31.10.2013   

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

CE 317/1


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB
MISTOQSIJIET BIL-MIKTUB U TWEĠIBIET

Mistoqsijiet bil-miktub magħmula mill-Membri tal-Parlament Ewropew u t-tweġibiet tagħhom mogħtija minn istituzzjoni tal-Unjoni Ewropea

(2013/C 317 E/01)

Werrej

E-010590/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: International rules on the use of drones

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010591/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Council

Subject: Charging VAT in the customer's country of residence on online sales of cultural goods

Version française

English version

E-010592/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Council

Subject: EU grant to the ACP countries

Version française

English version

E-010593/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Funding for Erasmus under threat

Version française

English version

E-010596/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Greener ICTs

Version française

English version

E-010597/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Charging VAT in the customer's country of residence on online sales of cultural goods

Version française

English version

E-010598/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: EU legislation on electric vehicles

Version française

English version

E-010600/12 by Francesco Enrico Speroni to the Commission

Subject: IVIE and IMU taxes contrary to Community law

Versione italiana

English version

E-010601/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Exemption from the Stability Pact to deal with the emergency caused by storms in the Veneto region

Versione italiana

English version

E-010602/12 by Ryszard Antoni Legutko to the Commission

Subject: Order to remove religious symbols from Slovak euro coin

Wersja polska

English version

E-010603/12 by Marek Henryk Migalski to the Commission

Subject: Dispute over proposed Slovak EUR 2 coin

Wersja polska

English version

E-010893/12 by Zbigniew Ziobro to the Commission

Subject: Removal of religious symbols from Slovak euro coins

Wersja polska

English version

E-011051/12 by Michał Tomasz Kamiński to the Commission

Subject: Saints Cyril and Methodius and religious freedom in Europe

Wersja polska

English version

E-011059/12 by Adam Bielan to the Commission

Subject: Removal of the crucifix from Slovakian euro coins

Wersja polska

English version

E-011547/12 by Jacek Włosowicz, Tadeusz Cymański, Jacek Olgierd Kurski and Zbigniew Ziobro to the Commission

Subject: Changes to the proposed design of the Slovak EUR 2 coin

Wersja polska

English version

E-010604/12 by Francesco De Angelis and Silvia Costa to the Commission

Subject: Lazio region and unused EU resources

Versione italiana

English version

E-010605/12 by Keith Taylor and Yves Cochet to the Commission

Subject: French definition of ‘foie gras’

Version française

English version

E-010606/12 by Nikos Chrysogelos, Claude Turmes and Reinhard Bütikofer to the Commission

Subject: An alternative method of eliminating the deficit of the special account for renewable energy sources in Greece

Deutsche Fassung

Ελληνική έκδοση

Version française

English version

E-010607/12 by Michael Cashman to the Commission

Subject: Displaying the products of execution

English version

E-010608/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Drastic cuts to agriculture

Versione italiana

English version

E-010609/12 by Mojca Kleva to the Council

Subject: National prosperity factors

Slovenska različica

English version

E-010610/12 by Mojca Kleva to the Commission

Subject: National prosperity factors

Slovenska različica

English version

E-010611/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda, Ana Miranda and Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Attacks on Gaza

Versión española

English version

E-010612/12 by Salvador Sedó i Alabart to the Commission

Subject: European Fund against poverty and social exclusion

Versión española

English version

E-010613/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 800/2008: Limits on loans and public grants for enterprises funded by means of repayable advances

Versión española

English version

E-010614/12 by Robert Sturdy to the Commission

Subject: EU-US trade relations: the nexus provision

English version

E-010615/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Concern over inhumane conditions at municipal dog pounds in Romania

Versione italiana

English version

E-010616/12 by Andrew Henry William Brons to the Commission

Subject: UK Membership of the EU

English version

E-010618/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Goods transit through transalpine tunnels: Italy at a disadvantage

Versione italiana

English version

E-010619/12 by Sergio Berlato and Antonio Cancian to the Commission

Subject: Crisis in the construction machinery sector and revision of the relevant legislation

Versione italiana

English version

E-010620/12 by Ivo Belet to the Commission

Subject: Rear fog lights: There are no uniform rules on the use of fog lights in the EU

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-010621/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Illegal dumping of huge quantities of waste asbestos over an aquifer at a refuse site in Paese (Treviso), in violation of the waste and water protection directives

Versione italiana

English version

E-010622/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Discharge of untreated waste water in Laguna de Duero

Versión española

English version

E-010623/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish prisoners' hunger strike in Turkish prisons

Versión española

English version

E-010624/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Opening of a quarry in the Rambla del Cañuelo

Versión española

English version

E-010625/12 by Willy Meyer to the Council

Subject: UN Resolution on the embargo on Cuba

Versión española

English version

E-010626/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — UN Resolution on the embargo on Cuba

Versión española

English version

E-010627/12 by Rolandas Paksas to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU strategy on the Iranian nuclear issue

Tekstas lietuvių kalba

English version

E-010628/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Fire safety in hotels and hostels

English version

E-010629/12 by Francesco Enrico Speroni to the Commission

Subject: Registered partnerships and the crime of bigamy in EU countries where registered partnerships are not recognised

Versione italiana

English version

P-010630/12 by Maria Badia i Cutchet to the Commission

Subject: Dealing with excessive household mortgage debt and assistance for the most vulnerable persons facing eviction

Versión española

English version

P-010631/12 by Richard Falbr to the Commission

Subject: Commission investigation into ČEZ (Case COMP/39727 — ČEZ)

České znění

English version

E-010632/12 by Antolín Sánchez Presedo and Maria Badia i Cutchet to the Commission

Subject: Merger of regulatory bodies and the competition authority in Spain

Versión española

English version

E-010633/12 by Antolín Sánchez Presedo to the Commission

Subject: Fisheries Protocol between Mauritania and the EU and cephalopod fishing

Versión española

English version

E-010634/12 by Antolín Sánchez Presedo to the Commission

Subject: Transparency with regard to the negotiations on the new Fisheries Partnership Agreement and the new Protocol between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius

Versión española

English version

E-010635/12 by Maria Badia i Cutchet and Raimon Obiols to the Commission

Subject: Plans by Red Eléctrica Española (REE) in Santa Coloma de Gramenet

Versión española

English version

E-010636/12 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: Considerable increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants at global level

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010637/12 by Chris Davies to the Commission

Subject: Bird-trapping in Cyprus

English version

E-010638/12 by Chris Davies to the Commission

Subject: CO2-related trade measures

English version

E-010639/12 by Chris Davies to the Commission

Subject: Reduction in potato varieties

English version

E-010640/12 by Anne Delvaux to the Commission

Subject: Ban on animal testing of cosmetic products

Version française

English version

P-010641/12 by Francesco Enrico Speroni to the Commission

Subject: Intra-EU transfers and validity of driving licences obtained in a Member State

Versione italiana

English version

E-010642/12 by Niccolò Rinaldi to the Commission

Subject: Ban on consumption of bovine intestines: impact for sugo di pajata (pajata sauce)

Versione italiana

English version

E-010643/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations by the Sudanese Government in the areas at war in Southern Kordofan

Versione italiana

English version

E-010644/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: In Bosnia, the jails are full and hundreds of convicted criminals are at large

Versione italiana

English version

E-010645/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: European funds paid to mafia families

Versione italiana

English version

E-010646/12 by Juozas Imbrasas to the Commission

Subject: EU Loan Guarantee Facility

Tekstas lietuvių kalba

English version

P-010647/12 by Franziska Katharina Brantner to the Commission

Subject: Redevelopment areas and EU state aid rules

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-010648/12 by George Sabin Cutaş to the Commission

Subject: EU definition and list of tax havens

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010649/12 by Bernd Lange to the Commission

Subject: Trade in services

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010650/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: EU-Japan cooperation and support programme

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010651/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Study certificates issued by franchised service providers

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010653/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Subsidies for Chinese solar panel manufacturers

Version française

English version

E-010654/12 by Francesco Enrico Speroni to the Commission

Subject: Italian identity document ‘not valid for travel abroad’

Versione italiana

English version

E-010655/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Foie gras production

English version

P-010657/12 by Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz to the Commission

Subject: Commission's plans and intentions concerning unmanned airborne vehicles (UAVs)

Wersja polska

English version

E-010658/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Scope of the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts (COM(2011)0897)

Versión española

English version

E-010659/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Possible legal uncertainty concerning the implementation of the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts (COM(2011)0897)

Versión española

English version

E-010660/12 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: Anti-dumping duties imposed on SME importers, wholesalers and retailers in the EU

English version

E-010661/12 by Sir Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Farhad and Rafiq Aliyev

English version

E-010662/12 by Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl to the Commission

Subject: China's export restrictions on rare earth elements

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010663/12 by Jean-Paul Besset to the Commission

Subject: Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy

Version française

English version

E-010664/12 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Allegations that the Egyptian Government has passed a decree restricting property rights in Sinai

English version

E-010665/12 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: Combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia in Greece

English version

E-010666/12 by Rolandas Paksas to the Commission

Subject: European Maritime and Fisheries Fund

Tekstas lietuvių kalba

English version

E-010667/12 by Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz to the Commission

Subject: Legal status of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) registered in or flying over EU territory

Wersja polska

English version

E-010668/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Viability of Greek SMEs

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010669/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Unwarranted additional bank charges for loans

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010670/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Steady increase in consumer price index in Greece/rising prices for goods

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010671/12 by Phil Bennion to the Commission

Subject: Nobel Peace Prize money

English version

E-010673/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Crisis in Italian shipbuilding

Versione italiana

English version

E-010674/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: HR/VP — Civilians killed by armed groups in the province of North Kivu (Congo)

Versione italiana

English version

E-010675/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: Social entrepreneurship initiative

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010676/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: IT security

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010677/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: Daphne programme — achievements and outlook

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010678/12 by Silvia-Adriana Ţicău to the Commission

Subject: Measures to develop skills and create jobs in industry

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010679/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Turkish Prime Minister's comments on Israel

Versione italiana

English version

E-010680/12 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Possible funding for a youth project for cultural and social advancement in the municipality of Rome

Versione italiana

English version

E-010681/12 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Possible funding for the construction of a chairlift between the Franciscan monastery and the ‘Sacro Speco’ in the municipality of Poggio Bustone

Versione italiana

English version

E-010682/12 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Possible funding for the Istituto Calasanzio in Frascati, in the province of Rome

Versione italiana

English version

E-010683/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Revival of the port of Taranto

Versione italiana

English version

E-010684/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Relations with Bangladesh

Versione italiana

English version

E-010685/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Violence against girls in India

Versione italiana

English version

E-010686/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Free competition for online gambling

Versione italiana

English version

E-010687/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Ilisu Dam on the Tigris River

Versione italiana

English version

E-010688/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Elephant slaughter

Versione italiana

English version

E-010689/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: University in Dadaab

Versione italiana

English version

E-010690/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: The efficiency of the Greek privatisation programme in the midst of an economic crisis

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010691/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Incentives for the creation of digitally advanced cities

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010692/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Support for uninsured unemployed persons

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010693/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Freedom of speech at risk in India as woman is arrested over her Facebook post

Versione italiana

English version

E-010694/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — The hell of Sinai

Versione italiana

English version

E-010695/12 by Antolín Sánchez Presedo to the Commission

Subject: Fiscal transparency and uncooperative jurisdictions

Versión española

English version

E-010696/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Mosques in Palestinian Territories celebrate Tel Aviv bus bombing

Versione italiana

English version

E-010697/12 by David Campbell Bannerman to the Commission

Subject: EU employees working in London but residing outside the UK

English version

E-010698/12 by David Campbell Bannerman to the Commission

Subject: EU employees working in London

English version

E-010699/12 by David Campbell Bannerman to the Commission

Subject: Single farm payments to recipients in the UK

English version

P-010700/12 by Jan Philipp Albrecht to the Commission

Subject: Working as an estate agent

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-010701/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Reality of grassland

English version

P-010702/12 by Karima Delli to the Commission

Subject: Commission decision to close down Crédit immobilier de France and make all its 2 600 employees redundant

Version française

English version

E-010703/12 by Antonyia Parvanova to the Commission

Subject: Bulgarian seamen charged with belonging to an organised crime group in Spain: serious failure to respect the procedural rights of the accused

българска версия

English version

E-010704/12 by Claude Moraes to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU intervention in Somalia and the African Peace Facility

English version

E-010705/12 by Claude Moraes to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — War crimes by Amisom forces

English version

E-010706/12 by Claudio Morganti to the Commission

Subject: Problems relating to the use of EU funds

Versione italiana

English version

E-010707/12 by Claudio Morganti to the Commission

Subject: EU-China developments on environmental issues

Versione italiana

English version

E-010708/12 by Eija-Riitta Korhola to the Commission

Subject: Interpretation of Article 7(7)(c) of the Energy Efficiency Directive

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

P-010709/12 by Iliana Malinova Iotova to the Commission

Subject: Incident in Bulgaria

българска версия

English version

E-010710/12 by David Martin to the Council

Subject: EU-Japan Free Trade Agreement

English version

E-010711/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: EU-Japan Free Trade Agreement

English version

E-010713/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment for the Free Trade Agreement between the EU and India: fresh criticism from a gender perspective

Versione italiana

English version

E-010714/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Pakistan: access to education and gender inequality, how many steps forward

Versione italiana

English version

E-010715/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: New impact assessment for microfinance in Pakistan: gender discrimination

Versione italiana

English version

E-010716/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Failure to fulfil the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 764/2008 concerning the principle of mutual recognition

Dansk udgave

English version

E-010717/12 by David Campbell Bannerman to the Commission

Subject: Travel expenses of EU employees travelling to work in the UK from other Member States

English version

E-010718/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: New restrictions for allergens in perfumes and natural substances: disproportionate measures for the European market and distortion of competition

Versione italiana

English version

E-010719/12 by Iva Zanicchi to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Escalation of violence in Nigeria

Versione italiana

English version

P-010720/12 by Elena Băsescu to the Commission

Subject: Funding for the Erasmus programme

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010721/12 by Michael Cramer and Heide Rühle to the Commission

Subject: EU financial aid for the Stuttgart 21 railway station

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010722/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Turkey's accession to the EU

Versione italiana

English version

P-010723/12 by Niccolò Rinaldi to the Commission

Subject: Call for Inter-Ministerial Decree No 2012/0534/I — C50A to be rejected

Versione italiana

English version

P-010724/12 by Patricia van der Kammen to the Commission

Subject: Request for definition

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010725/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Situation in Goma (Congo)

Versión española

English version

E-010726/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of the Bonn Declaration on Music Education

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010727/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of the Seoul Agenda for the development of arts education

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010728/12 by Phil Prendergast to the Commission

Subject: Rare diseases in Europe

English version

E-010729/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: ‘Valdastico A31 Nord’ motorway project, inexplicably included by the Italian authorities in corridor 1, Berlin-Palermo, of the TEN-T network

Versione italiana

English version

E-010730/12 by Jean-Jacob Bicep to the Commission

Subject: Prohibition of aerial spraying of pesticides

Version française

English version

E-010731/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Rights of air passengers: Court of Justice judgments on the interpretation of the concept of ‘denied boarding’

Version française

English version

E-010732/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Claims about the health benefits of ‘natural’ or organic products

Version française

English version

E-010733/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: EU assistance to the Turkish Cypriot community

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010734/12 by Patricia van der Kammen to the Commission

Subject: Return of battery eggs

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010735/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Erdogan pro-Hamas and anti-Israel

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010736/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Banning of anti-Islam film in Turkey (follow-up question)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010737/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — ‘Arab Spring’ = Arab Winter (follow-up question)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010738/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: ‘Gender balance’ at Parliament and the Commission

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-011110/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Egyptian press protests against the new constitution

Versione italiana

English version

E-010739/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Seizure of power by Morsi

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-011013/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Egypt's new Constitution

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-010740/12 by Carmen Fraga Estévez to the Commission

Subject: Repeated border rejections concerning canned tuna imported from Thailand

Versión española

English version

E-010741/12 by Sir Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Journalistic freedom in Kazakhstan

English version

E-010742/12 by Hans-Peter Mayer to the Commission

Subject: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 505/2012 — lignocellulose

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010743/12 by Dimitar Stoyanov to the Commission

Subject: Suspicions of deliberate limiting of sugar imports from ACP countries

българска версия

English version

E-010744/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Financial support for high-speed trains

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010745/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Local Authorities Observatory in Greece

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010746/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Commission investigation into Greek Law 4021/2011

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010747/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis and Georgios Koumoutsakos to the Commission

Subject: Premature births in Europe — raising awareness to help prevention

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010748/12 by Sophia in 't Veld, Renate Weber, Françoise Castex, Véronique Mathieu, Antonyia Parvanova, Baroness Sarah Ludford, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sirpa Pietikäinen and Cecilia Wikström to the Commission

Subject: Refusal to terminate a pregnancy

българска версия

Version française

Nederlandse versie

Versiunea în limba română

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-010749/12 by Slavi Binev to the Commission

Subject: The importance of stakeholder input

българска версия

English version

E-010750/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Humane killing of farmed fish

English version

E-010751/12 by Henri Weber to the Commission

Subject: Burma and the Generalised System of Preferences

Version française

English version

E-010752/12 by Gaston Franco to the Commission

Subject: Posidonia and cymodocea nurseries

Version française

English version

E-010753/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Partnership and cooperation between the EU and Kazakhstan

Version française

English version

E-010754/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Abuse of dominant position and discriminatory practices in the telecommunications market

Versione italiana

English version

E-010755/12 by Vincenzo Iovine and Andrea Cozzolino to the Commission

Subject: Clean-up of the Ferrandelle refuse dump, Caserta

Versione italiana

English version

E-010800/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda, Ulrike Lunacek and Franziska Keller to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Homophobia in the Turkish Army

Versión española

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010756/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Dismissal of homosexuals from the Turkish army

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010757/12 by Gabriel Mato Adrover to the Commission

Subject: Control of tomato imports from Morocco

Versión española

English version

E-010758/12 by Gabriel Mato Adrover to the Commission

Subject: Complaint giving rise to Case SA-35041‐ Public service brodcasting in the Canary Islands

Versión española

English version

E-010759/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: High cost of living in Greece despite dramatic decline in demand and fall in labour costs

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010760/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Christian girl attacked in Cairo metro

Versione italiana

English version

E-010761/12 by Thomas Ulmer to the Commission

Subject: Shortages of medicinal products

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010764/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Correlation between job losses and increased risk of heart attack

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010765/12 by Christine De Veyrac to the Council

Subject: EU trade agreements with third countries

Version française

English version

E-010766/12 by Christine De Veyrac to the Commission

Subject: Anti-dumping measures and the EU solar energy industry

Version française

English version

P-010767/12 by Emilie Turunen to the Commission

Subject: Possible tax evasion for aircrew

Dansk udgave

English version

E-010768/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Basel III — Disclosure of secret reserves

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010769/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Relaxation of capital rules for British banks

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010770/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Simplification of banking regulation

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010771/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — killing of human rights defence lawyers in Honduras

Versión española

English version

E-010772/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of the Rural Development Regulation

Dansk udgave

English version

E-010773/12 by Bendt Bendtsen to the Commission

Subject: Unfair competition in the air transport sector

Dansk udgave

English version

E-010774/12 by Franz Obermayr to the Commission

Subject: Genetically-modified insects in the EU

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010775/12 by Kartika Tamara Liotard to the Commission

Subject: Navigation systems and animal transport

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010776/12 by Pavel Poc to the Commission

Subject: Wind farm plans and projects in Iron Gates Natural Park

České znění

English version

E-010778/12 by Marita Ulvskog, Åsa Westlund and Anna Hedh to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's internal safeguards against Commissioner Borg's values

Svensk version

English version

P-010779/12 by Corien Wortmann-Kool to the Commission

Subject: Impact of a financial transaction tax on pension funds

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010780/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Deferral of Basel III

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010781/12 by Pavel Poc to the Commission

Subject: Development of criteria for endocrine disrupting chemicals

České znění

English version

E-010782/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar reform: evidence of ‘joined-up’ thinking

English version

E-010783/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar reform, DG AGRI and DG Competition

English version

E-010784/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar sector profitability

English version

E-010785/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar reform, DG AGRI and DG Trade

English version

E-010786/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: A free market in sugar

English version

E-010787/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar data consistency

English version

E-010788/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Sugar market and pricing

English version

E-010789/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Realities of the sugar market

English version

E-010790/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Ban on issue of 2 euro coins for the Jubilee in Slovakia

Versione italiana

English version

E-010844/12 by Sergio Berlato to the Commission

Subject: Protection of Europe's common historical memory and its symbols

Versione italiana

English version

E-010923/12 by Carlo Fidanza to the Commission

Subject: Reasons for the removal of religious symbols from the Slovakian two-euro coin dedicated to Saints Cyril and Methodius

Versione italiana

English version

E-010791/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Clarity regarding the EUR 140 million fund for Albania

Versione italiana

English version

E-010792/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: EU clarification of the impact of simplifying visa procedures

Versione italiana

English version

P-010793/12 by Ingeborg Gräßle to the Council

Subject: Allegations concerning a Maltese lawyer employed at the Council

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-010794/12 by Kerstin Westphal to the Commission

Subject: Regional assistance from 2014

Deutsche Fassung

English version

P-010795/12 by Inese Vaidere to the Commission

Subject: Upcoming visit by Commission President José Manuel Barroso to Armenia

Latviešu valodas versija

English version

E-010796/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda, Ana Miranda, Ulrike Lunacek and Catherine Grèze to the Commission

Subject: Hurricane Sandy in Cuba

Versión española

English version

E-010797/12 by Antonio López-Istúriz White to the Council

Subject: Safety at sea in the Gulf of Guinea

Versión española

English version

E-010798/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Common Fisheries Policy

Versión española

English version

E-010799/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Toxic clothes

Versión española

English version

E-010801/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Minimum standards for baggage handling at airports

Dansk udgave

English version

E-010802/12 by Josef Weidenholzer, Evelyn Regner and Birgit Sippel to the Commission

Subject: Almax display mannequins with facial recognition in Europe

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010803/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Waste prevention tax at European level for fast food

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010804/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Africa could feed itself

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010805/12 by Markus Pieper to the Commission

Subject: State aid control — export subsidies for doors and windows manufactured in Poland

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010830/12 by Nadja Hirsch to the Commission

Subject: Subsidies to promote exports of Polish-made windows and doors

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-011184/12 by Evelyne Gebhardt to the Commission

Subject: Possible distortion of competition by Polish economic promotion programme

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-011525/12 by Axel Voss to the Commission

Subject: State aid to support exports of Polish-made windows and doors

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-011533/12 by Werner Langen to the Commission

Subject: State aid law in Poland/Subsidies for windows and doors

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010806/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Iranian ships refuelling in Sudan

Versione italiana

English version

E-010807/12 by George Lyon to the Commission

Subject: Scotland and the MFF 2007-2013

English version

E-010808/12 by George Lyon to the Commission

Subject: Scotland and the MFF 2014-2020

English version

E-010809/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Mental health and homelessness

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010810/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Disaster relief in the Caribbean

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010811/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — New opposition coalition for Syria

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010812/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Single European Sky

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010813/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Homemade bombs

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010814/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: School Fruit Scheme

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010815/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Poverty in Chile

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-010816/12 by Georgios Stavrakakis to the Commission

Subject: Draft Amending Budget No 6/2012 and the potential effects of non-adoption

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010817/12 by Jean-Luc Bennahmias to the Commission

Subject: End-of-waste status: draft regulation on biodegradable waste

Version française

English version

E-010818/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Shale gas

Version française

English version

E-010819/12 by Philippe Boulland to the Commission

Subject: Combating obesity, in particular among children: ‘fat tax’ or prevention

Version française

English version

E-010820/12 by Philippe Boulland to the Commission

Subject: Traffic light radar systems for heavy goods vehicles

Version française

English version

E-010821/12 by Philippe Boulland to the Commission

Subject: Reform of decentralised state aid for film budgets and production

Version française

English version

E-010823/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Rise in heroin use

Versione italiana

English version

E-010824/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Protection of geological heritage

Versione italiana

English version

E-010825/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Stability Pact and climate change

Versione italiana

English version

E-010826/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Make-your-own wine and counterfeiting

Versione italiana

English version

E-011074/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Counterfeiting of fraudulent blends — ready-to-use ‘Italian wine kits’

Versione italiana

English version

E-010827/12 by Ivo Belet to the Commission

Subject: Endocrine disruptors in classrooms containing large quantities of plastic

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010828/12 by Adrian Severin to the Commission

Subject: Second request for clarification of the Commission's answer concerning the blocking of certain prerogatives of the interim President of Romania

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010829/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Fire in Bangladesh and corporate social responsibility

Versión española

English version

E-010831/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Ban on the use of Austrian freight wagons in Italy

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010832/12 by Michael Cramer to the Commission

Subject: Free movement of passenger and freight transport across the Øresund Strait

Deutsche Fassung

Version française

English version

E-010833/12 by Michael Cramer to the Commission

Subject: Public funding for rail freight transport noise reduction

Deutsche Fassung

Version française

English version

E-010834/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Eleven dead as terror blasts strike Kaduna barracks church in Nigeria

Versione italiana

English version

E-010835/12 by Bastiaan Belder to the Commission

Subject: Deinstitutionalisation of Bulgarian childcare — quality

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010836/12 by Bastiaan Belder to the Commission

Subject: Deinstitutionalisation in Bulgarian childcare — budget, reporting and crimes

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010837/12 by Edward McMillan-Scott to the Commission

Subject: UK Government changes to housing benefits in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights

English version

E-010838/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Expert group on online betting

Version française

English version

E-010839/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Anti-dumping measures on Taiwanese and Chinese lighters

Version française

English version

E-010840/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Breach of human rights in Guinea-Bissau

Version française

English version

E-010841/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Adoption by the Italian Government of a further exemption to Directive 2009/12/EC

Versione italiana

English version

E-010842/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Closure of the Schneider-Electric S.p.A. factory in Guardamiglio

Versione italiana

English version

E-010843/12 by Sergio Berlato to the Commission

Subject: Import duties on Chinese tableware

Versione italiana

English version

E-010845/12 by Sergio Berlato to the Commission

Subject: Issue of the Taranto ILVA and the tens of thousands of jobs at risk

Versione italiana

English version

E-010846/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Processing of municipal solid waste (R1/D10): European guidance document and the R1 statute

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010847/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Identical waste incineration plants provide different energy efficiency depending on in-house or external management

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010848/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: The self-sufficiency principle and commercial mixed municipal waste

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010849/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Transport/export of MSW to another Member State

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010850/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: The new Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC) encourages the export of MSW, while the principal objective must be the local processing of non-recyclable waste

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010851/12 by Bart Staes and Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Measures to combat waste incineration overcapacity in order to prevent dumping tariffs

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010852/12 by Adrian Severin to the Commission

Subject: Request for clarification regarding claims that the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) was used to avert ‘coup’ in Romania

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-010853/12 by Sirpa Pietikäinen and Indrek Tarand to the Commission

Subject: Building of an industrial estate for the Saaremaa deep-water port: possible breach of Estonia's Natura obligations

Eestikeelne versioon

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-010854/12 by Sari Essayah to the Commission

Subject: Restricting group relief to domestic parent companies

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-010855/12 by Jan Philipp Albrecht to the Commission

Subject: Imprisonment of Thongpaseuth Keuakoun, Seng-Aloun Phengphanh and Bouavanh Chanmanivong in the Lao People's Democratic Republic

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010856/12 by Axel Voss to the Commission

Subject: Disproportionate checks at the Gibraltar border

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010857/12 by Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl to the Commission

Subject: Russia's WTO accession after 18 years of negotiations

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010858/12 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Turkey and violence against women

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-010859/12 by Tomasz Piotr Poręba to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's stance on the community service sentence handed down by a court to the author of the Antykomor.pl website

Wersja polska

English version

E-010860/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Water

Versão portuguesa

English version

P-010861/12 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Court of Auditors report: detection of errors by Member States

English version

P-010862/12 by Søren Bo Søndergaard to the Commission

Subject: Possible access by the mafia to EU agricultural funds

Dansk udgave

English version

P-010863/12 by Debora Serracchiani to the Commission

Subject: Statements on Jews by the leader of the Hungarian Jobbik party

Versione italiana

English version

E-010864/12 by Andres Perello Rodriguez to the Commission

Subject: Vulnerable groups denied access to healthcare following cutbacks in public health spending

Versión española

English version

E-010865/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Reform of military jurisdiction in Colombia

Versión española

English version

E-010866/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Ceasefire proposed by FARC

Versión española

English version

E-010867/12 by Jörg Leichtfried to the Commission

Subject: Mercury in energy-saving light bulbs

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010868/12 by Jutta Steinruck to the Commission

Subject: Minimum standards in the textile industry

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010869/12 by Robert Sturdy to the Commission

Subject: Leaseback properties in Member States

English version

E-010870/12 by Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl and Christian Ehler to the Commission

Subject: US illegal subsidies in the aircraft trade dispute

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-010871/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Use of the death penalty in Afghanistan

Versione italiana

English version

E-010872/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Erdoğan wants Ottoman Empire

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-010873/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Grapefruit and medication — potential risks for public health

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010874/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Cultural policy

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010875/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Amendment of the rules on occurrence reporting in civil aviation

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010876/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Intercultural dialogue — Integration models

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010877/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: European identity

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010878/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Consumer protection — quality and classification of diesel sold in the EU

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-010879/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Future evaluation of the EU Strategy on Health and Safety at Work 2007-2012

Versão portuguesa

English version

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010590/12

an die Kommission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(20. November 2012)

Betrifft: Internationale Regeln für den Einsatz von Drohnen

Analytiken  (1) schlagen vor, dass die EU darauf hinarbeiten sollte, internationale Regeln für den Einsatz unbemannter Fluggeräte (Drohnen) für Überwachungsmaßnahmen und gezielte Tötungen zu entwickeln, um einer Generalisierung durch weit gefasste US-amerikanische Regelungen vorzubeugen. Ein Arbeitsdokument der Kommission  (2) befasst sich mit der zivilen Nutzung von Drohnen. Einige ethische Aspekte, vor allem psychologische Effekte sowie Missbrauchsmöglichkeiten, finden darin allerdings keine Erwähnung  (3).

1.

Plant die Kommission, eine internationale Initiative zur Definition und Harmonisierung der Regeln für den Einsatz von Drohnen für zivile und nichtzivile Überwachungszwecke vorzuschlagen?

2.

Plant die Kommission, eine internationale Initiative zur Definition und Harmonisierung der Regeln für den Einsatz von Drohnen für Angriffshandlungen in und außerhalb von Konflikten vorzuschlagen?

Antwort von Herrn Tajani im Namen der Kommission

(24. Januar 2013)

Wie aus dem Arbeitspapier der Kommission hervorgeht, auf das sich der Herr Abgeordnete bezieht, leitet die Kommission derzeit die Ausarbeitung eines Fahrplans für die sichere Integration ferngesteuerter Luftfahrtsysteme (4) in den nicht reservierten Luftraum (der Luftverkehrskontrolle unterworfener Luftraum). Mit dieser Initiative ist die Entwicklung innovativer ziviler Anwendungen von RPAS möglich, wodurch Arbeitsplätze und Wachstum entstehen.

Ein sehr wichtiger Aspekt ist die Zahl der zivilen Anwendungen, die durch RPAS möglich sind. Sie steigt mit den in der Technologie erzielten Fortschritten, etwa in den Bereichen Grenzüberwachung, Rettungseinsatz und Umweltanwendungen.

Der Einsatz von RPAS für Überwachungszwecke muss im Einklang stehen mit den europäischen und einzelstaatlichen Gesetzen zum Schutz der Privatsphäre, persönlicher Daten und anderer Grundrechte. Für die Einhaltung dieser Vorschriften sind nach wie vor in erster Linie die Mitgliedstaaten verantwortlich. Allerdings plant die Kommission Maßnahmen, die dazu beitragen sollen, dass der Einsatz von RPAS im Einklang mit der geltenden Rechtsetzung steht. Die Kommission hat nicht die Absicht, Initiativen zur Definition internationaler Regeln für den Einsatz von RPAS zur Überwachung oder für Angriffshandlungen vorzuschlagen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010590/12

to the Commission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: International rules on the use of drones

Analysts (5) suggest that the EU should develop international rules on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) deployed in surveillance missions and targeted killings, in order to prevent broadly defined rules from the USA being put into general use. A Commission working document (6) deals with the civil applications of drones. However, that document does not mention some of the ethical issues involved, in particular psychological effects and potential abuse (7).

1.

Does the Commission plan to propose an international initiative on the definition and harmonisation of the rules on the use of drones for civil and non-civil surveillance purposes?

2.

Does the Commission plan to propose an international initiative on the definition and harmonisation of the rules on the use of drones for acts of aggression during conflicts and in non-conflict situations?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2013)

As mentioned in the Commission working document referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission is leading the preparation of a Roadmap for the safe integration of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (8) into the non-segregated airspace (airspace subject to air traffic control). This initiative will enable the development of innovative civil applications of RPAS, thus creating jobs and growth.

A very important aspect of RPAS pertains to the number of civil applications that RPAS could deliver which is growing in line with the progress of technology including frontier surveillance, rescue operations, environmental applications, etc.

