payment Services Directive (249) and a regulation of interchange fees for card payments (250), the Commission has proposed to eliminate the surcharging on all three-party consumer cards. They should therefore fully address the issue raised by the Honourable Member.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009269/13

to the Commission

Catherine Stihler (S&D)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Protection of indigenous ladybird species in the EU

Can the Commission update Parliament on the actions being taken in conjunction with the Member States to protect indigenous ladybird species, in particular given the threat now posed by the Harlequin ladybird to native species? Is specific work being conducted, and if so, by whom and to what timescale?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(9 September 2013)

Apart from the general habitat conservation measures being undertaken by Member States under the Habitats Directive (251) there are no specific EU mandated actions being currently taken to protect indigenous ladybirds against the impact of invasive alen species such as the harlequin ladybird. The Commission intends to put forward a proposal to prevent and manage the introduction and spread of invasive alien species in the EU as part of implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009271/13

alla Commissione

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(29 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Revamping di un impianto di trattamento di rifiuti speciali sito a Marghera (VE), autorizzato in possibile violazione della direttiva «VAS» 2001/42/CE

La Giunta della Regione del Veneto ha recentemente concesso l'autorizzazione alla ristrutturazione con ampliamento (definita tecnicamente revamping) dell'impianto denominato «ALLES» di Marghera (VE), che opera nel campo del trattamento dei fanghi di escavazione dei canali della Laguna di Venezia (252).

Grazie al succitato provvedimento, la struttura in questione potrà ora ricevere 180.000 tonnellate all'anno di rifiuti speciali anche pericolosi, con raddoppiata capacità di stoccaggio (da 6.000 a 12.000 tonnellate); quanto ai rifiuti trattabili, si assiste addirittura all'aumento da 20 a 70 codici CER, tra i quali svariate tipologie di fanghi, rifiuti fangosi, ceneri pesanti, scarti di mescole, terre e rocce contenenti sostanze pericolose, fanghi prodotti da trattamenti fisico-chimici con sostanze pericolose. L'impianto riceverà inoltre rifiuti speciali (pericolosi e non) provenienti anche da aree esterne al bacino lagunare, ovvero da tutto il territorio nazionale e anche dall'estero, per rispondere alle richieste di mercato in tema di smaltimento dei rifiuti (253).

Il conferimento dell'autorizzazione appena descritta ha reso necessaria la contestuale modifica (mediante il medesimo provvedimento) del P.A.T. (Piano di Assetto del Territorio) del comune di Venezia, che impediva il rilascio di nuove autorizzazioni relative a impianti per il trattamento di rifiuti speciali. Tale modifica, poiché riguardante un piano territoriale e urbanistico adottato ai sensi di legge dalla Competente Autorità, avrebbe necessitato la previa effettuazione della V.A.S. (Valutazione Ambientale Strategica), ai sensi di quanto previsto dalla relativa direttiva 2001/42/CE; tale adempimento, tuttavia, sembrerebbe essere stato omesso.

Si ricorda infine che, in base ai risultati emersi da un'indagine epidemiologica promossa congiuntamente dall'Istituto superiore della Sanità, dal Ministero della Salute e dall'Università «La Sapienza» di Roma, l'area rimane ai primi posti tra quelle più inquinate d'Italia, nonché tra quelle caratterizzate da maggiore presenza di patologie tumorali (254).

Tutto ciò premesso, quali iniziative intende intraprendere la Commissione per reagire alla possibile violazione della direttiva «VAS» descritta sopra, nonché al fine di verificare la presenza di eventuali altre violazioni della normativa comunitaria ambientale nella vicenda in esame?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(23 settembre 2013)

A norma dell’articolo 3, paragrafo 3, della direttiva 2001/42/CE (255), per i piani di assetto territoriale in ambito urbano e rurale che determinano l’uso di piccole aree a livello locale e per le modifiche minori di tali piani la valutazione ambientale è necessaria solo se gli Stati membri stabiliscono che essi possono avere effetti significativi sull’ambiente.

La Commissione non ha ricevuto elementi di prova che indichino che il progetto cui fa riferimento l’onorevole deputato non rappresenta una modifica minore al piano d’assetto del territorio (PAT) della città di Venezia. Con DGR n. 448 del 10 aprile 2013, la Regione Veneto ha espresso parere favorevole circa la compatibilità ambientale del progetto.

Sulla base delle informazioni fornite e in mancanza di elementi chiari e sostanziali che comprovino l’esistenza di errori nelle valutazioni ambientali effettuate dalle autorità competenti, la Commissione non ha potuto riscontrare alcuna violazione della direttiva VAS.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009271/13

to the Commission

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Revamping of a special waste treatment plant in Marghera (Venice), authorised possibly in breach of Directive 2001/42/EC on Strategic Environmental Assessment

The Regional Council of the Veneto Region has recently granted permission for the ‘Alles’ plant in Marghera (Venice), which treats sludge from the excavation of canals in the Venice Lagoon, to be revamped (256).

This means that the facility in question will now be able to receive 180 000 tonnes of special waste per year, including hazardous waste, and will have a doubled storage capacity (from

6 000 to 12 000 tonnes). As regards treatable waste, there will even be an increase from 20 to 70 EWC codes, including various types of sludge, waste sludge, bottom ash, compound wastes, rocks and soils containing hazardous substances and sludge produced by physical and chemical treatments containing hazardous substances. The plant will also receive special waste (hazardous and non-hazardous) coming from areas outside the lagoon basin, or from all over the country and even from abroad, in order to meet the market demands in terms of waste disposal (257).

The granting of the permission described above meant that the City of Venice’s PAT (Spatial Planning Plan) also had to be changed at the same time (through the same measure), because this plan prohibited the issuance of new permits for special waste treatment plants. Given that this amendment concerned an urban development plan that had been legally adopted by the ‘Competent Authority’, it should first have been subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), in accordance with the provisions of Directive 2001/42/EC. This does not, however, appear to have been done.

Lastly, based on the findings of an epidemiological survey sponsored jointly by the National Institute of Health, the Ministry of Health and the La Sapienza University of Rome, the area remains among the most polluted of Italy, with one of the highest number of cases of cancer (258).

What measures does the Commission therefore intend to take in response to this possible breach of the SEA Directive as described above, and to ascertain whether there may have been any other breach of EU environmental legislation in the case in question?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2013)

According to Article 3(3) of the SEA Directive 2001/42/EC (259) plans regarding town and country planning, which determine the use of small areas at local level and minor modifications to these plans, require an environmental assessment to be carried out only where the Member States determine that these plans are likely to have significant environmental effects.

The Commission has not received the evidence suggesting that the project referred to by the Honourable Member does not represent a minor modification to the City of Venice's PAT (Spatial Planning Plan). By DGR n. 448 of 10 April 2013 the Veneto Region expressed a favourable opinion regarding the environmental compatibility of this project.

Based on the information provided and in the absence of clear and substantial evidence of error within the environmental assessments carried out by the competent Authorities, the Commission could not identify any evidence of a breach of the SEA Directive.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009272/13

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE) e Aldo Patriciello (PPE)

(29 luglio 2013)

Oggetto: Possibili finanziamenti per la creazione di un Parco Archeologico Ambientale Interregionale

Il Progetto denominato «Safinim» prevede la creazione di un Polo di Turismo Archeologico-Ambientale da costituirsi nel territorio dei Comuni di Agnone, Pietrabbondante, Pescopennataro (Molise) e Schiavi d'Abruzzo (Abruzzo) su iniziativa delle associazioni culturali Archeoclub di Schiavi d'Abruzzo e O.S.C.A., Istituzione di Studi e Ricerche, di Agnone (in provincia di Isernia).

Il progetto prevede la valorizzazione delle ricchezze specifiche del territorio attraverso la riqualificazione turistico-ambientale delle aree in oggetto, in particolare:

la sistemazione, l'ampliamento e la messa in rete di aree archeologiche sparse nel territorio dei comuni partecipanti ed omogenee per tematica (ad esempio Sannio e Sanniti, cuore della civiltà italica);

la realizzazione della Scuola di Alta formazione Archeologica post-laurea;

la realizzazione di una serie di attività di ricerca ed educazione ambientale grazie alla presenza nel territorio di siti ad altissima valenza ambientale (foreste Mab-Unesco, siti comunitari ecc.);

la costituzione di una rete internazionale di organizzazioni operanti nel settore.

Tutto ciò rappresenterebbe un importante volano per tutto il territorio, sia in termini di tutela ambientale sia in termini socio-econonomici ed occupazionali.

Ciò premesso, può la Commissione:

far sapere se esistono finanziamenti per la realizzazione del progetto suesposto;

far sapere quali programmi o finanziamenti sono previsti nell'ambito della programmazione 2014-2020;

fornire un quadro generale della situazione?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(9 settembre 2013)

1.

Nell'ambito dell’obiettivo

«Competitività regionale e occupazione» (2007-2013), nel quale rientrano le regioni Molise ed Abruzzo, il Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale (FESR) può cofinanziare la tutela e la valorizzazione del patrimonio naturale e culturale a sostegno dello sviluppo socioeconomico e della promozione dei beni naturali e culturali in quanto potenzialità di sviluppo del turismo sostenibile. Al fine di conseguire risultati tangibili, i progetti che fanno capo a questo ambito vanno concepiti come parte di una strategia integrata basata sul territorio per la valorizzazione delle risorse culturali.

In base al principio di gestione condivisa applicato ai finanziamenti della politica di coesione, la Commissione suggerisce agli onorevoli parlamentari di contattare direttamente le pertinenti autorità di gestione: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authorities.cfm?lan=IT&pay=it#1

2.

Nel periodo 2014-2020, la proposta della Commissione, non ancora adottata, prevede la possibilità di sostenere gli investimenti su piccola scala volti a tutelare, promuovere e sviluppare il patrimonio culturale nell'ambito di vari obiettivi tematici, compresa l'occupazione. Tuttavia, in quest'ultimo caso essi devono far parte della strategia di sviluppo integrata di un determinato territorio o città e contribuire in modo chiaro all'occupazione. Gli obiettivi da perseguire verranno definiti nei programmi 2014-2020, che le autorità italiane sottoporranno alla Commissione all'atto dell'adozione dei regolamenti sulla politica di coesione e parallelamente al perfezionamento dell'accordo di partenariato con l'Italia.

3.

Per una panoramica generale dei progetti UE finanziati dalla politica di coesione in Italia in tutti i settori, la Commissione invita gli onorevoli parlamentari a consultare il sito web

www.opencoesione.gov.it. Informazioni a livello di UE sono disponibili al seguente indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/projects/stories/index_it.cfm.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009272/13

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE) and Aldo Patriciello (PPE)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Possible funding of the creation of an Interregional Archaeological and Environmental Park

The Safinim project has the aim of establishing an archaeological and environmental tourism centre in the communes of Agnone, Pietrabbondante, Pescopennataro (Molise) and Schiavi d'Abruzzo (Abruzzo) at the initiative of the cultural associations Archeoclub in Schiavi d'Abruzzo and OSCA, Agnone Research Institute (in the province of Isernia).

The project involves promoting the area’s heritage by means of the touristic/environmental rehabilitation of the localities concerned, particularly:

developing, enlarging and networking archaeological sites scattered throughout the territory of the communes participating in the project which illustrate common themes (e.g. Samnium and the Samnites, the heart of the Italic civilisation);

establishment of the Postgraduate School of Archaeology;

carrying-out of a range of environmental research and education activities on the basis of the presence in the area of sites of great environmental value (MAB-Unesco forest, Community sites, etc.);

establishment of an international network of organisations operating in the sector.