RPAS used for surveillance purposes must comply with the European and national laws on the protection of privacy, personal data and other fundamental rights. Ensuring compliance with these rules remains predominantly the responsibility of the Member States. The Commission, however, plans to undertake actions to promote compliance of RPAS surveillance applications with the existing law. The Commission does not intend to propose initiatives to define international rules on the use of RPAS for surveillance or acts of aggression.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010591/12

au Conseil

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: TVA du lieu de résidence de l'internaute — vente des biens culturels

Le moins disant en matière de taxe sur la valeur ajoutée (TVA) est le Luxembourg avec son taux normal à 15 %, réduit à 12 % et 6 %, voire 3 % de super-taux réduit. Il est suivi par l'Irlande avec ses taux de 21 %, 13,5 % et 4,8 %, ainsi que par l'Espagne à 18 %, 8 % et 4 % ou le Royaume— Uni qui a pratiqué jusqu'en 2010 les taux attractifs de 17,5 % (passé à 20 % en 2011) et de 5 %. Pour la vente de biens culturels sur Internet, comme la musique en ligne ou la vidéo à la demande, voire le livre numérique, les États fiscalement attractifs n'hésitent pas à offrir leur taux réduit, ou super réduit, de TVA pour attirer les entreprises du Web.

1.

Le compromis luxembourgeois consistant à permettre à des États comme le Luxembourg de tout conserver jusqu'en 2015, année à partir de laquelle ils ne garderont plus que 30 % des recettes de TVA — le reste étant attribué au pays de résidence du consommateur — puis 15 % à partir de 2017, pour atteindre 0 % à partir de 2019 ne permet-il pas le maintien d'une concurrence déloyale pour des biens et des services vendus sur l'Internet sans frontières?

2.

La décision d'attendre 2019 pour que le principe de taxation au lieu de résidence de l'internaute ou du mobinaute puisse pleinement produire ses effets dans l'application de la TVA n'est-elle pas en opposition totale avec la ligne de la Commission européenne qui prône depuis 2000

«harmonisation, simplification et rationalisation» de la TVA?

3.

Enfin, cette décision prise par le Conseil à Luxembourg ne va-t-elle pas à l'encontre du marché unique dont nous sommes justement en train de fêter l'anniversaire?

Réponse

(18 février 2013)

Selon les règles établies par la directive 2008/8/CE du Conseil du 12 février 2008 modifiant la directive 2006/112/CE en ce qui concerne le lieu des prestations de services (9), le lieu d'imposition des services électroniques est le lieu où le preneur est établi. Ces règles seront applicables à partir du 1er janvier 2015.

Le partage des recettes évoqué par l'Honorable Parlementaire n'a aucune incidence sur la TVA due en application desdites règles, qui entreront pleinement en vigueur à la date susmentionnée.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010591/12

to the Council

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Charging VAT in the customer's country of residence on online sales of cultural goods

Luxembourg applies the lowest VAT rates, with a standard rate of 15%, reduced rates of 12% and 6% and even a super-reduced rate of 3%. Ireland (21%, 13.5% and 4.8%), Spain (18%, 8% and 4%) and the United Kingdom, which until 2010 offered very attractive rates of 17.5% (increased to 20% in 2010) and 5%, are the next lowest. When it comes to online sales of cultural goods, such as music, video on demand and even e-books, tax-friendly countries are not shy about offering reduced or even super-reduced VAT rates in order to attract Internet firms.

1.

The compromise reached in Luxembourg allows Member States such as Luxembourg to retain all VAT revenues until 2015, at which point their share will fall to 30%, with the remainder going to the consumer’s country of residence. In 2017, that share will fall still further, to 15%, and in 2019, to 0%.

Would the Council not agree that this compromise will allow unfair competition with regard to the sale of goods and services on the borderless Internet to continue?

2.

The decision was made to wait until 2019 for the principle of charging VAT at the online customer’s place of residence to come fully into effect. Is this decision not completely at odds with the

‘harmonisation, simplification and rationalisation’ approach the Commission has taken to VAT since 2000?

3.

Finally, does the decision taken by the Council in Luxembourg not run counter to the principles underpinning the single market, whose 20th anniversary we are celebrating this year?

Reply

(18 February 2013)

Council Directive 2008/8/EC of 12 February 2008 amending Directive 2006/112/EC as regards the place of supply of services (10) lays down rules on the taxation of electronic services at the place where the customer is established. These rules will be applicable as from 1 January 2015.

The revenue sharing referred to by the Honourable Member does not affect the VAT payable under those rules, which will come fully into effect on that date.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010592/12

au Conseil

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: Subvention de l'UE aux pays ACP

Depuis trois ans, les pays ACP attendent toujours les subventions de l'Union européenne (190 millions d'euros).

Les fonds européens à répartir pour la période 2010-2013 à un groupe de 10 pays ACP dont la Côte d'Ivoire, le Cameroun et le Ghana, les trois plus grands producteurs de banane africains, avaient été annoncés après un accord de commercialisation conclu le 15 décembre 2009 à Genève en Suisse entre la Commission européenne et les pays latino-américains.

Côté africain, malgré le maintien d'un tarif douanier à taux zéro pour 10 pays ACP, cette révision de régime commercial est perçue comme le début de la perte des privilèges accordés par l'UE.

Selon certains dirigeants des pays concernés, la nouvelle subvention de l'UE se fait attendre à cause des divergences, entre autres, au sein du Conseil européen.

Quelle est la position du Conseil sur ce dossier?

Réponse

(4 février 2013)

Les mesures d'accompagnement dans le secteur de la banane (MAB) ont fait l'objet d'une proposition de la Commission le 17 mars 2010. La Commission a proposé de modifier le règlement portant établissement d'un instrument de financement de la coopération au développement (ICD)  (11) en vue d'y intégrer le programme sous la forme d'un article additionnel.

Les MAB ont pour objectif de lutter contre la pauvreté. Elles soutiendront les processus d'adaptation à l'érosion des marges de préférence des États ACP producteurs de bananes grâce à un budget de 190 millions d'euros répartis entre dix pays. Cet instrument aura à l'évidence un impact sur les conditions de vie et de travail des cultivateurs et des personnes concernées et améliorera la résilience sociale. Les MAB répondent également à des préoccupations environnementales.

L'adoption des MAB est le résultat d'un long processus qui s'est achevé en décembre 2011, moment auquel le Conseil a terminé ses travaux sur ce dossier. Le Conseil européen n'y a pas été associé.

Depuis lors, la Commission a pris les mesures nécessaires pour lancer la phase de programmation des MAB.

Les stratégies d'assistance pluriannuelles pour chacun des dix pays bénéficiaires ont été approuvées par les États membres lors de la réunion du comité ICD du 19 septembre 2012. De même, les plans d'action annuels ont été approuvés par les États membres lors de la réunion du comité ICD du 7 novembre 2012.

Le Conseil ne doute pas que la Commission aura à cœur de mettre les MAB en œuvre dans les meilleurs délais.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010592/12

to the Council

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: EU grant to the ACP countries

The ACP countries have been awaiting grants from the European Union (190 million euros).

European funds to be allocated for the period 2010-2013 to a group of 10 ACP countries including the Ivory Coast, Cameroon and Ghana, the three largest banana producers in Africa, were announced after a trade agreement on 15 December 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland between the European Commission and the Latin American Countries.

On the African side, despite maintaining a zero tariff rate for 10 ACP countries, this revision of the trade regime is perceived as the first step towards losing privileges granted by the EU.

According to some leaders of the countries concerned, the new EU grant has been delayed, by disagreements, including within the European Council.

What is the Council’s position on this matter?

Reply

(4 February 2013)

The Banana Accompanying Measures (BAM) were proposed by the Commission on 17 March 2010. The Commission proposed to amend the regulation establishing the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) (12) in order to integrate the programme in the form of an additional article.

The objective of the BAM is to fight poverty. The BAM will support processes of adaptation to the erosion of the preference margins of ACP banana producers with a budget of EUR 190 million for ten beneficiary countries. This instrument will have a clear impact on the living and working conditions of farmers and persons concerned and will improve social resilience. The BAM also address environmental concerns.

The adoption of the BAM was a lengthy process that concluded in December 2011, which marked the end of work in the Council on that issue. The European Council was not involved.

Since then, the Commission has taken the necessary steps to launch the BAM programming phase.

The Multiannual Support Strategies for each of the ten beneficiary countries were approved by the Member States at the DCI Committee meeting of 19 September 2012. Similarly, the Annual Action Plans were approved by the Member States at the DCI Committee meeting of 7 November 2012.

The Council is confident that the Commission will pursue the timely implementation of the BAM.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010593/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: Financement Erasmus en péril

Alors que l'absence de mobilité des salariés d'Europe est pointée du doigt, celle des étudiants pourrait connaître un brusque arrêt.

Plus de 100 personnalités européennes du monde de l'éducation, de l'art, de la littérature, de l'économie, de la philosophie et des sports ont signé une lettre ouverte en soutien au programme d'échange d'étudiants Erasmus.

Parmi les signataires originaires de tous les États membres de l'Union Européenne, on compte le réalisateur espagnol Pedro Almodovar, le président du FC Barcelone Sandro Rosell, le lauréat du prix Nobel d'économie Christopher Pissarides. En Belgique, Axelle Red, Kevin et Jonathan Borlée et Lien Van de Kelder se sont mobilisés.

Une bonne éducation est fondamentale car notre jeunesse se prépare à vivre dans un monde en mutation accélérée, et de plus en plus mobile, interdépendant et multiculturel. Le programme Erasmus risque d'accuser un déficit de 90 millions d'euros cette année et la situation pourrait empirer en 2013. Si les budgets 2012 et 2013 de l'UE ne sont pas suffisants, le nombre de places disponibles ainsi que les bourses pourraient se voir fortement réduits. Un nouveau programme de financement appelé «Erasmus pour tous», étendra, à partir de 2014, les avantages du programme actuel à des millions d'autres jeunes Européens. Il coûterait moins de 2 % du budget total de l'Union.

1.

Des rencontres sont-elles prévues avec les États membres pour boucler le financement?

2.

La Commission a-t-elle un plan B en cas de refus de la part des États? La France, le Royaume-Uni, l'Allemagne, la Finlande, la Suède, les Pays-Bas et l'Autriche ont refusé de financer le budget présenté par la Commission européenne pour l'année 2013, qui s'élève à 138 milliards d'euros.

3.

Si la Commission n'obtient pas l'argent demandé, concrètement, quelles seront les conséquences? Sur quels domaines en particulier vont peser ces restrictions budgétaires?

Réponse donnée par Mme Vassiliou au nom de la Commission

(17 janvier 2013)

Le 23 octobre 2012, la Commission européenne a demandé au Conseil et au Parlement européen, en leur qualité d'autorité budgétaire, de voter un budget supplémentaire de 9 milliards d'euros pour des paiements. L'objectif était de faire correspondre plus étroitement les crédits de paiement et le niveau des engagements déjà votés par l'autorité budgétaire dans le cadre du budget 2012. La Commission a, en particulier, demandé 180 millions d'euros supplémentaires pour le programme pour l'éducation et la formation tout au long de la vie afin de garantir que les besoins en paiements soient couverts jusqu'à la fin de l'année. La part représentée par Erasmus a été estimée à 90 millions d'euros. Ce projet de budget rectificatif n° 6/2012 peut être consulté à l'adresse suivante: (http://ec.europa.eu/budget/biblio/documents/2012/2012_fr.cfm).

L'autorité budgétaire ayant récemment donné son accord sur le budget rectificatif n° 6/2012 (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/fr/ecofin/134128.pdf) et la Commission ayant adopté, le 23 novembre 2012, le projet de budget 2013 révisé, la menace immédiate est écartée.

La Commission continue d'engager l'autorité budgétaire à soutenir ses propositions concernant une augmentation notable des investissements en faveur de l'éducation et de la formation dans le cadre financier pluriannuel 2014-2020.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010593/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Funding for Erasmus under threat

While the issue of the lack of labour mobility in Europe has drawn attention, student mobility is in danger of coming to an abrupt halt.

More than 100 prominent Europeans from the worlds of education, the arts, literature, economics, philosophy and sport have signed an open letter in support of the Erasmus student exchange programme.

The signatories, who come from all EU Member States, include Spanish film director Pedro Almodóvar, the president of FC Barcelona, Sandro Rosell and the winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics, Christopher Pissarides. In Belgium, Axelle Red, Kevin and Jonathan Borlée, and Lien Van de Kelder have also rallied to the cause.

A good education is vital, as Europe’s youth will have to live in a rapidly changing world which is increasingly mobile, interdependent and multicultural. The Erasmus programme is likely to record a EUR 90 million deficit this year, and the situation could get worse in 2013. If the EU budgets for 2012 and 2013 are insufficient, the number of places and grants available could be heavily reduced. A new funding programme entitled ‘Erasmus for all’ could extend the current programme to cover millions of additional young Europeans from 2014 and would account for less than 2% of the total EU budget.

1.

Are meetings to be held with the Member States with a view to ensuring that sufficientfunding is available?

2.

Does the Commission have a plan B to fall back on if some Member States are unwilling to cooperate? France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Austria have all refused to fund the budget for 2013 proposed by the Commission, which covers a total of EUR 138 billion.

3.

What will the precise consequences be if the Commission fails to secure the funds requested? Which areas will be hardest hit by budget cuts?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2013)

On 23 October 2012 the European Commission asked the Council and the European Parliament as the Budgetary Authority to vote for an additional budget of EUR 9 billion for payments. This was so that the available payment credits more closely correspond to the level of commitments already voted for by the Budgetary Authority in the 2012 budget. In particular, the Commission requested an additional EUR 180 million for the Lifelong Learning Programme to ensure payment needs could be met until the end of the year. The share for Erasmus was estimated at EUR 90 Million. This Draft Amending Budget 6/12 can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/budget/biblio/documents/2012/2012_en.cfm.

With the recent agreement by the Budgetary Authority (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/134073.pdf) on the Amending Budget 6/2012 and the revised Draft budget 2013 adopted by the Commission on 23 November 2012, the immediate threat has been averted.

The Commission continues to urge the Budgetary Authority to support its proposals for a significant increase in investment for education and training in the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010596/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: TIC plus écologiques

Les technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC) deviennent un élément incontournable de la vie courante. Les entreprises et les consommateurs exigent en effet des informations et des systèmes en ligne toujours plus rapides.

Un nouveau problème est donc apparu: la durabilité des TIC. Les émissions de ce secteur sont désormais comparables à celles du secteur de l'aviation, réglementées à l'échelle européenne.

Les investissements dans les TIC devraient doubler d'ici à 2020 dans l'Union européenne pour répondre à la demande croissante des consommateurs friands de services en ligne.

Ce phénomène devrait cependant avoir des répercussions sur l'environnement en termes de consommation d'électricité et d'émissions de dioxyde de carbone.

Si aucune mesure n'est prise, les émissions de dioxyde de carbone du secteur des TIC devraient passer de 530 millions de tonnes d'équivalent CO2 en 2002 à 1,43 milliard en 2020, selon un rapport de la Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI), un consortium de sociétés de pointe dans le secteur des TIC.

1.

Quelle est la position européenne sur les TIC?

2.

Une législation spécifique ne devrait-elle pas être adoptée pour ce secteur?

Réponse donnée par Mme Kroes au nom de la Commission

(17 janvier 2013)

Les TIC offrent la possibilité de réduire la consommation d'énergie et les émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans d'autres secteurs, par exemple par la dématérialisation physique de biens et services physiques. Les systèmes en ligne ont cependant leur propre empreinte écologique qui va augmenter fortement au cours des années à venir.

La Commission a donné la priorité à la transparence de l'empreinte écologique du secteur. Dans le cadre de la stratégie numérique pour l'Europe, elle a invité le secteur des TIC à établir un cadre méthodologique pour déterminer ses empreintes énergétique et carbone. Des normes ont depuis lors été élaborées par l'UIT, l'ETSI et la CEI et pilotées par plus de 25 entreprises du secteur des TIC. En parallèle, une évaluation d'impact analyse des mesures de suivi.

Il existe une législation ciblée concernant les phases de conception/production, d'utilisation et d'élimination des produits TIC. Des exigences en matière d'écoconception ont été fixées concernant la consommation d'énergie de certains appareils tels que les téléviseurs, et des normes minimales ont été élaborées, par exemple pour la consommation en mode veille des appareils électroménagers et des équipements de bureau. Des mesures supplémentaires sont en préparation pour les ordinateurs et les serveurs informatiques. L'impact environnemental de la phase de production pour les produits TIC nécessite d'apporter une plus grande attention à l'utilisation rationnelle des matières (par exemple, durabilité, possibilités de démonter/recycler) dans les exigences en matière d'écoconception ou dans les accords volontaires. Pendant la phase d'utilisation, le label EnergyStar permet aux consommateurs de repérer les produits TIC qui sont particulièrement économes en énergie. Enfin, la directive relative aux déchets d'équipements électriques et électroniques (DEEE) refondue portera à 85 % le taux de récupération des équipements TIC en phase de fin de vie, ce qui améliorera l'efficacité de leur réutilisation ou de leur recyclage.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010596/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Greener ICTs

Information and telecommunications technologies (ICTs) are becoming a key part of everyday life. Enterprises and consumers are demanding ever quicker information and on‐line systems.

This has raised the new issue of ICT sustainability. Emissions in this sector are now comparable to those in the aviation sector, which are regulated at EU‐level.

Investment in ICTs is set to double between now and 2020 in the EU in order to meet consumers’ insatiable demand for on‐line services.

However, this will have repercussions for the environment in terms of electricity consumption and carbon dioxide emissions.

According to a report by a consortium of leading‐edge ICT companies, the ‘Global e‐Sustainability Initiative’ (GeSI), carbon dioxide emissions in the ICT sector will have increased from 530 million tonnes CO2 equivalent in 2002 to 1.43 billion tonnes by 2020.

1.

What is the EU’s position on ICTs?

2.

Should targeted legislation not be adopted for this sector?

Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2013)

ICTs have the potential to reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions in other sectors, e.g. through dematerialisation of goods and physical services. However, online systems also have their own environmental footprint which will strongly increase over the next years.

The Commission has prioritised transparency around the sector's environmental footprint. As part of the Digital Agenda for Europe, it called on industry to establish a methodological framework to capture the energy and carbon footprints of ICT. Standards have since been developed by the ITU, ETSI and IEC and piloted by more than 25 ICT companies. In parallel, an impact assessment is analysing follow-up measures.

Targeted legislation exists concerning the design/production, use and waste phases of ICT products. Eco-design requirements addressing energy consumption of specific devices such at televisions, and minimum standards, e.g. for standby consumption of household and office equipment, have been set Additional measures on computers and computer servers are being prepared. The environmental impact of the production phase for ICT products necessitates more attention to material efficiency (e.g. durability, dismantlability/recyclability) in Ecodesign requirements or voluntary agreements. In the use phase the EnergyStar label allows consumers to identify ICT products that are particularly energy-efficient. Finally, the recast WEEE Directive will boost collection rates of ICT equipment at the end-of-life phase to 85% enabling its more effective re-use or recycling.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010597/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: TVA du lieu de résidence de l'internaute — vente des biens culturels

Le moins-disant en matière de taxe sur la valeur ajoutée (TVA) est le Luxembourg avec son taux normal de 15 %, réduit à 12 %, 6 %, voire 3 % de taux super-réduit. Il est suivi par l'Irlande avec ses taux de 21 %, 13,5 % et 4,8 %, ainsi que par l'Espagne avec 18 %, 8 % et 4 % ou le Royaume-Uni, qui a pratiqué jusqu'en 2010 les taux attractifs de 17,5 % (passé à 20 % en 2011) et de 5 %. Pour la vente de biens culturels sur l'internet, comme la musique en ligne ou la vidéo à la demande, voire le livre numérique, les États fiscalement attractifs n'hésitent pas à offrir leur taux réduit de TVA ou leur taux super-réduit pour attirer les entreprises du web.

1.

Ne s'agit-il pas là d'un cas de concurrence déloyale pour des biens et des services vendus sur l'internet sans frontières?

2.

La décision d'attendre 2019 pour que le principe de taxation au lieu de résidence de l'internaute ou du mobinaute puisse pleinement produire ses effets dans l'application de la TVA n'est-elle pas caduque?

3.

Le compromis luxembourgeois permettant à des États comme le Luxembourg de tout conserver jusqu'en 2015, année à partir de laquelle ils ne garderont plus que 30 % des recettes de TVA — le reste étant attribué au pays de résidence du consommateur —, puis 15 % à partir de 2017, pour atteindre 0 % à partir de 2019, est il acceptable par la Commission européenne? La Commission est-elle sur la même ligne?

4.

Depuis 2000, les différents commissaires qui se sont succédé ont mis en haut de leur liste de priorités

«l'harmonisation, la simplification et la rationalisation de la TVA». Cette décision ne va-t-elle pas à l'encontre de cette citation?

5.

Ce marché de l'Union européenne est-il par conséquent moins unique?

Réponse donnée par M. Šemeta au nom de la Commission

(14 janvier 2013)

1. 4. et 5.

La dernière étape en date du processus qui vise à

 (13)  (14)

1. 4. et 5.

La dernière étape en date du processus qui vise à

2. et 3.

Les règles de taxation au lieu de prestation des services électroniques ont été adoptées en 2008 dans le cadre du paquet TVA

1. 4. et 5.

La dernière étape en date du processus qui vise à

«harmoniser, simplifier et rationaliser le régime de TVA» a été l'adoption, le 6 décembre 2011 (13), d'une communication sur la voie à suivre pour parvenir à un système de TVÀ plus simple, plus robuste et plus efficace, adapté au marché unique. À titre de suivi, la Commission a récemment lancé une consultation publique sur le réexamen de la législation existante sur les taux réduits de TVA (14). Le problème de la distorsion de la concurrence est posé dans la première question de cette consultation. À la lumière des informations dont ils disposent actuellement, les services de la Commission recherchent des éléments de preuve relatifs à toute situation concrète dans laquelle l'application d'un taux réduit par un ou plusieurs États membres sur certaines livraisons de biens ou prestations de services se traduit effectivement par une distorsion de concurrence notable au sein du marché unique.

2. et 3.

Les règles de taxation au lieu de prestation des services électroniques ont été adoptées en 2008 dans le cadre du paquet TVA

 (15). Cette modification prendra effet le 1er janvier 2015. La Commission prend toutes les mesures en son pouvoir afin que l'entrée en vigueur de ces nouvelles règles se déroule dans de bonnes conditions. Étant donné que la date prévue pour ce changement du lieu d'imposition n'a été adoptée par le Conseil que dans le cadre d'un compromis global, et compte tenu du temps nécessaire pour que les entreprises et les administrations fiscales se préparent à ce changement, il ne serait pas envisageable d'avancer la date de son entrée en vigueur. Le partage des recettes de TVA, d'ici 2019, entre l'État membre d'identification et l'État membre de consommation fait partie de ce compromis. Dans la mesure où il ne remet pas en cause le principe actuel de taxation au lieu de destination, au taux et aux conditions de l'État membre du preneur à partir de 2015, la Commission ne s'est pas opposée à ce compromis et n'a pas non plus d'objection à émettre à son égard.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010597/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Charging VAT in the customer's country of residence on online sales of cultural goods

Luxembourg applies the lowest VAT rates, with a standard rate of 15%, reduced rates of 12% and 6% and even a super-reduced rate of 3%. Ireland (21%, 13.5% and 4.8%), Spain (18%, 8% and 4%) and the United Kingdom, which until 2010 offered very attractive rates of 17.5% (increased to 20% in 2010) and 5%, are the next lowest. When it comes to online sales of cultural goods, such as music, video on demand and even e-books, tax-friendly countries are not shy about offering reduced or even super-reduced VAT rates in order to attract Internet firms.

1.

Does the Commission agree that this is an instance of unfair competition, in that different rules are being applied to goods and services purchased online?

2.

The decision was made to wait until 2019 for the principle of charging VAT at the online customer’s place of residence to come fully into effect. Does the Commission think that this decision was realistic?

3.

The compromise reached in Luxembourg allows Member States such as Luxembourg to retain all VAT revenues until 2015, at which point their share will fall to 30%, with the remainder going to the consumer’s country of residence. In 2017, that share will fall still further, to 15%, and in 2019, to 0%. Does the Commission consider the compromise to be acceptable? Does it support it?

4.

Since 2000, the EU's various Taxation Commissioners have said that ‘harmonising, simplifying and rationalising VAT arrangements’ is at the top of their list of priorities. Does the aforementioned decision not run counter to this statement?

5.

Can we therefore talk about a single market in the online cultural goods sector?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2013)

1, 4 and 5. The latest step in the process that aims at ‘harmonising, simplifying and rationalising VAT arrangements’ was the adoption on 6 December 2011 (16) of a communication on the way forward to achieve a simpler, more robust and efficient VAT system adapted to the single market. As a follow-up, the Commission recently launched a public consultation concerning the review of existing legislation on VAT reduced rates (17). The issue of distortion of competition is raised in the first question of this consultation. In the light of the information currently at its disposal, the Commission’s services seek evidence of any concrete situations where the application of a reduced rate on certain supplies by one or more Member States is effectively resulting in a material distortion of competition within the single market.

2 and 3. The rules of taxation at the place of the customer of electronic services were adopted in 2008 as part of the VAT Package (18). This change will take place on 1 January 2015. The Commission is taking all measures in its power to ensure the smooth entry into force of these new rules. Given that the date for this shift in taxation was only agreed by the Council as part of an overall compromise, and considering the time needed for businesses and tax administrations to prepare for this change, an earlier entry into force would not be feasible. Sharing VAT revenues up until 2019 between the Member State of identification and the Member States of consumption was part of that compromise. As this does not affect the principle of taxation at destination, at the rate and under the conditions of the Member State of the customer as from 2015, the Commission did not oppose this compromise nor does it have any objections to it.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010598/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: Lois européennes sur les véhicules électriques

Pour jouer son rôle et limiter le réchauffement climatique à 2 °C, l'Union européenne s'est engagée à réduire ses émissions de carbone de 80 à 95 % d'ici 2050 par rapport aux niveaux de 1990.

Dans le secteur des transports, cet objectif se traduit par une réduction de 70 % des émissions de gaz à effet de serre, selon les chiffres de 2008.Les voitures électriques représentent le moyen le plus rentable de réduire à long terme les émissions de CO2 des transports et, si le marché européen en plein essor continue de doubler chaque année, ces véhicules représenteront 3 à 4 % des ventes de voitures d'ici 2020.

De plus, en tant que député européen socialiste, je suis très sensible au fait que ce secteur est générateur de nouveaux emplois dans le secteur automobile, notamment en raison de la combinaison de technologies qui devront être produites, distribuées et réparées.

1.

Comment se positionne la Commission sur les mesures prises en Norvège et plus récemment en France et visant à aider les constructeurs automobiles en difficulté à acquérir une part importante du marché naissant des véhicules électriques?

Pour rappel, la Norvège, pays producteur de pétrole, a établi une loi permettant aux véhicules électriques de rouler sur les voies de bus et de bénéficier de places de parking et de bornes de recharge gratuites en centre ville.

La France, elle, va:

faire passer les bonus écologiques à l'achat de voitures électriques de 5 000 à 7 000 euros,

doubler les subventions aux voitures hybrides comme celles proposées par PSA Peugeot Citroën, qui passeront de 2 000 à 4 000 euros,

imposer des amendes aux véhicules polluants,

introduire une obligation de remplacer 25 % du parc automobile du gouvernement par des voitures électriques,

développer rapidement les infrastructures de rechargement électrique dans le pays.

La Commission ne devrait-elle pas élaborer une série de mesures visant à promouvoir sa vision d'une croissance soutenue pour le secteur des voitures électriques?

Réponse donnée par M. Tajani au nom de la Commission

(22 janvier 2013)

L'UE a pris l'initiative de réduire significativement ses émissions de gaz à effet de serre et convient que l'électro mobilité est une technologie prometteuse pour limiter les émissions de gaz à effet de serre imputables aux transports. Toutefois, la Commission pose sur le sujet un regard neutre d'un point de vue technologique et pense que plusieurs technologies de propulsion contribueront à atteindre les objectifs de réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. En particulier, les véhicules classiques disposent encore d'un grand potentiel de développement en matière d'efficacité énergétique et donc de réduction de leurs émissions de CO2. C'est dans cet esprit que la Commission a proposé des objectifs d'émissions de CO2 pour la période 2012-2015 et pour 2020, qui ont été adoptés par le Parlement européen et le Conseil (19). Récemment, des propositions ont été faites à propos des modalités permettant d'atteindre les objectifs de 2020 pour les voitures particulières et les camionnettes (20).

En ce qui concerne les véhicules électriques, leur véritable incidence sur les émissions de CO2 dépend des modes de production de l'électricité (bouquet énergétique) et de la présence de réseaux intelligents permettant de recharger les véhicules sans faire augmenter la demande en électricité produite à partir de combustibles fossiles.

Si les véhicules électriques offrent bien des solutions de mobilité à faibles émissions de carbone, leur taux de pénétration sur le marché demeure actuellement très faible. Les prévisions du marché varient, mais la majorité des experts s'accordent à dire que leur diffusion sur le marché va augmenter d'ici 2020 et ainsi ouvrir certainement des possibilités de création d'emplois. La Commission soutient le développement et le déploiement des véhicules électriques grâce à sa stratégie pour des véhicules propres et économes en énergie adoptée en 2010 (21) et plus récemment grâce au plan d'action CARS 2020 (22).

Les actions entreprises à l'échelle européenne sont complétées par les mesures déployées au niveau national et par des initiatives telles que celles mentionnées par l'Honorable Parlementaire.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010598/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: EU legislation on electric vehicles

In order to play its part in limiting global warming to 2°C, the European Union has undertaken to cut carbon emissions by 80 to 95% by 2050 as compared to 1990 levels.

In the transport sector, on the basis of the figures for 2008, that target implies reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 70%. Electric cars are the most cost‐effective way of reducing transport CO2 emissions in the long term and, if sales on the burgeoning EU market continue to double every year, such vehicles will account for 3 to 4% of all car sales by 2020.

Moreover, as a Socialist MEP, I am keenly aware of the fact that this sector generates new jobs in the automobile industry, not least owing to the combination of technologies that would have to be produced, distributed and repaired.

1.

What is the Commission’s position on the measures taken in Norway and more recently in France to help car makers in difficulty to acquire a significant market share in the new electric vehicle market?

By way of reminder, Norway, which is an oil producing country, has passed a law that allows electric vehicles to use bus lanes and free parking spaces and recharging points in city centres.

France, for its part, is going to:

increase eco‐bonuses for the purchase of electric vehicles from EUR 5 000 to EUR 7 000;

double the subsidies for hybrid vehicles, such as those proposed by PSA Peugeot Citroën, from EUR 2 000 to EUR 4 000;

impose fines on polluting vehicles;

introduce the requirement to replace 25% of the government’s car fleet with electric cars;

swiftly install electric recharging facilities across the country.

Should the Commission not be developing a set of measures to promote its vision of sustainable growth for the electric car sector?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2013)

The EU has taken the initiative to significantly reduce its greenhouse gas (23) emissions and agrees that, concerning the GHG emissions from transport, electro-mobility is a promising technology. The Commission is however looking at this from a technology-neutral perspective and believes that several propulsion technologies will contribute to reaching the GHG emission targets. Notably, conventional vehicles still have a considerable potential of increasing their energy efficiency and hence reducing their CO2 emissions. In that spirit, the Commission proposed CO2 emission targets for 2012-2015 and 2020, which have been adopted by the European Parliament and the Council (24). Recently, the modalities for reaching the 2020 CO2 targets for passenger cars and vans have been proposed (25).

As regards electric vehicles, the real impact on CO2 emissions depends on the modalities of electricity production (energy mix) and the availability of smart grids allowing recharging without increasing the demand for electricity generated from fossil fuels.

While electric vehicles offer the possibility of low-carbon mobility, their market penetration is currently very low. Market forecasts vary but the majority of experts agree that their market penetration will increase by 2020 and certainly, this will offer opportunities for job creation. The Commission is supporting the development and deployment of electric vehicles with its strategy on clean and energy efficient vehicles adopted in 2010 (26) and more recently with the CARS 2020 Action Plan (27).

The actions at EU level are complemented by actions at national level and initiatives such as the ones mentioned by the Honourable Member.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010600/12

alla Commissione

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(20 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Imposte IVIE e IMU in contrasto con l'ordinamento comunitario

Il governo italiano ha recentemente introdotto le imposte IVIE e IMU sul valore degli immobili che i cittadini italiani detengono in Italia e/o all'estero. Per determinare la base imponibile, la normativa prevede che si utilizzi il valore catastale dell'immobile stesso. Per gli immobili siti in paesi dell'Unione europea nei quali tale «valore catastale» non sia determinato né determinabile, la normativa prevede che l'imponibile IVIE sia determinato in base al valore d'acquisto o al valore di mercato del bene.

Poiché il valore catastale italiano, per ragioni interne allo Stato stesso, risulta normalmente inferiore, anche in maniera rilevante, sia rispetto al valore di acquisto che al valore di mercato dell'immobile, agli immobili esteri si applica, di fatto, un criterio di imposizione fiscale più oneroso ed iniquo, evidentemente in contrasto con l'esercizio della libera circolazione dei capitali.

Infatti, l'investimento in beni immobili in altri paesi dell'Unione europea risulta, alla luce di quanto sopra esposto, svantaggioso rispetto all'investimento di beni immobili in Italia. Non ritiene la Commissione che l'imposta IVIE sia quindi contraria ai principi comunitari e, nello specifico, all'articolo 63 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea?

Risposta di Algirdas Šemeta a nome della Commissione

(10 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione desidera informare l’onorevole parlamentare che essa ha già iniziato ad analizzare la conformità dell’imposta sul valore degli immobili situati all’estero [IVIE] (procedura amministrativa EU Pilot n. 3506/2012) con la normativa dell’UE. In questo contesto, sono stati sollevati alcuni dubbi circa la sua compatibilità con il diritto dell’UE e in particolare con l’articolo 63 del TFUE.

Nella loro risposta le autorità italiane si sono impegnate a modificare diversi aspetti delle disposizioni attualmente in vigore. In attesa dell’adozione definitiva di queste modifiche, prevista entro la fine dell’anno, la Commissione si riserva il diritto alla valutazione finale.

Qualora dovessero permanere delle incompatibilità, la Commissione intende avviare una procedura di infrazione a norma dell’articolo 258 del TFUE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010600/12

to the Commission

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: IVIE and IMU taxes contrary to Community law

The Italian Government has recently introduced the IVIE [tax on the value of foreign property] and IMU [single municipal tax] on the value of property owned by Italian citizens in Italy and/or abroad. The legislation provides that the rateable value of the property should be used to determine the taxable amount. For property in EU countries in which there is no ‘rateable value’ and it is therefore impossible to determine the rateable value, the law provides that IVIE is to be charged on the purchase price or market value of the property.

Since, for reasons internal to the Italian State, rateable values in Italy are usually lower, by a significant margin, than both the purchase price and the market value of property, this means that foreign property is in fact taxed more heavily, and unfairly, which is obviously contrary to the free movement of capital.

In view of the above, it is thus less profitable to invest in property in other EU countries than in Italy. Does the Commission not think that IVIE is thus against Community principles, specifically Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2013)

The Commission would like to inform the honourable MEP that the Commission has already started to analyse the EU conformity of the tax on the value of foreign immovable property [IVIE] (administrative procedure EU Pilot 3506/2012). In this context, some doubts concerning its compatibility with EC law and namely with Article 63 of TFEU have been raised.

In their reply the Italian authorities committed to amend several aspects of the provisions currently in force. Awaiting the final adoption of these amendments, normally foreseen by the end of the year, the Commission reserves its final assessment.

Should any incompatibility persist, the Commission will open an infringement procedure under Article 258 TFUE.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010601/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(20 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Deroga al patto di stabilità per fronteggiare l'emergenza maltempo in Veneto

L'11 novembre scorso, a soli due anni dalla precedente devastante alluvione, il Nord Italia è stato colpito da una forte ondata di maltempo che ha causato danni ingenti, sfiorando la catastrofe umana, sociale ed economica in Veneto, Toscana, Liguria e molte altre zone.

Il Veneto, in particolare, è stato duramente colpito. Abitazioni private, scuole, edifici pubblici d'importanza storica, ponti, strade e, inevitabilmente, anche imprese e aziende agricole sono stati gravemente danneggiati.

Considerando la necessità e l'urgenza di interventi concreti per affrontare il dissesto idrogeologico del territorio in Veneto e nel Nord Italia, quale unica via percorribile e logica per fronteggiare questa emergenze e scongiurarne di future, si chiede alla Commissione:

una deroga al patto di stabilità, che dia la possibilità agli enti locali di investire nuove risorse per la messa in sicurezza del territorio,

l'introduzione di norme semplificate volte a permettere una rapida riassegnazione dei fondi europei già assegnati all'Italia nell'ambito della programmazione 2007-2013, ma non ancora spesi.

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(25 gennaio 2013)

Conformemente al Patto di stabilità e crescita, nella relazione della Commissione, che deve essere preparata prima di prendere la decisione di avviare una procedura per i disavanzi eccessivi nei confronti di uno Stato membro, si deve tener conto degli investimenti pubblici. Uno Stato membro viene inserito in una procedura per disavanzi eccessivi se il suo debito supera il 60 % del Prodotto interno lordo e il suo deficit supera il 3 % del Prodotto interno lordo, a meno che il superamento non sia di piccola entità e temporaneo.

Come delineato nel suo Piano per un'unione economica autentica e approfondita, la Commissione esaminerà le modalità per conciliare gli investimenti con l'aspetto preventivo del Patto di stabilità e crescita.

La riassegnazione rapida dei fondi dell'UE è già possibile in base alle modalità di attuazione dei programmi dei Fondi europei. La Commissione è sempre pronta a discutere una simile riassegnazione di fondi con gli Stati membri e le regioni.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010601/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Exemption from the Stability Pact to deal with the emergency caused by storms in the Veneto region

On 11 November, only two years after the last devastating floods, northern Italy was again struck by severe storms; the Veneto region, Tuscany, Liguria and many other areas suffered enormous damage, amounting to a virtual human, social and economic catastrophe.

The Veneto was particularly hard hit. Serious damage was caused to homes, schools, historic public buildings, bridges, roads and, of course, farms and businesses.

Given that practical measures are urgently needed to cope with hydrogeological instability in the Veneto region and northern Italy, will the Commission take the only logical and feasible course to cope with the emergency and prevent further disasters in future, which is to:

allow an exemption from the Stability Pact to enable local authorities to invest new resources to make the ground safe,

simplify the rules to allow speedy reallocation of European funds already earmarked for Italy in the 2007-2013 programming period, but not yet spent.

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 2013)

According to the Stability and Growth Pact, public investments are taken into account in the Commission report to be prepared before a decision is taken to place a Member State in Excessive Deficit Procedure. .A Member State will be placed in Excessive Deficit Procedure if its debt breaches 60% of gross domestic product and its deficit breaches 3% of gross domestic product, unless the breach is small and temporary.

As set out in its Blueprint for a deep and genuine economic and monetary union, the Commission will explore ways to accommodate investments within the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact.

The speedy reallocation of EU funding is already possible due to the way that EU funding programmes are implemented. The Commission is always ready to discuss such reallocation of funding with Member States and regions.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-010602/12

do Komisji

Ryszard Antoni Legutko (ECR)

(20 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Zalecenie usunięcia z monety euro (Słowacja) symboli religijnych

18 listopada br. rzeczniczka Narodowego Banku Słowackiego poinformowała, że Komisja Europejska zaleciła usunięcie z projektu monety o nominale dwóch euro z wizerunkami świętych Cyryla i Metodego krzyży na ich ornatach oraz aureol. Działania Narodowego Banku Słowacji miały na celu upamiętnienie 1150 rocznicy przybycia obu świętych na Morawy. Wizyta ta w sposób bezsporny zaważyła na dalszej historii tej części Europy.

W związku z powyższym bardzo proszę o odpowiedź na pytanie: dlaczego Komisja nie respektuje chrześcijańskich tradycji Europy?

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-010603/12

do Komisji

Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)

(20 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Kwestionowanie słowackiego projektu monety 2 euro

Dostosowując się do zaleceń Komisji Europejskiej, Słowacja usunęła z projektu monety o nominale 2 euro krzyż na ornamentach świętych Cyryla i Metodego oraz aureole nad ich głowami. Według doniesień prasowych stało się to na życzenie „niektórych państw członkowskich”. W związku z powyższym chcę zapytać Komisję:

Które państwa członkowskie domagały się usunięcia krzyża i aureoli z projektu słowackiej monety?

Czy Komisja uważa, że krzyż jest elementem, który powinien być wyeliminowany z przestrzeni publicznej w Unii Europejskiej?

Czy Komisja kwestionuje prawo Kościoła Katolickiego do nadawania świętości poszczególnym osobom?

Czy Komisja kwestionuje wkład chrześcijaństwa w kulturę europejską, cywilizacje zachodnią oraz podstawy, na których wyrosła Wspólnota Europejska?

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-010893/12

do Komisji

Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD)

(29 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Usunięcie symboli religijnych ze słowackich monet euro

W ostatnim tygodniu media podały bulwersującą informację dotyczącą zalecenia usunięcia symboli krzyża oraz aureoli ze słowackich monet euro. Zalecenie to wydane zostało przez Komisję Europejską. Według słów rzecznika Komisja podjęła decyzję pod wpływem nacisków niektórych krajów europejskich.

Które kraje europejskie zażądały usunięcia znaków krzyża oraz aureoli?

W

jaki sposób Komisja Europejska zamierza propagować chrześcijańskie korzenie i tradycje zjednoczonej Europy?

Proszę o przedstawienie prawnych argumentów, które zaważyły na podjęciu decyzji o usunięciu symboli religijnych związanych z kulturową i historyczną tradycją Słowacji.

Instytucje Unii Europejskiej wielokrotnie powtarzają hasła o zjednoczeniu równych sobie państw suwerennych w jedną wspólnotę europejską. Wyrazem tego jest między innymi myśl przewodnia siódmej kadencji Parlamentu Europejskiego

„zjednoczeni w różnorodności”. Czy Komisja nie uważa, że decyzja o usunięciu symboli religijnych związanych z historią Słowacji stoi w sprzeczności z duchem integracji europejskiej?

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-011051/12

do Komisji

Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR)

(4 grudnia 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Święci Cyryl i Metody a wolność religijna w Europie

Słowacja usunęła niedawno aureole i krzyż z monety o nominale dwóch euro upamiętniającej 1150. rocznicę przybycia świętych Cyryla i Metodego do Wielkich Moraw i Panonii. Media donoszą, że Komisja stwierdziła, iż symbole religijne należy usunąć ze względu na konieczność przestrzegania zasady neutralności religijnej. Słowacja zgodziła się usunąć aureole mimo uznanej świętości Cyryla i Metodego.

Czy Komisja przyznaje, że sprawa ta świadczy o całkowitym braku szacunku dla religijnego i kulturalnego dziedzictwa Europy? Czy Komisja zdaje sobie sprawę, jakie znaczenie dla wiary prawosławnej i jej wyznawców mają święci Cyryl i Metody? Czy Komisja zdaje sobie sprawę z historycznej drażliwości związanej z jej wnioskiem w sprawie usunięcia symboli religijnych oraz z faktu, że w czasach komunizmu władze zwracały się do malarzy i rzeźbiarzy o przedstawianie Cyryla i Metodego bez aureoli będącej oznaką świętości?

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-011059/12

do Komisji

Adam Bielan (ECR)

(4 grudnia 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Usunięcie krzyża na słowackich monetach euro

Według informacji przedstawionych przez rzeczniczkę Narodowego Banku Słowackiego, Komisja Europejska zaleciła usunięcie z projektu monety o nominale 2 euro z wizerunkami świętych Cyryla i Metodego krzyży na ich ornatach i aureol nad ich głowami. Moneta w zaprezentowanym kształcie miała upamiętnić 1150 rocznicę przybycia obu świętych na Morawy. Oburzenia nie kryje słowacki episkopat, a także duchowni i wierni w Polsce.

Zwracam się więc do Komisji z następującymi pytaniami:

Jakie motywy kierowały przedstawicielami Komisji przy podejmowaniu tejże decyzji?

Jakimi przesłankami Komisja tłumaczy pozbawienie katolickich świętych ich odwiecznych atrybutów i jakimi prawami się kierowała?

Czy nastąpi zmiana stanowiska Komisji w tej bulwersującej sprawie?

Czy Komisja poprzez swoje zalecenie odżegnuje się od chrześcijańskiego rodowodu Europy?

Czy wobec innych symboli religijnych, nie tylko chrześcijańskich, Komisja planuje stosować podobne działania?

Czy eksponowanie przez państwa członkowskie symboli nawiązujących do ich własnej tradycji stoi w sprzeczności z działalnością Komisji?

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-011547/12

do Komisji

Jacek Włosowicz (EFD), Tadeusz Cymański (EFD), Jacek Olgierd Kurski (EFD) oraz Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD)

(18 grudnia 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Zmiany w projekcie monety o wartości nominalnej 2 euro na Słowacji

W drugiej połowie listopada br. na Słowacji wybuchł skandal w związku z zaleceniem Komisji Europejskiej dotyczącym konieczności wprowadzenia zmiany w projekcie monety o nominalnej wartości 2 euro. Moneta ma zostać wydana przez Narodowy Bank Słowacki (NSB) w 2013 r. Ma przedstawiać na rewersie wizerunek św. Cyryla i św. Metodego, a okazją ku temu jest 1150. rocznica przybycia obu świętych na Morawy. Zgodnie z zaleceniem Komisji Europejskiej z monety ma zniknąć znak krzyża, a znad głów świętych aureole. Rzeczniczka NSB Petra Pauerova oznajmiła słowackiemu dziennikowi „Pravda”, że „Komisja Europejska, przychylając się do »propozycji niektórych krajów Wspólnoty«, zaleciła usunięcie wspomnianych atrybutów z pierwotnego projektu monety. Ponieważ moneta zostanie dopuszczona do obiegu we wszystkich krajach strefy euro, jej projekt powinien respektować zasady »neutralności religijnej«”.

Ze względu na silne niezadowolenie słowackiego społeczeństwa, episkopatu i polityków Rada Narodowego Banku Słowackiego postanowiła ostatecznie odrzucić zalecenia Komisji Europejskiej dotyczące projektu nowej monety i wysłała do Brukseli projekt pierwotny, gdzie na ornatach świętych pozostają krzyże i aureole nad ich głowami.

W związku z powyższym pragnę zapytać:

Czy opisywana próba ingerencji Komisji nie jest pogwałceniem artykułu 22 Karty praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej, który mówi o tym, że Unia szanuje różnorodność kulturową, religijną i językową?

Ze względu na propozycje których krajów wspólnoty Komisja zaleciła zmianę opisywanego projektu monety?

Wspólna odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Olliego Rehna w imieniu Komisji

(5 lutego 2013 r.)

Unia Europejska opiera się na poszanowaniu praw człowieka, w tym wolności religii i przekonań, oraz szanuje i wspiera różnorodność kulturową i religijną zgodnie z tym, co zapisano w Karcie praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej.

Historyczne znaczenie biskupów Cyryla i Metodego jest bezsporne, jednak w rozporządzeniu Rady (WE) nr 975/98, zmienionym rozporządzeniem 566/2012, przewidziano, że państwa członkowskie, przygotowując projekty monety euro, muszą uwzględnić fakt, że monety te są w obiegu w całej strefie euro. W ramach procedury konsultacji dwa państwa członkowskie wyraziły zastrzeżenia wobec przedmiotowego projektu i dlatego też zgłosiły swój sprzeciw co do wzoru tej monety okolicznościowej. Komisja nie posiada prawa weta.

W międzyczasie Słowacja przedstawiła ponownie projekt monety i uprzednie zastrzeżenia zostały przez państwa członkowskie wycofane. Projekt został zatwierdzony przez Radę.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010602/12

to the Commission

Ryszard Antoni Legutko (ECR)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Order to remove religious symbols from Slovak euro coin

On 18 November 2012, a spokeswoman for the National Bank of Slovakia stated that the Commission had ordered a crucifix to be removed from the vestments of Saints Cyril and Methodius, as well as the Saints’ halos, on the proposed 2 EUR coin. The National Bank of Slovakia’s proposed coin was intended to commemorate the 1150th anniversary of the Saints’ arrival in Moravia. This arrival indisputably influenced the course of history in this part of Europe.

In connection with the above, would the Commission answer the following question: Why does the Commission not respect Europe’s Christian traditions?

Question for written answer E-010603/12

to the Commission

Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Dispute over proposed Slovak EUR 2 coin

In response to the Commission’s recommendations, Slovakia removed a crucifix and the halos of Saints Cyril and Methodius from their proposed EUR 2 coin. According to press reports, this was carried out at the request of ‘certain Member States’.

1.

Which Member States demanded the removal of the crucifix and the halos from the proposed Slovak coin?

2.

Does the Commission believe that the crucifix should be removed from public spaces in the EU?

3.

Does it question the right of the Catholic Church to confer sainthoods to particular people?

4.

Does it dispute the contribution made by Christianity to European culture, Westerncivilisation and the foundations of the European Community?

Question for written answer E-010893/12

to the Commission

Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD)

(29 November 2012)

Subject: Removal of religious symbols from Slovak euro coins

In the past week, the media have revealed shocking news concerning an order that was given to remove images of the crucifix and halos from Slovak euro coins. This order came from the Commission. According to a spokesperson, the Commission made its decision after coming under pressure from certain Member States.

— Which European countries demanded the removal of the crucifix and halos?

— How does the Commission intend to promote the Christian roots and traditions of a united Europe?

— Could the Commission please state what legal arguments influenced its decision to order the removal of religious symbols associated with Slovakia’s cultural and historical traditions?

— The EU institutions often repeat slogans about sovereign countries with equal status coming together to form a single European community. One expression of this is the motto of the seventh term of the European Parliament: ‘united in diversity’. Does the Commission not feel that the decision to remove religious symbols associated with Slovakia’s history runs counter to the spirit of European integration?

Question for written answer E-011051/12

to the Commission

Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR)

(4 December 2012)

Subject: Saints Cyril and Methodius and religious freedom in Europe

Slovakia has recently removed the halos and cross from the two-euro coin commemorating the 1150th anniversary of the arrival of Saints Cyril and Methodius in Great Moravia and Pannonia. According to media reports, the Commission said that the religious symbols should be removed on account of the need to observe religious neutrality. Slovakia agreed to remove the halos despite Cyril and Methodius’s status as saints.

Does the Commission acknowledge that this case marks a total lack of respect for the religious and cultural heritage of Europe? Is the Commission aware of the importance of Saints Cyril and Methodius to the Orthodox faith and its followers? Is the Commission aware of the historical sensitivities surrounding its request that the religious symbols be removed, and of the fact that during the Communist era painters and sculptors were requested by the authorities to portray Cyril and Methodius without the sanctity of halos?

Question for written answer E-011059/12

to the Commission

Adam Bielan (ECR)

(4 December 2012)

Subject: Removal of the crucifix from Slovakian euro coins

According to information provided by a spokeswoman for the National Bank of Slovakia, the Commission has ordered the crucifix to be removed from the vestments of Saints Cyril and Methodius, as well as the Saints’ halos, on the proposed 2 euro coin.The coins were to have commemorated the 1150th anniversary of the Saints' arrival in Moravia.This has outraged not only the Slovakian Episcopate, but also the clergy and faithful in Poland.

Could the Commission therefore answer the following questions:

What led the Commission to take this decision?

What is the Commission's justification for depriving these Catholic Saints of their traditional symbols, and on what legal grounds did it base its decision?

Will the Commission change its position on this contentious matter?

By making this recommendation, is the Commission disassociating itself from Europe's Christian heritage?

Is the Commission planning to take similar action against other, not only Christian, religious symbols?

Is the display by Member States of symbols referring to their own tradition somehow contrary to the Commission's activities?

Question for written answer E-011547/12

to the Commission

Jacek Włosowicz (EFD), Tadeusz Cymański (EFD), Jacek Olgierd Kurski (EFD) and Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD)

(18 December 2012)

Subject: Changes to the proposed design of the Slovak EUR 2 coin

A scandal erupted in the second half of November 2012 when the Commission recommended that Slovakia make changes to the design of its proposed EUR 2 coin. The coin was to be issued by the National Bank of Slovakia (NBS) in 2013. The reverse of the coin was supposed to depict Saints Cyril and Methodius, in commemoration of the 1150th anniversary of their arrival in Moravia. The Commission recommended that depictions of a crucifix and of the Saints' halos be removed from the coin. A spokeswoman for the NBS revealed to the Slovak newspaper ‘Pravda’ that the Commission, acceding to requests from certain Member States, had recommended that the aforementioned images be removed from the coin’s original design. Given that the coin would be in circulation in all eurozone states, its design should respect the principle of ‘religious neutrality’.

In response to strong opposition from Slovak society, clergy and politicians, the board of the NBS ultimately decided to reject the Commission's recommendations and forwarded the original design, featuring the crucifix and the Saints' halos, to Brussels.

1.

Is the Commission's aforementioned attempt at interference a violation of Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that the Union must respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity?

2.

On the basis of which Member States' requests did the Commission recommend makingchanges to the design of the Slovak EUR 2 coin?

Joint answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2013)

The European Union is based on the value of respect for human rights, including the freedom of religion and belief, and it shall respect and foster cultural and religious diversity, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

While the historic importance of Bishops Cyril and Methodius is uncontested, Council Regulation 975/98 as amended by Regulation 566/2012 provides that Member States have to take into account when preparing a draft design for a euro coin that this coin will circulate throughout the whole Eurozone. Two Member States expressed concerns with the design in the course of the consultation procedure and therefore vetoed the design of the commemorative coin. The Commission does not have a right of veto.

In the meantime Slovakia resubmitted the proposal of the design and the former objections by Member States were withdrawn. The design has now been approved by the Council.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010604/12

alla Commissione

Francesco De Angelis (S&D) e Silvia Costa (S&D)

(20 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Regione Lazio e le risorse dell'UE inutilizzate

— Considerato che dal 24 settembre 2012, in conseguenza delle dimissioni della giunta regionale del Lazio, la fase di programmazione nonché di concertazione con le parti interessate sull'impiego delle risorse della politica di coesione è stata completamente sospesa;

— tenuto conto che permangono molte incertezze in relazione alla data effettiva di svolgimento delle elezioni per il rinnovo delle cariche istituzionali della Regione Lazio, e dunque per il rilancio dell'attività di indirizzo sull'impiego delle risorse dell'UE assegnate a codesta regione;

— visto il significativo ritardo della Regione Lazio nell'impiego delle risorse dell'UE nell'ambito dei fondi FSE, FESR e FEASR in relazione alla programmazione 2007-2013,

può la Commissione riferire, in base alle informazioni in suo possesso, a quanto ammontano ad oggi le risorse della Regione Lazio inutilizzate di provenienza UE in attesa dell'operatività della nuova giunta?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(23 gennaio 2013)

Il programma Lazio 2007-2013 cofinanziato dal Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale ha una dotazione finanziaria complessiva di 743 milioni di euro con un tasso di cofinanziamento del 50 % da parte del FESR. A tutto il 31 ottobre 2012 il livello degli impegni del programma ammontava a 408 milioni di euro (55 %) e il livello dei pagamenti era pari a 279 milioni di euro (37 %). Pertanto, i rimanenti finanziamenti ancora da impiegare entro la fine del periodo ammontano a 464 milioni di euro.

Il programma 2007-2013 cofinanziato dal Fondo europeo agricolo per lo sviluppo rurale (FEASR) ha uno stanziamento complessivo di 700 milioni di euro con un tasso di finanziamento del FEASR pari al 45 %.

A tutto il 15 ottobre 2012 la spesa complessiva è stata di 282 milioni di euro (40 %). La regione prevede di aumentare la spesa fino a 331 milioni di euro entro il 31 dicembre 2012 (47 % dello stanziamento totale). Ciò significa che alla fine del periodo rimarranno ancora da usare 418 milioni di euro.

Il programma 2007-2013 cofinanziato dal Fondo sociale europeo (FSE) ha una dotazione finanziaria complessiva di circa 736 milioni di euro con una tasso di finanziamento del FSE pari al 50 %. A tutto il 31 ottobre 2012 il livello degli impegni del programma FSE ammontava a 479 milioni di euro (65 %) e il livello dei pagamenti era pari a 266 milioni di euro (36 %). Pertanto, i fondi rimanenti ancora da impegnare e spendere entro la fine del periodo 2007-2013 sono pari a 257 milioni di euro e a 470 milioni di euro rispettivamente.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010604/12

to the Commission

Francesco De Angelis (S&D) and Silvia Costa (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Lazio region and unused EU resources

Since 24 September 2012, following the resignation of the Lazio regional government, planning procedures and consultation with the relevant stakeholders concerning the use of cohesion policy funding have come to a complete halt.

There is considerable doubt as to the actual date of the elections for the renewal of the Lazio regional government and hence the resumption of activities relating to the management of EU funding earmarked for the region.

There has also been considerable delay on the part of the Lazio regional government regarding the take-up of ESF, ERDF and EAFRD appropriations for the programming period 2007-2013.

In view of this, can the Commission say what amount of EU funding earmarked for the Lazio region still remains unused pending effective assumption of office by the new administration?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2013)

The 2007-2013 Lazio programme co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund has a total financial allocation of EUR 743 million with a co-financing rate of 50% from ERDF. As of 31 October 2012, the level of commitments of the programme amounted to EUR 408 million (55%) and the level of payments equalled EUR 279 million (37%). Therefore, the remaining funds still to be used by the end of the period equal EUR 464 million.

The 2007-2013 programme co-financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) has a total allocation of EUR 700 million with a EAFRD co-financing rate of 45%.

As of 15 October 2012, total expenditure was EUR 282 million (40%). The region expects to increase the expenditure up to EUR 331 million by 31 December 2012 (47% of total allocation). This means that EUR 418 million is still to be used by end of the period.

The 2007-2013 programme co-financed by the European Social Fund (ESF) has a total financial allocation of about EUR 736 million with a ESF co-financing rate of 50%. As of 31 October 2012, the level of commitments of the ESF programme amounted to EUR 479 million (65%) and the level of payments equalled EUR 266 million (36%). Therefore, the remaining funds still to be committed and spent by the end of the 2007-2013 period are EUR 257 million and EUR 470 million respectively.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010605/12

à la Commission

Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE) et Yves Cochet (Verts/ALE)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: Définition française du foie gras

Au titre du règlement (CE) no 543/2008 de la Commission (ainsi que du règlement (CEE) no 1538/91 antérieur), le gavage n'est pas exigé pour classifier un foie d'oiseau comme étant un «foie gras». Or, depuis 2005, le droit national français définit le «foie gras» comme le foie d'un oiseau engraissé par gavage.

1.

Dès lors, la définition française du foie gras empêche tout foie provenant d'un oiseau engraissé par des méthodes autres que le gavage d'être considéré comme foie gras ou d'être commercialisé sous ce nom. Comment la Commission compte-t-elle lever l'obstacle que pose une définition si restrictive à la commercialisation de foie gras obtenu par des méthodes autres que le gavage?

2.

Une recommandation du Comité permanent de la Convention européenne sur la protection des animaux dans les élevages n'autorise le gavage que dans les lieux où il est actuellement pratiqué, à condition que soit encouragée la recherche sur d'autres méthodes de production. Comment la Commission compte-t-elle garantir que le droit national des pays producteurs de foie gras ne fasse pas obstacle aux exigences de l'Union en matière de mise au point de méthodes de production de foie gras autres que le gavage?

Réponse donnée par M. Borg au nom de la Commission

(24 janvier 2013)

Aux termes du règlement (CE) no 543/2008 (28), les termes «foie gras» désignent «[l]es foies gras d'oies ou de canards des espèces Cairina muschata ou Cairina muschata x Anas platyrhynchos gavés de façon à produire l'hypertrophie cellulaire graisseuse du foie». Aux termes de la législation française (29), «on entend par foie gras le foie d'un canard ou d'une oie spécialement engraissé par gavage».

La Commission entend vérifier la conformité de la législation française avec la définition du règlement (CE) no 543/2008 et déterminer si la définition figurant dans la législation française empêche que le foie gras produit par d'autres méthodes soit pris en compte et commercialisé en tant que «foie gras» en France.

Les aspects de la production de foie gras liés au bien-être des animaux font l'objet de la directive 98/58/CE concernant la protection des animaux dans les élevages (30), ainsi que des recommandations du Conseil de l'Europe concernant les oies (31) et les canards de Barbarie et les hybrides de ces canards et de canards domestiques (32).

Les recommandations font partie de la législation de l'Union européenne et imposent aux pays qui autorisent la production de foie gras d'encourager les travaux de recherche sur les aspects liés au bien-être et sur les méthodes autres que le gavage.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010605/12

to the Commission

Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE) and Yves Cochet (Verts/ALE)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: French definition of ‘foie gras’

Under Commission Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 (and previous Regulation (EEC) No 1538/91), force-feeding is not a prerequisite for classifying livers as ‘foie gras’. However, since 2005, ‘foie gras’ has been defined in French national law as the liver of a bird fattened by force-feeding.

1.

Hence, the French definition prevents any fatty liver obtained by alternative methods to force-feeding from being considered or marketed as

‘foie gras’ in France. How does the Commission intend to lift the obstacle to the marketing of ‘foie gras’ obtained by alternative methods created by such a restrictive definition?

2.

A Recommendation from the Standing Committee of the European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes allows force-feeding only where currently practised, under the condition that research on alternative methods is encouraged. How does the Commission intend to ensure that national laws in

‘foie gras’-producing countries do not jeopardise EU requirements on the development of alternatives to force-feeding in ‘foie gras’ production?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2013)

Under Commission Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 (33) the term ‘foie gras’ denotes ‘the livers of geese, or of ducks of the species Cairina muschata or Cairina muschata x Anas platyrhynchos which have been fed in such a way as to produce hepatic fatty cellular hypertrophy’. The French law (34) defines ‘foie gras’ as the liver of a bird fattened by force-feeding (gavage).

The Commission will assess whether the French law is in line with the definition of Regulation (EC) No 543/2008 and clarify whether the definition given in the French law would prevent any fatty liver obtained by alternative methods from being considered and hence marketed as ‘foie gras’ in France.

The welfare aspects of foie gras production are covered by Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (35) and the recommendations of the Council of Europe concerning geese (36) and Muscovy ducks and their hybrids (37).

The recommendations are part of EC law and require countries allowing foie gras production to encourage research on its welfare aspects and on alternative methods which do not include gavage.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010606/12

an die Kommission

Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE), Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) und Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)

(20. November 2012)

Betrifft: Eine alternative Methode zur Beseitigung des Defizits des Sonderkontos für erneuerbare Energiequellen in Griechenland

Griechenland verpflichtete sich gegenüber seinen Gläubigern unter anderem dazu, das Defizit des Sonderkontos für erneuerbare Energiequellen, das für Ausgleichszahlungen an Hersteller von Elektrizität aus erneuerbaren Energiequellen verwendet wird  (38), bis Ende Dezember 2013 zu beseitigen. Als eine der wichtigsten Maßnahmen zur Beseitigung dieses Defizits sieht das neue Gesetz (39) rückwirkend die Erhebung einer Sondersteuer auf Fotovoltaik-Anlagen vor, was sich auf eine Verringerung des entsprechenden Einspeisetarifs um 25-30 % beläuft, sowie eine pauschale Steuer von 10 % auf alle anderen erneuerbaren Energiequellen. Es wäre jedoch auch möglich, dasselbe Ergebnis durch eine Änderung der Berechnungsmethode der Sondersteuer ETMEAR (40) zu erreichen, die von Verbrauchern erhoben wird, um die Entwicklung erneuerbarer Energiequellen in Griechenland zu unterstützen. Laut einer Studie der Stiftung für wirtschaftliche und industrielle Forschung (IOBE) (41) beläuft sich der Beitrag der Sondersteuer zu erneuerbaren Energiequellen nur auf ungefähr 40 %, während laut den Berechnungen von Fachverbänden im Bereich der erneuerbaren Energiequellen (42) von Januar 2009 bis April 2012 die griechischen Verbraucher insgesamt 336,1 Mio. EUR an ETMEAR gezahlt haben. Von diesem Betrag wurden nur 40 % oder 134,4 Mio. EUR zur Förderung von erneuerbaren Energiequellen verwendet, während der Restbetrag von 201,7 Mio. EUR als Fördermittel an Elektrizitätsversorgungsunternehmen ging. Hätte man diese 201,7 Mio. EUR, die von den Verbrauchern einbezahlt wurden, anstatt für Elektrizitätsversorgungsunternehmen für das Sonderkonto für erneuerbare Energiequellen verwendet, dann wäre das Defizit, das Ende April 2012 bei 201,1 Mio. EUR lag, beseitigt worden.

Die Verfälschung ist auf die Berechnungsmethode der ETMEAR-Steuer zurückzuführen. Derzeit basiert sie auf dem Unterschied zwischen dem garantierten Preis für erneuerbare Energiequellen und dem Systemgrenzpreis nach der Einführung von Energie aus erneuerbaren Quellen und nicht dem Systemgrenzpreis, den die Elektrizitätsversorgungsunternehmen bezahlen müssten, wenn es keine Herstellung von Elektrizität aus erneuerbaren Energiequellen gäbe (43). Somit tragen die Verbraucher die Kosten, die von den Versorgungsunternehmen übernommen werden sollten, und es kommt zu einem Defizit des Sonderkontos für erneuerbare Energiequellen. Um dieses zu beseitigen, sind bestimmte Maßnahmen erforderlich, die jedoch die Entwicklung des Marktes für erneuerbare Energiequellen beeinträchtigen.

1.

Empfindet die Kommission die derzeitige Berechnungsmethode der ETMEAR-Steuer als den griechischen Verbrauchern gegenüber gerecht?

2.

Zieht die Vertretung der Kommission in der Troika eine Änderung der Berechnungsmethode der ETMEAR-Steuer in Betracht, um das Defizit des Sonderkontos für erneuerbare Energiequellen ohne Kosten für die Verbraucher und ohne Schädigung der Glaubwürdigkeit des Einspeisetarifsystems in Griechenland zu beseitigen?

3.

Beabsichtigt die Kommission, mit den griechischen Behörden zusammenzuarbeiten, um ein gerechtes System zu schaffen, in dem die zusätzlichen Kosten für Energie aus erneuerbaren Quellen geteilt werden, was auch zur Glaubwürdigkeit des Einspeisetarifsystems beitragen würde?