All this would give the area as a whole a big boost in terms both of environmental protection and of the socioeconomic and employment impact.

1.

Does any funding exist which could be used for the above project?

2.

What programmes or financing are provided for in the period 2014-2020?

3.

Can the Commission provide a general overview of the situation?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(9 September 2013)

1.

Under

the ‘Regional competitiveness and employment objective’ (in 2007-2013), to which regions Molise and Abruzzo belong, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) can co-finance the protection and enhancement of the natural and cultural heritage in support of socioeconomic development and the promotion of natural and cultural assets as potential for the development of sustainable tourism. Projects in this field should be conceived as part of an integrated, place-based strategy for the exploitation of cultural resources so as to achieve tangible results.

In line with the shared management principle used for cohesion policy funding, the Commission suggests the Honourable Member contacts directly the respective managing authorities: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authorities.cfm?lan=EN&pay=it#1

2.

In the 2014-2020 period, the Commission proposal, not yet adopted, provides for the possibility to support small scale investments aiming at protecting, promoting and developing cultural heritage under various thematic objectives, including employment. However, in the latter case they should be part of an integrated development strategy of a specific territory or town and clearly contribute to employment. The objectives to be pursued will be defined in the 2014-2020 programmes to be submitted by the Italian authorities to the Commission upon adoption of the Cohesion Policy Regulations and in parallel with the finalisation of the Italian Partnership Agreement.

3.

For a general overview of EU projects funded by Cohesion policy in Italy, the Honorable member is invited to consult the

website www.opencoesione.gov.it . Information at EU level is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/projects/stories/index_en.cfm.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009273/13

aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter / Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)

Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)

(29 juli 2013)

Betreft: VP/HR — Protesten Turkije (vervolgvraag)

Op 25 juli 2013 heeft hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie antwoord gegeven op schriftelijke vraag E‐006390/2013. Daarin schrijft zij onder andere: „De huidige gebeurtenissen onderstrepen het belang van nadere betrokkenheid bij Turkije in het kader van het proces van toetreding tot de EU, inclusief met betrekking tot de onderhandelingshoofdstukken die het meest essentieel zijn voor het hervormingsproces. Bijgevolg is de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter ingenomen met het besluit van de Raad Algemene Zaken (RAZ) van 25 juni 2013 om hoofdstuk 22 te openen. De intergouvernementele conferentie met Turkije vindt plaats na de presentatie van het jaarlijkse voortgangsverslag van de Commissie en na een bijeenkomst van de RAZ. Tijdens deze bijeenkomst wordt het gemeenschappelijk standpunt van de RAZ ten gunste van de opening van hoofdstuk 22 bekrachtigd en wordt de datum voor de toetredingsconferentie bepaald.”

1.

Het openen van hoofdstuk 22, waarmee de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter zo

„ingenomen” is, betreft „Regionaal Beleid & Coördinatie van Structurele Instrumenten”. Waarom verwacht de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter dat de opening van juist dít hoofdstuk het hervormingsproces resp. de toetredingsonderhandelingen een positieve impuls zou kunnen geven?

2.

Is de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter bekend met Erdoğans uitspraak:

2.

Is de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter bekend met Erdoğans uitspraak:

 (260)

3.

Wanneer trekt de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter de, uiteindelijk onvermijdelijke, conclusie dat de toetredingsonderhandelingen met Turkije een gebed zonder einde zijn? Met andere woorden: wanneer komt de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter tot het besef dat — hoeveel hoofdstukken er ook worden geopend — Turkije zich niet aan de EU wíl en kán aanpassen en bijgevolg nóóit tot de EU zal kunnen toetreden? Wanneer besluit de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter dientengevolge de toetredingsonderhandelingen te beëindigen?

Antwoord van de heer Fuele namens de Commissie

(20 september 2013)

1.

In zijn conclusies van december 2012 heeft de Raad onderstreept dat dankzij actieve en geloofwaardige toetredingsonderhandelingen die in overeenstemming zijn met de verbintenissen van de EU en de gestelde voorwaarden, het potentieel van de betrekkingen tussen de EU en Turkije volledig zal kunnen worden benut en dat het in het belang van beide partijen is dat de toetredingsonderhandelingen spoedig weer op tempo komen en dat de EU het ijkpunt voor hervormingen in Turkije blijft. In dit opzicht geeft het openen van een onderhandelingshoofdstuk waarvoor Turkije aan de voorwaarden heeft voldaan een positieve impuls aan het hervormingsproces en de toetredingsonderhandelingen.

2.

De Commissie maakt in haar jaarlijkse voortgangsverslag aan de Raad en het Parlement een beoordeling van de vooruitgang die Turkije boekt wat betreft volledige naleving van de toetredingscriteria, en met name de politieke criteria, die betrekking hebben op de stabiliteit van de instellingen die de democratie, de rechtsstaat, de mensenrechten en de eerbiediging van en bescherming van minderheden garanderen. Het volgende voortgangsverslag wordt in oktober 2013 gepubliceerd.

3.

Ik verwijs het geachte parlementslid naar de antwoorden op een aantal eerdere schriftelijke vragen, waaronder schriftelijke vraag E-010384/2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009273/13

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: VP/HR — Protests in Turkey (follow-up question)

On 25 July 2013, Vice-President/High Representative Ashton replied to Written Question E-006390/2013 on behalf of the Commission. She wrote, inter alia: ‘Current events underline the importance of further engagement with Turkey within the framework of the EU accession process, including on those negotiating chapters most fundamental to its reform efforts. The HR/VP therefore welcomes the decision of the General Affairs Council on 25 June 2013 to open Chapter 22. The Inter-Governmental Conference with Turkey will take place after the presentation of the Commission’s annual progress report and following a discussion of the GAC which will confirm the common position of the Council for the opening of Chapter 22 and determine the date for the accession conference.’

1.

The opening of Chapter 22, which the VP/HR so

‘welcomes’, concerns ‘Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments’. Why does the VP/HR anticipate that the opening of this chapter in particular could give positive impetus to the reform process and the accession negotiations?

2.

Is the VP/HR familiar with

2.

Is the VP/HR familiar with

 (261)

3.

When will the VP/HR draw the ultimately inevitable conclusion that the accession negotiations with Turkey are a never-ending saga? In other words, when will the VP/HR realise that — no matter how many chapters are opened — Turkey is neither willing nor able to adapt to the EU and consequently will never be able to accede to the EU? When will the VP/HR therefore decide to terminate the accession negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Fuele on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2013)

1.

The Council in its December 2012 conclusions underlined that active and credible accession negotiations which respect the EU's commitments and established conditionality will enable the EU-Turkey relationship to achieve its full potential, and that it is in the interest of both parties that accession negotiations regain momentum, ensuring that the EU remains the benchmark for reforms in Turkey. Against this background, opening of a negotiating chapter in which Turkey has complied with the conditions indeed gives positive impetus to the reform process and the accession negotiations.

2.

The Commission reflects its assessment of progress by Turkey towards full compliance with the accession criteria, including the political criteria, which cover the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities, in its yearly progress report to the Council and Parliament. The next progress report will be published in October 2013.

3.

The Honourable Member is kindly referred to the answers to several previous written questions, notably E-010384/2012.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009274/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Apoios para a divulgação dos produtos dos pequenos produtores

A Associação de Criadores de Carne de Bovino Mirandesa é uma cooperativa que associa pequenos produtores deste tipo de carne. Em recente reunião com esta associação, foi-nos relatado que a situação dos pequenos produtores é bastante difícil e que necessitam, entre outros, de apoios para viagens de promoção e divulgação deste produto regional, nomeadamente junto dos importadores, com vista à internacionalização dos seus produtos.

Desta forma, pergunto à Comissão que auxílios poderão ser mobilizados para apoiar atividades, iniciativas e viagens de divulgação dos produtos dos pequenos produtores junto dos importadores internacionais.

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloș em nome da Comissão

(17 de setembro de 2013)

Os pequenos e médios produtores que fazem parte de organizações profissionais ou interprofissionais podem beneficiar de apoio financeiro para campanhas de informação ou promoção genéricas no âmbito do Regulamento (CE) n.° 3/2008 do Conselho (262). Essas campanhas tanto podem ter por alvo países terceiros como o mercado interno.

O Fundo Europeu Agrícola de Desenvolvimento Rural (Feader) não apoia medidas específicas de promoção de produtos agrícolas no mercado internacional. Existem, contudo, algumas medidas ao abrigo deste Fundo que podem ser úteis para melhorar a competitividade dos produtos.

O Feader ajuda os agricultores a investir nas respetivas explorações, na transformação e comercialização dos seus produtos e na criação de novos produtos e tecnologias. O Feader apoia igualmente a participação dos agricultores em regimes de garantia da qualidade criados ao abrigo do Regulamento da UE. Podem ainda beneficiar de apoio as atividades de informação e promoção de produtos abrangidos por um regime de garantia da qualidade no mercado interno.

Os agricultores e as PME agrícolas podem também beneficiar de formação específica e de consultoria, em função do teor dos programas de desenvolvimento rural. Os investimentos apoiados pelo Feader devem, contudo, ser levados a cabo nas respetivas áreas do programa de desenvolvimento rural.

Além disso, devido às regras em matéria de auxílios estatais que se aplicam ao Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER), não é possível conceder apoio ao desenvolvimento regional diretamente às empresas que se dedicam à produção primária dos produtos agrícolas constantes do anexo I do Tratado. O FEDER tem apoiado, todavia, algumas iniciativas neste setor, nomeadamente o Polo de Competitividade e Tecnologia Agroindustrial, o Cluster Agroindustrial do Centro ou o Cluster Agroindustrial do Ribatejo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009274/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Support for promoting small producers' products

The Mirandesa Cattle Farmers Association is a cooperative of small beef producers. At a recent meeting with the association, we learned that small producers were in a very difficult situation and that they needed, among other things, support in order travel around promoting and raising awareness of this regional product, particularly among importers, with a view to selling their products internationally.

What aid could be mobilised to support activities, initiatives and trips promoting small producers’ products among international importers?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2013)

Small and medium-sized stakeholders as members of trade and/or inter-trade organisations are potential beneficiaries of the financial support for generic information and promotion campaigns provided within the framework of Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 (263). These campaigns can be destined to third countries or the internal market.

The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) does not support specific measures for the promotion of agricultural products in the international market. However there are some measures under this policy that can be relevant for improving the competitiveness of products.

EAFRD supports farmers to invest in their farms in processing and marketing of their production and in the creation of new products and technologies. The EAFRD also supports the participation of farmers in quality schemes established under the EU regulation. Information and promotion activities of products covered by a quality scheme in the internal market may also be supported.

Farmers and rural SMEs can also receive specific training and advisory support, depending on the content of the rural development programmes. The supported investments by the EAFRD, however, should be undertaken in the respective rural development programme area.