Antwort von Herrn Oettinger im Namen der Kommission

(24. Januar 2013)

Diskussionen über die Kosten erneuerbarer Energien und über die Finanzierung von Defiziten im Energiesektor generell sind wichtig und können relativ technisch sein. Ein wichtiges Element, das in solchen Diskussionen berücksichtigt werden muss, ist die Frage, wie die Merit-Order-Effekte in geeigneter Weise in die Berechnungen einbezogen werden sollen. Die von den Herren Abgeordneten angesprochenen Punkte sind Teil der technischen Diskussion, die in Griechenland derzeit über die Reform der verschiedenen Preisfestsetzungs‐ und Finanzierungsregelungen im griechischen Energiesektor generell geführt wird. Die Kommission teilt die Auffassung, wonach Bemühungen in diesem Bereich eine gerechte Abbildung und Allokation der Kosten sicherstellen müssen, die die Belastung der Energieverbraucher möglichst gering halten.

Die Kommission wird ihre enge Zusammenarbeit mit den griechischen Behörden fortsetzen, um das griechische Fördersystem für erneuerbare Energien weiter zu stabilisieren und zu reformieren. Hierzu hat die Kommission den griechischen Behörden ein umfassendes technisches Hilfsprogramm vorgeschlagen, das bald anlaufen könnte.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010606/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE), Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) και Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)

(20 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Μια εναλλακτική μέθοδος για την εξάλειψη του ελλείμματος του ειδικού λογαριασμού για τις ανανεώσιμες πηγές ενέργειας στην Ελλάδα

Μεταξύ των υποχρεώσεων που η ελληνική κυβέρνηση έχει συμφωνήσει να εκπληρώσει έναντι των πιστωτών της, είναι η κατάργηση, μέχρι το τέλος Δεκεμβρίου 2013, του ελλείμματος του ειδικού λογαριασμού για τις ανανεώσιμες πηγές ενέργειας (ΑΠΕ), που χρησιμοποιείται για την αποζημίωση των παραγωγών ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας από ΑΠΕ (44). Ως βασικό μέσο για την εξάλειψη του ελλείμματος αυτού, ο νέος νόμος (45) επιβάλλει, με αναδρομική ισχύ, ένα ειδικό τέλος για φωτοβολταϊκά συστήματα που ισοδυναμεί με μείωση κατά 25-30% της αντίστοιχης επιδότησης της τιμής της παραγόμενης ενέργειας (FIT), καθώς και μια κατ' αποκοπή εισφορά 10% στις άλλες ΑΠΕ. Θα ήταν δυνατόν, ωστόσο, να επιτευχθεί το ίδιο αποτέλεσμα με αλλαγή του τρόπου υπολογισμού του ειδικού «ETMEAR» (46) δηλαδή του φόρου που πληρώνουν οι καταναλωτές για την υποστήριξη της ανάπτυξης ΑΠΕ στην Ελλάδα. Σύμφωνα με μια μελέτη του Ιδρύματος Οικονομικών και Βιομηχανικών Ερευνών (ΙΟΒΕ) (47), «η συμβολή του ειδικού φόρου για τις ΑΠΕ είναι μόνο περίπου 40% » , ενώ σύμφωνα με τους υπολογισμούς των επαγγελματικών οργανώσεων ΑΠΕ (48), κατά την περίοδο από τον Ιανουάριο 2009 έως τον Απρίλιο 2012 οι έλληνες καταναλωτές κατέβαλαν συνολικά 336,1 εκατομμύρια ευρώ σε ETMEAR. Από το ποσό αυτό, μόνο το 40%, ή 134,4 εκατομμύρια ευρώ, χρησιμοποιήθηκαν προς όφελος των ΑΠΕ, ενώ το υπόλοιπο ποσό ύψους 201,7 εκατομμυρίων, κυρίως σε επιδοτούμενους προμηθευτές ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας. Αν αυτά τα 201,7 εκατομμύρια ευρώ που πλήρωσαν οι καταναλωτές είχαν εκτραπεί στον ειδικό λογαριασμό για τις ΑΠΕ αντί στους προμηθευτές ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας, το έλλειμμα, το οποίο στο τέλος του Απρίλη 2012 ήταν 201 100 000 ευρώ, θα είχε εξαλειφθεί.

Η στρέβλωση αυτή προκύπτει από τη μέθοδο σύμφωνα με την οποία υπολογίζεται ο ETMEAR. Επί του παρόντος, βασίζεται στη διαφορά μεταξύ της εγγυημένης τιμής για τις ΑΠΕ και της οριακής τιμής συστήματος (SMP), μετά την ενσωμάτωση της ενέργειας από ΑΠΕ, και όχι στην SMP που οι προμηθευτές ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας θα κατέβαλαν εάν δεν είχε υπάρξει καμία παραγωγή ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας από ΑΠΕ (49). Έτσι, οι καταναλωτές φέρουν τα έξοδα τα οποία θα έπρεπε να βαρύνουν τους προμηθευτές και ο ειδικός λογαριασμός για τις ΑΠΕ αναπτύσσει ένα έλλειμμα. Για να εξαλειφθεί αυτό, απαιτούνται ειδικά μέτρα, τα οποία όμως θα βλάψουν μακροπρόθεσμα την αγορά των ΑΠΕ.

1.

Πιστεύει η Επιτροπή ότι η τρέχουσα μέθοδος υπολογισμού ETMEAR είναι δίκαιη για τους Έλληνες καταναλωτές;

2.

Έχει ο εκπρόσωπος της Επιτροπής στην τρόικα εξετάσει αλλαγή της μεθόδου υπολογισμού ETMEAR ως ένα τρόπο εξάλειψης του ελλείμματος του ειδικού λογαριασμού για τις ΑΠΕ, χωρίς κανένα κόστος για τον καταναλωτή και χωρίς να βλαφτεί η αξιοπιστία του συστήματος (FiT) σύστημα στην Ελλάδα;

3.

Προτίθεται η Επιτροπή να συνεργαστεί με τις ελληνικές αρχές προκειμένου να καθιερωθεί ένα δίκαιο σύστημα κατανομής του επιπλέον κόστους των ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας, συμβάλλοντας έτσι και στην αξιοπιστία του συστήματος FIT;

Απάντηση του κ. Oettinger εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(24 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Οι συζητήσεις σχετικά με το κόστος των ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας και τη χρηματοδότηση των ελλειμμάτων του ευρύτερου τομέα της ενέργειας είναι σημαντικές και μπορεί να είναι ιδιαίτερα τεχνικές. Σημαντικό θέμα που επιβάλλεται να εξετασθεί κατά τις εν λόγω συζητήσεις είναι οι ενδεδειγμένοι τρόποι συνυπολογισμού εν προκειμένω των επιπτώσεων της κατάταξης συναρτήσει της οικονομικής αξίας. Τα στοιχεία που θίγουν τα Αξιότιμα Μέλη του Κοινοβουλίου αποτελούν μέρος της υπό εξέλιξη τεχνικής συζήτησης στην Ελλάδα σχετικά με τη μεταρρύθμιση των επιμέρους διακανονισμών τιμολόγησης και χρηματοδότησης στο σύνολο του ελληνικού ενεργειακού τομέα. Η Επιτροπή συμφωνεί ότι οι προσπάθειες αυτές πρέπει να διασφαλίζουν την ορθή αναπαράσταση και κατανομή των δαπανών ώστε να ελαχιστοποιείται η επιβάρυνση των καταναλωτών ενέργειας.

Η Επιτροπή θα συνεχίσει να συνεργάζεται στενά με τις ελληνικές αρχές για την περαιτέρω σταθεροποίηση και μεταρρύθμιση του ελληνικού συστήματος υποστήριξης των ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας. Για τον σκοπό αυτόν, η Επιτροπή πρότεινε στις ελληνικές αρχές ολοκληρωμένο πρόγραμμα τεχνικής βοήθειας που θα μπορούσε να δρομολογηθεί σύντομα.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010606/12

à la Commission

Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE), Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) et Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)

(20 novembre 2012)

Objet: Une autre méthode pour combler le déficit du compte spécial pour les sources d'énergie renouvelables en Grèce

Au nombre des exigences de ses créanciers que le gouvernement grec s'est engagé à respecter figure la résorption du déficit, d'ici à la fin du mois de décembre 2013, du compte spécial pour les sources d'énergie renouvelables, destiné à subventionner les producteurs d'électricité provenant de sources d'énergie renouvelables (50). La nouvelle loi (51) impose deux instruments clés pour combler ce déficit, tous deux rétroactifs: un prélèvement spécial sur les systèmes photovoltaïques, qui équivaut à une réduction de 25 à 30 % des tarifs de rachat correspondants, et un prélèvement forfaitaire de 10 % sur toutes les autres sources d'énergie renouvelables. Or, le même résultat pourrait être atteint en modifiant la méthode de calcul de la taxe spéciale «Etmear» (52), une taxe à la consommation censée soutenir le développement des sources d'énergie renouvelables en Grèce. D'après une étude menée par la Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research (IOBE) (53), seuls quelque 40 % des revenus issus de la taxe spéciale contribuent effectivement à soutenir les sources d'énergie renouvelables. En effet, selon les calculs effectués par des organisations professionnelles du secteur (54), les consommateurs grecs ont payé 336,1 millions d'euros au titre de l'Etmear entre janvier 2009 et avril 2012. Or, seuls 40 % de cette somme, soit 134,4 millions d'euros, ont été effectivement consacrés aux sources d'énergie renouvelables, les 201,7 millions d'euros restants ayant bénéficié, dans les faits, aux fournisseurs d'électricité. Si ces 201,7 millions d'euros prélevés sur les consommateurs avaient été affectés au compte spécial pour les énergies renouvelables au lieu d'être transférés aux fournisseurs d'électricité, le déficit dudit compte, qui était, à la fin du mois d'avril 2012, de 201,1 millions d'euros, aurait pu être comblé.

Cette anomalie provient de la méthode de calcul de l'Etmear. À l'heure actuelle, elle repose sur la différence entre le prix garanti de l'énergie produite à partir de sources renouvelables et le prix marginal du système. Or, ce dernier est calculé en incluant l'énergie produite à partir de sources renouvelables, au lieu d'être celui que les fournisseurs auraient à payer s'il n'y avait pas eu d'électricité produite à partir de sources d'énergie renouvelables (55). Dès lors, non seulement les consommateurs doivent supporter des coûts qui devraient être à la charge des fournisseurs, mais encore le compte spécial pour les sources d'énergie renouvelable devient déficitaire. Afin de combler ce déficit, des mesures spéciales s'imposent, qui nuisent toutefois au marché des sources d'énergie renouvelables.

1.

La Commission estime-t-elle que la méthode actuelle de calcul de l'Etmear est équitable pour le consommateur grec?

2.

Le représentant de la Commission au sein de la troïka a-t-il envisagé, pour combler, sans coût pour le consommateur et sans perte de crédibilité du système grec de tarifs de rachat, le déficit du compte spécial pour les sources d'énergie renouvelables, la possibilité de modifier la méthode de calcul de l'Etmear?

3.

La Commission compte-t-elle travailler avec les autorités grecques afin de mettre en place un système équitable de partage des coûts liés aux énergies renouvelables, ce qui ne manquerait pas de contribuer également à la crédibilité du système de tarifs de rachat?

Réponse donnée par M. Oettinger au nom de la Commission

(24 janvier 2013)

Les discussions menées à propos du coût de l'énergie renouvelable et du financement des déficits qui se creusent dans le secteur de l'énergie sont importantes et peuvent être assez techniques. Le moyen approprié consistant à intégrer dans les calculs l'effet induit par l'«ordre de préséance» constitue un élément important qui doit être pris en considération dans ce type de discussions. Les points soulevés par les Honorables Parlementaires s'inscrivent dans le cadre de la discussion technique qui est en cours en Grèce concernant la réforme des différents systèmes de tarification et de financement utilisés dans le secteur grec de l'énergie dans son ensemble. La Commission convient que ces efforts doivent garantir une représentation et une répartition équitables des coûts permettant de réduire au minimum la charge supportée par les consommateurs d'énergie.

La Commission continuera à collaborer étroitement avec les autorités grecques afin de poursuivre la stabilisation et la réforme du régime d'aides grec en faveur des énergies renouvelables. À cette fin, la Commission a proposé aux autorités grecques un programme global d'assistance technique qui pourrait être mis en œuvre prochainement.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010606/12

to the Commission

Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE), Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) and Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: An alternative method of eliminating the deficit of the special account for renewable energy sources in Greece

Among the obligations that the Greek Government has agreed to fulfil towards its creditors is the elimination, by the end of December 2013, of the deficit of the special account for renewable energy sources (RES) which is used to compensate producers of electricity from RES (56). As a key means of eliminating this deficit, the new law (57) imposes, retroactively, a special levy on photovoltaic systems which amounts to a 25‐30% reduction of the corresponding feed‐in tariff (FiT) as well as a flat‐rate 10% levy on all other RES. It would be possible, however, to achieve the same result by changing the method of calculating the special ‘ETMEAR’ tax (58) that consumers pay to support RES development in Greece. According to a study by the Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research (IOBE) (59), the contribution of the special tax to RES is only about 40%, while according to the calculations of RES professional organisations (60), in the period from January 2009 to April 2012 Greek consumers paid a total of EUR 336.1 million in ETMEAR. Of this amount, only 40%, or EUR 134.4 million, was utilised for the benefit of RES, whereas the remaining EUR 201.7 million in effect subsidised electricity suppliers. If this EUR 201.7 million paid by consumers had been diverted to the special account for RES instead of the electricity suppliers, its deficit, which at the end of April 2012 was EUR 201.1 million, would have been eliminated.

The distortion arises from the method whereby ETMEAR is calculated. Currently, it is based on the difference between the guaranteed price for RES and the system marginal price (SMP) after the incorporation of energy from RES, and not the SMP that the electricity suppliers would pay had there been no electricity production from RES (61). Thus consumers bear the costs which should be borne by the suppliers and the special account for RES develops a deficit. In order to eliminate it, special measures are necessary, which however damage the RES market in the process.

1.

Does the Commission think that the current method of calculating ETMEAR is fair to Greek consumers?

2.

Has the Commission’s representative in the Troika considered changing the method of calculating ETMEAR as a way of eliminating the deficit of the special account for RES at no cost to the consumer and without damaging the credibility of the feed-in tariff (FiT) system in Greece?

3.

Does the Commission intend to work with the Greek authorities in order to establish an equitable system for sharing the additional cost of renewables, thereby also contributing to the credibility of the FiT system?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2013)

Discussions on the cost of renewable energy and the financing of broader energy sector deficits are important and can be quite technical. The appropriate means of incorporating merit order effects into the calculations is one important element which must be considered in such discussions. The elements the honourable Members raise are a part of the technical discussion currently underway in Greece on the reform of the various pricing and financing arrangements in the Greek energy sector overall. The Commission agrees that such efforts must ensure a fair representation and allocation of costs that minimises the burden to energy consumers.

The Commission will continue to work closely with the Greek authorities to further stabilise and reform the Greek support scheme for renewable energies. To this end the Commission has proposed to the Greek authorities a comprehensive technical assistance programme that could be launched soon.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010607/12

to the Commission

Michael Cashman (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Displaying the products of execution

The ‘Bodies Unveiled’ exhibition is currently on display in Liverpool and has previously displayed in Birmingham. It is a commercial display which charges customers to view exhibits made from human body parts.

The organisers obtained these exhibits from China and one of the suppliers, Dalian Medical University, previously supplied at least two corpses with bullet holes in their skulls for an exhibition in 2004.

In 2008 the company was required by the courts to carry a disclaimer for its New York exhibition, stating that the exhibits were ‘human remains of Chinese citizens or residents which were originally received by the Chinese Bureau of Police. The Chinese Bureau of Police may receive bodies from Chinese prisons. Premier cannot independently verify that the human remains you are viewing are not those of persons who were incarcerated in Chinese prisons.’

1.

Does the Commission agree that commercial exhibitions should not display, and profit from, the products of execution?

2.

What can the Commission do to prevent this?

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

(4 February 2013)

The Commission does not have information regarding this exhibition and is not aware of the provenance of the human body parts used in it.

On the wider issue of the disposal of the bodies of executed prisoners, the European External Action Service (EEAS) has raised the issue of organ harvesting with the Chinese authorities and raised concerns over the secrecy which surrounds both death penalty and organ transplant statistics.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010608/12

alla Commissione

Matteo Salvini (EFD)

(20 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Tagli drastici all'agricoltura

— Visto e considerato che in base all'articolo 39 del TFUE (ex articolo 33 del TCE) e seguenti, Titolo III, l'agricoltura e la pesca hanno un regime particolare per quanto riguarda il finanziamento e il commercio nell'UE;

— considerando che l'agricoltura e tutta la filiera agroalimentare sono colpite da una forte crisi europea e mondiale;

— considerata la particolare volatilità dei prezzi propria del settore agricolo;

— considerando che il numero delle aziende agricole italiane è diminuito di circa il 16 %;

— considerando che, qualora i tagli annunciati corrispondenti a 25,5 miliardi di euro per il periodo 2014-2020 saranno effettivi, migliaia di imprese agricole saranno distrutte,

può la Commissione far sapere:

quale sarà l'impatto per le aziende agricole europee se queste previsioni saranno reali, e

quali sono i criteri stabiliti nell'applicazione dei tagli, al fine di accordare le esigenze di tutti gli Stati membri, soprattutto con un importante settore agricolo da preservare, quale quello italiano?

Risposta di Dacian Cioloş a nome della Commissione

(29 gennaio 2013)

Per quanto concerne il quadro finanziario pluriennale per il periodo 2014-2020, la Commissione ha proposto (62) di congelare gli importi per la politica agricola comune in termini nominali al livello del 2013, tenendo conto del proseguimento della graduale introduzione dei pagamenti diretti agli agricoltori.

I negoziati relativi al prossimo quadro finanziario pluriennale si stanno svolgendo sullo sfondo della gravissima crisi economica e sono soggetti alla pressione per il risanamento del bilancio in tutti gli Stati membri. In tale contesto alcuni tagli degli importi proposti dalla Commissione erano già stati proposti dalla presidenza di Cipro. Durante il Consiglio europeo del 22-23 novembre 2012 sono stati inoltre considerati alcuni adeguamenti degli importi proposti dalla Commissione, non solo per la politica agricola comune ma per tutte le rubriche del quadro finanziario pluriennale.

I negoziati sul quadro finanziario pluriennale sono attualmente in corso. Il Consiglio europeo ha dato mandato al presidente Van Rompuy, di concerto con il presidente della Commissione, di continuare il lavoro e proseguire le consultazioni per trovare un consenso tra gli Stati membri in relazione al quadro finanziario pluriennale per il periodo 2014-2020.

Un adeguato livello di finanziamento è essenziale per la politica agricola comune al fine di poter procedere a una riforma ambiziosa e affinché l'agricoltura europea possa effettivamente far fronte alle sfide future ed assicurare un tenore di vita equo per la comunità agricola in tutta l'Unione europea.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010608/12

to the Commission

Matteo Salvini (EFD)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: Drastic cuts to agriculture

— Given that, on the basis of Article 39 TFEU (ex Article 33 of the EC Treaty) et seq. (Title III), a specific regime exists for agriculture and fisheries, as regards financing and trade, within the EU;

— considering that agriculture and the whole food supply chain are impacted by an acute European and world crisis;

— in view of the particular price volatility in the agricultural sector;

— considering that the number of agricultural holdings in Italy has fallen by about 16%;

— considering that, if the proposed cuts, amounting to EUR 25,5 billion in the period 2014-2020, are implemented, thousands of farm businesses will be destroyed,

can the Commission say:

what will be the impact on agricultural holdings in Europe if these plans are put into effect, and

what criteria have been laid down for the implementation of the cuts, in order to reconcile the requirements of all Member States, especially those such as Italy which have a large agricultural sector to preserve?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

For the multi-annual financial framework for the period 2014-2020, the Commission has proposed (63) to freeze in nominal terms the amounts for the common agricultural policy at their 2013 level, taking into account the continuing phasing-in of the direct payments to farmers.

The negotiations on the next multi-annual financial framework are taking place against the background of the very severe economic crisis and with pressure for fiscal consolidation in all Member States. In this context, certain cuts in the amounts proposed by the Commission had already been proposed by the Cyprus Presidency. During the European Council of 22-23 November 2012, certain adjustments in the amounts proposed by the Commission have also been considered, not only for the common agricultural policy but for all the headings of the multi-annual financial framework.

The negotiations on the multi-annual financial framework are ongoing. The European Council has given a mandate to President Van Rompuy, together with the President of the Commission, to continue the work and pursue consultations to find a consensus among the Member States over the multi-annual financial framework for the period 2014-2020.

An adequate level of financing is essential for the common agricultural policy in order to be able to undertake an ambitious reform and hence for European agriculture to effectively face its future challenges and to provide a fair standard of living for the agricultural community throughout the European Union.

(Slovenska različica)

Vprašanje za pisni odgovor E-010609/12

za Svet

Mojca Kleva (S&D)

(20. november 2012)

Zadeva: Sistem faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti

Sistem faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti (ang. national prosperity factors) določa nivo evropskih sredstev za manj razvite regije in temelji na izračunih stopnje razvitosti tako regije kot tudi države članice.

V pogajalskem okviru za naslednji večletni finančni okvir je ciprsko predsedstvo predlagalo znižanje teh faktorjev. Prvi izračuni držav članic so pokazali, da bi skupni učinek predlaganih sprememb teh faktorjev nesorazmerno prizadel regije različnih držav članic. Predlagane spremembe bi med drugimi močno občutila tudi slovenska manj razvita regija – Vzhodna Slovenija, ki bi ji novi izračuni prinesli znižanje sredstev za kar 40 %.

V luči tega me zanima naslednje:

Evropske poslanke in poslanci nismo imeli nobene možnosti za razpravo o spremembah formul za izračun faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti ter posledicah, ki jih te spremembe nosijo, čeprav le-te več kot očitno spadajo v področje kohezijske politike, kjer ima Evropski parlament pristojnost soodločanja. Zanima me, zakaj poslanke in poslanci nismo bili vključeni v ta proces?

V trenutnem kriznem času in ob pogledu na prepotrebno izvajanje solidarnosti in investicijskih politik v EU, je preprosto nemogoče obrazložiti, zakaj bi se morala manj razvita regija v manj razviti državi članici, s svojim BDP, nižjim od 75 % evropskega, soočiti z izgubo skoraj polovice kohezijskih sredstev. Kakšni so razlogi Sveta za podporo predlogom sprememb, ki gredo jasno navzkriž evropski ideji solidarnosti?

Odgovor

(18. februar 2013)

V Svetu še vedno potekajo pogajanja o večletnem finančnem okviru 2014–2020, zato ni mogoče napovedati njihovega izida.

V skladu s členom 312 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije je mogoče uredbo o določitvi večletnega finančnega okvira sprejeti šele potem, ko da soglasje Evropski parlament.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010609/12

to the Council

Mojca Kleva (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: National prosperity factors

National prosperity factors determine the level of EU funding for less prosperous regions and are based on calculations of the level of development of both the region and the Member State.

In the negotiations for the next multiannual financial framework the Cypriot Presidency proposed lowering these factors. Initial calculations by the Member States show that the overall effect of the proposed changes to these factors would have a disproportionate impact on the regions of various Member States. One of the less developed regions where the proposed changes would have a major impact is Eastern Slovenia, which, under the new calculations, would see its funding fall by as much as 40%.

1.

The European Parliament had no opportunity to debate the changes to the formulas for calculating national prosperity factors and the consequences of those changes, even though they quite clearly fall under the area of cohesion policy, where the European Parliament has the power of co-decision. I would like to know why we, the Members of the European Parliament, were not included in this process.

2.

In the current economic crisis, and given the need for solidarity and investment policies in the EU, it is simply impossible to understand how a less-developed region in a less-developed Member State, with a GDP 75% lower than the EU average, should have to cope with losing almost half of its cohesion funds. What are the Council's reasons for supporting these proposed changes, which clearly run counter to the European idea of solidarity?

Reply

(18 February 2013)

Negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 are continuing to take place within the Council, so it is not in a position to anticipate their outcome.

Under Article 312 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Parliament must give its consent before the regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework can be adopted.

(Slovenska različica)

Vprašanje za pisni odgovor E-010610/12

za Komisijo

Mojca Kleva (S&D)

(20. november 2012)

Zadeva: Sistem faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti

Sistem faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti (ang. national prosperity factors) določa nivo evropskih sredstev za manj razvite regije in temelji na izračunih stopnje razvitosti tako regije kot tudi države članice.

V pogajalskem okviru za naslednji večletni finančni okvir je ciprsko predsedstvo predlagalo znižanje teh faktorjev. Prvi izračuni držav članic so pokazali, da bi skupni učinek predlaganih sprememb teh faktorjev nesorazmerno prizadel regije različnih držav članic. Predlagane spremembe bi med drugimi močno občutila tudi slovenska manj razvita regija – Vzhodna Slovenija, ki bi ji novi izračuni prinesli znižanje sredstev za kar 40 %.

V luči tega me zanima naslednje:

Evropske poslanke in poslanci nismo imeli nobene možnosti za razpravo o spremembah formul za izračun faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti ter posledicah, ki jih te spremembe nosijo, čeprav le-te več kot očitno spadajo v področje kohezijske politike, kjer ima Evropski parlament pristojnost soodločanja. Zanima me, zakaj poslanke in poslanci nismo bili vključeni v ta proces? Glede na to, da so predlogi prišli s strani ciprskega predsedstva za Svet (only in the heading), kako se do njih opredeljuje Komisija?

V trenutnem kriznem času in ob pogledu na prepotrebno izvajanje solidarnosti in investicijskih politik v EU, je preprosto nemogoče obrazložiti, zakaj bi se morala manj razvita regija v manj razviti državi članici, s svojim BDP, nižjim od 75 % evropskega, soočiti z izgubo skoraj polovice kohezijskih sredstev. Kakšni so razlogi Komisije za podporo predlogom sprememb, ki gredo jasno navzkriž evropski ideji solidarnosti?

Odgovor komisarja Johannesa Hahna v imenu Komisije

(21. januar 2013)

1.

Komisija je v predlogu večletnega finančnega okvira za obdobje 2014–2020 prilagodila različne kvantitativne elemente, na katerih temelji izračun finančnih dodelitev, da bi zagotovila uravnotežen predlog glede na proračunske omejitve. Komisija se je seznanila s predlogi ciprskega predsedstva za Svet (only in the heading). Treba je opozoriti, da bodo končne vrednosti faktorjev nacionalne razvitosti ter drugih elementov, ki določajo raven finančnih dodelitev, določene šele ob koncu pogajanj o večletnem finančnem okviru, v katera je v celoti vključen Evropski parlament.

2.

Komisija je predlagala objektivno metodo izračuna finančnih dodelitev za manj razvite regije, ki upošteva regionalno in nacionalno razvitost ter stopnjo brezposelnosti. Glede na lastnosti regij in njihovega razvoja lahko to povzroči znižanje regionalnih finančnih dodelitev v primerjavi z obdobjem 2007–2013. V primeru Vzhodne Slovenije je zmanjšanje v veliki meri mogoče pojasniti z dejstvom, da se je BDP na prebivalca v regiji povečal v primerjavi s povprečjem EU.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010610/12

to the Commission

Mojca Kleva (S&D)

(20 November 2012)

Subject: National prosperity factors

National prosperity factors determine the level of EU funding for less prosperous regions and are based on calculations of the level of development of both the region and the Member State.

In the negotiations for the next multiannual financial framework the Cypriot Presidency proposed lowering these factors. Initial calculations by the Member States show that the overall effect of the proposed changes to these factors would have a disproportionate impact on the regions of various Member States. One of the less developed regions where the proposed changes would have a major impact is Eastern Slovenia, which, under the new calculations, would see its funding fall by as much as 40%.

1.

The European Parliament had no opportunity to debate the changes to the formulas for calculating national prosperity factors and the consequences of those changes, even though they quite clearly fall under the area of cohesion policy, where the European Parliament has the power of co-decision. I would like to know why we, the Members of the European Parliament, were not included in this process. Given that these proposals have come from the Cypriot Council Presidency, what is the Commission's position on them?

2.

In the current economic crisis, and given the need for solidarity and investment policies in the EU, it is simply impossible to understand how a less-developed region in a less-developed Member State, with a GDP 75% lower than the EU average, should have to cope with losing almost half of its cohesion funds. What are the Commission's reasons for supporting these proposed changes, which clearly run counter to the European idea of solidarity?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

1.

In its proposal for the 2014-2020 Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF), the Commission has adjusted the various quantitative elements underpinning the calculation of financial allocations in order to ensure a balanced proposal given the budgetary constraints. The Commission took note of the proposals by the Cyprus Presidency of the Council. It has to be noted that the final values of the national prosperity factors, and of the other elements determining the level of the allocations, will only be determined at the end of the MFF negotiations, in which the European Parliament is fully engaged.

2.

The Commission has proposed an objective allocation calculation method for less-developed regions which takes into account both regional and national prosperity, together with the unemployment level. Depending on the regions' characteristics and its evolution, this can lead to reductions of the regional allocations in comparison to the 2007-2013 period. In the case of Eastern Slovenia the reduction can, to a large extent, be explained by the fact that the region's GDP/capita has increased in comparison with the EU average.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010611/12

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE) y Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Ataques a Gaza

En los últimos ataques a Gaza murieron un centenar de palestinos, incluyendo niños y niñas, y 3 israelíes. Israel autorizó el desplazamiento de 75 000 militares reservistas y bombardeó 80 lugares solamente durante la noche de domingo a lunes 19 de noviembre. Esto puede desencadenar un conflicto armado en toda la zona.

El presidente de la Autoridad Nacional Palestina (ANP), Mahmud Abbas, exhortó al pueblo palestino a resistir las agresiones de Israel de forma pacífica y el Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas pidió el alto al fuego. Sin embargo, la UE, a través de la Alta Representante Catherine Ashton, ha reconocido el derecho de Israel a defenderse de los ataques de Hamás, que considera «inaceptables». El bloque europeo también ha llamado a las autoridades israelíes a responder de forma proporcionada. En la próxima reunión del Consejo, los ministros de Asuntos Exteriores analizarán la situación.

¿Qué quiere decir concretamente la Sra. Ashton con responder de forma proporcionada? La invasión terrestre que planea Israel, ¿entra dentro de su concepto de «forma proporcionada»? Bombardear un territorio ocupado, donde viven civiles, con un armamento altamente superior, ¿es considerado defensa por parte del Estado de Israel? ¿Por qué la Alta Representante no pide el alto al fuego tal y como hizo el Secretario General de la ONU?

¿Qué contactos tiene la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante con la Liga de países árabes y con la ANP? ¿Cómo piensa intervenir la diplomacia europea para evitar más ataques de Israel a Palestina?

¿Qué acciones tomará la UE para proteger a los civiles, israelíes y palestinos que se encuentran en esta zona? ¿Ha desplegado ya servicios de ayuda a refugiados?

Respuesta de la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta Ashton en nombre de la Comisión

(25 de enero de 2013)

La Sra. Ashton comparte plenamente la valoración realizada por el Consejo de Asuntos Exteriores de los acontecimientos en Gaza e Israel en sus conclusiones sobre Gaza de 19 de noviembre, en las que la Unión Europea pedía que se pusiera fin inmediatamente a todas las hostilidades y al sufrimiento injustificable inflingido a civiles inocentes. El Consejo de Asuntos Exteriores reconoció el derecho de Israel a proteger a su población, pero subrayó también, sin entrar en más detalles, que al hacerlo debe actuar de manera proporcionada y garantizar la protección de la población civil en todo momento. Asimismo la UE recalcó la necesidad de que todas las partes respeten plenamente el Derecho internacional humanitario.

A lo largo de toda la escalada de violencia la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta se mantuvo continuamente en estrecho contacto con los principales interesados en la región y fuera de ella, especialmente con Egipto, los Estados Unidos, Israel, la Autoridad Nacional Palestina, las Naciones Unidas y la Liga Árabe.

Las conclusiones del Consejo sobre el proceso de paz en Oriente Próximo, publicadas tras la reunión del Consejo de Asuntos Exteriores de 10 de diciembre, reflejan el compromiso inquebrantable de la UE de contribuir a que se alcance un acuerdo en este conflicto, entre otras cosas buscando una solución a la situación en la Franja de Gaza, que es insostenible. En dichas conclusiones la UE expuso, entre otras cosas, su determinación a facilitar el desarrollo social y económico de la Franja de Gaza y la necesidad de solucionar urgentemente y de manera efectiva el problema de la transferencia ilegal de armas a la misma. Por añadidura, la UE se mostró dispuesta a utilizar los instrumentos de que dispone para apoyar los esfuerzos de las partes, lo que incluye la posible reactivación, mediante los medios adecuados, de la misión EUBAM Rafah, y subrayó su voluntad de estudiar otras vías para hacer frente a la situación en la Franja de Gaza, especialmente con las partes interesadas de la región, de conformidad con la Resolución 1860 (2009) del Consejo de Segurdiad de las Naciones Unidas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010611/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE) and Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Attacks on Gaza

The latest attacks on Gaza have killed a hundred Palestinians, including children, and three Israelis. Israel authorised the mobilisation of 75 000 military reservists and bombed 80 sites solely during the night of Sunday to Monday 19 November. This could spark off an armed conflict throughout the zone.

The President of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Mahmud Abbas, called on the people of Palestine to resist Israel’s assaults peacefully and the United Nations Secretary-General called for a cease-fire. The EU, however, through its High Representative Catherine Ashton, has recognised Israel’s right to defend itself from the attacks by Hamas, which it considers ‘unacceptable’. Europe also urged Israel to ensure that its response is proportionate. The Ministers for Foreign Affairs will analyse the situation at the next meeting of the Council.