Moreover, due to the European State Aid rules applied to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) it is not possible to grant regional development support directly to undertakings active in the primary production of agricultural products as listed in Annex I to the Treaty. However, ERDF has supported some initiatives in the agro-sector such as ‘PCT Agro-industrial’, ‘Cluster Agro-industrial do Centro’ e ‘Cluster Agro-industrial do Ribatejo’.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009275/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Apoios para a modernização do pequeno comércio local

Em recente reunião com a Associação Comercial e Industrial de Bragança, a qual aglomera 560 associados, nomeadamente da área do comércio local, foi-nos relatada uma situação dramática. Segundo a associação, a falência e o encerramento de unidades de comércio local é constante e a situação piorou progressivamente ao longo dos últimos 3 anos, o que está associado à diminuição do poder de compra dos portugueses. O impacto do encerramento de pequenas unidades de comércio nas economias locais do interior de menor dimensão é, evidentemente, muito significativo.

A referida associação transmitiu-nos ainda que os pequenos comerciantes não têm acesso a financiamentos direcionados para a modernização e qualificação das suas lojas.

Desta forma, pergunto à Comissão que fundos da UE podem ser mobilizados para o apoio a projetos de pequenas obras de modernização das lojas do pequeno comércio local.

Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão

(5 de setembro de 2013)

A mobilização de fundos da UE, no âmbito do quadro de referência estratégico nacional de Portugal (QREN) para 2007-2013, bem como a seleção de projetos a financiar, em conformidade com o princípio da gestão partilhada utilizado para a administração da política dos fundos de coesão, é da plena e exclusiva competência e responsabilidade das autoridades portuguesas competentes, nomeadamente as autoridades de gestão responsáveis pela execução dos programas operacionais nacionais e regionais.

As informações relativas aos programas, ações e medidas em curso de implementação durante o período de 2007-2013, estão disponíveis no seguinte sítio Web: www.qren.pt.

As informações específicas relativas ao programa ON.2 O Novo Norte de 2007-2013 podem ser obtidas através do seguinte contacto da autoridade de gestão:

Comissão de Coordenação e Desenvolvimento Regional do Norte

Rua Rainha D. Estefânia, 251

4150-304 Porto

Tel. 00.351.226 086 300

email: geral@ccdr-n.pt

Além disso, a Comissão está atualmente a estudar as dificuldades no acesso ao crédito por parte das PME, através do Mecanismo de Garantia GPME do programa PCI (264), que é disponibilizada às PME através de intermediários financeiros, tais como bancos e sociedades de garantias mútuas. Para o período de 2014-2020, o novo programa COSME basear‐se‐á na experiência adquirida com o atual PCI (265). O programa incluirá um mecanismo de garantia de empréstimos, que irá complementar o instrumento de garantia incluída no novo programa Horizonte 2020 (266).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009275/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Support for modernising small local shops

At a recent meeting with the Bragança Trade and Industry Association, which has 560 members, mainly local businesspeople, our attention was drawn to a serious situation. According to the association, local businesses are constantly going bankrupt and closing down and the situation has steadily deteriorated over the last three months, as a result of the Portuguese public’s reduced purchasing power. The closure of small businesses clearly has a very significant effect on smaller, local inland economies.

The association also told us that small traders do not have access to funding for modernising and fitting out their shops.

What EU funds can be mobilised to support projects involving small-scale works to modernise small local shops?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

Mobilisation of EU funds in the framework of the 2007-2013 Portuguese National Strategic Reference Framework, as well as selection of projects to be funded, in line with the shared management principle used for the administration of cohesion policy funds, is the full and exclusive competence and responsibility of relevant Portuguese authorities, in particular the managing authorities in charge of the implementation of national and regional operational programmes.

Information relating to programmes and relevant actions and measures under implementation during the 2007-2013 period is available on the following website: www.qren.pt.

Specific information relating to the ‘ON.2 O Novo Norte’ 2007-2013 programme can be obtained through the contact with the managing authority to the following adress:

Comissão de Coordenação e Desenvolvimento Regional do Norte

Rua Rainha D. Estefânia, 251

4150-304 Porto

Tel. 00.351.226 086 300

email: geral@ccdr-n.pt

In addition, the Commission is currently addressing the difficulties in access to credit by SMEs by means of the SMEG guarantee facility of the CIP (267) programme, which is made available to SMEs through financial intermediaries, such as banks and mutual guarantee societies. For the period 2014-2020, the new COSME (268) programme will build on the experience gained from the current CIP. The programme will include a Loan Guarantee Facility which will complement the guarantee instrument included in the new Horizon 2020 programme (269).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009276/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Apoios para projetos de divulgação do comércio local

Em recente reunião com a Associação Comercial e Industrial de Bragança, a qual aglomera 560 associados, nomeadamente da área do comércio local, foi-nos relatada uma situação dramática. Segundo a associação, a falência e o encerramento de unidades de comércio local é constante e a situação piorou progressivamente ao longo dos últimos 3 anos, o que está associado à diminuição do poder de compra dos portugueses. O impacto do encerramento de pequenas unidades de comércio nas economias locais do interior de menor dimensão é, evidentemente, muito significativo.

Sendo certo que esta situação é consequência das políticas do governo nacional e da troica e que só quando estas terminarem é que a situação se inverterá globalmente, a referida associação informou-nos que tem falta de apoios para a realização de projetos de animação e divulgação do comércio local e dos produtos regionais.

Desta forma, pergunto à Comissão:

Tem conhecimento, nomeadamente através dos técnicos da Comissão Europeia que integram a troica, desta situação desastrosa que está a afetar os pequenos comerciantes locais?

Que apoios podem ser mobilizados para a realização de projetos de animação e divulgação do comércio local, nomeadamente através de iniciativas de rua que promovam este setor da economia?

Resposta dada por Olli Rehn em nome da Comissão

(19 de setembro de 2013)

A economia portuguesa está a sofrer um importante processo de ajustamento que implica o abandono de um crescimento induzido principalmente pelo mercado doméstico para um crescimento induzido pelas exportações. Tendo em conta o elevado endividamento da economia, este processo, sem o qual a dívida externa ficaria insustentável, é necessário. Implica alterações significativas na reafetação dos recursos, passando das empresas tradicionais principalmente voltadas para o mercado doméstico para o setor mais dinâmico das empresas exportadoras. Este ajustamento já progrediu de forma substancial, como comprovam os dados muito positivos das exportações. Existem igualmente indicações mais gerais de que o processo de ajustamento está a dar os seus frutos, por exemplo, com dados que demonstram que, em 2013, o número de empresas recém-criadas ultrapassou o número de empresas encerradas.

Para ajudar as empresas locais a resistirem melhor ao processo de reorientação acima referido, os mais de 600 membros da Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) (rede europeia de apoio às empresas) prestam assistência no acesso a novos mercados e informações sobre possíveis financiamentos da UE. No Norte de Portugal, existem duas sucursais da EEN — no Porto (o Instituto de Apoio às Pequenas e Médias Empresas e à Inovação e a Agência de Inovação) e em Braga (Associação Industrial do Minho). Além disso, a Comissão está a divulgar guias que oferecem ideias, exemplos testados, ajuda prática e aconselhamento prático reunidos por grupos de peritos em política das PME. A aplicação das melhores práticas identificadas por estes grupos de peritos pode também ser elegível para apoio financeiro dos fundos estruturais (FEDER e FSE).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009276/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Support for projects publicising local businesses

At a recent meeting with the Bragança Trade and Industry Association, which has 560 members, mainly local businesspeople, our attention was drawn to a serious situation. According to the association, local businesses are constantly going bankrupt and closing down and the situation has steadily deteriorated over the last three years, as a result of the Portuguese public’s reduced purchasing power. The closure of small businesses clearly has a very significant effect on smaller, local inland economies.

Convinced that the policies of the Portuguese Government and the Troika have led to this situation and that it will only be completely resolved when the polices are abandoned, the association told us that it lacked support for carrying out projects to promote and publicise local businesses and regional products.

1.

Is the Commission aware, particularly through Commission staff in the Troika, of this disastrous situation that is affecting small local traders?

2.

What support can be mobilised for carrying out projects to promote and publicise local businesses, particularly through initiatives on the ground to promote this sector of the economy?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2013)

The Portuguese economy is undergoing an important adjustment process from mainly domestically driven growth to an export driven one. In view of the high indebtedness of the economy, this is a necessary development in the absence of which external debt would become unsustainable. This process entails a significant relocation of resources from traditional companies mainly catering for the domestic market to the more dynamic, export-oriented sector. This adjustment has already made substantial progress as evidenced by the very positive export data. There are also more general indications that the adjustment process is bearing fruit with, for instance, data showing that during 2013 the number of newly created companies has overtaken the number of companies that ceased to exist.

In order to help local business to better withstand the abovementioned relocation process, the more than 600 members of the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) provide assistance in accessing new markets and inform about possible EU funding. In the North of Portugal, there are two branches of the EEN in Porto (Instituto de Apoio às Pequenas e Médias Empresas e à Inovação and Agência de Inovação) and in Braga (Associação Industrial do Minho). Furthermore, the Commission is disseminating guidebooks which offer ideas, tested examples, practical help and hands-on advice gathered by SME Policy expert groups. Implementation of the best practices identified by these expert groups can also be eligible for financial support by structural funds (ERDF and ESF).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009277/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Financiamento dos centros de investigação

A Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia é a instituição responsável pelo financiamento da atividade de investigação em Portugal, nomeadamente da atividade dos centros de investigação, um financiamento que é executado com fundos nacionais e fundos provenientes da União Europeia.

O novo regulamento da FCT relativo à Avaliação e Financiamento de Unidades de Investigação inclui duas parcelas de financiamento: Financiamento de Base e Financiamento Estratégico. Nesta última parcela de financiamento apenas estão abrangidas as unidades de investigação científica e desenvolvimento tecnológico com classificação de Excecional, Excelente ou Muito Bom. Significa isto que parte do financiamento é automaticamente direcionada para estas unidades, excluindo aquelas que têm avaliação de Bom.

Do nosso ponto de vista, isto pode potenciar uma duplicação ao nível da atribuição dos financiamentos a instituições que já estão mais consolidadas e prejudicar aquelas que se pretendem afirmar e, desta forma, atingir progressivamente níveis mais elevados na sua classificação. Segundo informações que recebemos da Reitoria do Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, tal poderá também significar que os financiamentos se concentrarão nas grandes universidades e unidades do litoral, em detrimento de instituições do interior do país, tão fundamentais para garantir o desenvolvimento de regiões mais deprimidas, atenuar as assimetrias sociais e regionais e garantir os objetivos da coesão tão proclamados pela UE.

Desta forma, questiono a Comissão:

Tem informações acerca desta situação?

Considera que as regras de financiamento acima citadas estão de acordo com os princípios da coesão?

Resposta dada por Máire Geoghegan-Quinn em nome da Comissão

(16 de setembro de 2013)

1.

Dispor de capacidade de investigação e inovação de craveira mundial, assente numa base científica sólida e pública, é fundamental para a prosperidade futura da Europa. A estratégia Europa 2020 colocou a investigação, a inovação e a ciência no centro da política europeia para o crescimento. Para tal, devemos proteger os orçamentos para a investigação pública mas também aumentar a eficiência, a eficácia e a excelência do nosso sistema público de investigação. Embora as regras de financiamento referidas pela Senhora Deputada sejam da competência exclusiva das autoridades nacionais, a reforma dos sistemas de investigação nacionais, para assegurar uma maior eficácia das despesas públicas, encontra-se no cerne do Espaço Europeu da Investigação. A existência de concorrência no financiamento da investigação contribui para a eficiência dos dinheiros públicos consagrados à investigação. As melhores práticas a nível nacional implicam a repartição dos financiamentos mediante convites abertos à apresentação de propostas e de uma avaliação institucional em função do desempenho.

2.