What exactly does Baroness Ashton mean by a proportionate response? Does her concept of a proportionate response include the ground invasion planned by Israel? Does she consider the State of Israel to be defending itself when it uses highly superior weapons to bomb occupied territory where civilians live? Why does the High Representative not call for a cease-fire as did the UN Secretary-General?

What contacts does the Vice-President/High Representative have with the Arab League and the PNA? How does European diplomacy intend to intervene to prevent further attacks by Israel and Palestine?

What action will the EU take to protect the Israeli and Palestinian civilians in this zone? Has it yet deployed any aid services for refugees?

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

(25 January 2013)

The HR/VP fully shares the assessment of the events in Gaza and Israel made by the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) in its Conclusions on Gaza of 19 November, in which the EU called for an immediate end to all hostilities and to the unjustifiable suffering on innocent civilians. Whilst recognising the right of Israel to protect its population, the FAC furthermore stressed, without elaborating further, that in doing so it must act proportionately and ensure the protection of civilians at all times. The EU also stressed the need for all sides to fully respect international humanitarian law.

Throughout the escalation of violence, the HR/VP was in continuous close contact with key players in the region and elsewhere, in particular with Egypt, the United States, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the United Nations (UN) and the Arab League.

The Council conclusions on Middle East peace process issued following the FAC meeting on 10 December reflect the EU’s unwavering commitment to contributing to the settlement of the conflict, including finding a solution to the unsustainable situation in the Gaza Strip. In these conclusions the EU stated among other things that it is committed to facilitating the social and economic development of the Gaza Strip and that the issue of illegal weapons transfer into the Gaza Strip has to be effectively addressed as a matter of urgency. In addition, the EU expressed its readiness to make use of its instruments in support of the parties’ efforts, including the possible reactivation, in the appropriate way, of the EUBAM Rafah mission, and underlined its readiness to explore further ways to address the situation in the Gaza Strip, including with concerned parties in the region, in line with UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1860 (2009).

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010612/12

a la Comisión

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Fondo Europeo contra la pobreza y la exclusión social

Uno de los efectos más perversos de la actual crisis económica es su impacto sobre el incremento de la pobreza en nuestras sociedades. En los últimos meses hemos presenciado un preocupante incremento de la desigualdad social en muchos países miembros de la Unión Europea.

Por otro lado, la destrucción de puestos de trabajo ha llevado a muchas familias a situaciones de desesperación, aumentando de forma significativa el riesgo de exclusión social.

¿Contempla la Comisión la posibilidad de crear un fondo específico para ayudar a combatir la pobreza y la exclusión social a escala europea?

¿Qué medidas concretas ha adoptado la Comisión para la promoción de la activación de colectivos en situación o en riesgo de exclusión social para combatir y prevenir el desempleo y, así, la pobreza?

En Europa hay casi 20 millones de niños que están en riesgo de pobreza. Resolver este problema es fundamental para el cumplimiento de los objetivos de la UE sobre cohesión social y empleo para el 2020. ¿En qué medida ayudará a erradicar la pobreza infantil el paquete de medidas de inversión social que prevé lanzar la Comisión a comienzos del próximo año?

Respuesta del Sr. Andor en nombre de la Comisión

(21 de enero de 2013)

La Estrategia Europa 2020 para un crecimiento inteligente, sostenible e integrador reconoce como una de las prioirdades de la UE la lucha contra la pobreza y la exclusión social. Los progresos realizados para cumplir este objetivo se evalúan en el Semestre Europeo, que ha conducido a la adopción, en julio de 2012, de recomendaciones específicas por país en ámbitos como los servicios sociales y la reducción de la pobreza. Abordar el desempleo y las consecuencias sociales de la crisis constituye una de las cinco prioridades establecidas en el Estudio Prospectivo Anual sobre el Crecimiento 2013.

El Paquete sobre Inversión Social, que se adoptará a principios de 2013, se centra en la infancia e incluye una Recomendación de la Comisión sobre la pobreza infantil. En dicha Recomendación se proponen principios comunes en ámbitos como el apoyo a las familias (acceso al mercado laboral para los padres y ayudas a los ingresos), los servicios (cuidado de niños, educación, asistencia sanitaria, vivienda y servicios sociales) y la participación de los niños.

Con respecto a la financiación, la Comisión ha propuesto que al menos el 25 % de los fondos de la política de cohesión en el periodo 2014-2020 se asigne al Fondo Social Europeo, y al menos el 20 % de ese importe específicamente a la inclusión social. En octubre de 2012, la Comisión publicó una propuesta relativa a un Fondo de Ayuda Europea para los Más Necesitados, dotado con un presupuesto de 2 500 millones de euros para el periodo comprendido entre 2014 y 2020, con el objeto de abordar la privación material y apoyar los programas de los Estados miembros destinados a suministrar alimentos, ropa y otros bienes básicos esenciales a las personas sin hogar y a los niños que padecen privaciones materiales. Apoyará asimismo la integración social de las personas más alejadas del mercado laboral, que no pueden beneficiarse de las medidas de activación del FSE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010612/12

to the Commission

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: European Fund against poverty and social exclusion

One of the most perverse effects of the current economic crisis is that it is causing poverty to increase within our societies. Over the last few months we have witnessed a worrying increase in social inequality in many EU Member States.

Furthermore, the destruction of jobs has brought many families to a state of despair and has significantly increased the risk of social exclusion.

Is the Commission considering the possibility of setting up a special fund to help combat poverty and social exclusion at European level?

What specific action has the Commission taken in order to stimulate communities which are socially excluded or at risk of social exclusion, with a view to combating and preventing unemployment and hence poverty?

In Europe almost 20 million children are at risk of falling into poverty. Solving this problem is essential if the EU's 2020 social-cohesion and employment objectives are to be achieved. To what extent will the package of social-investment measures which the Commission is due to launch at the start of next year help to eradicate child poverty?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

Combating poverty and social exclusion has been recognised as an EU priority in the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Progress towards meeting it is monitored through the European Semester and led to the adoption in July 2012 of country-specific recommendations covering such issues as social services and poverty reduction. Tackling unemployment and the social consequences of the crisis is one of the five priorities identified in the 2013 Annual Growth Survey.

The Social Investment Package, which will be adopted in early 2013, will focus on children and include a Commission recommendation on child poverty. The latter will propose common principles in the areas of support for families (access to the labour market for parents and income support), services (childcare, education, healthcare, housing and social services) and children's participation.

As regards financing, the Commission has proposed that at least 25% of Cohesion Policy funding in 2014-20 be allocated to the European Social Fund, and at least 20% of that amount be earmarked for social inclusion. In October 2012 the Commission published a proposal for a Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived with a budget of EUR 2.5 billion between 2014-20, which will tackle material deprivation and support Member State schemes providing food, clothing and other essential basic goods to homeless people and materially-deprived children. It will also provide support to the social integration of persons placed the furthest away from the labour market where they cannot sufficiently benefit from activation measures under the ESF.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010613/12

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Artículo 35 del Reglamento (CE) no 800/2008: Limitaciones a los préstamos y subvenciones públicas para empresas que se financian con «anticipos reembolsables»

El primer proyecto de Ictineu Submarins SL (empresa de nueva creación) es puramente de I+D+i y ha consistido en el diseño, ingeniería y construcción de un submarino científico para 1 200 metros de profundidad y tres pasajeros, con presupuesto de 2,5 millones de euros. Esta empresa se ha acogido a las líneas de financiación públicas reguladas en el Marco comunitario sobre ayudas estatales de investigación, desarrollo e innovación (2006/C 323/01) y el Reglamento (CE) no 800/2008 de la Comisión de 6 de agosto de 2008. Estas fijan, para una microempresa de nueva creación, un máximo del 45 % de subvención, y un máximo del 75 % para la suma de subvenciones más préstamos públicos. Las que se acogen además al artículo 35 del Reglamento de 2008, tienen un límite de 1 millón de euros de «ayuda». En España los anticipos reembolsables son los préstamos Neotec del CDTI. En 2010, cuando la empresa solicitó el Neotec 2, estos préstamos estaban limitados a un máximo de 1 millón de euros.

En ese momento la empresa tenía concedido casi medio millón en subvenciones públicas. CDTI contabilizó los anticipos reembolsables como si fueran 100 % subvención, en vez de contabilizar la subvención bruta equivalente, tal como indican el Marco y Reglamento Comunitario en más de 12 ocasiones diferentes en sus textos. De esta forma, CDTI recortó medio millón del préstamo acogiéndose al artículo 5.4 del Marco y alegando que la empresa había llegado al máximo de 1 millón de euros de subvención establecido en el artículo 35 del Reglamento de 2008 del Marco. Puesto que los Neotec son incompatibles con el resto de préstamos y subvenciones de CDTI, esta decisión de CDTI contraviene el apartado 1.5 Motivación de las medidas específicas contempladas en el presente Marco por haber perjudicado la financiación del proyecto de la empresa, ante la imposibilidad de haber llegado a los máximos establecidos. En estos momentos la empresa ha conseguido tan sólo un 11,5 % de subvención pública (500.000 euros), o un 35,5 % si se suman subvención más préstamos públicos.

Cuando en el artículo 35, apartado 4, del Reglamento de 2008 se fija un límite de 1 millón de euros de «ayuda», esta «ayuda» ¿se refiere a subvención a fondo perdido, o se refiere a la suma de subvenciones más préstamos?

Respuesta del Sr. Almunia en nombre de la Comisión

(1 de febrero de 2013)

La Comisión desea señalar que, conforme a lo dispuesto en el artículo 4 del Reglamento (CE) n° 800/2008 de la Comisión, de 6 de agosto de 2008, por el que se declaran determinadas categorías de ayudas compatibles con el mercado común en aplicación de los artículos 87 y 88 del Tratado, « … Cuando se conceda una ayuda en cualquier forma distinta de una subvención, el importe de la ayuda será su equivalente en subvención. » .

Por consiguiente, si la ayuda consiste en una combinación de subvenciones no reembolsables e instrumentos reembolsables del tipo préstamos, las autoridades que conceden la ayuda deben asegurarse de que la suma del valor de las subvenciones no reembolsables y del equivalente en subvención de los instrumentos de ayuda reembolsables se mantenga por debajo de los umbrales especificados para el tipo de ayuda correspondiente, es decir, el límite de 1 millón de euros fijado en el artículo 35, apartado 4, del mencionado Reglamento en el caso de las ayudas a empresas jóvenes e innovadoras.

Conviene además mencionar que ese límite de 1 millón de euros representa un importe máximo que no se puede exceder. Por lo que respecta a la ayuda supuestamente insuficiente concedida a Ictineu, la Comisión desea subrayar que las autoridades nacionales que otorgan la ayuda tienen la posibilidad de conceder importes más bajos, para lo que pueden tener en cuenta el valor nominal de los instrumentos reembolsables cuando se combinen distintos instrumentos de ayuda.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010613/12

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 800/2008: Limits on loans and public grants for enterprises funded by means of repayable advances

The first project of ICTINEU Submarins S.L, a new company, is purely an RDI venture and concerns the design, engineering and construction of a scientific submersible capable of operating at depths of 1 200 metres and holding three people. The project has a budget of EUR 2.5 million. ICTINEU applied for the public funding available under the Community Framework for state aid for Research and Development and Innovation (2006/C 323/01) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008. Young micro enterprises are eligible to receive grant funding of up to 45% of the total cost of a project, or a combination of grants and public loans amounting to a maximum of 75% of that total cost. Any aid granted under Article 35 of the aforementioned regulation should not exceed EUR 1 million. In Spain, repayable advances take the form of the NEOTEC loans awarded by the Centre for Industrial and Technological Development (Centro para el Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial — CDTI). In 2010, when ICTINEU applied for NEOTEC 2 funding, these loans could not exceed EUR 1 million.

At that time the company had received almost EUR 500 000 in public grants. The CDTI classified the repayable advances solely as grants, rather than calculating the gross grant equivalent, as specified in more than 12 different places in the Community framework and regulation. The CDTI thus cut EUR 500 000 from the loan, citing Section 5.4 of the Community Framework and arguing that ICTINEU had received the maximum grant of EUR 1 million laid down in Article 35 of the 2008 regulation. Given that NEOTEC funding is incompatible with the other loans and grants awarded by the CDTI, this decision by the CDTI contravenes Section 1.5 of the Community framework (motivation of specific measures), jeopardising the support for ICTINEU's project by making it impossible for the company to secure the maximum funding for which it is eligible. So far the company has received public grants amounting to only 11.5% (EUR 500 000) of the cost of the project, or 35.5% of the cost if public loans are also taken into account.

When Article 35(4) of the 2008 regulation sets an ‘aid’ limit of EUR 1 million, does this ‘aid’ refer to non-repayable grants or to the sum of both grants and loans?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2013)

The Commission points out that according to the provisions of Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Article 87 and 88 of the Treaty, ‘… where aid is awarded in a form other than a grant, the aid amount shall be the grant equivalent of the aid ’.

Therefore, if aid is granted through a combination of non-repayable grants and repayable instruments such as loans, the granting authorities should ensure that the sum of the value of the non-repayable grants and of the grant equivalent of the repayable aid instruments stays below the thresholds specified for the relevant type of aid, e.g. the EUR 1 million aid limit set out in Article 35(4) of the above Regulation with regard to aid to young innovative enterprises.

However, it is worth mentioning that the EUR 1 million aid limit represents a maximum amount that should not be exceeded. As to the allegedly insufficient support granted to ICTINEU, the Commission emphasises that the national granting authorities remain free to grant lower amounts, including by taking into account the nominal value of repayable aid instruments when different aid instruments are combined.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010614/12

to the Commission

Robert Sturdy (ECR)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: EU-US trade relations: the nexus provision

Following the EU-US Summit of 24 November 2011, it was decided to launch a high-level working group for growth and jobs, tasked with exploring different ways of deepening the transatlantic trade relationship, with a view to addressing existing barriers to trade prior to the possible opening of formal negotiations.

1.

Does the Commission plan to address, within the remit of its negotiating mandate, the use of the

‘nexus provision’ which unfairly insists that, for example, UK exporters of software goods must register for sales tax and income tax in some parts of the United States, even without having a physical presence in the territory itself?

2.

To what extent does the Commission consider this blatant extension of fiscal reach beyond the boundaries of its jurisdiction a barrier to EU exports?

3.

To what extent does the Commission foresee a willingness by the US to address this nexus, which exists in 25 states, considering the fact that the states are not themselves bound by US double taxation agreements and the Federal Government has no power to enforce them?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2013)

The work of the EU-US High Level Working Group for Jobs and Growth is under way and good progress has been achieved in the joint analysis that the Commission is carrying out with its American counterparts. The High level Working Group has been looking into the details of all areas and is looking forward to issuing a final report soon.

Work done so far has been of a preparatory nature, and details of various areas will have to be dealt with during negotiations, should the decision be taken to launch such negotiations.

The specific point the Honourable Member is referring to has so far not been dealt with in the context of the preparatory work of the High Level Working Group. It will have to be decided in which manner this point should be analysed and tackled.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010615/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Condizioni estremamente deplorevoli dei canili municipali in Romania

Recentemente sono state sottoposte all'attenzione dell'interrogante le misere condizioni dei canili municipali in Romania. Le associazioni animaliste temono fortemente che questi canili violino i diritti degli animali nell'UE. In base alle informazioni disponibili, le autorità rumene utilizzano metodi crudeli per catturare i cani randagi. Ma le preoccupazioni aumentano una volta che i cani si trovano nei canili municipali, che sono costituiti da recinti di piccole dimensioni, all'aperto e chiusi su ogni lato. I canili non sono riscaldati e pertanto durante l'inverno l'acqua a disposizione dei cani congela, tanto che gli animali corrono il rischio di morire per disidratazione, fame e freddo.

In Romania i proprietari dei cani non vengono registrati e non esistono leggi che impongano l'identificazione di tutti i cani, sia di proprietà sia abbandonati, per cui risulta difficile determinare se un cane sia di proprietà, abbandonato o randagio. La Romania è firmataria della Convenzione europea per la protezione degli animali da compagnia (serie dei trattati del Consiglio d'Europa, n. 125), entrata in vigore in Romania nel 2005, che sancisce l'obbligo morale di rispettare tutte le creature viventi. Allo stesso modo, l'articolo 13 del trattato di Lisbona sancisce che «l'Unione e gli Stati membri tengono pienamente conto delle esigenze in materia di benessere degli animali in quanto esseri senzienti».

1.

È la Commissione al corrente delle crudeli condizioni riscontrate nei canili municipali rumeni? Posto che la Romania è divenuta Stato membro nel 2007, qual è la posizione della Commissione in proposito?

2.

Ritiene la Commissione opportuno invitare le autorità rumene a effettuare ispezioni in tutti i canili municipali e a impegnarsi nell'attuazione di nuove norme in linea con i trattati dell'UE?

3.

Quali azioni intende intraprendere al fine di accrescere il benessere degli animali in Romania?

Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

Si rinvia l'onorevole deputata alle risposte alle interrogazioni scritte E‐006543/2011, E-007161/2011, E-009002/2011,P-004480/2012 e E-002062/2012 (64) che affrontano le problematiche dei cani randagi e della gestione delle popolazioni canine.

La Commissione non è chiamata a svolgere un ruolo specifico nella materia poiché i canili sono gestiti dalle autorità nazionali competenti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010615/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Concern over inhumane conditions at municipal dog pounds in Romania

The extremely poor standard of municipal dog pounds in Romania has recently been brought to my attention. Animal rights groups are much concerned that these pounds violate animal rights in the EU. According to reports, the Romanian authorities employ cruel tactics to catch stray dogs. Such concerns are multiplied, however, once the dogs have been brought to the municipal dog pounds, which are small, outdoor, fenced-off enclosures. As the facilities have no heating, any water the dogs receive freezes over in the winter, so that dogs are likely to die from dehydration, hunger and cold.

In Romania, dog owners are not registered, and there are no laws requiring the identification of all owned and abandoned dogs. This makes it difficult to determine whether a dog is owned, abandoned or stray. Romania is signatory to the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals (Council of Europe Treaty Series No 125). The Convention, which entered into force in Romania in 2005, highlights the moral obligation to respect all living creatures. Article 13 of the Lisbon Treaty also states that ‘the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals’.

1.

Is the Commission aware of the inhumane conditions found at Romanian municipal dog pounds? Given that Romania became a Member State in 2007, what is the Commission’s position on this matter?

2.

Does the Commission not believe that it would be beneficial to invite the Romanian authorities to inspect all municipal dog pounds and to work strongly to implement new standards that are in line with the EU Treaties?

3.

What steps need to be to be taken, in the Commission’s view, to improve animal welfare in Romania?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Honourable Member is invited to refer to the answers to written questions E‐006543/2011, E-007161/2011, E-009002/2011,P-004480/2012 and E-002062/2012 (65) which address the issues of stray dogs and of dog population management.

The Commission has no specific role regarding the way animal shelters are managed by the national competent authorities.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010616/12

to the Commission

Andrew Henry William Brons (NI)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: UK Membership of the EU

A nationwide Observer opinion poll in the UK reveals that 56% of the UK’s population would likely vote to leave the EU in a referendum, with only 30% in favour of remaining.

The Commission will, of course, be aware of negative sentiment in the UK from its own sources.

1.

Is the Commission engaged in any internal discussions or preparations in respect of the probability that the UK will eventually secede from the EU and will almost certainly demand the negotiation of a repatriation of competences?

2.

Does the Commission consider that it will be better able to carry out its objective of building an ever closer union without the hostile presence, veto and voting weight of the UK?

Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2013)

1.

No.

2.

No. The Commission remains convinced that the UK's membership of the EU is in the best interests of both the UK and the EU as a whole.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010618/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Transito merci sulle infrastrutture transalpine: posizione di svantaggio dell'Italia

Dal 1° novembre 2012 il transito degli autocarri con massa superiore alle 3,5t omologati Euro2 sarà inibito nel traforo del Monte Bianco. Inoltre, in tale traforo e nel traforo del Frejus saranno aumentati i pedaggi del 5,01 %, con un ulteriore aggravio di spesa per i mezzi Euro3, come consentito dalla direttiva 2011/79/UE. Inizialmente, le autorità francesi richiedevano anche la sospensione del transito dei veicoli Euro3 nel versante francese, adducendo motivi di inquinamento ambientale. Tuttavia, la presentazione di un secondo studio sull'inquinamento dell'aria, che portava risultati molto differenti e meno negativi rispetto a quelli presentati dalla prefettura dell'Alta Savoia, unitamente all'incongruenza logica di esentare da tale divieto il traffico merci con destinazione nella sola Valle dell'Arve, hanno portato al ritiro della richiesta.

Vanno consideranti i seguenti elementi:

l'Italia è separata dal resto d'Europa dall'arco alpino e questo pone il mercato dei trasporti italiano in una posizione di netto svantaggio rispetto agli altri Stati membri;

il trasporto su gomma nelle infrastrutture transalpine esistenti è l'unica via d'accesso delle merci italiane agli altri mercati europei;

le infrastrutture potenzialmente alternative al trasporto su strada, quali la TAV Torino-Lione o il potenziamento dell'asse ferroviario del Brennero, saranno ultimate solo fra il 2025 e il 2030;

spesso sono attuate dai paesi di confine, concorrenti dell'Italia, misure unilaterali di contrasto al transito merci dall'Italia sull'arco alpino (come nel caso sopra esposto, un divieto di transito di determinati veicoli nel lato francese è di fatto un divieto di transito nelle infrastrutture transalpine).

Ciò premesso, può la Commissione far sapere come intende agire per tutelare l'Italia, il cui mercato rischia di essere relegato sempre più ai margini rispetto ai mercati degli altri Stati membri, schiacciato da normative e balzelli che all'atto pratico ricadono solo sul nostro paese?

Dato che si rende sempre più necessario e giusto, nel rispetto dell'ambiente, un rinnovo dei veicoli commerciali circolanti, intende la Commissione mettere in campo delle risorse destinate alle imprese per sostenerle nell'acquisto di nuovi mezzi meno inquinanti?

Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione

(21 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione segue con attenzione le questioni relative al traffico transalpino. Garantisce che le norme che disciplinano le attività del trasporto transalpino rispettino pienamente l’acquis dell’UE (ad esempio, che siano applicate senza discriminazioni). Secondo le informazioni di cui dispone la Commissione, i pedaggi da pagare e i divieti di circolazione sulle infrastrutture di transito alpine si applicano nello stesso modo a tutti gli autotrasportatori, a prescindere dal paese di origine.

L'UE favorisce lo sviluppo sostenibile del parco veicoli, tra l’altro, adottando disposizioni volte ad autorizzare pedaggi differenziati in funzione della categoria di emissione EURO (direttiva «Eurobollo») (66), promuovendo investimenti nelle tecnologie avanzate e nell’innovazione per veicoli puliti (ad esempio nel contesto dell’iniziativa CARS 2020 lanciata di recente) e consentendo regimi di sostegno di vario genere per il rinnovo della flotta a livello di Stati membri.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010618/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Goods transit through transalpine tunnels: Italy at a disadvantage

From 1 November 2012 heavy goods vehicles of over 3.5 tonnes classified as Euro 2 will be forbidden to use the Mont Blanc tunnel. In addition, the tolls for this tunnel and the Fréjus tunnel will be increased by 5.01%, with a further increase for Euro 3 vehicles, which is permissible under Directive 2011/76/EU. Initially, the French authorities also requested a suspension of transit by Euro 3 vehicles on the French side, for reasons of environmental pollution. However, they withdrew their request when a second air pollution study was submitted, with very different, less negative results than those of the prefecture of Haute‐Savoie, and bearing in mind that it was illogical to exempt goods traffic destined only for Valle dell'Arve from the ban.

It should be borne in mind that:

Italy is separated from the rest of Europe by the Alps, which puts the Italian haulage industry at a distinct disadvantage compared with other Member States;

road haulage using existing transalpine tunnels is the only way for Italian goods to access other European markets;

potential alternatives to road haulage, such as the Turin‐Lyon TGV, or the upgrade of the Brenner rail link, will not be complete until between 2025 and 2030;

neighbouring countries, Italy's competitors, often take unilateral measures against goods traffic across the Alps from Italy (as in the case described above, a ban on transit by certain vehicles on the French side is in fact a ban on transit through transalpine tunnels).

Will the Commission say what it intends to do to protect Italy, whose market is at risk of being increasingly marginalised compared with the markets of other Member States, hamstrung by rules and arbitrary taxes which in practice affect only Italy?

Given that it is increasingly necessary and right to replace the commercial vehicles on the roads, on environmental grounds, does the Commission intend to make resources available to businesses to help them buy new, less polluting vehicles?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

The Commission is closely following transalpine traffic issues. It ensures that the rules governing transalpine transport activities fully comply with the EU acquis (e.g. that they are applied without discrimination). According to the Commission's information, the charges to be paid and the traffic bans on Alpine transit routes apply equally to all hauliers regardless of their country of origin.

The EU is supporting the sustainable development of the European vehicle fleet among others by adopting provisions which allow for a differentiation of tolls according to EURO emission class (Eurovignette Directive) (67), by promoting investment in advanced technologies and innovation for clean vehicles (e.g. in the context of the recently launched CARS 2020 initiative) and by allowing various support schemes for fleet renewal at the level of Member States.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010619/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Berlato (PPE) e Antonio Cancian (PPE)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Crisi del settore delle macchine per costruzioni e revisione della legislazione in materia

L'industria meccanica e, in particolare, quella delle macchine per costruzioni hanno investito milioni di euro per conformarsi alla legislazione in materia di emissioni e rumore, riducendo il loro impatto in termini di emissioni di oltre il 90 % durante gli ultimi dieci anni. Tuttavia si rileva che, a fronte di questi sforzi necessari per mantenere competitivo il prodotto e ottemperare alle normative europee, non è corrisposto da parte delle istituzioni nazionali e dell'Unione europea nessun provvedimento né per premiare chi acquista macchine e attrezzature di ultima generazione, né per contrastare il fenomeno dei mezzi non conformi che, immessi sul mercato, distorcono la concorrenza e possono essere pericolosi per la sicurezza e dannosi per l'ambiente.

Sulla base del piano di lavoro della Commissione europea per il 2012 e della comunicazione del Commissario Tajani del 10 ottobre 2012, emerge che essa sta riflettendo su una proposta di revisione della legislazione per renderla maggiormente effettiva. Tutto ciò premesso, si rivolgono alla Commissione le seguenti domande:

Preso atto delle difficoltà in cui versa l'industria europea delle macchine da costruzioni, quali sono le tempistiche per la presentazione della proposta di cui sopra? Ritiene che la proposta in oggetto possa essere analizzata entro la fine dell'attuale legislatura?

L'industria delle macchine per costruzioni sta rischiando di subire danni irreparabili a causa della scarsità dei mezzi messi a disposizione dalle autorità di sorveglianza del mercato e dalle dogane. Considerando che l'industria del settore, in diverse sedi, ha proposto varie soluzioni al problema, può la Commissione, partendo da questi suggerimenti, rendere noto se ritiene opportuno armonizzare le sanzioni, assicurare fondi e persone sul territorio e alle frontiere, e istituire un sistema informatico unico di allerta a cui gli operatori economici possano accedere per segnalare la presenza di macchine non conformi alla legge?

Il problema della conformità non coincide con la questione della sicurezza poiché la conformità include la sicurezza ma va ben oltre: significa produrre nel rispetto della legislazione ambientale in vigore e, pertanto, nel rispetto delle regole della concorrenza leale sul mercato. Può la Commissione rendere noto se condivide questa visione?

Risposta di Antonio Tajani a nome della Commissione

(29 gennaio 2013)

La sorveglianza del mercato è la componente che sottende l'intero quadro normativo per la commercializzazione dei prodotti. È l'ultimo anello in una catena che assicura:

la conformità dei prodotti immessi sul mercato unionale con i dispositivi in vigore, siano essi finalizzati alla protezione dell'ambiente, alla salute e sicurezza, alla protezione dei consumatori o ad altri interessi pubblici; e

condizioni di commercio leale per gli operatori economici responsabili.

La Commissione si trova ora nella fase finale di preparazione di una proposta relativa a un nuovo regolamento a se stante sulla sorveglianza del mercato. Esso prepara la via per un sistema maggiormente collaborativo e stretto di sorveglianza del mercato e porrà a livello dell'Unione delle basi atte ad assicurare un quadro giuridico chiaro e con obiettivi ben definiti. La Commissione non intende però proporre l'armonizzazione delle sanzioni poiché quest'ambito è di esclusiva competenza degli Stati membri. Quanto all'istituzione di un sistema informatico unico di allerta, la Commissione ribadisce che già nell'ambito della legislazione attuale gli operatori economici hanno l'obbligo di informare le autorità delle irregolarità che riscontrano. Le autorità, a loro volta, sono tenute a cooperare per il tramite dei sistemi ICSMS e RAPEX.

La proposta della Commissione è prevista per il febbraio 2013. L'obiettivo della Commissione è che essa venga adottata dal legislatore nel corso dell'attuale legislatura.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010619/12

to the Commission

Sergio Berlato (PPE) and Antonio Cancian (PPE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Crisis in the construction machinery sector and revision of the relevant legislation

The mechanical engineering industry, and the construction machinery sector in particular, have invested millions of euros in order to comply with legislation on emissions and noise, reducing their impact in terms of emissions by more than 90% over the last 10 years. It should be noted, however, that these efforts, which have been necessary to keep their products competitive and meet European standards, have not been matched by national and EU institutions with any provisions either to create incentives for purchasing state‐of‐the‐art machinery and equipment or to combat the phenomenon of non‐compliant equipment which, when placed on the market, distorts competition and can be dangerous and harmful to the environment.

The European Commission’s work plan for 2012, and Commissioner Tajani’s Communication of 10 October 2012, indicate that the Commission is envisaging a proposal to revise the legislation in order to make it more effective. In view of all the above, we wish to put the following questions to the Commission:

Given the difficulties faced by the European construction machinery industry, what is the timescale for the submission of the above proposal? Does the Commission believe that it will be possible to examine the proposal before the end of the current parliamentary term?

The construction machinery industry risks suffering irreparable damage as a result of the paucity of resources made available by the market surveillance authorities and customs services. Considering that, on a number of occasions, the industry has proposed various solutions to the problem, can the Commission, starting from these suggestions, indicate whether it considers it appropriate to harmonise penalties, ensure that resources and personnel are deployed in the field and at borders, and establish a single IT alert system which economic operators can access in order to report the presence of machinery which does not comply with the law?

The question of conformity does not conflict with the issue of safety, since conformity includes safety but goes far beyond it: it means that production complies with current environmental legislation and, consequently, with the rules governing fair competition in the market. Can the Commission indicate whether it shares this view?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

Market surveillance is the component that underpins the whole of the regulatory framework for the marketing of products. It is the last link in a chain of elements which ensures:

the compliance of products placed on the Union market with the applicable requirements, irrespective of whether these refer to environmental protection, health and safety, consumer protection or other public interests ; and

fair trading conditions for responsible economic operators.

The Commission is now in the final stage of preparation of a proposal for a new stand-alone Regulation on Market Surveillance. It paves the way for a more collaborative, joined-up system of market surveillance and will lay foundations at Union level that bring clarity and real purpose to the legal framework. The Commission, however, does not intend to propose a harmonisation of penalties since this area is the exclusive competence of Member States. As to the establishment of a single IT alert system, the Commission would like to stress that already under the current legislation economic operators have the obligation to inform authorities of the irregularities they witness. Authorities in turn are obliged to cooperate through the ICSMS and RAPEX systems.

The Commission proposal is scheduled for February 2013. Thus, the Commission's aim is indeed adoption by the legislator during the current Parliamentary term.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010620/12

aan de Commissie

Ivo Belet (PPE)

(21 november 2012)

Betreft: Achtermistlichten

Er bestaat binnen de EU geen eenduidige regelgeving over het gebruik van mistlichten.

In een aantal lidstaten, waaronder België, is het aansteken van de achtermistlichten verplicht wanneer het zicht, in geval van mist, sneeuwval, minder is dan 100 meter, alsook bij felle regen. In andere lidstaten mogen mistlichten enkel gebruikt worden wanneer de zichtbaarheid minder dan 50 meter is, maar het gebruik ervan is in deze landen niet verplicht.

Bovendien zou het gebruik van de achtermistlichten in files tot problemen leiden, omdat achterliggers hierdoor verblind kunnen worden.

Dit zou kunnen worden opgelost door aan automobilisten, wanneer zij in de file staan, de mogelijkheid te geven de achtermistlichten te doven.

1.

Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de problemen die het gebruik van achtermistlichten bij files kan veroorzaken?

2.

Zal de Commissie een initiatief nemen om het gebruik van mistlichten te harmoniseren?

Antwoord van de heer Kallas namens de Commissie

(21 december 2012)

1.

Zoals het geachte Parlementslid opmerkt, wordt het gebruik van mistlichten geregeld bij nationale wetgeving. Het is de Commissie niet bekend dat het incorrecte gebruik van achtermistlichten, met name in files, een probleem vormt voor de verkeersveiligheid.

2.

De Commissie is niet voornemens het gebruik van mistlichten te harmoniseren.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010620/12

to the Commission

Ivo Belet (PPE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Rear fog lights: There are no uniform rules on the use of fog lights in the EU

In a number of Member States, including Belgium, it is compulsory to switch on rear fog lights when visibility is less than 100 metres due to fog or falling snow, and in heavy rain. In other Member States, fog lights may be used only when visibility is less than 50 metres, but their use is not compulsory in those countries.

Moreover, the use of rear fog lights in traffic jams is said to cause problems because drivers of following vehicles may be blinded by them.

This problem could be solved by allowing drivers to switch off their rear fog lights when they are in traffic jams.

1.

Is the Commission aware of the problems that can be caused by the use of rear fog lights in traffic jams?

2.

Will the Commission take an initiative to harmonise the use of fog lights?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2012)

1.

As the Honourable Member points out, the use of fog lights is regulated in national legislation. The Commission is not aware that the incorrect use of rear fog lights, particularly in traffic jams, constitutes a problem for road safety.

2.

The Commission is not envisaging to harmonise the use of fog lights.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010621/12

alla Commissione

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Deposito illegale di ingenti quantità di rifiuti di amianto sopra una falda acquifera in una discarica a Paese (Treviso), in violazione delle direttive relative alle discariche e alla protezione delle acque

A Paese, comune di circa 22 000 abitanti in provincia di Treviso, si trova una ex cava dalla quale, nel corso degli anni, sono stati estratti oltre 1 100 000 m3 cubi di ghiaia, e nella quale è stata successivamente autorizzata una discarica per rifiuti inerti di proprietà della ditta Terra S.r.l., appartenente al gruppo Mosole. In questa discarica sono state depositate circa 80 000 tonnellate di rifiuti di amianto a seguito di un'autorizzazione (68) rilasciata dalla provincia di Treviso, dichiarata successivamente illegittima dal Consiglio di Stato (69) per la violazione della direttiva 1999/31/CE relativa alle discariche di rifiuti e della direttiva 337/85/CEE concernente la valutazione dell'impatto ambientale di determinati progetti pubblici e privati, valutazione che non è mai stata eseguita per tale discarica.

Nonostante una richiesta di bonifica presentata dall'allora sindaco di Paese, Valerio Mardegan, il 3 aprile 2008 alla provincia di Treviso, i rifiuti cancerogeni non sono stati ancora asportati e al momento sono depositati a pochissimi metri dal livello della falda acquifera dalla quale, a valle, attingono acqua centinaia di pozzi della rete idrica consortile locale, che alimenta di acqua potabile le abitazioni di decine di migliaia di cittadini delle province di Treviso e di Venezia.

In data 17 maggio 2012 la ditta titolare della discarica ha presentato ufficialmente al pubblico un progetto di riclassificazione della discarica da rifiuti inerti a rifiuti speciali, allo scopo di depositare nella stessa ulteriori 460 000 m3 di rifiuti contenenti amianto.

In tale progetto tuttavia non era ancora prevista la bonifica delle 80 000 tonnellate di rifiuti di amianto già presenti, depositate illegalmente e potenziali fonte di inquinamento della sottostante falda acquifera e dell'atmosfera.

Contro la realizzazione di questo progetto le ONG «Paeseambiente» e «Legambiente Trevignano» hanno presentato una petizione al Parlamento europeo (che ad oggi, in pochi mesi, ha raccolto le firme di ben 7 500 cittadini) e una denuncia alla Commissione.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, la Commissione non ritiene che le autorità competenti debbano procedere al più presto alla bonifica dell'amianto smaltito illegalmente nella discarica di Paese, conformemente alla normativa comunitaria relativa alle discariche di rifiuti e alla tutela delle acque? In caso affermativo, quali azioni intende intraprendere?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(16 gennaio 2013)

I requisiti concernenti lo smaltimento dell’amianto nelle discariche sono stabiliti nella direttiva 1999/31/CE relativa alle discariche di rifiuti (70) e nel diritto derivato, ossia la decisione sui criteri per l’ammissione dei rifiuti nelle discariche (71). I requisiti in oggetto sono principalmente volti a prevenire le emissioni nell’atmosfera provocate dai rifiuti contenenti amianto nelle discariche e a garantirne, successivamente, un’adeguata copertura.

La direttiva quadro sulle acque (72) impone agli Stati membri di evitare qualsiasi tipo di deterioramento della qualità dei corpi idrici sotterranei e di conseguire un buono stato delle acque sotterranee entro il 2015. La direttiva sulle acque sotterranee (73) richiede agli Stati membri di determinare standard nazionali di qualità (i cosiddetti valori soglia) in funzione dei rischi di inquinamento delle acque sotterranee. Dalle informazioni a nostra disposizione nessuno Stato membro dell’UE ha stabilito un valore soglia relativo all’amianto.

Poiché la rimozione e l’ulteriore trattamento dell’amianto potrebbero comportare rischi ancora maggiori per la salute rispetto al deposito in discarica, tale opzione in via di principio non è realizzabile.

Tuttavia la Commissione contatterà le autorità italiane per chiedere delucidazioni in merito allo status giuridico della discarica in oggetto e ai potenziali rischi che comporta per le acque sotterranee.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010621/12

to the Commission

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Illegal dumping of huge quantities of waste asbestos over an aquifer at a refuse site in Paese (Treviso), in violation of the waste and water protection directives

In Paese, a municipality with a population of around 22 000 in the Province of Treviso, there is a former quarry from which, over the years, over 1 100 000 m3 of gravel were extracted, and which was subsequently approved as a refuse site for inert waste run by the company Terra s.r.l., which belongs to the Mosole Group. Around 80 000 tonnes of waste asbestos have been dumped at this site after a licence (74) was issued by the Treviso Provincial Government which was then declared to be illegal by the Council of State (75) as it violated Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste and Directive 337/85/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment; no assessment has ever been conducted on this refuse site.

Despite a request to treat the waste being made by Valerio Mardegan, then Mayor of Paese, to the Treviso Provincial Government on 3 April 2008 , the carcinogenic waste has still not been removed, and is currently lying just a few metres above the aquifer, which feeds into hundreds of wells on the network managed by the local water company which in turn supplies tens of thousands of homes in the Provinces of Treviso and Venezia.

On 17 May 2012, the company which manages the refuse site officially presented to the public a plan to convert the site from an inert waste to a special waste site, with a view to dumping there a further 460 000 m3 of waste containing asbestos.

That project still did not provide for the treatment of the 80 000 tonnes of waste asbestos that were already there, which had been dumped illegally and which could potentially pollute the underlying aquifer and the atmosphere.

The NGOs ‘Paeseambiente’ and ‘Legambiente Trevignano’ have submitted a petition (in just a few months this has been signed by some 7 500 people) to Parliament to protest against the implementation of that project, and have reported the matter to the Commission.

In the light of the above, does the Commission not consider that the relevant authorities should move as quickly as possible to recycle the asbestos dumped illegally at the Paese refuse site, in line with the Community regulations on landfill waste and water protection? If so, what action does it plan to take?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2013)

The requirements for landfilling of asbestos are laid down in the Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) (76) and its secondary legislation — the decision on Waste Acceptance Criteria (77). Such requirements are mainly aimed at preventing emissions into the air when asbestos waste is landfilled and at ensuring its adequate coverage after landfilling.

The Water Framework Directive (78) requires Member States to avoid any deterioration in quality of their groundwater bodies and achieve good groundwater status by 2015. The Groundwater Directive (79) requires Member States to establish their national quality standards (called threshold values) based on the risks of pollution of groundwater. According to our information no EU Member State has set a threshold value for asbestos.

As the removal and further processing of asbestos could lead to more significant health risks than leaving it in the landfill this option is in principle not advisable.

Nevertheless the Commission will contact the Italian authorities in order to receive clarification concerning the legal status of the landfill in question and the potential risks of the landfill on groundwater bodies.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010622/12

a la Comisión

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Vertido de aguas residuales no tratadas en Laguna de Duero

En el municipio español de Laguna de Duero, situado en la Comunidad Autónoma de Castilla y León, con más de 20 000 habitantes, se produce el vertido de aguas residuales directamente sobre el río Duero, en concreto en una zona que forma parte de la Red Europea Natura 2000.

Conforme al artículo 4.1 de la Directiva 91/271/CEE del Consejo, de 21 de mayo de 1991, sobre el tratamiento de las aguas residuales urbanas, el municipio de Laguna de Duero debería haber depurado sus aguas residuales antes del 31 de diciembre de  2000. Exactamente lo mismo contempla la legislación española sobre el tema, en concreto el artículo 5.1 del Real Decreto Ley 11/1995 de 28 de diciembre por el cual se establece el tratamiento obligatorio de las aguas residuales antes del 1 de enero de 2001 para aglomeraciones urbanas mayores de 15 000 habitantes. Por otra parte, el artículo 25.2 de la Ley 7/1985 de 2 de abril, reguladora de las Bases del Régimen Local, obliga al municipio a ejercer las competencias en los términos de la legislación nacional y autonómica, en materia de tratamientos de aguas residuales.

Este marco jurídico obliga al Ayuntamiento de Laguna de Duero al tratamiento de sus aguas residuales, más aún teniendo en cuenta que los vertidos se realizan directamente a la zona «Riberas del río Duero y afluentes», que es una zona protegida dentro de la Red Europea Natura 2000.

El vertido se realiza en un bosque de ribera que forma parte de dicha red y, por tanto, se encuentra protegido por la Directiva Europea 92/43/CEE del Consejo, de 21 de mayo de 1992. Son diversas las denuncias realizadas por la oposición municipal desde hace años, así como las advertencias por parte de la Confederación Hidrográfica del Duero, por lo que el ayuntamiento es plenamente consciente de la situación y de la ilegalidad del vertido. Este vertido, contaminante de un enclave natural protegido, representa un considerable agravante por parte del Ayuntamiento de Laguna de Duero al suponer la violación simultánea de dos directivas comunitarias y dos leyes nacionales, con un claro conocimiento de la situación.

1.

¿Tiene conocimiento la Comisión de los hechos reseñados?

2.

¿Iniciará la Comisión las acciones necesarias para que el Ayuntamiento de Laguna del Duero ponga fin de una vez a los vertidos de aguas residuales no tratadas?

3.

¿Cuáles son las acciones que pretende llevar a cabo?

Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión

(21 de enero de 2013)

La Comisión no tiene noticias de la situación a que se refiere Su Señoría. Las autoridades españolas no han informado sobre la aplicación de la Directiva sobre el tratamiento de las aguas residuales urbanas (80) en Laguna de Duero (Valladolid, España).

La Comisión tiene la intención de pedir a las autoridades españolas que faciliten información detallada sobre la prestación de servicios de tratamiento de aguas residuales en la zona considerada, a fin de determinar si Laguna de Duero debe ser considerada una aglomeración urbana en los términos de la Directiva y, por lo tanto, sujeta a todas las obligaciones pertinentes. Cuando se reciba la información, la Comisión valorará la necesidad de adoptar medidas particulares.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010622/12

to the Commission

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Discharge of untreated waste water in Laguna de Duero

In Laguna de Duero, a Spanish municipality in the Autonomous Community of Castile and León with more than 20 000 inhabitants, waste water is being discharged directly into the river Duero, specifically in an area which is part of the European Natura 2000 network.

Pursuant to Article 4(1) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment, the Laguna de Duero municipality should have treated its waste water before 31 December 2000. Spanish legislation on this matter lays down exactly the same requirements; specifically, Article 5(1) of Royal Decree Law 11/1995 of 28 December makes it obligatory to treat waste water before 1 January 2001 in urban agglomerations with over 15 000 inhabitants. Moreover, Article 25(2) of Law 7/1985 of 2 April, which lays down the rules governing local administration, obliges the municipality to exercise its powers under the terms of national and autonomous legislation in the area of waste water treatment.

This legal framework obliges the Laguna de Duero town council to treat this waste water, particularly since the water is being discharged directly into the area along the banks of the river Duero and its tributaries, which is a Natura 2000 protection site.

The water is being discharged into a stretch of riverbank woodland which is part of this network and is therefore protected by Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992. The council’s opposition has made many complaints over the years, and the Duero River Hydrographic Authority has issued numerous warnings. The town council is therefore fully aware of the situation and knows that this discharge of waste water is illegal. This pollution of a nature protection site represents a serious infringement by the Laguna de Duero Town Council, which is fully aware that it is in breach of two EU directives and two national laws.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2.

Will the Commission take the necessary action to ensure that the Laguna del Duero TownCouncil puts an end to the discharge of untreated waste water once and for all?

3.

What action does it intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

The Commission is not aware of the situation referred to by the Honourable Member. Spanish authorities have not reported on the implementation of the Urban Waste Water Directive (81) in Laguna de Duero (Valladolid, Spain).

The Commission intends to request the Spanish authorities to provide detailed information on the provision of waste water treatment services in the area concerned in order to ascertain whether Laguna de Duero has to be considered an agglomeration under the terms of the directive and, therefore, is subject to all relevant obligations. When the information is received, the Commission will assess whether any particular action is needed.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010623/12

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Huelga de hambre de prisioneros kurdos en cárceles de Turquía

El pasado día 12 de septiembre un grupo de mujeres kurdas inició una huelga de hambre indefinida exigiendo una educación en su lengua materna, así como la posibilidad de presentar recursos jurídicos también en su lengua. A esta huelga se han ido sumando diferentes presos políticos kurdos en cárceles de Turquía que han añadido la petición de libertad para Abdullah Ocalan en sus reclamaciones, llegando a la cifra de 776 presos repartidos entre 56 cárceles diferentes de todo el territorio turco.

Dicha huelga se produce en un contexto de represión ejercida por el Gobierno de Turquía ante cualquier reclamación de la comunidad kurda, que es la comunidad étnica sin Estado propio más numerosa del mundo, suponiendo unos 40 millones de personas que viven dentro de las fronteras de Turquía, Siria, Irak e Irán. La estrategia de enfrentamiento llevada a cabo por el Partido Comunista del Kurdistán (PKK) fue abandonada unilateralmente en 2009, demostrando su voluntad política de alcanzar un acuerdo por vías pacíficas. Pero ante esta voluntad el Gobierno turco está llevando a cabo una estrategia de represión contra una nueva generación de activistas que han nacido en años posteriores a la guerra de los años noventa. Entre 2009 y lo que llevamos de 2012 miles de kurdos han sido detenidos bajo todo tipo de acusaciones por el simple hecho de ser kurdos.

El grado de represión de las autoridades turcas contra cualquier expresión de identidad kurda es tal que son cientos los jóvenes kurdos encarcelados prácticamente sin motivo alguno, lo que supone una flagrante violación de los derechos humanos de dicha comunidad, así como un proceso de persecución étnica.

1.

¿Tiene conocimiento la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante de los hechos reseñados? ¿Está siguiendo la situación de las personas en huelga de hambre?

2.

¿Considera la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante que Turquía está cumpliendo con la Carta Universal de Derechos Humanos en el caso del pueblo kurdo?

3.

¿Piensa plantear alguna medida de presión ante el Gobierno turco para garantizar el respeto de los derechos humanos del pueblo kurdo?

Respuesta de la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta Ashton en nombre de la Comisión

(31 de enero de 2013)

La Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta estaba al corriente de la huelga de hambre recientemente llevada a cabo por reclusos y presos preventivos kurdos en Turquía. De hecho, siguió muy de cerca la evolución de esa situación, de la que trató además en su reciente reunión con el Ministro de Asuntos Exteriores Davutoğlu en Bruselas. La AR/VP ha acogido con gran satisfacción el fin de la huelga de hambre.

La AR/VP desea subrayar la importancia de abordar la cuestión kurda en foros democráticos y con la contribución más extensa posible de todas las fuerzas democráticas, lo que incluye su discusión como parte de la actual actividad de elaboración de una nueva constitución democrática. Junto al desarrollo social, económico y cultural, la región sudeste necesita paz, democracia y estabilidad. Ello solo puede conseguirse mediante un consenso sobre medidas concretas que amplíen los derechos sociales, económicos y culturales de los habitantes de la región.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010623/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish prisoners' hunger strike in Turkish prisons

On 12 September 2012 a group of Kurdish women began an indefinite hunger strike demanding to be educated in their mother tongue and to be able to make legal appeals in their own language. As many as 776 Kurdish political prisoners in 56 different prisons throughout Turkey have joined the strike, calling also for the release of Abdullah Ocalan.

The strike comes against a backdrop of repression by the Government of Turkey with regard to any complaints made by the Kurdish community, which is the largest stateless ethnic community in the world, with some 40 million people living within the borders of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. The strategy of confrontation implemented by the Communist Party of Kurdistan (PKK) was unilaterally abandoned in 2009, demonstrating its political will to reach a peaceful agreement. However, in response to this, the Turkish Government is pursuing a strategy of repression against a new generation of activists who were born in the years after the war in the 1990s. Since 2009, thousands of Kurds have been arrested on all kinds of charges, due to the mere fact of being Kurds.

The degree of repression of any expression of Kurdish identity by the Turkish authorities is such that there are hundreds of young Kurds imprisoned for almost no reason, which is a flagrant violation of the human rights of the Kurdish community, not to mention a process of ethnic persecution.

1.

Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the facts described? Is she monitoring the situation of the people on hunger strike?

2.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative believe that Turkey is complying with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the case of the Kurdish people?

3.

Will she bring some kind of pressure to bear on the Turkish Government to ensure that the human rights of the Kurdish people are respected?

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

(31 January 2013)

The HR/VP was aware of the recent hunger strike by Kurdish prisoners and remand prisoners in Turkey. She followed the situation closely and discussed the issue at her recent meeting with Foreign Minister Davutoglu in Brussels. She very much welcomes the end of the hunger strike.

The HR/VP underlines the importance of addressing the Kurdish issue in the democratic arena, with the widest possible contribution of all democratic forces, including in the framework of the ongoing work on a new democratic constitution. The South-East needs peace, democracy and stability as well as social, economic and cultural development. This can only be achieved via consensus over concrete measures expanding the social, economic and cultural rights of the people living in the region.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010624/12

a la Comisión

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Instalación de una cantera en la Rambla del Cañuelo

En el término municipal de Felix, situado en la provincia de Almería (España), se encuentra la Rambla del Cañuelo, con importantes recursos naturales y diferentes hábitats de interés con fauna y flora típicos del clima mediterráneo.

El Ayuntamiento de Felix, administración competente en materia de ordenación urbanística, y la Consejería de Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía, competente en materia de conservación y protección del medio ambiente, han autorizado la instalación de una cantera de explotación de áridos al aire libre.

La cantera tendría un impacto dramático sobre dicha área debido a que se trata de una actividad clasificada dentro del grupo C (cód. 04061602) del Catálogo de Actividades Potencialmente Contaminadoras de la Atmósfera (CAPCA). Además, supondría la voladura con dinamita y la introducción de maquinaria en el terreno, con la correspondiente contaminación del aire y un incremento de los niveles de ruido.

La Rambla del Cañuelo contiene varios hábitats protegidos por el Real Decreto 1193/1998 y también por la Directiva europea de Hábitats (Directiva 92/43/CEE del Consejo). Estos importantes recursos naturales deben ser conservados y la autorización recibida por la cantera supone una violación de las diferentes normativas que los protegen. En el Catálogo Andaluz de Especies Amenazadas se señala la existencia en dicha zona del búho real o el murciélago cavernícola, siendo estos tan sólo dos ejemplos de la riqueza natural de la flora y fauna de la Rambla del Cañuelo.

Ante la existencia de diferentes normativas que protegen el lugar:

¿Está informada la Comisión de la autorización administrativa otorgada a la cantera en la Rambla del Cañuelo?

¿Ha cumplido dicha autorización con los requisitos sobre evaluación del impacto ambiental que impone la Directiva 2011/92/UE del Parlamento Europeo y el Consejo?

¿Considera la Comisión que dicha actividad de explotación puede realizarse sin violar la citada Directiva de Hábitats?

¿Piensa actuar la Comisión al respecto y ponerse en contacto con las administraciones para exigir el cumplimiento de las citadas normativas?

Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión

(22 de enero de 2013)

La Comisión es sabedora de la publicación en el Diario Oficial de de Andalucía (82) de una Autorización Ambiental Unificada para el proyecto «Explotación de la Cantera El Cañuelo» en el municipio de Félix, en la provincia de Almería (Andalucía, España). Según la información que figura en dicha autorización, el proyecto ha sido sometido a una evaluación de impacto ambiental con arreglo a lo dispuesto en la Directiva 2011/92/UE (83) y las autoridades competentes han llegado a la conclusión de que el proyecto no afecta a ningún lugar de importancia comunitaria (LIC) y de que los trabajos no afectarán a la red Natura 2000.

Corresponde a los Estados miembros garantizar el cumplimiento de la Directiva 92/43/CEE (Directiva sobre hábitats) (84). La Comisión considera que se han respetado los procedimientos requeridos por la legislación ambiental de la UE. No hay razones para pensar que ha habido una infracción de la Directiva sobre hábitats y la Comisión no tiene la intención de ponerse en contacto con las autoridades competentes o tomar cualquier otra medida en esta fase.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010624/12

to the Commission

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Opening of a quarry in the Rambla del Cañuelo

The Rambla del Cañuelo, located in the province of Almeria (Spain) in the municipal district of Felix, is an area rich in natural resources and different types of conservation habitats with flora and fauna typical of the Mediterranean climate.

Felix Town Council, which is responsible for urban planning, and Andalucia’s Regional Ministry of the Environment, responsible for conserving and protecting the environment, have approved the opening of an open surface quarry for aggregates.

The quarry will have a dramatic impact on the area, as quarrying of this kind comes under the Group C classification (ref: 04061602) of the CAPCA Catalogue of possible atmosphere polluting activities. There will be dynamite blasting and heavy machinery on site, bringing with them air pollution and increased noise levels.

Several of the habitats in the Rambla del Cañuelo are protected by Royal Decree 1193/1998, as well as by the EU’s Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC). These important natural resources must be conserved and authorising the quarry entails a breach of the various laws protecting them. The Andalusian Catalogue of Endangered Species states that the eagle owl and the cave bat can be found in this area, and these are only two examples of the natural wealth of the flora and fauna in the Rambla del Cañuelo.

In view of the various laws protecting this site:

Is the Commission aware that a quarry has been authorised in the Rambla del Cañuelo?

Was the environmental impact of this quarry assessed as required pursuant to Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council?

In the Commission’s view, can this quarry be worked without breaching the Habitats Directive?

Is the Commission planning to contact the authorities concerned to ensure they comply with the aforementioned legislation?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2013)

The Commission is aware of the publication in the Official Journal of Andalucía (85) of a Unified Environmental Authorisation (Autorización Ambiental Unificada) for the project ‘Explotación de la Cantera El Cañuelo’, in the municipality of Felix, in the province of Almería (Andalucía, Spain). According to the information contained in this authorisation, the project has been subjected to an environmental impact assessment, as required in Directive 2011/92/EU (86) and the competent authorities have concluded that the project does not affect any site of Community importance (SCI) and that the works do not affect the Natura 2000 network.

It falls to Member States to ensure compliance with the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (87). The Commission considers that the procedures required by EU environmental legislation have been followed. There is no reason to conclude that there has been a breach of the Habitats Directive and the Commission does not intend to contact the authorities concerned or take any further measure at this stage.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010625/12

al Consejo

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Resolución de las Naciones Unidas sobre el embargo a Cuba

El pasado martes 13 de noviembre de 2012 se presentó a votación en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas la Resolución titulada «Necesidad de poner fin al bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero de los Estados Unidos contra Cuba».

Con el resultado final de la votación de 188 votos a favor, tres en contra (EE.UU., Israel y Palau) y dos abstenciones (Islas Marshall y Micronesia), el embargo volvió a ser condenado por vigésimo primera vez consecutiva en el seno del organismo internacional con mayor representación de Estados de la comunidad internacional.

La totalidad de los Estados miembros de la UE, junto con otros ciento sesenta y un Estados, votaron a favor de esta resolución que emplaza al Gobierno de los EE.UU. a poner fin al injusto bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero que sufre la isla desde 1962 y que fue endurecido con las leyes Torricelli en 1992 y Helms Burton en 1996. Según académicos y varias organizaciones, este cruel bloqueo ha causado daños por valor de 1 066 000 millones de dólares desde su imposición.

En este contexto, resulta incomprensible la Posición Común de la Unión Europea respecto a Cuba, siendo el único trato de excepción que la UE mantiene con un tercer país.

¿Ha iniciado el Consejo los trámites necesarios para mantener un diálogo de alto nivel con las autoridades de EE.UU. respecto al embargo?

¿Respalda el Consejo la presente resolución? ¿Piensa el Consejo trasladar la postura de sus Estados miembros y exigir a los Estados Unidos de América el fin del embargo?

¿Piensa el Consejo iniciar un debate encaminado a que se ponga fin a la Posición Común de la Unión Europea respecto a Cuba?

Respuesta

(11 de marzo de 2013)

La política comercial de los Estados Unidos con respecto a Cuba es fundamentalmente una cuestión bilateral.

La Unión Europea y sus Estados miembros han manifestado regularmente su oposición a la aplicación extraterritorial del embargo de los Estados Unidos, como el contemplado en la Ley para la Democracia en Cuba (Cuban Democracy Act) de 1992 y en la Ley Helms-Burton de 1996.

En noviembre de 1996, el Consejo adoptó, con objeto de proteger los intereses de las personas físicas o jurídicas residentes en la Unión Europea contra los efectos de la aplicación extraterritorial de la legislación Helms-Burton, un Reglamento  (88) y una Acción Común (89) que impiden el cumplimiento de dicha legislación. Por otra parte, el 18 de mayo de 1998, en la Cumbre Unión Europea-Estados Unidos celebrada en Londres, se acordó un conjunto de medidas que incluían excepciones de los títulos III y IV de la Ley Helms-Burton, el compromiso del gobierno estadounidense de abstenerse de adoptar nueva legislación extraterritorial similar y un Acuerdo sobre Medidas para reforzar la protección de las inversiones. La Unión Europea sigue instando a los Estados Unidos a que ejecute sus compromisos con arreglo al Acuerdo de 18 de mayo de 1998.

En su sesión del 19 de noviembre de 2012, el Consejo debatió la evolución de la situación en Cuba y la forma de apoyar las reformas en curso en el país y de mejorar la calidad de vida de los ciudadanos cubanos. Tras el debate, el Consejo tomó nota de la intención de la Alta Representante de iniciar la elaboración de un proyecto de directrices de negociación, que se someterá a la aprobación del Consejo, con vistas a un posible acuerdo bilateral UE-Cuba. La Posición común de la UE sobre Cuba sigue vigente. Para su derogación se requeriría el acuerdo unánime de todos los Estados miembros.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010625/12

to the Council

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: UN Resolution on the embargo on Cuba

On 13 November 2012 the General Assembly of the United Nations voted on its Resolution entitled ‘Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba’.

With the final result of the vote 188 in favour to three against (US, Israel and Palau) with two abstentions (Marshall Islands and Micronesia), the embargo was condemned for the 21st time in a row by the international body which represents more States in the international community than any other.

All of the EU’s Member States, together with another 161 countries, voted in favour of this resolution which calls on the Government of the United States to end the unfair economic, commercial and financial blockade Cuba has been subjected to since 1962 and which was further tightened by the Torricelli law in 1992 and the Helms Burton law in 1996. Academics and various organisations estimate that this cruel blockade has caused damage worth USD 1 066 000 million since it was imposed.

In this context, the European Union’s Common Position on Cuba is incomprehensible, since it is the only case of special treatment applied by the EU to a third country.

Has the Council set in motion the procedures necessary for holding a high-level dialogue on the embargo with the US authorities?

Does the Council support this resolution? Will the Council convey the views of the Member States and demand that the United States end this embargo?

Does the Council intend to launch a debate aimed at bringing the EU’s Common Position on Cuba to an end?

Reply

(11 March 2013)

The US trade policy towards Cuba is fundamentally a bilateral issue.

The European Union and its Member States have regularly expressed their opposition to the extraterritorial application of the United States embargo, such as that contained in the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 and the Helms-Burton Act of 1996.

In November 1996, the Council adopted a regulation (90) and a Joint Action (91) to protect the interests of natural or legal persons residing in the European Union against the extraterritorial effects of the Helms-Burton legislation, which prohibit compliance with that legislation. Moreover, on 18 May 1998, at the European Union-United States Summit in London, a package was agreed covering waivers to Titles III and IV of the Helms-Burton Act, a commitment by the United States administration to refrain from further similar extraterritorial legislation, and an Understanding with respect to disciplines for the strengthening of investment protection. The European Union continues to urge the United States to implement its commitments under the 18 May 1998 Understanding.

At its meeting on 19 November 2012, the Council discussed developments in Cuba and how to support the ongoing reforms in the country and improve the lives of Cuban citizens. Following the discussion, the Council took note of the intention of the High Representative to start preparing the drafting of negotiating directives, to be submitted to the Council for approval, with a view to a possible EU-Cuba bilateral agreement. The EU Common Position on Cuba remains in force. Its repeal would require the unanimous agreement of all Member States.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010626/12

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Resolución de las Naciones Unidas sobre el embargo a Cuba

El pasado martes 13 de noviembre de 2012 se presentó a votación en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas la Resolución titulada «Necesidad de poner fin al bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero de los Estados Unidos contra Cuba».

Con el resultado final de la votación de 188 votos a favor, tres en contra (EE.UU., Israel y Palau) y dos abstenciones (Islas Marshall y Micronesia), el embargo volvió a ser condenado por vigésimo primera vez consecutiva en el seno del organismo internacional con mayor representación de Estados de la comunidad internacional.

La totalidad de los Estados miembros de la UE, junto con otros ciento sesenta y un Estados, votaron a favor de esta resolución que emplaza al Gobierno de los EE.UU. a poner fin al injusto bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero que sufre la isla desde 1962 y que fue endurecido con las leyes Torricelli en 1992 y Helms Burton en 1996. Según académicos y varias organizaciones, este cruel bloqueo ha causado daños por valor de 1 066 000 millones de dólares desde su imposición.

En este contexto, resulta incomprensible la Posición Común de la Unión Europea respecto a Cuba, siendo el único trato de excepción que la UE mantiene con un tercer país.

¿Ha iniciado la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante los tramites necesarios para incluir en el diálogo bianual de alto nivel la necesidad de que las autoridades de los EE.UU. pongan fin al embargo, trasladando así la postura de los 27 Estados miembros respecto al bloqueo?

¿Respalda la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante esta resolución de las Naciones Unidas?

¿Piensa la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante iniciar un debate encaminado a que se ponga fin a la Posición Común de la Unión Europea respecto a Cuba?

Respuesta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Sra. Ashton en nombre de la Comisión

(16 de enero de 2013)

La Unión Europea considera que la política comercial de Estados Unidos respecto a Cuba es fundamentalmente un problema bilateral. No obstante, la Unión Europea y sus Estados miembros han manifestado claramente su oposición a la extensión extraterritorial del embargo estadounidense, propuesto en la Cuban Democracy Act de 1992 y en la Helms-Burton Act de 1996. El 13 de noviembre de 2012, los Estados miembros de la UE votaron a favor de la Resolución de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas «Necesidad de poner fin al bloqueo económico, comercial y financiero de los Estados Unidos contra Cuba». La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta apoya plenamente esta posición.

La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta informó al Consejo de Asuntos Exteriores (CAE) de 19 de noviembre de 2012 sobre los resultados de la reflexión emprendida por el CAE de 25 de octubre de 2010 sobre el futuro de las relaciones UE-Cuba. Posteriormente, la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta dio instrucciones a los servicios para que comenzaran a redactar directrices para un posible acuerdo bilateral con Cuba. La decisión sobre la supresión de la Posición común de 1996 exige unanimidad por parte de los Estados miembros de la UE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010626/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — UN Resolution on the embargo on Cuba

On 13 November 2012 the General Assembly of the United Nations voted on its Resolution entitled ‘Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba’.

With the final result of the vote 188 in favour to three against (US, Israel and Palau) with two abstentions (Marshall Islands and Micronesia), the embargo was condemned for the 21st time in a row by the international body which represents more States in the international community than any other.

All of the EU’s Member States, together with another 161 countries, voted in favour of this resolution which calls on the Government of the United States to end the unfair economic, commercial and financial blockade Cuba has been subjected to since 1962 and which was further tightened by the Torricelli law in 1992 and the Helms Burton law in 1996. Academics and various organisations estimate that this cruel blockade has caused damage worth USD 1 066 000 million since it was imposed.

In this context, the European Union’s Common Position on Cuba is incomprehensible, since it is the only case of special treatment applied by the EU to a third country.

Has the Vice-President/High Representative set in motion the procedures necessary to ensure that the need for the US authorities to end the embargo is included in the biannual high-level dialogue, conveying the views of the 27 Member States on this matter?

Does the Vice-President/High Representative support this UN resolution?

Does the Vice-President/High Representative intend to launch a debate aimed at bringing the EU’s Common Position on Cuba to an end?

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

(16 January 2013)

The European Union believes that the United States trade policy towards Cuba is fundamentally a bilateral issue. Notwithstanding, the European Union and its Member States have been clearly expressing their opposition to the extraterritorial extension of the United States embargo, such as that contained in the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 and the Helms-Burton Act of 1996. On 13 November 2012, the EU Member States voted again in favour of the GA resolution ‘Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the USA against Cuba’. The HR/VP fully supports this position.

The HR/VP reported back to FAC of 19 November 2012 on the results of the reflection launched by the FAC of 25 October 2010 on the future of EU-Cuba relations. As a follow-up, the HR/VP instructed the services to start drafting directives for a possible bilateral agreement with Cuba. The decision on the elimination of the 1996 Common Position requires unanimity by the EU Member States.

(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)

Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-010627/12

Komisijai (Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotojai ir vyriausiajai įgaliotinei)

Rolandas Paksas (EFD)

(2012 m. lapkričio 21 d.)