Para o próximo período de programação (2014-2020), as condições

ex ante

para a atribuição de financiamento a título da coesão (ao abrigo dos Fundos Estruturais e de Investimento Europeus) ao apoio à investigação e à inovação consistem na elaboração de um quadro estratégico de investigação e inovação para a especialização inteligente. Portugal está atualmente a preparar a sua estratégia de especialização inteligente, que terá elementos nacionais e regionais. Isto deve permitir garantir que o financiamento dos Fundos Estruturais e de Investimento Europeus ao abrigo dos programas operacionais conexos em Portugal terá em conta as exigências da estratégia global de Portugal no domínio da investigação e inovação, incluindo os aspetos territoriais.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009277/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Funding of research centres

The Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) is the body in charge of funding research in Portugal, particularly the work of research centres. This funding comes from national and European Union funds.

The new FCT regulation on the assessment and funding of research centres includes two types of funding: basic funding and strategic funding. The latter type of funding only covers scientific research and technological development centres classified as exceptional, excellent or very good. That means that a portion of the funding is automatically channelled towards such centres, excluding those that have been evaluated as good.

We believe that this could encourage duplication in the funding allocated to institutions that are already very well established and damage those seeking gradually to achieve a higher classification. According to information from the Rector’s office of Bragança Polytechnic, this could also mean that funding is concentrated on large universities and coastal institutions, to the detriment of inland institutions, which are so vital for securing the development of more disadvantaged regions, reducing social and regional inequality and ensuring that the EU’s much-lauded cohesion objectives are met.

1.

Does the Commission have any information on this situation?

2.

Does it think that the funding rules mentioned above are compatible with the principles of cohesion?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2013)

1.

A world-leading research and innovation capacity, built on a strong public science base, is critical for Europe's future prosperity. With the Europe 2020 strategy, research, innovation and science have been placed at the heart of European policy for growth. This requires that public research budgets are protected, but also that we need to increase the efficiency, effectiveness and excellence of our public research system. While the specific rule referred to by the Honourable Member in the second paragraph

is the exclusive competence of the relevant national authorities, reforms of national research systems to ensure the highest efficiency of public spending are at the heart of the European Research Area (ERA). The availability of competitive research funding contributes to the efficiency of public money invested in research. Best-practices at Member States’ level involve allocation of funding through open calls for proposals and performance based institutional assessment.

2.

For the next programming period (2014-20), the

ex-ante

conditionality for the allocation of cohesion funding (under the European Structural and Investment Funds — ESIF) in support of research and innovation will be the preparation of a research and innovation strategic policy framework for smart specialisation. Portugal is at present preparing its smart specialisation strategy that will have both national and regional elements. This will help to ensure that ESIF funding under the related Operational Programmes in Portugal will take account of the overall strategic requirements of Portugal in the field of research and innovation, including the territorial aspects.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009278/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Situação da Casa do Douro

A Casa do Douro, sediada no Peso da Régua, é uma instituição de cariz associativo que representa os interesses dos viticultores, nomeadamente dos pequenos e médios produtores, mas que presta também serviços de apoio à produção.

Os produtores têm sido bastante afetados por políticas que os prejudicam, como o corte de 25 mil pipas de benefício aos produtores implementado pelo atual Governo. A atual situação dos viticultores tem-se refletido também nos problemas financeiros da Casa do Douro, que tem avultadas dívidas. Urge, em nome dos interesses dos pequenos e médios viticultores, salvar a Casa do Douro, mantendo o seu atual estatuto.

Desta forma, pergunto à Comissão:

Tem conhecimento desta situação?

Que tipo de apoios é que a UE pode mobilizar para auxiliar a Casa do Douro?

Esta questão foi debatida com o Governo português no âmbito da reprogramação das verbas dos fundos comunitários destinados ao setor agrícola?

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloş em nome da Comissão

(13 de setembro de 2013)

A Comissão não tem conhecimento dos elementos descritos relacionados com os problemas financeiros da Casa do Douro.

Portugal, tal como outros Estados-Membros produtores de vinho, beneficiou de um instrumento específico de programação financeira para o setor vitivinícola no período de 2009-2013, no âmbito da Organização Comum do Mercado (OCM) da UE: o programa de apoio nacional. Um segundo programa de apoio nacional beneficiará o setor vitivinícola português durante o período de 2014-2018, tendo esse programa sido discutido com as autoridades portuguesas no ano passado. As medidas incluídas nesse programa, que se destinam aos diferentes intervenientes na cadeia de abastecimento, incluem «restruturação e conversão de vinhas», «promoção em países terceiros», «seguros de colheitas» e «destilação de subprodutos».

O principal objetivo dessas medidas consiste no aumento da competitividade do setor vitivinícola da UE/Portugal, bem como na disponibilização de instrumentos de gestão dos riscos em caso de circunstâncias imprevistas. Não parece que seja possível que qualquer uma destas medidas possa ajudar a organização referida a resolver os seus problemas de dívidas, embora essas medidas possam ajudar viticultores individuais que são membros da Casa do Douro.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009278/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Situation of Casa do Douro

Casa do Douro, in the Portuguese municipality of Peso da Régua, is an association that represents the interests of winegrowers, particularly small and medium-sized producers; it also provides production support services.

Producers have been severely affected by damaging policies, such as the cut in aid for producers by 25 000 barrels introduced by the current government. The current situation of winegrowers has also been mirrored in the financial problems of Casa do Douro, which has huge debts. In the interests of small and medium-sized winegrowers, it is vital to save Casa do Douro, preserving its current status.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2.

What kind of support can the EU mobilise to help Casa do Douro?

3.

Has this issue been discussed with the Portuguese Government as part of the reprogramming of EU funds for the agricultural sector?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2013)

The Commission is not aware of the elements described, related to financial problems of the organisation ‘Casa do Douro’.

Portugal, as well as other wine producing Member States, has benefited from a specific financial programming instrument for the wine sector during the period 2009-2013, in the framework of the EU single Common Market Organisation (CMO): the national support programme (NSP). A second NSP will benefit the Portuguese wine sector during the period 2014-2018, which has been discussed with Portuguese authorities during the past year. The measures included in such programme, targeting different actors in the supply chain, include ‘restructuring and conversion of vineyards’, ‘promotion in third countries’, ‘harvest insurance’ and ‘by-products distillation’.

These measures aim mainly at increasing the competitiveness of the EU/Portuguese wine sector, as well as providing risk-management tools against unforeseen circumstances. It does not appear possible for any of these measures to assist the referred organisation in solving its debt problems, although they could benefit individual wine-growers which are members of Casa do Douro.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-009279/13

à Comissão

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 de julho de 2013)

Assunto: Poder local

Sob cobertura e com o pretexto das imposições feitas pela troica, o Governo português tem asfixiado financeiramente o poder local democrático em Portugal impondo, não apenas o financiamento dos serviços que as autarquias prestam às populações, mas também roubando, indiretamente, recursos e meios que lhes seriam devidos.

Aliado a isto, o aumento exponencial do desemprego e da pobreza e o corte nas despesas sociais do Estado (medida imposta pela troica) exigem do poder local um maior esforço financeiro e material para fazer face ao flagelo social que atinge as suas populações, uma vez que as autarquias são as instituições que mais próximo estão dos cidadãos.

Assim, solicito à Comissão que me informe quais os programas e fundos da Politica de Coesão que podem ser mobilizados diretamente pelo poder local.

Resposta dada por László Andor em nome da Comissão

(5 de setembro de 2013)

No atual período de programação de 2007-2013, as autoridades públicas locais podem ter diretamente acesso ao FSE e ao FEDER, seja na qualidade de beneficiárias, de autoridades de gestão ou de organismos intermédios, em função das disposições nacionais ou regionais. Neste contexto, é importante sublinhar que as autoridades locais (aos níveis regional e municipal) participam ativamente em diferentes programas e projetos através de vários mecanismos, beneficiando assim direta e indiretamente de fundos comunitários.

A proposta da Comissão Europeia para o período de 2014-2020 prevê que os fundos estruturais e de investimento intervenham ativamente ao nível local, por intermédio de estruturas igualmente locais. Estes podem ser utilizados para envolver mais ativamente as autoridades regionais e locais, as cidades, os parceiros sociais e as organizações não governamentais. O desenvolvimento promovido pelas comunidades locais será promovido por grupos de ação local, compostos por representantes dos interesses socioeconómicos, públicos e privados locais, e concebidos tendo em conta as necessidades e potencialidades presentes. Além disso, para gerir e executar os investimentos territoriais integrados, o Estado-Membro ou a autoridade de gestão pode designar um ou vários organismos intermediários, incluindo autoridades locais, organismos de desenvolvimento regional ou organizações não governamentais (ONG).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009279/13

to the Commission

Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)

(29 July 2013)

Subject: Local government

Citing the conditions imposed by the Troika as an excuse, the Portuguese Government has drastically restricted the money available to democratic local government in Portugal by dictating not only the funding for public services provided by local authorities, but also by indirectly stealing the resources and funds due to them.

In addition to this, the exponential rise in unemployment and poverty and the cut in social spending by the State (a measure imposed by the Troika) require local government to commit more financial and material resources to tackling the social challenges facing the public, as local authorities are the institutions that are most in touch with the public.

Can the Commission say what Cohesion Policy programmes and funds could be mobilised directly for local government?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

In the current programming period 2007-2013, ESF and ERDF can be accessed directly by local public authorities, either as beneficiaries or also in the role of managing authorities or intermediary bodies, depending on national or regional arrangements. In this context, it is relevant to emphasise that local authorities (at regional and municipal level) are being active partners in different programmes and projects through several mechanisms, being thus directly and indirectly beneficiaries from Community funds.

The European Commission's proposal for 2014 — 2020 has provided for wide local involvement through local delivery vehicles of the European Structural and Investment Funds. They can be used to involve more actively regional and local authorities, cities, social partners, and Non-Governmental Organisations. Community-Led Local Development shall be promoted by local action groups composed of representatives of public and private local socioeconomic interests, and designed considering local needs and potential. Also, to manage and implement an Integrated Territorial Investments, the Member State or a managing authority may designate one or more intermediate bodies, including local authorities, regional development bodies or NGOs.

(българска версия)

Въпрос с искане за писмен отговор E-009280/13

до Комисията

Vladko Todorov Panayotov (ALDE)

(1 август 2013 г.)

Относно: Финансовата криза в Кипър през 2013 г. и въздействието на сделката с тройката председателства върху ЕС

Кипърското правителство, под натиска на тройката председателства, реши да наложи данък от 10 % върху всички сметки в банки, разположени на територията на Кипър, без изключение, с цел покриване на прекомерния бюджетен дефицит на държавата.

Извършила ли е Комисията правен анализ на тази мярка и потенциалните правни последици, които тя може да окаже върху кипърското общество, по-специално по отношение на нейното въздействие върху основните права на ЕС и правата на човека като цяло?

Била ли е извършена оценка на въздействието на тази мярка преди нейното прилагане, с цел да се направи преценка на възможните последици за цялостния имидж на Кипър, а също така за този на ЕС и еврозоната?

Не се ли опасява Комисията, че това действие може да създаде прецедент в бъдеще поради факта, че на държава членка е наложено решение от страна на тройката председателства — орган, който не е част от Договорите на ЕС, и поради факта, че институции извън ЕС, например Международният валутен фонд, участват и изпълняват много важна роля във вземането на политически решения, които засягат ЕС?

Отговор, даден от г-н Рен от името на Комисията

(28 август 2013 г.)