Tema: VP/HR – ES strategija Irano branduolinės veiklos klausimu

Pastaraisiais metais JAV vyriausybė, visapusiškai remiama ES, išplatino nuomonę, kad vienintelis būdas sutrukdyti Irano vyriausybei kurti branduolinius ginklus yra apkrauti ją sankcijomis ir grasinti kariniu smūgiu. Remiantis tokiu argumentavimu kitos priemonės yra pasmerktos žlugti, nes Iranas neketina pradėti rimtų derybų ir tik nori laimėti laiko, kad leistų savo mokslininkams daryti pažangą kuriant branduolinį ginklą. Laikantis tokio požiūrio į šią problemą nepaisoma Irano pozicijos ir sumenkinamas bet koks pasiūlytas alternatyvus sprendimas. Tokie pasiūlymai buvo iš tikrųjų pateikti: prieš dvejus metus Iranas sutiko su Turkijos ir Brazilijos parengtu planu, pagal kurį šios šalys iš Irano gautų branduolinės medžiagos, kurią prisodrintų laikydamosi civiliniam naudojimui nustatytų apribojimų ir tada grąžintų Iranui. Tačiau JAV administracija, iš pradžių rėmusi šį pasiūlymą, gėdingai pakeitė savo nuomonę spaudžiama Izraelio lobistų Vašingtone. Praeitais metais Rusija parengė planą, pagal kurį Iranui nustatyti apribojimai dėl urano sodrinimo, taip pat nustatyta, kad Tarptautinė atominės energijos agentūra (TATENA) atliktų daugiau žvalgomųjų patikrų. Iranas buvo pasiruošęs aptarti šį projektą, bet iš to ir vėl nieko neišėjo, nes JAV prioritetas buvo padidinti tarptautinį spaudimą Teheranui, kad būtų pritarta naujoms sankcijoms. Nėra jokios informacijos apie Europos poziciją dėl šio pasiūlymo.

Todėl Irano ekstremistai gali lengvai tęsti savo įtartiną urano sodrinimo, kuris dabar pasiekė 20 proc., programą. Taigi nuo šiol į bet kurį naują diplomatinį susitarimą tenka įtraukti reikalavimą dėl vis labiau invazinės stebėsenos, naudojant Irano atominėse gamyklose įrengtą išankstinio perspėjimo sistemą. Tačiau kiekviename susitarime, į kurį įtrauktas šis reikalavimas, taip pat turi būti pateiktas aiškiai apibrėžtų veiksmų, kurių Iranas privalo imtis, kad sankcijos būtų palaipsniui panaikintos, sąrašas. Daugelį metų Iranas pakartotinai siūlydavo laikytis invazinių patikrų režimo, kuris yra griežtesnis nei įprastai taikomas JT atominės energijos agentūros. Buvęs vyriausiasis derybininkas Hossein Mousavian pasiūlė, kad sodrinimo ribinė vertė būtų 5 proc., ir sutiko nelaikyti prisodrinto urano pertekliaus Irane. Mainais Jungtinės Valstijos ir jų sąjungininkai turėtų pripažinti Irano teisę į sodrinimo technologiją – teisę, kuri yra vienas iš svarbiausių Sutarties dėl branduolinio ginklo neplatinimo elementų – ir laipsniškai panaikinti sankcijas.

Atsižvelgiant į išdėstytus argumentus:

Ar Sąjungos vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotoja pasiruošusi kurti aktyvesnę ES strategiją dėl Irano branduolinės programos, kurioje būtų atsižvelgta į Irano vyriausybės norą derėtis dėl taikaus sprendimo?

Ar Sąjungos vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotoja mano, kad perspektyviame susitarime su Irano vyriausybe dėl jos branduolinės programos turėtų būti pateiktas aiškiai apibrėžtų veiksmų, kurių Iranas privalo imtis, kad sankcijos būtų palaipsniui panaikintos, sąrašas?

Europos Sąjungos vyriausiosios įgaliotinės ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotojos Catherine Ashton atsakymas Komisijos vardu

(2013 m. sausio 18 d.)

ES pasiryžusi siekti diplomatinio sprendimo dvejopu būdu, derindama ir spaudimo priemones, ir dialogą. Tikslas lieka tas pats – skatinti Iraną dėti daug pastangų, kad būtų kuriama pasitikėjimo atmosfera, vadovaujantis abipusiškumo principais, ir žingsnis po žingsnio artėti prie prasmingų derybų dėl branduolinės programos.

Nuo 2012 m. pradžios Europos Sąjungos vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotoja dalyvavo atnaujintose pastangose įtikinti Iraną pradėti prasmingas derybas. Kartu su grupės E3+3 (JK, Prancūzija Vokietija ir JAV, Kinija, Rusija) šalimis Europos Sąjungos vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotoja Stambule, Bagdade ir Maskvoje dalyvavo trijuose derybų su Iranu raunduose. Ji taip pat kalbėjosi su dr. S. Jaliliu dvišaliame susitikime Stambule ir pabrėžė būtinybę Iranui imtis esminių veiksmų. Diplomatinės pastangos tęsiamos.

Per šias derybas E3+3 šalys pateikė pagrįstą ir esminį derybinį pasitikėjimo stiprinimo pasiūlymą. Norima pasiekti ilgalaikį ir nuodugnų susitarimą dėl Irano branduolinių klausimų. Pats Iranas turi elgtis atsakingai ir atgauti tarptautinės bendruomenės pasitikėjimą tuo, kad jo branduolinė programa yra visiškai taiki ir kad sankcijas galima panaikinti. Tai patvirtinta 2012 m. spalio 15 d. Tarybos išvadose.

Iranas kol kas nedavė jokių signalų, kad yra pasirengęs rimtai spręsti aktualiausius su jo branduoline programa susijusius klausimus. Naujausioje TATENA ataskaitoje patvirtinta, kad Irano branduolinė programa, ypač urano sodrinimo veikla, plečiama. Be to, Iranas atsisako bendradarbiauti su TATENA, kad išspręstų vis dar atvirus klausimus, įskaitant ir tuos, kurie liudija apie galimą karinį aspektą. Iranas ir toliau nepaiso reikalavimų, nustatytų Jungtinių Tautų Saugumo Tarybos (JTST) ir TATENA rezoliucijose.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010627/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Rolandas Paksas (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — EU strategy on the Iranian nuclear issue

In recent years, the US Government, with the full support of the EU, has spread the view that the only way to prevent the Iranian Government from building nuclear bombs is to overwhelm it with sanctions and threaten it with military attack. According to this line of reasoning, other methods are doomed to fail, because Iran has no intention of engaging in serious negotiations and only wishes to buy time to allow its scientists to progress towards the building of the bomb. This view of the matter ignores the Iranian position and downplays any proposed alternative solution. Such proposals have indeed been put forward: two years ago, Iran agreed to a plan by Turkey and Brazil, whereby these countries would receive nuclear material from Iran, which they would enrich within the limitations of civilian use and then return to Iran. But the US administration, after endorsing this proposal, made a shameful U-turn after pressure from the Israeli lobby in Washington. Last year, Russia put forward a plan that imposed restrictions on Iran with regards to enriching uranium, coupled with more probing inspections on the part of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran was willing to discuss this project, but once again nothing came of it because the US priority was to boost international pressure on Tehran in order to approve new sanctions. There is no report of any European stance on this proposal.

This has made it an easy task for Iranian extremists to continue with their suspicious enrichment of uranium, which has now reached 20%. So from now on, any new diplomatic agreement is forced to include ever more invasive monitoring, with an early warning system placed inside Iran’s nuclear establishments. But any agreement that includes this requirement must also include a list of clearly-defined steps that Iran must take in order for the sanctions to be progressively lifted. Over the years, Iran has repeatedly offered to accept a regime of invasive inspections, which go beyond the ones routinely carried out by the UN’s atomic energy agency. Former head negotiatior Hossein Mousavian suggested an enrichment threshold equal to 5%, and agreed not to stock any excess enriched uranium on Iranian soil. In exchange, the United States and its allies would have had to acknowledge Iran’s right to enrichment technology — a right that is one of the key points of the Non-Proliferation Treaty — and gradually dismantle the sanctions.

Given the arguments above:

Is the Vice-President/High Representative willing to build a more active EU strategy on the Iranian nuclear programme, capable of taking into account the willingness of the Iranian Government to negotiate a peaceful solution?

Does the Vice-President/High Representative believe that a viable agreement with the Iranian Government over its nuclear programme should include a list of clearly-defined steps that Iran must make in order to obtain a progressive lifting of sanctions?

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

(18 January 2013)

The EU is determined to work towards a diplomatic solution on the basis of the double-track approach which combines pressure with dialogue. The objective remains to engage Iran in a serious effort of confidence building, guided by the principles of reciprocity and step by step, leading to meaningful negotiations on the nuclear programme.

Since the beginning of 2012 the HR/VP has been engaged in renewed efforts to move Iran into meaningful negotiations. Together with the E3+3 the HR/VP conducted three rounds of talks with Iran in Istanbul, Baghdad and Moscow. The HR/VP also met bilaterally with Dr Jalili in Istanbul and stressed the need for Iran to make a substantial move. The diplomatic efforts are ongoing.

During these talks the E3+3 put forward a credible and substantial confidence building proposal for negotiations. The objective is to achieve a long-term comprehensive settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue. It is up to Iran to act responsibly and restore international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme so that sanctions could be finished. This was confirmed by the Council conclusions of 15 October 2012.

Iran has failed to give any signal that it is ready to seriously address the most urgent concerns regarding its nuclear programme. The latest IAEA report confirmed that the Iranian nuclear programme and particularly its enrichment activities are expanding. In addition Iran refuses to cooperate with the IAEA to resolve outstanding issues, including those pointing to a possible military dimension. Iran continues to defy the requirements contained in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and IAEA resolutions.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010628/12

to the Commission

David Martin (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Fire safety in hotels and hostels

We welcome the commitment made by the Commission at a parliamentary hearing to produce a consultative Green Paper on safety in services, with the specific inclusion of fire safety in hotels as a key issue, and the Commission’s offer to go further, such that (to quote) ‘when you’re going to a hotel, the European Union wants to know that it has the right protection against fire’.

Will the Commission confirm that, subject to the evidence submitted during the consultation on the Green Paper, it would consider, in the light of the hotel industry’s failure to self‐regulate, proposing a directive on fire safety in hotels and hostels?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission is currently working on the preparation of a comprehensive consultation of stakeholders and interested parties on the safety of services, with a focus on tourism-related services.

The consultation, expected in 2013, will address specific service sectors, including tourism accommodation fire safety. It will be the framework to consult on a set of diverse policy options, to identify gaps in existing legislation, as well as to collect information on the implementation of national rules, initiatives and best practices.

The consultation will support the Commission in assessing the added value of any initiative at European level and its results will be informing and influencing the subsequent actions in the field of service safety. Any more detailed commitment at this stage would be premature.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010629/12

alla Commissione

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Unioni civili e reato di bigamia nei paesi dell'UE che non prevedono le unioni registrate

Più di uno Stato membro dell'Unione europea ha adottato normative al fine di riconoscere e disciplinare le unioni di fatto o le unioni civili sia tra coppie eterosessuali che omosessuali. Inoltre, tali normative ritengono configurato il reato di bigamia qualora un soggetto registri un'ulteriore unione civile o contragga matrimonio, pur essendo coniugato o partner di una convivenza già registrata.

Considerando che non tutti gli Stati membri dell'Unione europea disciplinano le unioni registrate o le unioni civili, può la Commissione far sapere in che modo ritiene debba essere disciplinato il caso in cui un soggetto sia partner di un'unione registrata in uno Stato membro e in seguito contragga matrimonio in un altro Stato membro dove le unioni registrate non sono riconosciute?

La Commissione ritiene di dover disciplinare tale fattispecie, affinché venga assicurata la tutela dei cittadini di Stati membri in cui le unioni registrate non sono riconosciute?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(21 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione informa l’onorevole parlamentare che il reato di bigamia rientra nelle competenze degli Stati membri e che l’attuale legislazione dell’UE non contempla il riconoscimento delle unioni registrate. A tutt’oggi, il riconoscimento di un’unione registrata in uno Stato membro diverso da quello in cui è avvenuta la registrazione è disciplinato dalle legislazioni nazionali.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010629/12

to the Commission

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Registered partnerships and the crime of bigamy in EU countries where registered partnerships are not recognised

A number of EU Member States have adopted legislation recognising and regulating de facto unions or registered partnerships, between both heterosexual and homosexual couples. In addition, under such legislation it is considered a bigamous offence for someone to register another partnership or contract a marriage while they are already married or in a partnership that has already been registered.

Given that not all EU Member States regulate registered partnerships, can the Commission say how it thinks cases should be regulated where someone who is in a registered partnership in one Member State subsequently contracts a marriage in another Member State where registered partnerships are not recognised?

Does the Commission think it should regulate such cases in order to protect the citizens of Member States where registered partnerships are not recognised?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honorable Member that the offence of bigamy falls in the competence of the Member States and that the existing EC law does not cover the recognition of a registered partnership. Today the recognition of a registered partnership in another Member State than the Member States where the partnership was registered is governed by the national law of Member States.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita P-010630/12

a la Comisión

Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Regulación del sobreendeudamiento de las familias por causa hipotecaria y mecanismos de ayuda a las personas más vulnerables ante el caso de desahucio

Ante el alarmante crecimiento de los desahucios en España y el elevado nivel de la deuda privada de los hogares, el Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI) (92), entre otros organismos internacionales, ha recomendado articular medidas para facilitar la reducción y reestructuración de la deuda de los hogares y aliviar la situación de las familias y personas más vulnerables. La ausencia de estas medidas supone una deficiente gestión de la crisis y un freno a la recuperación de la actividad económica con costes sociales inaceptables.

En ausencia de armonización en la EU de las medidas nacionales en este terreno, países europeos como Francia han establecido moratorias temporales de desahucios para sectores vulnerables. En este sentido, también se está debatiendo cómo deben actuar las administraciones públicas para ofrecer ayuda a las personas afectadas por los desahucios, por ejemplo ofreciendo viviendas sociales de alquiler.

A la luz del creciente número de desahucios en diferentes Estados miembros, como España, y del drama social que supone:

¿Piensa emprender la Comisión alguna medida de armonización en línea con las recomendaciones del FMI y en relación con el diseño y ejecución de las medidas nacionales relativas a evitar desahucios?

¿Qué acciones tiene en marcha o puede impulsar la Comisión para velar por que los Estados miembros puedan prevenir el sobreendeudamiento de las familias por causa hipotecaria?

¿Qué propuestas puede plantear la Comisión para instar a los Estados miembros a que intervengan para ayudar a aquellos ciudadanos y ciudadanas afectados por un desahucio a que puedan restablecer su solvencia económica y hacer efectivo su derecho a una vivienda digna?

Respuesta del Sr. Rehn en nombre de la Comisión

(9 de enero de 2013)

La Comisión comparte la inquietud de Su Señoría acerca de las repercusiones sociales de la crisis actual. El problema de los desahucios ha sido merecedor de especial atención en España y ha dado lugar a la adopción de nueva legislación que impone una moratoria de dos años para los desahucios en el caso de los grupos especialmente vulnerables. Habida cuenta de las grandes diferencias entre Estados miembros en lo que respecta tanto a la severidad de la situación como a las estructuras institucionales y jurídicas, no se considera recomendable ni posible imponer un enfoque armonizado para esta cuestión.

La Comisión ha estudiado el problema del sobreendeudamiento hipotecario de las familias y sus implicaciones macroeconómicas como parte del procedimiento de desequilibrio macroeconómico a escala de la UE. De forma consiguiente, en el marco del Semestre Europeo 2012 se formularon recomendaciones específicas a una serie de países, incluida España, que pueden contribuir a prevenir el sobreendeudamiento hipotecario, como, por ejemplo, la eliminación de los incentivos fiscales que favorecen el acceso a la vivienda en propiedad, que fueron un importante factor para la acumulación de esa deuda antes de la crisis.

Puede consultarse más información sobre las recomendaciones específicas por país en las páginas web siguientes:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/pdf/20_scps/2012/04_council/es_2012-07-10_council_recommendation_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/op103_en.htm

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010630/12

to the Commission

Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Dealing with excessive household mortgage debt and assistance for the most vulnerable persons facing eviction

Faced with the alarming increase in evictions in Spain and the high level of private household debt, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (93) and other international organisations have called for action to reduce and restructure household debt and alleviate the difficulties encountered by the most vulnerable families and individuals. Failure to take the necessary measures is an indication of inadequate crisis management and is slowing down economic recovery, with unacceptable social consequences.

In the absence of EU harmonisation regarding national measures in this area, European countries such as France have imposed a provisional ban on the eviction of vulnerable members of society. At the same time, ways are being discussed of providing public assistance to those affected by evictions, for example the provision of rented social housing.

In view of the growing number of evictions in various Member States such as Spain and the drastic social consequences of this:

Is the Commission envisaging harmonised measures in line with IMF recommendations with regard to the formulation and implementation of measures at national level to prevent evictions?

What measures is the Commission taking or is able to take to ensure that Member States are able to prevent excessive household mortgage debt?

What measures can the Commission recommend to encourage Member States to assist those affected by evictions, helping them to recover financially and defend their right to decent housing?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(9 January 2013)

The Commission shares the concerns about the social implications of the current crisis. The issue of evictions has recently gained particular attention in Spain, with the adoption of new legislation introducing a two-year moratorium on evictions for particularly vulnerable groups. Given the large differences across Member States in terms of the severity of the challenge and the institutional and legal setting, it does not appear advisable or possible to impose a harmonised approach in this area.

The Commission has studied the issue of excessive household mortgage debt and its macroeconomic implications in the context of the Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure at the EU level. Accordingly, in the framework of the 2012 European Semester country specific recommendations have been addressed to a number of Member States, including Spain, which can help prevent excessive mortgage debt taking in the future, e.g. removing tax incentives favouring home ownership which played a major role in build-up of such debt prior to the crisis.

More details about these country specific recommendations could be found at the following websites:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/pdf/20_scps/2012/04_council/es_2012-07-10_council_recommendation_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/op103_en.htm

(České znění)

Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení P-010631/12

Komisi

Richard Falbr (S&D)

(21. listopadu 2012)

Předmět: Šetření EK vůči ČEZ (vedeno pod číslem „Case COMP/39727 – ČEZ“)

Kromě toho, že jsem poslancem Evropského parlamentu, předsedám Hospodářské a sociální radě Ústeckého kraje (Krajská tripartita), jehož součástí je Mostecko. Tento region je regionem s dlouhodobě nejvyšší nezaměstnaností v ČR. Těžba hnědého uhlí a energetika jsou na Mostecku nejvýznamnějším zdrojem pracovních míst. Zde tvoří zaměstnanci hornictví přibližně 6‐7 %. Míra nezaměstnanosti přitom aktuálně činí téměř 16 %.

Pokud Evropská komise umožní společnosti ČEZ řešit zneužívání monopolního postavení na trhu prodejem elektrárny Dětmarovice v úplně jiném regionu, to je na severní Moravě, přímo tím ohrozí zhruba 10 000 pracovních míst spojených s těžbou hnědého uhlí, provozem elektrárny Počerady a souvisejícími službami (při použití multiplikačního faktoru 3). Je si Komise vědoma této skutečnosti a jak se s touto hrozbou hodlá vypořádat?

Jak jsem byl informován, většina účastníků market testu považuje jednu z variant vypořádání – tedy prodej elektrárny Dětmarovice – za nedostatečnou. Proč EK nepřihlédla k těmto připomínkám a elektrárnu Dětmarovice z navrhovaného závazku ČEZ nevyřadila? Hazarduje tím s dramatickým nárůstem nezaměstnanosti až na 30 % v regionu, kde již dnes existuje velké sociální napětí.

Nezávislé studie potvrzují, že účinným řešením by byl závazek prodat elektrárnu Počerady a případně další hnědouhelnou elektrárnu ve vlastnictví ČEZ a.s. Tento postup by zároveň stabilizoval zaměstnanost v regionu Mostecka v horizontu 40 let.

Jak je možné, že společnost ČEZ již od začátku tvrdila, že je s EK dohodnuta, což se nakonec potvrdilo? Zdůrazňuji, že vystupuji v zájmu těžce zkoušeného regionu, jehož problematice se věnuji intenzivně již od roku 1996.

Odpověď pana Almunii jménem Komise

(18. prosince 2012)

Komise si je vědoma neutěšené sociální situace v Ústeckém a Moravskoslezském kraji. Nevidí však jakékoli přímé spojení mezi prodejem elektrárny Dětmarovice společností ČEZ a mírou zaměstnanosti v odvětví těžby hnědého uhlí na severozápadě Čech. Podle informací Komise převyšuje poptávka po hnědém uhlí v České republice nabídku a zdá se, že neexistuje důvod, proč by měla být pracovní místa v oblasti těžby hnědého uhlí nějak ohrožena.

Na základě tržního testu Komise obdržela sedm odpovědí. Pět z nich nezpochybňuje skutečnost, že prodej elektrárny Dětmarovice je vhodným opravným prostředkem.

Kromě toho nebyl proces vyjednávání o opravných prostředcích ještě ukončen. Komise stále analyzuje výrobní zařízení, jež jsou navržena jako závazky. Pokud by Komise dospěla k názoru, že jakékoliv z aktiv, které společnost ČEZ navrhuje, nepředstavuje vhodný opravný prostředek, jenž rozptýlí obavy týkající se hospodářské soutěže, nebyla by tato aktiva přijata jako závazky.

Komise prošetřuje možné porušení článku 102 Smlouvy o fungování Evropské unie a přísně se řídí všemi procesními pravidly, včetně těch, která se týkají vedení jednání o závazcích, jež nabízejí podniky podle článku 9 nařízení č. 1/2003 (94). Komise nemá pravomoc kontrolovat prohlášení učiněná třetími osobami, i když jsou předmětem šetření Komise. Komise může pouze zopakovat, že mezi ní a společností ČEZ nebylo zatím dosaženo žádné dohody. V červnu 2012 společnost ČEZ nabídla v souladu s článkem 9 nařízení č. 1/2003 závazky, jejichž cílem je rozptýlit obavy Komise v oblasti hospodářské soutěže. V současné době Komise posuzuje, zda by tyto závazky představovaly vhodný opravný prostředek pro předpokládané protiprávní jednání. Pokud Komise dospěje k závěru, že tomu tak je, závazky se stanou pro společnost ČEZ právně závaznými.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010631/12

to the Commission

Richard Falbr (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Commission investigation into ČEZ (Case COMP/39727 — ČEZ)

In addition to my duties as an MEP, I also chair the Economic and Social Council for Ústecký Region (Regional Tripartite), which includes Mostecko. This region has long had the highest unemployment rate in the Czech Republic. Brown‐coal mining and the energy sector are the main providers of employment in Mostecko, with mining staff accounting for some 6‐7% of all workers. The current unemployment rate stands at almost 16%.

If the Commission allows ČEZ to settle its abuse of monopoly position on the market by selling off the Dětmarovice power station in the entirely different region of Northern Moravia, this will put directly at risk some 10 000 jobs connected with brown‐coal mining, operations at Počerady power plant, and auxiliary services (applying a multiplication factor of three). Is the Commission aware of this situation, and how does it intend to tackle this threat?

I am informed that the majority of market test participants consider one of the options — that of selling off the Dětmarovice power station — to be inadequate. Why has the Commission not taken account of these observations and removed the Dětmarovice power station from the commitment proposed by ČEZ? By failing to do so, it risks provoking a dramatic rise in the region’s unemployment to as much as 30% in the region and exacerbating existing social tensions.

Independent studies demonstrate that it would be more effective for ČEZ to commit to selling off the Počerady power plant and, if appropriate, another of its brown‐coal power plants. Doing so would also stabilise the employment situation for the next 40 years in the Mostecko region.

How can ČEZ have maintained from the very beginning that it had reached an agreement with the Commission when this was only later proven to be the case? I should like to stress that I am acting on behalf of a hard‐hit region whose problems have been one of my major concerns since 1996.

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2012)

The Commission is aware of the bleak social situation in the Ustecky and Moravskoslezsky regions. However, the Commission fails to see any direct connection between the divestment of the Detmarovice plant by CEZ and the employment rate in the lignite mining sector in North-West Bohemia. According to the Commission's information, the demand for lignite in the Czech Republic exceeds supply and there appears to be no reason why jobs in lignite mining should be at risk.

In reply to the market test, the Commission received seven responses. Five do not question selling the Detmarovice power plant as a suitable remedy.

In addition, the process of negotiating the remedies is not over. The Commission is still analysing the generation assets proposed for commitments. If the Commission takes the view that any of the assets propsed by CEZ do not represent suitable remedies to the competition concerns, they would not be accepted as commitments.

The Commission is investigating a possible infringement of Article 102 TFEU and strictly follows all procedural rules, including those on conducting commitments negotiations offered by undertakings under Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 (95). The Commission has no power to control statements made by third parties, even if they are subject to the Commission's investigation. The Commission can only repeat that no agreement has been reached between CEZ and the Commission. In June 2012, CEZ offered, in line with Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003, commitments to meet the Commission's competition concerns. Currently, the Commission is assessing whether they would represent a suitable remedy for the suspected infringement. If the Commission concludes that this is the case, the commitments would be made legally binding upon CEZ.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010632/12

a la Comisión

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D) y Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Fusión de organismos reguladores y de la autoridad de la competencia en España

El Gobierno español ha presentado un proyecto de Ley (Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales de 19 de octubre de 2012) para la creación de la Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC) que integrará en un solo organismo a todos los reguladores de industrias de red existentes hasta la fecha junto con la autoridad de la competencia.

El proyecto presentado supone una modificación institucional fundamental. Se trata de una iniciativa cuyo ámbito comprende la autoridad de la competencia y va más allá de la racionalización y simplificación de organismos reguladores sectoriales susceptibles de concentrarse en grandes áreas. La fusión de todos los organismos reguladores y de la autoridad de la competencia afecta negativamente al principio de especialidad esencial para la regulación sectorial y al principio de especificidad clave para un desarrollo consistente de la política de la competencia.

La acumulación de diferentes mandatos limita la independencia regulatoria y obstaculiza la cooperación estructurada en el seno de la Unión Europea quebrando las condiciones fundamentales para el ejercicio adecuado de la actividad reguladora. Todo ello en detrimento de los consumidores, últimos destinatarios de los beneficios de la actividad regulatoria.

1.

¿Cuál es la posición de la Comisión sobre esta iniciativa?

2.

¿Considera la Comisión que la concentración en un mismo organismo de tanta heterogeneidad y diversidad de competencias puede dar lugar a disfuncionalidades, ineficiencias y conflictos de intereses en detrimento de la actividad regulatoria?

3.

¿Estima la Comisión que sería beneficioso que las autoridades de la Red Europea de Competencia tuvieran un carácter específico y diferenciado así como plenas garantías de independencia?

4.

¿Va a adoptar la Comisión alguna medida para evitar que se consume este proceso?

Respuesta de la Sra. Kroes en nombre de la Comisión

(10 de enero de 2013)

La Comisión está al corriente de las novedades legislativas españolas en relación a la adopción de la ley por la que se crea la Comisión Nacional de Mercados y Competencia (CNMC). Una vez aprobado por el Consejo de Ministros, el proyecto de ley ha sido presentado al Parlamento para su aprobación definitiva.

Los Estados miembros gozan de un alto grado de autonomía a la hora de establecer sus órganos reguladores sectoriales y de la competencia, siempre que se cumplan todos los requisitos impuestos por el Derecho de la UE. La reestructuración de diferentes reguladores sectoriales específicos en un único organismo puede resultar eficaz en vista de la convergencia cada vez mayor entre esos sectores (es decir, las comunicaciones electrónicas y el sector audiovisual). La «fusión» de un regulador sectorial específico con la autoridad de la competencia también permitirá sinergias. Son varias las autoridades reguladoras que tienen la responsabilidad de aplicar la legislación de competencia en su sector (por ejemplo, Ofcom en el Reino Unido y EETT en Grecia).

Es importante sin embargo que el resultado de esa reorganización no afecte a la independencia de los reguladores. Para que el mercado único funcione correctamente, es fundamental que existan reguladores que sean independientes, eficientes y cuenten con los recursos adecuados. La Comisión no dudará en tomar medidas si la reestructuración merma la independencia, la capacidad reguladora y la eficiencia de los organismos, poniendo en peligro el mercado único.

La Comisión se mantiene en contacto con las autoridades españolas para cerciorarse, ya en esta fase, de que el proyecto de ley ampara la independencia del nuevo organismo y que este tiene atribuciones suficientes para desarrollar sus funciones conforme al Derecho de la UE. La Comisión velará por que se cumpla el Derecho de la UE, analizará la ley atendiendo a esos requisitos y, si procede, adoptará las medidas que sean necesarias.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010632/12

to the Commission

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D) and Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Merger of regulatory bodies and the competition authority in Spain

The Spanish Government has submitted a draft law (Official Journal of the Parliament of 19 October 2012) to set up the National Commission for Markets and Competition (CNMC), which would bring together all the existing network industry regulatory bodies with the national competition authority to form a single entity.

This bill would entail fundamental institutional change. The scope of the proposal includes the competition authority and goes well beyond streamlining and simplifying sectoral regulatory bodies, which tend to concentrate their work in major areas. Merging all the regulatory bodies with the competition authority compromises the principle of speciality, which is essential for sectoral regulation, and the principle of specification, which is necessary for substantially developing competition policy.

Combining roles limits regulatory independence and obstructs structured cooperation in the European Union by changing the framework that is essential for effective regulatory work to take place. This would all be to the detriment of consumers, who benefit from regulation.

1.

What is the Commission’s view of this initiative?

2.

Does the Commission think that merging such diverse entities with varying competencescould lead to failures, inefficiency and conflicts of interest, to the detriment of regulatorywork?

3.

Does the Commission think that it would be of benefit for the authorities which make upthe European Competition Network to have a specific and distinct role, as well as beingcompletely independent?

4.

Will the Commission take any action to avoid this merger taking place?

Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2013)

The Commission is aware of the legislative developments in Spain regarding the adoption of the law creating the CNMC. Following its adoption by the Council of Ministers, the draft law has been submitted to the Parliament for adoption.

Member States have a considerable degree of autonomy in deciding how to set up their competition and sector regulatory bodies provided that the requirements imposed by EC law are complied with. The restructuring of different sector specific regulators in a single authority may be efficient in view of the increasing convergence between such sectors (i.e. electronic communications and audiovisual sector). The ‘merger’ of a sector specific regulator with a competition authority may also allow for synergies. Several regulatory authorities have the responsibility to apply competition law in their sector (i.e. Ofcom in the UK, EETT in Greece).

It is however important to ensure that the result of this reorganisation does not compromise the independence of the regulators. Independent, efficient, and adequately resourced regulators are critical to the effective functioning of the single market. The Commission will not hesitate to take action when restructuring jeopardises independence, regulatory capacity and efficiency of the authorities, thus compromising the single market.

The Commission is in contact with the Spanish authorities regarding this draft law to ensure, already at this stage, the independence of the new authority and to ascertain that it has sufficient powers to fulfil its functions under EC law. The Commission is committed to ensure compliance with EC law and will analyse the law in light of these requirements taking necessary measures, as appropriate.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010633/12

a la Comisión

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Protocolo de Pesca entre Mauritania y la UE, y pesca de cefalópodos

La pesca de cefalópodos en Mauritania comenzó en 1965. Desde entonces, junto a la flota mauritana, han explotado esos recursos buques españoles, portugueses, coreanos, japoneses, libios y chinos. El nuevo Protocolo de Pesca UE-Mauritania, rubricado el 26 de julio por un período de dos años y con un coste para la UE de 70 millones de euros por año, a diferencia del anterior, no reconoce posibilidades de pesca al sector cefalopodero de la UE. Esto implica un gran impacto en Galicia (España).

La expulsión de la flota cefalopodera europea no se corresponde con el resultado del informe del Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), utilizado por la Comisión y que, después de evaluar la biomasa en 2008, aconsejaba una «reducción general del esfuerzo pesquero para todas las flotas que desarrollaban la pesquería» pero no una prohibición de capturas.

Recientes informes del sector y del Instituto Español de Oceanografía señalan una evolución positiva de los recursos de cefalópodos a partir de 2008. Además, el informe del STECF señala que la flota mauritana se compone de 900 canoas artesanales y 200 congeladores arrastreros de otras nacionalidades que han sido reabanderados bajo pabellón mauritano. La flota española de congeladores arrastreros es únicamente la octava parte de esta flota reabanderada. En una reciente reunión entre ONGs y representantes del sector pesquero de Mauritania se criticó la existencia de arrastreros chinos faenando con pabellón mauritano, fruto del acuerdo privado entre Mauritania y la compañía china Poly Hondone. En esa reunión se recomendó la no discriminación entre flotas extranjeras y la necesidad de transparencia en los acuerdos y en la actividad pesquera en aguas mauritanas.

1.

¿Va a revisar la Comisión el protocolo para que se reconozcan posibilidades de pesca a la flota europea?

2.

¿Puede confirmar la Comisión la existencia de informes sobre la favorable evolución de los recursos con posterioridad a 2008?

3.

¿Considera que el reabanderamiento como flota mauritana de buques extranjeros es una medida fraudulenta que deja sin efecto el acceso prioritario de las flotas de la Unión Europea a los excedentes de pesca conforme a lo que reconoce en el artículo 1.3 del Protocolo?

4.

¿Va a reclamar la Comisión transparencia sobre los acuerdos pesqueros, públicos o privados, en Mauritania?

5.

¿Va a aceptar la Comisión la discriminación de la flota europea en la captura de cefalópodos en aguas mauritanas?