Случаят с Кипър е безпрецедентен поради размера на банковия сектор на страната, съчетан с неговата структура, степента на поемане на риск и недостатъчния надзор. Предприетите мерки са съобразени с извънредната ситуация в Кипър с цел да се възстанови жизнеспособността на един по-малък банков сектор, като същевременно бъдат защитени всички депозити в размер под 100 000 евро в съответствие с принципите на ЕС. Комисията иска да отбележи също така, че използването на негарантираните депозити за целите на рекапитализация чрез вътрешни източници на двете най-големи банки представлява едностранна мярка на кипърските власти, която не е част от сключения по-късно меморандум за разбирателство.

Финансовата политика на Кипър е насочена към възстановяване на доверието в банковата система. Властите предприеха трудни, но необходими мерки за цялостна рекапитализация на Банката на Кипър (Bank of Cyprus), като по този начин ѝ позволиха да премине през оздравителна процедура и да възстанови нормалната си работа. Властите изработиха и ясна програма за преструктуриране и рекапитализация преди края на годината на други финансови институции. По отношение на еврозоната според данни от средата на месец април не се наблюдава изтегляне на депозити.

Комисията подкрепя Кипър и кипърските граждани, като подпомага възстановяването на финансовата стабилност, бюджетната устойчивост и растежа на страната и нейното население. За целта са мобилизирани и средства от фондовете на Общността (включително Европейския социален фонд, Европейския фонд за регионално развитие и Кохезионния фонд). Комисията създаде група за подпомагане на Кипър, която ще работи в тясно сътрудничество с кипърските власти, като им предоставя техническа експертиза.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009280/13

to the Commission

Vladko Todorov Panayotov (ALDE)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: The 2013 Cypriot financial crisis and the impact of the Troika deal on the EU

The Government of Cyprus, under pressure from the Troika, decided that a tax of 10% would be imposed on all Cyprus-based bank accounts, without exception, to cover the country’s excessive deficit.

Has the Commission carried out a legal analysis of this measure and the potential legal implications that it could have on Cypriot society, specifically in terms of its impact on fundamental EU rights and human rights in general?

Has an impact assessment of this measure been carried out ahead of implementation, so as to evaluate the potential implications for Cyprus’ global image, as well as that of the EU and the eurozone?

Is the Commission not afraid that this event might set a precedent for the future, considering that a decision was imposed on a Member State by the Troika — a body that is not part of the EU Treaties — and considering that non-EU institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund, participate and have a very strong say in policy decisions affecting the EU?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(28 August 2013)

Cyprus is a unique case because of the size of its banking sector combined with its structure, level of risk-taking and suboptimal supervision. Measures taken are tailor-made to the very exceptional situation in Cyprus in order to restore the viability of a smaller banking sector while, at the same time, protecting all deposits below EUR 100,000 in accordance with the EU principles. The Commission notes also that the bail-in of uninsured deposits in the two major banks constitutes a unilateral measure of the Cypriot authorities that does not form part of the MoU that was subsequently concluded.

Financial sector policies in Cyprus have been geared toward restoring confidence in the banking system. The authorities have taken difficult but necessary steps to fully recapitalize Bank of Cyprus, thus allowing it to exit resolution and return to normal operations. The authorities have also set out a clear agenda to restructure and recapitalize other financial institutions before the end of the year. As regards the euro area, data since mid-April do not show deposit flight.

The Commission stands by Cyprus and the Cypriot people in helping to restore financial stability, fiscal sustainability and growth to the country and its people. The Community Funds (including the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund) are also mobilised to this end. The Commission has set up a Support Group for Cyprus that will work closely with the Cypriot authorities by providing technical expertise.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009281/13

to the Commission

Daniel Hannan (ECR)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Gibraltar

Does the Commission believe that the use of border controls between two EU territories for reasons other than national security, as a mechanism to exert political pressure in an unrelated dispute, is a violation of the European Treaties?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2013)

Border checks on persons need to be carried out in accordance with the Schengen Borders Code by a Member State which is part of the Schengen area at its border with a European territory for whose external relations another Member State is responsible and which territory is not part of the Schengen area, independent of any dispute between the Member States concerned.

In addition, if a European territory for whose external relations a Member State is responsible is not part of the customs area of the European Union, a Member State which is part of the customs area also needs to carry out customs checks at the border with that territory.

Checks carried out in accordance with the above provisions are in line with the treaties.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009283/13

aan de Commissie

Cornelis de Jong (GUE/NGL)

(1 augustus 2013)

Betreft: Discriminatie van Europese consumenten door ondernemingen die nationale registratienummers vereisen

Kortgeleden ontving ik een klacht van een Nederlands staatsburger die een deel van het jaar doorbrengt in zijn zomerhuisje in Zweden. De periode die hij elk jaar in Zweden verblijft is niet lang genoeg om zich te kunnen registreren en een Zweeds persoonlijk identificatienummer te ontvangen. Dit levert geen problemen op bij zijn contacten met de Zweedse autoriteiten, maar een aantal ondernemingen in Zweden verlangen een dergelijk identificatienummer voordat zij bereid zijn hun diensten te verlenen. Dit geldt bijvoorbeeld voor het openen van een bankrekening, het nemen van een mobieletelefoonabonnement of het huren van dvd's. Indien nodig kan ik de Commissie nadere informatie verstrekken over de betreffende ondernemingen en hun praktijken.

1.

Deze ondernemingen verlangen van burgers van de EU dat zij beschikken over een persoonlijk identificatienummer van een lidstaat waar zij een beperkt aantal weken verblijven, voordat ze bereid zijn hun diensten te verlenen. Is de Commissie het ermee eens dat dit ingaat tegen de beginselen van de interne markt en het burgerschap van de EU, in het bijzonder tegen het recht op non-discriminatie?

2.

Zo nee, waarom niet? Zo ja, welke maatregelen wil de Commissie dan nemen om deze praktijken tegen te gaan?

Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie

(11 september 2013)

De Commissie heeft onlangs een aantal klachten ontvangen van burgers van de Unie die tijdelijk als zelfstandige, werknemer, student of gepensioneerde in Zweden verblijven, en van wie het verzoek om registratie in het Zweedse bevolkingsregister door de Zweedse autoriteiten is afgewezen.

Volgens de Zweedse wet inzake het bevolkingsregister kan een persoon die minder dan een jaar in Zweden verblijft, niet in het Zweedse bevolkingsregister worden geregistreerd. Deze personen mag bijgevolg geen Zweeds persoonlijk identificatienummer (PIN) worden toegekend. Zij mogen echter wel een coördinatienummer krijgen.

De personen die het recht op een PIN wordt ontzegd, ervaren uiteenlopende problemen in verband met bepaalde administratieve formaliteiten in Zweden en met de toegang tot huisvesting en andere basisdiensten (zoals scholen, taalcursussen en vervoer). Ondernemingen zouden wegens het ontbreken van een PIN ook de toegang hebben geweigerd tot allerhande diensten zoals de opening van een bankrekening, het sluiten van een telefoon‐ of internetabonnement en het huren van dvd’s. In de klachten wordt gesteld dat een coördinatienummer of andere identificatiemiddelen zelden worden aanvaard voor de beschreven doeleinden.

De verenigbaarheid van de Zweedse wetgeving en/of praktijk met het EU‐recht, in het bijzonder met de regels betreffende het vrije verkeer van personen en diensten, moet nader worden onderzocht. Om de situatie in haar geheel te kunnen beoordelen, is meer informatie nodig. De Commissie is voornemens contact op te nemen met de Zweedse autoriteiten. In het kader daarvan gaat de Commissie in op het aanbod van het geachte Parlementslid en vraagt zij het de informatie over de betrokken ondernemingen en hun praktijken te bezorgen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009283/13

to the Commission

Cornelis de Jong (GUE/NGL)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Discrimination against European consumers by companies requiring national registration numbers

Recently, I received a complaint from a Dutch citizen who spends part of the year in his cottage in Sweden. The time he spends in Sweden each year is not long enough for him to register and receive a Swedish personal identification number. This does not pose any problems as far as his contacts with the Swedish authorities are concerned, but a number of companies in Sweden require such a number before they are willing to offer their services. This applies, for example, to opening a bank account, obtaining a mobile phone contract or renting DVDs. I can provide the Commission with more detailed information on the companies concerned and their practices if necessary.

1.

These companies require EU citizens to have a personal identification number for a Member State in which they spend a limited number of weeks in order to gain access to certain services. Does the Commission agree that this runs counter to the principles of the internal market and of EU citizenship, in particular the right not to be discriminated against?

2.

If not, why not? If so, what action does the Commission plan to take to combat these practices?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2013)

The Commission has recently received a number of complaints from Union citizens temporarily residing in Sweden as self-employed, workers, students or retired and whose requests for registration in the Swedish population registry have been rejected by the Swedish authorities.

According to the Swedish Registration Act, a person residing in Sweden for less than one year cannot be registered in the Swedish population registry. These persons may therefore not be granted a Swedish personal identification number (PIN). They may, however, be granted a coordination number.

The complaints allege various difficulties, as a result of being denied the right to be granted a PIN, in completing certain administrative formalities in Sweden and in accessing to housing or other basic services (such as schools, language courses, transport). Access to various services, such as the opening of a bank account, making a telephone or Internet subscription, renting DVDs, etc. have allegedly also been refused by companies in the absence of a PIN. The complaints allege that a coordination number or other forms of identification are rarely accepted for the purposes described.

The compatibility of Swedish law and/or practice with EC law, in particular with the rules on free movement of persons and services, needs to be further verified. To assess the situation in full, more information is necessary. The Commission intends to contact the Swedish authorities. In that context, the Commission would appreciate to receive the information on the companies concerned and their practices as offered by the Honourable Member.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009284/13

an die Kommission

Franz Obermayr (NI)

(1. August 2013)

Betrifft: TTIP-Verhandlungen

Zahlreiche Organisationen aus den Bereichen Landwirtschaft, Umweltschutz, Entwicklungs‐ und Handelspolitik kritisieren die geplante „Transatlantische Handels‐ und Investitionspartnerschaft“ (TTIP) zwischen der EU und den USA. Mit der geplanten Marktöffnung für Produkte der amerikanischen Agrarindustrie sind laut deren Kritik viele Errungenschaften des europäischen Verbraucherschutzes in Gefahr. So drohen z. B. Klonfleisch, Hormonmilch, Chlorhühnchen und noch mehr Gentechniklebensmittel auf den Tellern zu landen. Dazu ergeben sich folgende Fragen:

Es wird unter anderem die Geheimhaltung und Intransparenz der Verhandlungen kritisiert. In welchem Rahmen finden die Verhandlungen schlussendlich statt?

Fallen bei dieser Verhandlungsstrategie so nicht gesellschaftliche Interessen unter den Tisch, während sich Wirtschaftsinteressen großer Konzerne durchsetzen könnten?

Kritisiert wird auch die Anerkennung der niedrigen amerikanischen Lebensmittelstandards in Europa durch dieses Abkommen. Wie sieht die Kommission die Befürchtungen der Konsumenten, für die viel auf dem Spiel steht?

Setzt dieses Vorgehen nicht die bäuerliche und qualitätsorientierte Landwirtschaft in Europa massiv unter Druck?

Wie will die Kommission unsere sozialen und ökologischen Standards in Europa in Zukunft schützen und weiterentwickeln?

Befürchtungen werden laut, dass mit TTIP das Vorsorge‐ und das Verursacherprinzip im Klima‐ und Umweltschutz und dadurch auch im Arbeitsschutz unterlaufen werden könnten. Wie beurteilt das die Kommission?

Wird durch das TTIP-Abkommen versucht, die europäische Chemikalien-, Umwelt‐ und Energiegesetzgebung zu umgehen? Und wie wird die gesamte Umweltbewegung in Europa darauf reagieren? Was denkt die Kommission darüber?

Stimmt es, dass im TTIP-Abkommen auch Sonderklagerechte für Konzerne geplant sind?

Viele Konzerne freuen sich schon auf das Investitionskapitel des geplanten Vertrags. Deutschland und die EU wollen angeblich Konzernen wie Chevron Sonderrechte geben, mit denen diese dann vor geheimen Schiedsgerichten gegen gemeinwohlorientierte Politik klagen können. Stimmt das?

Wenn ja, wie lässt sich dies mit elementaren Grundsätzen von Demokratie und Rechtsstaatlichkeit vereinbaren?

Antwort von Herrn De Gucht im Namen der Kommission

(26. September 2013)

Der Kommission sind die von dem Herrn Abgeordneten geäußerten Bedenken bekannt. Damit die EU erfolgreich handeln und ihre Ziele erreichen kann, ist ein gewisses Maß an Vertraulichkeit bei den Verhandlungen erforderlich. Die Kommission bleibt in ständigem Kontakt mit dem Europäischen Parlament, den Mitgliedstaaten, der Zivilgesellschaft und der breiten Öffentlichkeit. Bei Abschluss wird das Abkommen wie alle internationalen Abkommen mit den Grundsätzen der Rechtsstaatlichkeit vereinbar sein und es muss vom Europäischen Parlament ratifiziert werden. Somit unterliegt das Abkommen weiterhin vollkommen der demokratischen Kontrolle durch das Parlament.

Oberste Priorität aller Handels‐ und Investitionsverhandlungen der EU ist es, für die Gesellschaft, die Bürger und die Unternehmen nachhaltige Vorteile zu erzielen. Dies gilt folglich auch für die TTIP-Verhandlungen: Inländische Standards zum Schutz von Umwelt und Privatsphäre und in den Bereichen Sicherheit oder Gesundheit sowie Verbraucherschutzmaßnahmen werden und dürfen nicht zugunsten von Handel und Investitionen aufgeweicht werden. Von den Verhandlungen geht keinerlei Gefahr einer gesundheitlichen Beeinträchtigung der europäischen Verbraucher aus. Grundlegende Rechtsvorschriften zum Verbraucherschutz stehen nicht zur Debatte. Ferner beachtet die Kommission genau die Besonderheiten der Agrarmärkte der EU und behandelt sensible Waren gesondert. Das Vorsorgeprinzip und das Verursacherprinzip, die im AEUV niedergelegt sind, werden uneingeschränkt berücksichtigt.

Bei Handels‐ und Investitionsverhandlungen wie den TTIP-Verhandlungen wird das Regelungsrecht stets vollständig gewahrt. Bezüglich des Investitionsschutzes wird besonderes Augenmerk darauf gelegt, dass materielle Normen eindeutig so abgefasst sind, dass Rechtsvorschriften im öffentlichen Interesse jederzeit beibehalten oder verabschiedet werden können.

Die Kommission verweist den Herrn Abgeordneten auf die Beantwortung der Anfragen 2504‐6958/13 (270).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009284/13

to the Commission

Franz Obermayr (NI)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations

A host of agricultural, environmental, development and trade organisations are critical of the planned TTIP between the EU and the US, claiming that the projected opening-up of markets to US agro-industry products will jeopardise much of what has been achieved in terms of EU consumer protection. For instance, there is a risk that cloned meat, hormone-containing milk, chlorine-washed chicken and even more genetically engineered foods will be served up. The following questions arise:

Criticism is directed inter alia at the fact that the negotiations are being held in secret and are not transparent. Within what forum are the negotiations taking place?

Is this negotiating strategy not ignoring society’s interests, while large concerns’ financial interests might be gaining the upper hand?

Criticism is also directed at the fact that, through the agreement, the US’ low food standards would be recognised in the EU. What is the Commission’s view of the fears of consumers, for whom much is at stake?

Does this not put high-quality small-scale farming in the EU under severe pressure?

How does the Commission intend to safeguard and expand the EU’s social and environmental standards in future?

Fears are being voiced that as regards climate change and protecting the environment, and consequently industrial health and safety standards too, the TTIP might undermine the precautionary principle and the polluter-pays principle. How does the Commission view this?

Is an attempt being made, via the TTIP agreement, to circumvent EU chemicals, environment and energy legislation? How will the entire environmental movement in the EU react to this? What are the Commission’s thoughts on this?

Is it true that a special entitlement for concerns to bring actions is also planned to be included in the TTIP agreement?

Many concerns are already looking forward to the investment chapter of the planned agreement. Germany and the EU are allegedly seeking to grant concerns such as Chevron special rights which they would be able to exercise to bring actions, before secret courts of arbitration, against policies which were in the public interest? Is that true?

If it is, how can this be compatible with elementary principles of democracy and the rule of law?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2013)

The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by the Honourable Member. A certain level of confidentiality is needed in the negotiations for the EU to succeed and reach its objectives. The Commission will remain in regular contact with the European Parliament, Member States, civil society and the public at large. The agreement, when concluded, will, like all international agreements, comply with the rule of law and have to be ratified by the European Parliament. It will thus remain entirely subject to the democratic scrutiny of the Parliament.

All EU trade and investment negotiations are conducted with the overarching aim of bringing benefits to our societies, citizens and companies in a sustainable way. The same therefore applies to the TTIP negotiations: domestic environmental, privacy, safety or health standards, and policies to protect consumers cannot and will not be lowered to promote trade and investment. The negotiations would not be about compromising the health of European consumers. Basic legislation protecting consumers will not be up for negotiation. Moreover, the Commission will carefully take into account the specifics of EU agricultural markets and special treatment will be provided for sensitive products. The precautionary principle and the polluter-pays principle, which are enshrined in the TFEU, will be fully respected.

The right to regulate will always be fully preserved in EU trade and investment agreements, including in the TTIP. As for investment protection, due consideration is given to the way substantive standards are drafted to make it clear that regulatory measures in the public interest can always be maintained or adopted.

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answers to questions 2504‐ 6958/13 (271).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009285/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(1 Αυγούστου 2013)

Θέμα: Αμίαντος στο δίκτυο ύδρευσης του Αμπελώνα, Δήμου Τυρνάβου του Νομού Λάρισας

Αντιμέτωποι με διαρκή έκθεση σε αμίαντο βρίσκονται οι εργαζόμενοι της Δημοτικής Επιχείρησης Ύδρευσης Αποχέτευσης Τυρνάβου, αλλά και οι πολίτες του Αμπελώνα του Δήμου Τυρνάβου του Νομού Λάρισας, εξαιτίας του αμιαντούχου δικτύου ύδρευσης της περιοχής, το οποίο χρήζει επισκευών διαρκώς. Η κατάσταση αυτή έχει προκαλέσει μεγάλη ανησυχία στην τοπική κοινωνία ως προς την δημόσια υγεία.

Με δεδομένα ότι:

το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στο ψήφισμά του «σχετικά με τις απειλές κατά της υγείας στον χώρο εργασίας λόγω αμίαντου και τις προοπτικές πλήρους εξάλειψης του υπάρχοντος αμίαντου» (P7_TA(2013)0093), μεταξύ άλλων, «καταδικάζει την έλλειψη πληροφοριών εκ μέρους πολλών κρατών μελών που δεν επιτρέπει μια αξιόπιστη πρόβλεψη για τη θνησιμότητα λόγω μεσοθηλιώματος στην Ευρώπη, ενώ, σύμφωνα με την Παγκόσμια Οργάνωση Υγείας (ΠΟΥ), μόνο στην ΕΕ, ο αριθμός των κρουσμάτων ασθενειών που σχετίζονται με τον αμίαντο κυμαίνεται μεταξύ 20 000 και 30 000 ετησίως και περισσότεροι από 300 000 πολίτες αναμένεται ότι θα πεθάνουν από μεσοθηλίωμα έως το 2030 στην ΕΕ» και «καλεί τα κράτη μέλη να προχωρήσουν στη σταδιακή κατάργηση του αμίαντου το συντομότερο δυνατό» και

η Δημοτική Επιχείρηση Ύδρευσης Αποχέτευσης Τυρνάβου έχει εκπονήσει μελέτες αντικατάστασης των σωληνώσεων αμιάντου,

ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Έχει υποβληθεί αίτημα χρηματοδότησης από ευρωπαϊκά κονδύλια, για την αντικατάσταση των δικτύων και την απομάκρυνση των σωληνώσεων αμιάντου, από τις αρμόδιες αρχές; Αν όχι, υπάρχει δυνατότητα χρηματοδότησης του εν λόγω προγράμματος στο πλαίσιο του τρέχοντος ΕΣΠΑ;

Απάντηση του κ. Hahn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(5 Σεπτεμβρίου 2013)

Σύμφωνα με τους κανονισμούς για τα διαρθρωτικά ταμεία, προβλέπεται βοήθεια για την εκτέλεση των αρμοδιοτήτων των κρατών μελών και της Επιτροπής. Βάσει της αρχής της επιμερισμένης διαχείρισης, ο σχεδιασμός, η προετοιμασία, η υλοποίηση, η παρακολούθηση, ο έλεγχος και η αξιολόγηση των συγχρηματοδοτούμενων παρεμβάσεων στο πλαίσιο των προγραμμάτων είναι αρμοδιότητα των εθνικών αρχών, στο πλέον κατάλληλο εδαφικό επίπεδο και ανάλογα με το θεσμικό σύστημα κάθε κράτους μέλους.

Η Επιτροπή δεν μπορεί να παρέμβει στην επιλογή των έργων (εκτός από πολύ μεγάλα έργα και έργα συγχρηματοδοτούμενα από το Ταμείο Συνοχής για την περίοδο 2000-2006), διότι αυτό είναι αποκλειστική αρμοδιότητα των εθνικών διαχειριστικών αρχών, υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι οι επιλογές τους είναι σύμφωνες με τα έγγραφα προγραμματισμού που έχουν εγκριθεί ύστερα από διαβούλευση με την Επιτροπή και υπό τον όρο ότι συμμορφώνονται με την κείμενη νομοθεσία.

Συνεπώς, η Επιτροπή συνιστά στον κ. βουλευτή να έρθει σε επαφή με την ενδιάμεση διαχειριστική αρχή της περιφέρειας της Θεσσαλίας, που είναι η αρμόδια αρχή για την επιλογή και την παρακολούθηση των έργων σύμφωνα με τη στρατηγική και τους στόχους του προγράμματος «Θεσσαλίας-Στερεάς Ελλάδας-Ηπείρου» 2007-2013:

Περιφέρεια Θεσσαλίας-Ενδιάμεση Διαχειριστική Αρχή

Οδός Σωκράτους 111, 413 36 Λάρισα

Tηλ: 2413 505100

Φαξ: 2410287408

Ηλ. ταχυδρομείο: thessalia@mou.gr

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009285/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Asbestos in the water supply of Ambelona in the municipality of Tyrnavos in Larissa Prefecture

Tyrnavos Municipal Water Supply and Sewerage Company employees and also citizens of Ambelona in the Municipality of Tyrnavos in Larissa Prefecture are constantly exposed to asbestos because of the local water supply pipes which contain asbestos and need constant repairs. This situation has caused great concern about public health among the local community.

Given that:

The European Parliament in its resolution on asbestos-related occupational health threats and prospects for abolishing all existing asbestos (P7_TA (2013) 0093) in particular: ‘Deplores the lack of information from several Member States that impedes a reliable prediction of mesothelioma mortality in Europe, when according to the World Health Organisation (WHO) between 20 000 and 30 000 cases of asbestos-related diseases are recorded every year in the EU alone and more than 300 000 citizens are expected to die from mesothelioma by 2030 in the EU’ and ‘Calls on the Member States to move forward with the phasing-out of asbestos in the shortest possible timeframe’ and

The Tyrnavos Municipal Water Supply and Sewage Company has drawn up studies to replace the asbestos pipes,

Will the Commission say:

Has any application for EU funding been made by the relevant authorities to replace the water supply networks and remove the asbestos pipes? If not, is there any possibility of funding this programme under the current NSRF?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2013)

In accordance with the Structural Funds Regulations, assistance is provided in view of the respective responsibilities of the Member States and the Commission. On the basis of the shared management principle, the design, preparation, implementation, monitoring, audit and evaluation of co-funded interventions under the programmes is the responsibility of the national authorities, at the most appropriate territorial level and according to the institutional system of each Member State.

The Commission may not intervene in the selection of the projects (except for major projects and projects co-financed under the 2000-2006 Cohesion Fund), as this comes under the exclusive competence of the national managing authorities, provided that their choices are in line with the programming documents adopted in consultation with the Commission, and that they comply with current legislation.

Therefore, the Commission suggests the Honourable Member to contact the intermediate managing authority of Thessaly, which is the competent authority for the selection and monitoring of projects in line with the strategy and objectives of the ‘Continental Greece-Thessaly‐ Epirus’ 2007-2013 programme:

Intermediate managing authority of Thessaly

111 Sokratous str., 413 36 Larissa

Tel: 2413 505100

Fax:2410287408

email: thessalia@mou.gr

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009286/13

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(1 Αυγούστου 2013)

Θέμα: Ανεξέλεγκτη απόρριψη αποβλήτων και κίνδυνος περιβαλλοντικής υποβάθμισης της Λίμνης Τριχωνίδας (περιοχή Natura 2000 GR 2310009)

Έντονη ανησυχία σε κατοίκους και φορείς της ευρύτερης περιοχής της Λίμνης Τριχωνίδας του Νομού Αιτωλοακαρνανίας έχουν προκαλέσει οι συνεχιζόμενες ανεξέλεγκτες απορρίψεις στερεών και υγρών αποβλήτων στις παρόχθιες ζώνες και τα ύδατα της Λίμνης Τριχωνίδας. Όπως καταγγέλλεται, δεκάδες σημεία της λίμνης έχουν μετατραπεί σε παράνομες χωματερές και ανεπεξέργαστα υγρά απόβλητα, από ελαιοτριβεία και άλλες μεταποιητικές μονάδες της περιοχής, διατίθενται απευθείας στη λίμνη ή μέσω των χειμάρρων καταλήγουν σε αυτήν.

Με δεδομένο ότι η Λίμνη Τριχωνίδα:

είναι η μεγαλύτερη σε έκταση φυσική λίμνη στην Ελλάδα με μεγάλη οικολογική, αισθητική και παραγωγική αξία,

έχει πλούσια βιοποικιλότητα που περιλαμβάνει 20 είδη ψαριών και περισσότερα από 200 είδη πτηνών, ορισμένα από αυτά εξαιρετικά σπάνια,

ως ενιαίο οικοσύστημα με τη Λίμνη Λυσιμαχεία έχει ενταχθεί στο ευρωπαϊκό οικολογικό δίκτυο Natura 2000 (GR 2310009) ως Ειδική Ζώνη Διατήρησης για την ορνιθοπανίδα και οικότοπος προτεραιότητας για την ΕΕ (οδηγία 92/43/ΕΚ),

ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Είναι σε γνώση της ο κίνδυνος της περιβαλλοντικής υποβάθμισης της εν λόγω λίμνης; Με ποιο τρόπο σκοπεύει να παρέμβει για την εφαρμογή του κοινοτικού δικαίου ως προς την προστασία της Λίμνης Τριχωνίδας από την καθημερινή περιβαλλοντική υποβάθμιση;

Γνωρίζει εάν οι χώροι ανεξέλεγκτης απόθεσης απορριμμάτων στις παρόχθιες ζώνες της Λίμνης Τριχωνίδας περιλαμβάνονται στη λίστα με τους Χώρους Ανεξέλεγκτης Διάθεσης Αποβλήτων (ΧΑΔΑ), για τους οποίους έχει παραπεμφθεί η Ελλάδα στο Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο;

Έχει εγκριθεί το σχέδιο διαχείρισης λεκάνης απορροής ποταμών στο οποίο εντάσσεται η Λίμνη Τριχωνίδα; Αν ναι, καταγράφεται σε αυτό η παραπάνω κατάσταση;

Υπάρχουν κοινοτικοί πόροι που θα μπορούσαν να αξιοποιηθούν από τις αρμόδιες ελληνικές αρχές για την προστασία και αξιοποίηση της λίμνης και, αν ναι, έχουν γίνει οι αναγκαίες ενέργειες ώστε να απορροφηθούν αυτοί οι πόροι και σε ποιο βαθμό;

Απάντηση του κ. Potočnik εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(2 Οκτωβρίου 2013)

Η Επιτροπή δεν είναι ενήμερη για τη συγκεκριμένη κατάσταση που περιγράφεται όσον αφορά τη λίμνη Τριχωνίδα.

Η διάθεση μεγάλου μέρους οικιακών αποβλήτων που παράγονται στην Ελλάδα παραμένει ανεξέλεγκτη ή παράνομη. Αυτός είναι ο λόγος για τον οποίον, τον Φεβρουάριο του 2013, η Επιτροπή αποφάσισε να αναπέμψει την υφιστάμενη υπόθεση παράβασης (2001/2273) στο Δικαστήριο της ΕΕ και να ζητήσει την επιβολή οικονομικών κυρώσεων. Η εν λόγω υπόθεση αφορά όλους τους παράνομους χώρους υγειονομικής ταφής απορριμμάτων στην Ελλάδα.

Η Ελλάδα υπέβαλε στην Επιτροπή εκθέσεις σχετικά με 8 μόνο από τα 14 σχέδια διαχείρισης λεκανών απορροής ποταμών (ΣΔΛΑΠ). Τα σχέδια αυτά δεν έχουν ακόμη εκτιμηθεί. Το ΣΔΛΑΠ για τη λεκάνη απορροής στην οποία βρίσκεται η Τριχωνίδα δεν περιλαμβάνεται σε αυτά που έχει εγκρίνει μέχρι τώρα η Ελλάδα. Το 2011, η Επιτροπή προσέφυγε κατά της Ελλάδας στο Δικαστήριο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για μη συμμόρφωση με τη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ για τα ύδατα και για μη υποβολή όλων των ΣΔΛΑΠ της. Το Δικαστήριο καταδίκασε την Ελλάδα τον Απρίλιο του 2012.

Ο κανονισμοί για τα διαρθρωτικά ταμεία (272) προβλέπουν ότι ο σχεδιασμός, η προετοιμασία, η υλοποίηση, η παρακολούθηση, ο έλεγχος και η αξιολόγηση των συγχρηματοδοτούμενων παρεμβάσεων στο πλαίσιο επιχειρησιακών προγραμμάτων αποτελούν αρμοδιότητα των εθνικών αρχών, στο καταλληλότερο εδαφικό επίπεδο και σύμφωνα με το θεσμικό σύστημα κάθε κράτους μέλους. Με εξαίρεση τα μεγάλα έργα (273), οι υπηρεσίες της Επιτροπής δεν ενημερώνονται σχετικά με μεμονωμένα έργα που λαμβάνουν στήριξη από τα διαρθρωτικά ταμεία.

Ωστόσο, σύμφωνα με πληροφορίες που υπέβαλαν οι ελληνικές αρχές, έργο σχετικό με τα λύματα των παράκτιων κοινοτήτων της Τριχωνίδας βρίσκεται υπό εξέταση στο πλαίσιο του επιχειρησιακού προγράμματος «Περιβάλλον και αειφόρος ανάπτυξη 2007-2013». Για περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες, παραπέμπουμε το Αξιότιμο Μέλος στη διαχειριστική αρχή του προγράμματος (274).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009286/13

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Uncontrolled dumping of waste and threat of environmental degradation of Lake Trichonida (Natura 2000 site GR 2310009)

Residents and organisations in the Lake Trichonida area in Aitoloakarnania Prefecture are extremely concerned about the ongoing uncontrolled dumping of solid and liquid waste along the shores and in the waters of Lake Trichonida. They complain that dozens of sites on the lake have become illegal dumps and that untreated effluents from olive mills and other manufacturing plants in the region are being discharged directly into the lake or into the streams that drain into it.

Given that Lake Trichonida:

Is the largest natural lake in Greece and is of great ecological, aesthetic and productive value;

Has a rich biodiversity including 20 species of fish and over 200 species of bird, some of them extremely rare;

As a single ecosystem with Lake Lysimachia, forms part of the European environmental network Natura 2000 (GR 2310009) as a Special Area of Conservation for birds and a priority habitat for the EU (Directive 92/43/EC);

Will the Commission say:

Is it aware of the risk of environmental degradation of the Lake? How does it intend to intervene to ensure the application of Community law so as to protect Lake Trichonida from daily environmental degradation?

Is it aware that the illegal dumping sites on the shores of Lake Trichonida are included in the list of illegal landfills in respect of which Greece was referred to the European Court?

Has the River Basin Management Plan been approved for the river basin to which Lake Trichonida belongs? If so, does this plan record the above situation?

Are there any Community funds that could be used by the competent Greek authorities for the protection and utilisation of the lake? If so, have the necessary steps been taken to ensure the take-up of these funds and to what extent?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2013)

The Commission is not aware of the specific situation described with regard to Trichonida Lake.

The disposal of a large part of household waste produced in Greece remains uncontrolled or illegal. The Commission therefore decided in February 2013 to refer the existing infringement case (2001/2273) back to the EU Court of Justice and seek financial sanctions. This case concerns all illegal landfills operating in the country.

Greece has only reported to the Commission 8 out of 14 River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs), and they have not yet been assessed. The RBMP for the river basin to which Lake Trichonida belongs is not among those which have been adopted by Greece so far. In 2011, the Commission took Greece to the European Union Court of Justice over failure to comply with EU water legislation and submit all of its River Basin Management Plans. The Court condemned Greece on April 2012.

The Structural Funds Regulations (275) provide that the design, preparation, implementation, monitoring, audit and evaluation of co-funded interventions under operational programmes is the responsibility of national authorities, at the most appropriate territorial level and according to the institutional system of each Member State. With the exception of major projects (276), the Commission services are not informed on individual projects supported by the Structural Funds.

However, according to the information received from the Greek authorities, a project related to the waste water of the coastal municipalities surrounding Trichonida is being considered under the ‘Operational Programme Environment and Sustainable Development 2007-2013’. For further details the Honourable Member could contact the Managing authority of the Programme (277).

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-009287/13

à la Commission

Constance Le Grip (PPE)

(1er août 2013)

Objet: Rôle de la Commission européenne dans la régulation de la concurrence

Les fonctionnaires de la DG Concurrence de la Commission européenne ont récemment perquisitionné trois grands opérateurs de télécommunications européens: Orange, Deutsche Telekom et Telefonica. Ces derniers faisaient l'objet d'une enquête à la suite d'une plainte de la société américaine Cogent les accusant de ne pas écouler leur trafic gratuitement, comme le prévoient les accords de «peering».

Au-delà du fait que les trois opérateurs contestent les accusations de Cogent, on remarque que ce n'est pas la première fois que la Commission européenne enquête auprès de sociétés européennes, notamment Orange, sur des questions de concurrence les opposant à des entreprises américaines, et ce dans un laps de temps relativement réduit. Il est évidemment du ressort de la Commission européenne de veiller au maintien de pratiques concurrentielles saines aussi bien au sein de l'Union que vis-à-vis des entreprises étrangères; cependant, ce rôle d'autorité de la concurrence ne doit pas être surinterprété, au risque de pénaliser nos entreprises européennes et d'entrer en contradiction avec l'objectif fixé par la Commission elle-même de favoriser l'émergence de champions industriels européens.

1.

La concentration de la Commission européenne sur l'antitrust dans sa politique économique, notamment dans le secteur des télécoms, ne risque-t-elle pas de provoquer l'effet inverse à celui voulu, c'est-à-dire une multiplication de fusions entre opérateurs qui ne sauraient plus faire face tout seuls à la concurrence?

2.

Dans un contexte où les opérateurs sont obligés d'investir massivement dans de nouvelles technologies afin de maintenir leur rang mondial, et où, en parallèle, leurs ressources diminuent (baisse du prix du

«roaming», concurrence accrue…), la Commission a-t-elle prévu des mesures qui permettraient de stimuler ces investissements, dont les consommateurs européens seraient les premiers bénéficiaires?

Réponse donnée par M. Almunia au nom de la Commission

(23 octobre 2013)

Les règles de concurrence de l'UE concourent avec la réglementation spécifique au secteur des télécommunications à offrir des services innovants et d'un coût abordable aux consommateurs européens. La politique de concurrence de l'UE n'entrave pas l'émergence ni la croissance d'entreprises européennes capables d'affronter la compétition mondiale. Au contraire, l'application des règles de l'UE en la matière contribue à faire en sorte que l'industrie européenne soit bien armée pour faire face à la concurrence de plus en plus rude sur les marchés mondiaux. Il convient de rappeler que la réussite des entreprises sur le plan international s'explique très souvent par leur aptitude à satisfaire une demande complexe sur des marchés internes compétitifs. C'est pourquoi la politique de concurrence de l'UE est cruciale pour une politique de compétitivité efficace.

La Commission ne peut pas se prononcer sur des affaires en cours, mais il convient de préciser qu'elle a procédé à cette inspection d'office, et non à la suite d'une plainte.

L'énorme potentiel de croissance et de création d'emplois de l'économie numérique n'est pas pleinement exploité dans l'UE parce que nous ne disposons pas encore d'un véritable marché unique des télécommunications. L'intégration du marché créera les incitations nécessaires pour innover et rendre le marché plus dynamique et plus compétitif, ce qui accélérera probablement les investissements dans l'internet à haut débit, améliorera le choix offert au consommateur et la qualité et consolidera la position concurrentielle de l'Europe sur le marché mondial du numérique.

Le Conseil européen de printemps a appelé à des mesures visant à créer un véritable marché unique des télécommunications. À la suite de cet appel, la Commission vient d'adopter un ensemble de mesures législatives visant à transposer dans le secteur des télécommunications deux principes essentiels: la liberté de fournir des services dans toute l'UE et celle d'en acquérir n'importe où dans l'Union.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009287/13

to the Commission

Constance Le Grip (PPE)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Commission's role as competition regulator

Officials from the Commission’s DG Competition recently raided the offices of three major European telecoms operators, namely Orange, Deutsche Telekom and Telefonica. The raids were part of an investigation launched into the companies following a complaint from US firm Cogent accusing them of not carrying traffic free of charge, as envisaged in ‘peering’ agreements.

While all three operators deny the allegations made by Cogent, it is worth noting that this is not the first time that the Commission has investigated European companies, particularly Orange, in connection with competition-related disputes with US businesses, and that it last did so only quite recently. Of course, it is part of the Commission’s job to safeguard fair competition within the Union and vis-à-vis non-EU firms. However, the Commission must be wary of overreaching in its role as the competition authority, as this might harm European companies and jeopardise its efforts to achieve its own goal of encouraging the emergence of European industrial champions.

1.

Is there not a danger that the Commission’s focus on anti-trust issues in its economic policy, particularly with regard to the telecoms sector, will have the opposite effect to that intended, i.e. a proliferation of mergers among operators no longer able to compete on their own?

2.

Given that operators are having to invest heavily in new technologies to stay ahead in the global market, and that at the same time they are seeing their revenues diminish (owing to lower roaming fees, greater competition, etc.), does the Commission plan to take measures to encourage such investment, which would benefit European consumers first and foremost?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2013)

The EU competition rules work side by side with regulation specific to the telecoms sector to bring innovative, affordable services to European consumers. EU competition policy does not stand in the way of the emergence and growth of European companies capable of competing on the world market. On the contrary, enforcing the EU competition rules helps to ensure that European industry is in good shape to take on the increasingly fierce competition that characterises global markets. It should be recalled that very often companies’ international success has been due to their ability to satisfy sophisticated demand on competitive home markets. EU competition policy is therefore a central element of an effective competitiveness policy.

The Commission cannot comment on ongoing cases, but it is necessary to point out that this inspection arose from ex officio action by the Commission and not as the result of a complaint.

The enormous potential of the digital economy as a source of growth and job creation is not fully exploited in the EU because we still lack a true single market for telecoms. Market integration will create the right incentives to innovate and render the market more dynamic and competitive. This in turn is likely to fuel investments in high-speed Internet, increase consumer choice and quality and reinforce Europe's global competitive position in the digital economy.

The Spring European Council called for measures to establish a genuine single market for telecoms. Following that call, the Commission has just adopted a set of legislative measures aiming at reflecting in the telecom sector two key principles of the Treaty: the freedom to provide services anywhere in the EU and the freedom to buy services from anywhere in the EU.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009289/13

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(1o agosto 2013)

Oggetto: Bollino rosso sui prodotti «made in Italy» commercializzati nel Regno Unito

Per contrastare l'aumento del tasso di obesità, il 19 giugno scorso il governo del Regno Unito ha introdotto un codice a colori sulle etichette dei prodotti alimentari: bollino verde per gli alimenti sani, giallo per gli intermedi e rosso per quelli contenenti alte percentuali di grassi e zuccheri. Il sistema prevede una classifica in base alle percentuali calcolate sui singoli nutrienti dei prodotti, con il risultato che anche gli ingredienti essenziali per una qualsiasi dieta, come per esempio il latte e la carne, i formaggi e la marmellata, risultano «insani» per un corretto regime alimentare. L'iniziativa, che entrerà in vigore a partire da settembre e che è stata accolta da tutte le grosse catene di supermercati come Tesco, Sainsbury's e Marks&Spencer, danneggerà in particolare le importazioni di prodotti tipici italiani. Circa il 60 % di essi, tra cui il parmigiano, il prosciutto di Parma, l'olio toscano e altri prodotti della dieta mediterranea venduti sia all'ingrosso sia al dettaglio, risulteranno bollati come prodotti insani.

Può la Commissione rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:

è informata dei fatti?

Come valuta l'iniziativa del governo del Regno Unito?

Ritiene che tale iniziativa contrasti con la politica di qualità promossa dall'Unione per il commercio e la valorizzazione dei prodotti tipici e delle eccellenze alimentari degli Stati membri così come stabilito dal Libro verde del 15 ottobre 2008 sulla qualità dei prodotti agricoli: norme di prodotto, requisiti di produzione e sistemi di qualità (COM(2008)0641)?

Ritiene necessaria una revisione del sistema dei bollini in modo da permettere ai cittadini del Regno Unito una giusta informazione sul corretto apporto nutritivo degli alimenti?

Intende intervenire a sostegno delle aziende italiane del settore alimentare, la qualità della cui produzione è riconosciuta in tutto il mondo e che saranno penalizzate da tale provvedimento?

Come intende rispondere a Federalimentare, la Federazione italiana dell'industria alimentare, e alle altre associazioni di categoria del settore che chiedono un intervento dell'Unione per verificare la legittimità di tale iniziativa?

Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione

(4 ottobre 2013)

1.

La Commissione è a conoscenza del sistema di etichettatura

«a semaforo» raccomandato dal governo britannico per i prodotti alimentari.

2.

Il regolamento (UE) n. 1169/2011 relativo alla fornitura di informazioni sugli alimenti ai consumatori

2.

Il regolamento (UE) n. 1169/2011 relativo alla fornitura di informazioni sugli alimenti ai consumatori

 (278)

3.

Il sistema di etichettatura raccomandato non è inteso a valutare la qualità globale del prodotto alimentare in merito ad aspetti quali le caratteristiche organolettiche, bensì ad integrare la dichiarazione nutrizionale obbligatoria con altre modalità di presentazione delle medesime informazioni.

4.

Spetterebbe alle autorità britanniche rivedere, ove necessario, il raccomandato sistema di etichettatura supplementare, cui viene fatto ricorso in via facoltativa.

5.

A quanto risulta alla Commissione i criteri utilizzati per questo sistema di etichettatura sono gli stessi per tutti i prodotti alimentari, indipendentemente dalla loro origine nazionale. Pertanto il sistema in questione, che resta di natura facoltativa, non penalizza in particolare nessun alimento proveniente da un determinato Stato membro.

6.

Ai fini della conformità con il suddetto regolamento il sistema raccomandato deve soddisfare i criteri di cui all'articolo 35 del medesimo. In una lettera della DG Imprese e industria della Commissione è stato ricordato alle autorità britanniche che il sistema in questione non deve assumere carattere obbligatorio, né

de jure

, né

de facto

.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-009289/13

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(1 August 2013)

Subject: Red label for Italian products sold in the United Kingdom

On 19 June 2013 the British Government, seeking to combat the growing obesity rate, launched a ‘traffic-light’ labelling system for food products: healthy foods will bear a green label; foods in the ‘medium’ category are denoted by an amber label; and foods high in fats and sugars will be identified by a red label. The system rates products according to the percentages of nutrients which they contain. Because of that fact, even foods which — whatever one’s eating habits — constitute essential ingredients, such as milk, meat, cheese, and jam, are deemed to be ‘unhealthy’ from the point of view of a proper diet. This scheme, which will enter into force in September and which all the leading supermarket chains, for example Tesco, Sainsbury’s, and Marks & Spencer, have agreed to join, will be particularly damaging to imports of typical Italian products, roughly 60% of which, including Parmesan cheese, Parma ham, Tuscan extra-virgin olive oil, and other foods forming part of the Mediterranean diet, will, whether sold wholesale or retail, be classed as ‘unhealthy’.

1.

Is the Commission aware of the above facts?

2.

What does it think about the British Government’s initiative?

3.

Does it consider the initiative to be at odds with the quality policy advocated by the EU for the purposes of marketing and promoting Member States’ premium products and food specialities, as set out in the Green Paper of 15 October 2008 on

‘agricultural product quality: product standards, farming requirements and quality schemes’ (COM(2008)0641)?

4.