Respuesta de la Sra. Damanaki en nombre de la Comisión

(1 de febrero de 2013)

En el nuevo Protocolo entre Mauritania y la UE, que se aplica provisionalmente por decisión del Consejo, no se asigna posibilidad de pesca alguna con respecto los cefalópodos, si bien se añade una cláusula de revisión en caso de que Mauritania decida ceder una parte de sus posibles excedentes a las flotas de la UE. La revisión de la cuota de cefalópodos requiere un dictamen científico positivo, aprobado por el Comité Científico Conjunto, una decisión de Mauritania por la que ceda sus excedentes a la UE y, por último, la asignación presupuestaria correspondiente.

La Comisión es consciente de que los cefalópodos son una población de ciclo de vida corto que puede incrementar su biomasa si se aplican medidas de ordenación adecuadas, tales como las propuestas en el último estudio del IEO. Por consiguiente, no se descarta que la población haya mejorado desde las negociaciones. Con todo, en tal caso quedaría por asignar parte del excedente a la UE.

En lo que se refiere a la transparencia en los acuerdos públicos o privados, el artículo 5 del Protocolo prevé la aplicación de condiciones técnicas y financieras idénticas a todos los buques extranjeros que faenan en aguas mauritanas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010633/12

to the Commission

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Fisheries Protocol between Mauritania and the EU and cephalopod fishing

Cephalopod fishing started in Mauritania in 1965. Since then, cephalopod stocks have been fished not only by the Mauritanian fleet but also by Spanish, Portuguese, Korean, Japanese, Libyan and Chinese vessels. The new EU‐Mauritania Fisheries Protocol, which was signed on 26 July for a two‐year period and will cost the EU EUR 70 million per annum, does not — unlike the previous protocol — grant the EU cephalopod fisheries sector any fishing opportunities. This will have a major impact in Galicia (Spain).

This expulsion of the EU cephalopod fleet is at odds with the report by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) used by the Commission, which, after assessing the biomass in 2008, recommended an overall reduction in fishing effort by all fleets conducting fisheries operations, but not a catch ban.

Recent industry reports and reports by the Spanish Institute of Oceanography point to an upturn in cephalopod stocks since 2008. The STECF report also notes that the Mauritanian fleet consists of 900 artisanal canoes and of 200 freezer trawlers from other countries, now fishing under the Mauritanian flag. Spanish freezer trawlers account for just one eighth of that reflagged fleet. At a recent meeting between NGOs and representatives of the Mauritanian fisheries industry, criticisms were levelled at the fact that Chinese trawlers were operating under the Mauritanian flag on the basis of a private sector agreement between Mauritania and the Chinese company Poly Hondone. That meeting recommended that there should be no discrimination between foreign fleets and that the agreements, and fishing operations in Mauritanian waters, needed to be transparent.

1.

Will the Commission review the Protocol in question so that the EU fleet is granted fishing opportunities?

2.

Can the Commission corroborate the reports indicating an upturn in stocks from 2008 onwards?

3.

Does it not consider the reflagging of foreign vessels as Mauritanian to be a fraudulent practice that undermines the priority access for EU fleets to fish surpluses granted under Article 1.3 of the Protocol?

4.

Will the Commission call for transparency in both public and private fisheries agreements in Mauritania?

5.

Is the Commission willing to accept this discrimination against the EU fleet as regards fishing for cephalopods in Mauritanian waters?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2013)

In the new Protocol between Mauritania and the EU, and provisionally applied by the Council, cephalopods are mentioned with zero quota but with a review clause pending the decision of Mauritania to grant a part of its possible surplus to the EU fleets. A revision of the cephalopods quota requires first a positive scientific advice, endorsed by the Joint Scientific Committee, then a Mauritanian decision to grant this surplus to the EU, and finally a subsequent budget allocation.

The Commission is aware of the fact that cephalopods are a short-life-cycle stock and may increase their biomass if appropriate management measures, such as proposed in the last IEO study, are applied. It is therefore not excluded that stock has improved since the negotiation. However, in that case it would be up to allocate part of the surplus to the EU.

Concerning transparency in both public and private agreements, Article 5 of the Protocol provides for the application of identical technical and financial conditions for all foreign fleets in Mauritanian waters.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010634/12

a la Comisión

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Transparencia en el proceso negociador del nuevo Acuerdo de Colaboración Pesquera y del nuevo Protocolo entre la Unión Europea y la República de Mauricio

Diversas organizaciones vinculadas al ámbito de la pesca en Mauricio han expresado su malestar por la manera con la que se han desarrollado las negociaciones que han dado lugar a la rúbrica del nuevo Acuerdo de Colaboración Pesquera y del nuevo Protocolo entre la Unión Europea y la República de Mauricio.

Alegan falta de transparencia y de consulta con los actores que hacen uso de los recursos marítimos y pesqueros mauricianos, a fin de asegurar que la sostenibilidad de los recursos y los intereses de todos los implicados están salvaguardados así como de evaluar el impacto social de la iniciativa.

Esta situación puede afectar a la imagen y credibilidad de la Unión Europea en la zona, interesada en generar confianza para desarrollar relaciones a largo plazo mutuamente beneficiosas.

El Convenio de Aarhus sobre acceso a la información, participación pública en la toma de decisiones y acceso a la justicia en materia de medio ambiente (y la pesca afecta a los recursos naturales), suscrito por la Unión Europea, junto con la normativa comunitaria derivada del mismo, suponen la puesta en práctica del concepto de la Administración pública abierta y transparente. Nuestros compromisos internacionales y comunitarios obligan a la transparencia y a la difusión de amplia información ambiental. El derecho a la información ambiental tiene un carácter público y forma parte de los principios democráticos.

¿Considera la Comisión que el proceso de negociación del nuevo Acuerdo de colaboración Pesquera y del nuevo Protocolo de Pesca entre la Unión Europea y la República de Mauricio se ha realizado en condiciones de transparencia y posibilitando la consulta de los interesados?

Respuesta de la Sra. Damanaki en nombre de la Comisión

(1 de febrero de 2013)

La Comisión otorga una gran importancia a la transparencia en cada una de las fases del proceso de negociación de los acuerdos de colaboración en el sector pesquero (ACP). Con vistas a ello, antes de llevar a cabo las negociaciones con los terceros países se efectúa una evaluación independiente externa, que brinda la oportunidad de consultar a todas las partes afectadas.

En lo que respecta a la información a los grupos interesados, cabe señalar que, en lo que concierne al caso específico del Acuerdo con Mauricio, la Delegación de la UE en este país informó a las organizaciones profesionales, antes de reanudar el proceso de negociación, acerca de las distintas cuestiones que estaban en juego. Durante la evaluación, el evaluador externo tomó contacto, entre otras personas, con el representante de los pescadores locales (Syndicat des Pêcheurs) a fin de mantener un franco debate. A nivel institucional, los servicios del Ministerio responsable de la pesca y del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores han estado perfectamente al corriente de los objetivos del ACP y se les remitió una copia de la evaluación ex-ante, que también figura publicada en el sitio web de la Comisión.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010634/12

to the Commission

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Transparency with regard to the negotiations on the new Fisheries Partnership Agreement and the new Protocol between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius

Various organisations linked to the fishing sector in Mauritius have expressed concern at the way in which negotiations have been conducted in the run-up to the signing of the new Fisheries Partnership Agreement and the new Protocol between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius.

They claim that there has been a lack of transparency and consultation with stakeholders who use Mauritian maritime and fishery resources, with the aim of ensuring that the sustainability of those resources and the interests of all those involved are safeguarded and assessing the social impact of the initiative.

This may affect the European Union's image and credibility in the area, at a time when the EU is concerned to build trust and develop mutually beneficial long-term relations.

Both the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (also relevant to fisheries, since natural resources are affected), which has been signed by the European Union, and Community legislation deriving from that Convention entail implementation of the notion of open and transparent public administration. Our international and Community commitments require transparency and the dissemination of comprehensive environmental information. The right to environmental information is a public right and a democratic principle.

Does the Commission believe that the process of negotiations on the new Fisheries Partnership Agreement and the new Fisheries Protocol between the European Union and the Republic of Mauritius was conducted transparently, providing an opportunity for those concerned to be consulted?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2013)

The Commission attaches great importance to transparency in each step of the process of negotiation of Fishery partnership agreements (FPA). To this end, before negotiating with third countries an external independent evaluation is prepared, providing an opportunity for all those concerned to be consulted.

Concerning the information to the stakeholders, in the specific case of the agreement with Mauritius, the EU Delegation in Mauritius informed professional organisations of what was at stake before the negotiation process resumed. During evaluation, the external evaluator was also introduced, inter-alia, to the representative of the local fishermen (Syndicat des Pêcheurs) for an open discussion. At institutional level, the services of the Ministry in charge of fisheries and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were also perfectly aware of the objectives of the FPA and were given a copy of the ex-ante evaluation study, which is also published on the Internet site of the Commission.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010635/12

a la Comisión

Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D) y Raimon Obiols (S&D)

(21 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Proyecto de Red Eléctrica Española (REE) en Santa Coloma de Gramenet

En su respuesta E-007253/2012, relativa al proyecto de Red Eléctrica Española (REE) para cambiar el cableado de 220 kV por un trazado de 400 kV en la línea eléctrica del tramo Sentmenat/Santa Coloma de Gramenet, la Comisión observaba una posible violación de la Directiva 2011/92/UE sobre evaluación de impacto ambiental y manifestaba su intención de solicitar mayor información al respecto a las autoridades españolas correspondientes. Teniendo en cuenta lo avanzado del proyecto y que la misma Directiva, en el punto 20 de su Anexo I, menciona específicamente a las líneas aéreas de electricidad con voltaje igual o superior a 220 Kv y longitud superior a 15 km como de obligada evaluación ambiental de conformidad con los artículos 5 a 10,

1.

¿Podría informar la Comisión de si ya ha recibido una respuesta por parte de las autoridades españolas? En caso negativo, ¿podría la Comisión detallar los plazos en los que espera recibir dicha respuesta?

2.

Si las autoridades españolas correspondientes ya han enviado los datos solicitados, ¿podría la Comisión emitir una primera conclusión sobre si considera que hay indicios de violación de la Directiva 2011/92/UE y si, por lo tanto, debería iniciarse procedimiento de infracción?

Por otro lado, tal y como la Comisión ha indicado, existen también sospechas en este caso de la vulneración de los derechos a la información medioambiental y a los procesos de participación del público en la toma de decisiones. En este sentido, el proyecto de REE en Santa Coloma podría estar vulnerando no sólo el artículo 6 de la directiva de impacto sino asimismo las disposiciones que la UE asumió con la ratificación del Convenio de Aarhus sobre acceso a la información, participación de los ciudadanos y acceso a la justicia (Decisión 2005/370/CE), completados por la Directiva 2003/35/CE sobre participación del público en la elaboración de planes y programas relacionados con el medio ambiente, y la Directiva 2003/4/CE relativa al acceso del público a la información medioambiental.

3.

¿Ha tenido también en cuenta la Comisión el cumplimiento de los preceptos de información y participación del público en su requerimiento de información a las autoridades españolas?

Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión

(23 de enero de 2013)

Los servicios de la Comisión se han puesto en contacto con las autoridades españolas, en el marco de una investigación, para pedirles más información sobre el proyecto de Red Eléctrica de España. La respuesta de las autoridades, que se espera recibir en enero de 2013, se examinará con arreglo al Derecho medioambiental de la UE, atendiendo a la Directiva de evaluación del impacto (Directiva 2011/92/UE), que, entre otras disposiciones, contiene las del Convenio de Aarhus (96). La Directiva 2003/4/CE (97) no es aplicable en este contexto.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010635/12

to the Commission

Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D) and Raimon Obiols (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Plans by Red Eléctrica Española (REE) in Santa Coloma de Gramenet

In its answer E-007253/2012 regarding Red Eléctrica Española’s (REE) plans to upgrade a section of power lines between Sentmenat and Santa Coloma de Gramenet from 220 kV to 400 kV, the Commission picked up on a possible infringement of Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, and it also expressed its intention to request further information on this matter from the competent Spanish authorities. Given the advanced stage that the plans have reached and that in point 20 of Annex I to Directive 2011/92/EU specific reference is made to the requirement for overhead electrical power lines with a voltage of 220 kV or more and a length of more than 15 km to undergo an obligatory assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10,

1.

Can the Commission specify whether it has already received a response from the Spanish authorities? If it has not, can the Commission give details about the time frame within which it expects to receive a response?

2.

If the competent Spanish authorities have already supplied the requested information, can the Commission deliver its initial conclusion on whether it considers there to be evidence of a breach of Directive 2011/92/EU, and on whether it should initiate infringement proceedings accordingly?

In addition, as the Commission has indicated, there are also doubts about whether the right of access to environmental information and the right of public participation in decision-making have been infringed. In this respect, REE’s plans in Santa Coloma could be in breach of not only Article 6 of the environmental impact assessment directive, but also of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, and of Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information.

3.

Has the Commission also taken into account the fulfilment or otherwise of requirements relating to access to information and public participation when requesting information from the Spanish authorities?

(Version française)

Dans le cadre d'une investigation, les services de la Commission ont contacté les autorités espagnoles pour obtenir des informations supplémentaires sur le projet de Red Eléctrica de España. La réponse des autorités espagnoles, qui est attendue en janvier 2013, sera examinée à la lumière du droit environnemental de l'UE, en tenant compte de la directive d'évaluation d'impact environnemental 2011/92/UE, qui inclut notamment les dispositions de la Convention d'Aarhus (98). La directive 2003/4/CE (99) n'est pas d'application dans ce contexte.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010636/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE)

(21 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Σημαντική αύξηση του διοξειδίου του άνθρακα και των σταθμών καύσης άνθρακα σε παγκόσμιο επίπεδο

Σύμφωνα με εκτιμήσεις (100) του Διεθνή Οργανισμού Ενέργειας οι εκπομπές διοξειδίου του άνθρακα από την καύση ορυκτών καυσίμων σε παγκόσμιο επίπεδο ανήλθαν στο ιστορικά υψηλό επίπεδο των 31,6 γιγατόνων το 2011, σημειώνοντας αύξηση 3,2% σε σχέση με το 2010. Οι εκπομπές αυτές οφείλονταν πρωτίστως στην καύση άνθρακα σε ποσοστό 45%. Παράλληλα, μελέτη (101) του World Meteorological Organization διατυπώνει το ίδιο συμπέρασμα, τονίζοντας πως ο πλανήτης αρχίζει πλέον να χάνει την ικανότητα απορρόφησης του πλεονάζοντος διοξειδίου του άνθρακα. Ωστόσο, στη μελέτη «Global Coal Risk Assessment» που δημοσίευσε το World Resources Institute (WRI) αναφέρεται πως προετοιμάζεται η κατασκευή περίπου 1 200 σταθμώνηλεκτροπαραγωγήςμεκαύση άνθρακα σε όλο τον κόσμο, μικρός αριθμός εκ των οποίων θα κατασκευαστεί και στην ευρωπαϊκή επικράτεια. Δεδομένου ότι η ΕΕ κινείται στο πλαίσιο επίτευξης των στόχων για τη μείωση των εκπομπών αερίων του θερμοκηπίου έως το 2020 (102) και δεδομένης της πρόθεσης της ΕΕ να συνεχίσει να ανταποκρίνεται στην αυξημένη ζήτηση για ενέργεια (103) ερωτάται το Συμβούλιο:

Πως αντιμετωπίζει τα νέα αυτά δεδομένα; Θεωρεί πως θέτουν την ανάγκη αναθεώρησης των πολιτικών για τη μείωση των εκπομπών αερίων σε ευρωπαϊκό και διεθνές επίπεδο;

Πως αντιμετωπίζει τη σημαντική αύξηση των σταθμών καύσης σε παγκόσμιο επίπεδο; Διαθέτει εκτιμήσεις για τις επιπτώσεις όσον αφορά την παγκόσμια προσπάθεια μείωσης των εκπομπών αερίων του θερμοκηπίου;

Η κατασκευή των νέων σταθμών στην ευρωπαϊκή επικράτεια σχετίζεται με την αντικατάσταση υφιστάμενων σταθμών; Σε ποιο πλαίσιο προγραμματισμού κινείται η κατασκευή τους;

Συμμερίζεται την άποψη (104) της υπεύθυνης της μελέτης του WRI ότι το γεγονός της κατασκευής νέων σταθμών «μας οδηγεί σε μία πραγματικά επικίνδυνη τροχιά»; Αν ναι, πως σκοπεύει να αντιδράσει;

Απάντηση της κ. Hedegaard εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(31 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Τα στοιχεία αυτά είναι παρόμοια με πρόσφατες προβολές του Διεθνούς Οργανισμού Ενέργειας (ΔΟΕ-IEA) στις Παγκόσμιες Ενεργειακές Προοπτικές για το 2012 (World Energy Outlook 2012) αναφορικά με το δυναμικό που θα προκύψει από την κατασκευή νέων μονάδων ηλεκτροπαραγωγής με καύση άνθρακα έως και το 2035 εάν δεν ληφθούν πρόσθετα μέτρα σε παγκόσμια κλίμακα, επιπλέον των ήδη προβλεπομένων. Μέρος του νέου δυναμικού θα αντικαταστήσει υφιστάμενο δυναμικό, συνολικά, όμως, θα υπάρξει συνεχής αύξηση της ηλεκτροπαραγωγής με καύση άνθρακα. Ο ΔΟΕ συνεπέρανε ότι αυτό αντιστοιχεί σε πιθανότητα 50% περιορισμού της μακροπρόθεσμης μέσης αύξησης της θερμοκρασίας του πλανήτη σε 3,6 °C σε σχέση με τα επίπεδα της προβιομηχανικής εποχής. Το αποτέλεσμα αυτό υπολείπεται σαφώς του στόχου των 2 °C και συνεπώς απαιτούνται συνεχείς προσπάθειες για περαιτέρω μείωση των εκπομπών.

Στην ΕΕ προτείνεται συνολική δυναμικότητα περίπου 50 gigawatts και αφορά σταθμούς που λειτουργούν με καύση άνθρακα, υπό μελέτη ή κατασκευή, εκ των οποίων εκτιμώμενη δυναμικότητα 11 gigawatt βρίσκεται στη Γερμανία. Παράλληλα, σχεδιάζεται η απόσυρση δυναμικότητας περίπου 34 gigawatts από το 2013 έως το 2015. Το πλαίσιο σχεδιασμού νέων σταθμών στα περισσότερα κράτη μέλη συνήθως υπερβαίνει την πενταετία.

Όλες οι εγκαταστάσεις ηλεκτροπαραγωγής εντός της ΕΕ υπάγονται στο σύστημα εμπορίας εκπομπών, βάσει του οποίου ορίζεται ανώτατο όριο για τις συνολικές εκπομπές το οποίο φθίνει με ετήσιο ρυθμό 1,74%. Σε διεθνές επίπεδο, οι μη βιώσιμες αυτές τάσεις θα πρέπει να αναστραφούν στο πλαίσιο του προσεχούς γύρου διαπραγματεύσεων για την κλιματική αλλαγή, που πρόκειται να ολοκληρωθούν το 2015.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010636/12

to the Commission

Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Considerable increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants at global level

According to estimates by the International Energy Agency, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption at global level reached a record high of 31.6 gigatonnes in 2011, a 3.2% increase compared with 2010. These emissions are caused primarily (45%) by coal consumption. At the same time, a study by the World Meteorological Organisation has arrived at the same conclusion, emphasising that the planet is now starting to lose the ability to absorb the surplus carbon dioxide. However, the Global Coal Risk Assessment published by the World Resources Institute (W.R.I.) notes that there are plans to construct approximately 1 200 coal-fired power plants throughout the world, a small number of which will be constructed within Europe. Given that the EU is working to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and given the intention of the EU to continue to respond to rising energy demand, will the Council say:

What is its response to these data? Does it consider that they indicate the need for a policy review, in order to reduce emissions at European and international level?

What is its response to the considerable increase in combustion plants at global level? Does it have estimates of the impact on global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Are new plants being constructed within Europe to replace existing plants? What is the planning framework for their construction?

Does it share the view expressed in the W.R.I. study that the construction of new plants ‘would put us on a really dangerous trajectory’? If so, how does it intend to react?

Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2013)

This data is similar to recent projections in the World Energy Outlook 2012 by the International Energy Agency (IEA) regarding the amount of newly built coal capacity between now and 2035 if no additional action is undertaken globally compared to measures foreseen at present. Part of this newly installed capacity would replace existing capacity, but overall it would result in a continued increase of electricity production with coal. The IEA concluded that this would correspond to a 50% probability of limiting the long term average global temperature increase to 3.6 °C relative to pre-industrial levels. This is clearly not in line with the 2C objective, and therefore continued efforts are needed to further reduce emissions.

In the EU a total capacity of circa 50 gigawatts of coal fired power plants are proposed, being developped or already under construction. On the other hand, a capacity of approximatly 34 gigawatts is planned for retirement in the period of 2013 to 2015. The planning framework for new plants in most Member States usually is longer than five years.

Within the EU, all power installations fall under the EU emissions trading system where total emissions are capped and declining at a rate of 1.74% per year. At the international level, these unsustainable trends will have to be reversed as part of the next round of climate change negotiations to be completed in 2015.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010637/12

to the Commission

Chris Davies (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Bird-trapping in Cyprus

What is the Commission’s assessment of the degree to which migratory birds are still being illegally trapped in Cyprus? How does this compare with the situation at the time of the country’s accession to the European Union, and what further action is being taken to bring the trapping to an end?

Is the Commission able to make an assessment of the degree to which trapping takes place on the territory of the British Sovereign Bases, which are not part of the European Union, and is the Commission content with the degree of cooperation being provided by the police and administration of the Sovereign Bases?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2013)

On the basis of the information provided by the national authorities on their monitoring of illegal trapping of birds and the enforcement efforts deployed in Cyprus, the Commission acknowledges a significant decrease of the problem since the country's accession to the EU. However, recent data shows an alarming upward trend of trapping practices. The Commission is concerned that the number of birds affected by illegal practices is still extremely high in Cyprus and in the Sovereign British Areas (SBA).

The Cypriot and UK authorities have informed the Commission of some concrete measures taken to curb the problem. These include the well-established collaboration between the Cypriot and the SBA administration, a better cooperation with stakeholders, more effective controls and sanctions, and awareness-raising. The Commission is of the opinion that these measures go in the right direction but will assess the forthcoming report containing autumn 2012 monitoring data on trapping activities before determining whether further action is needed.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010638/12

to the Commission

Chris Davies (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: CO2-related trade measures

What is the Commission doing to assess the development of instruments that might be used to ensure that CO2-related factors are taken into account when determining the terms of trade with countries outside the European Union?

Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 2013)

Global trade is a key driver for growth and jobs, and an important avenue for moving to a low-carbon economy. Trade liberalisation in energy efficient and climate friendly goods and services can bring an important contribution to the fight against climate change by fostering the deployment of low emission technologies. The EU is pursuing this both through the multilateral avenue (e.g. in the WTO) as well as through bilateral free trade agreements.

In order to ensure that trade and climate policies inter-act in a mutually supportive manner, trade agreements recently concluded by the EU contain specific provisions on trade and sustainable development, including the promotion of trade in climate-friendly products and technologies. They are also confirming the sovereign right of Parties to take legislative and regulatory measures necessary to achieve climate change related objectives on the basis of the level of protection that they deem appropriate. The EU also aims at achieving in its trade agreements early liberalisation of green goods, including those that can be described as ‘climate-friendly’.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010639/12

to the Commission

Chris Davies (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Reduction in potato varieties

1.

Can the Commission confirm that EC regulations requiring the licensing of potato varieties, at some expense, have led to a reduction in the range of seed potatoes available for sale, including older

‘heritage’ varieties?

2.

Has the Commission made any assessment of the number of varieties that may have disappeared from sale?

3.

Does the Commission plan to propose changes to the current arrangements so as to maintain the diversity of potato varieties?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

1.

The Commission cannot confirm that the EU legislation regulating the registration and certification of seed potatoes

1.

The Commission cannot confirm that the EU legislation regulating the registration and certification of seed potatoes

 (105) has led to a reduction in the number of seed potato varieties (including conservation varieties) available on the market. The number of potato varieties in the Common Catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species has increased from 815 in 2003 to 1548 in 2012. The latter number includes 41 conservation potato varieties that can be listed as such since 2010 (106).

2.

The Commission has not undertaken any study to assess the number of potato varieties that may have disappeared from the market. The Commission can only state that since 2000 approximately 450 potato varieties were deleted from the Common Catalogue.

3.

The legislation on the marketing of plant reproductive material is currently under review.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010640/12

à la Commission

Anne Delvaux (PPE)

(21 novembre 2012)

Objet: Interdiction de l'expérimentation animale dans les cosmétiques

La directive «cosmétique» prévoit un cadre réglementaire dans le but d'éliminer progressivement l'expérimentation animale. Elle établit une interdiction d'expérimentation sur les animaux des produits cosmétiques finis et des ingrédients cosmétiques (interdiction d'expérimentation), et une interdiction de mise sur le marché de l'Union européenne, des produits et des ingrédients cosmétiques inclus dans les produits cosmétiques qui ont été expérimentés sur des animaux (interdiction de commercialisation).

L'interdiction d'expérimentation sur les animaux des produits cosmétiques finis s'applique depuis le 11 septembre 2004, alors que l'interdiction d'expérimentation des ingrédients ou de combinaison d'ingrédients s'appliquera graduellement dès que des méthodes alternatives auront été validées et adoptées. Toutefois, pour ce dernier cas, la directive prévoit une date limite maximale de 6 ans après l'entrée en vigueur de la directive, c'est-à-dire le 11 mars 2009, pour la fin des expérimentations sur les animaux, indépendamment de la disponibilité de méthodes alternatives aux expérimentations sur les animaux.

L'interdiction de commercialisation s'appliquera graduellement dès que les méthodes alternatives auront été validées et adoptées dans la législation de l'UE avec le respect dû au processus de validation de l'OCDE. Cette interdiction de commercialisation sera introduite au plus tard 6 ans après l'entrée en vigueur de la directive, c'est-à-dire le 11 mars 2009, pour tous les effets sur la santé humaine, à l'exception de la toxicité des doses répétées, de la toxicité pour la reproduction et de la toxicocinétique. Pour ces effets spécifiques sur la santé, une échéance de 10 ans après l'entrée en vigueur de la directive est prévue, c'est-à-dire le 11 mars 2013, indépendamment de la disponibilité des méthodes alternatives aux expérimentations sur les animaux.

La Commission étudie actuellement l'effet qu'aura l'entrée en vigueur de l'interdiction en 2013 en l'absence de méthodes de substitution et a annoncé qu'elle déciderait de la marche à suivre sur la base de l'évaluation d'impact complète.

Un report de l'échéance de 2013 pour l'entrée en vigueur de l'interdiction serait inacceptable et injustifiable à mes yeux. Où en est l'évaluation de la Commission? Comment se positionne le nouveau commissaire sur cette question?

Réponse donnée par M. Borg au nom de la Commission

(15 janvier 2013)

La Commission renvoie l'auteur de la question aux réponses qu'elle a données à de précédentes questions sur ce sujet, dont les questions E‐005922/2012 et E‐007793/2012 et, plus récemment, la question E‐009629/2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010640/12

to the Commission

Anne Delvaux (PPE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Ban on animal testing of cosmetic products

The Cosmetics Directive provides a regulatory framework for the phasing-out of animal testing. It establishes a ban on testing finished cosmetic products and cosmetic ingredients on animals (testing ban) and a ban on marketing in the European Union finished cosmetic products and ingredients included in cosmetic products which were tested on animals (marketing ban).

The animal testing ban on finished cosmetic products has applied since 11 September 2004; the testing ban on ingredients or combinations of ingredients will apply step by step as alternative methods are validated and adopted. However, in the latter case the directive provides for a cut-off date of six years after entry into force of the directive, i.e. 11 March 2009, for an end to animal testing, irrespective of the availability of alternative non-animal tests.

The marketing ban will apply step by step as alternative methods are validated and adopted in EU legislation with due regard to the OECD validation process. This marketing ban was to be introduced within a maximum of six years after the entry into force of the directive, i.e. by 11 March 2009, for all human health effects with the exception of repeated-dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity and toxicokinetics. For these specific health effects a maximum cut-off date of 10 years after entry into force of the directive, i.e. 11 March 2013, applies, irrespective of the availability of alternative non-animal tests.

The Commission is currently studying the effects which will ensue if the ban comes into force in 2013 without alternative methods having been developed, and has announced that it will decide on the approach to adopt on the basis of a full impact assessment.

Postponing the 2013 deadline for entry into force of the ban would in my view be unacceptable and unjustifiable. How far has the Commission got with its assessment? What is the new Commissioner's position on this issue?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2013)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to earlier answers to questions in relation to this issue, notably E-005922/2012, E-007793/2012 and most recently E-009629/2012.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010641/12

alla Commissione

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Trasferimenti intra-UE e validità della patente di guida conseguita in uno Stato membro

Considerato che sempre più di frequente i cittadini di uno Stato membro dell'UE si spostano per ragioni di lavoro e di vita, anche per periodi di pochi anni, all'interno dell'Unione europea, in altri Stati membri;

considerato che, ai sensi della normativa vigente, per gli stessi vige l'obbligo di acquisire la patente dello Stato membro UE di trasferimento, con evidenti fastidi e costi legati all'adempimento delle pratiche burocratiche di volta in volta richieste dallo Stato di trasferimento;

ritiene la Commissione opportuno emanare una norma atta a consentire ai cittadini dell'UE di usare la patente di guida conseguita in uno Stato membro anche in qualunque altro Stato membro, indipendentemente dalla residenza e dagli spostamenti della stessa?

Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione

(3 gennaio 2013)

La legislazione dell’Unione europea sulle patenti di guida (107) non impone ai cittadini di cambiare la patente di guida quando si trasferiscono in un altro Stato membro, in quanto le patenti di guida sono reciprocamente riconosciute da tutti gli Stati membri. Quando una patente di guida scade, il rinnovo può avvenire nello Stato membro in cui una persona normalmente risiede.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010641/12

to the Commission

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Intra-EU transfers and validity of driving licences obtained in a Member State

Citizens of EU Member States increasingly move to other EU Member States, for work and private reasons, even for periods of just a few years.

Under the rules in force, those citizens are obliged to acquire the driving licence of the EU Member State to which they move. This obviously causes inconvenience and involves costs relating to the administrative formalities involved, which vary from one Member State to the next.

Does the Commission not agree that legislation should be adopted to allow EU citizens to use driving licences obtained in one Member State in all other Member States too, irrespective of any changes of residency?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(3 January 2013)

The Union legislation on driving licences (108) does not require that citizens exchange their driving licence when moving to another Member State. Driving licences shall be mutually recognised by all Member States. Once a driving licence expires, its renewal can take place in the Member State of normal residency.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010642/12

alla Commissione

Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Divieto di consumo dell'intestino di bovini: conseguenze sul «sugo di pajata»

Il sugo «alla pajata» è una specialità tipica della cucina popolare romana, usato per condire i rigatoni, fatto con le frattaglie del vitello.

Con la diffusione dell'encefalopatia spongiforme (BSE), malattia che colpisce i bovini e che è comunemente nota come «sindrome della mucca pazza», il Parlamento e il Consiglio hanno adottato il regolamento (CE) n. 999/2001 che, per ridurre il rischio di contagio nell'uomo, vieta una serie di prodotti derivanti dai bovini, tra i quali l'intestino. Dal 2001 ad oggi, con la progressiva scomparsa dell'emergenza della «mucca pazza», l'elenco dei prodotti vietati è stato più volte rivisto: il metodo adottato solitamente è stato quello di innalzare il limite di età dell'animale macellato, in modo da poter utilizzare le parti provenienti da esemplari giovani.

Considerato che:

il sugo di pajata è un piatto tipico della cucina romana e che, da tempo, i romani ne reclamano la «restituzione»;

il sugo di pajata si prepara con l'intestino tenue del vitellino da latte (quindi un esemplare giovane di bovino);

si è già provveduto ad innalzare il limite di età per l'uso di molte altre parti del bovino (vedi il caso della bistecca alla fiorentina — regolamento (CE) n. 357/2008), mentre per l'intestino permane ancora un divieto totale;

si chiede alla Commissione:

se è possibile modificare l'attuale regolamento sull'uso e il consumo dell'intestino dei bovini, innalzando il limite d'età dell'animale per la rimozione degli intestini;

se, in caso ciò non fosse possibile, esiste qualche altro rimedio che consenta di restituire ai romani il prelibato sugo alla pajata.

Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

I materiali specifici a rischio (SRM) sono gli organi che si ritiene ospitino l'infettività in un animale affetto da encefalopatia spongiforme bovina (BSE). Sulla base dei risultati e delle raccomandazioni di diversi pareri scientifici adottati dal Comitato scientifico direttivo tra il dicembre 1997 e il giugno 2001, gli intestini, dal duodeno al retto e il mesentere dei bovini di tutte le età sono attualmente inclusi nell'elenco dei SRM di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 999/2001 (109) poiché contengono cellule e tessuti che possono ospitare l'infettività della BSE. Di conseguenza, tali tessuti devono essere rimossi dalla filiera dei mangimi e degli alimenti per proteggere la salute del pubblico e degli animali dal rischio di BSE.

Tra il 2007 e il 2011 l'Autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare (EFSA) ha adottato tre pareri scientifici relativi alla valutazione quantitativa del rischio di BSE negli intestini dei bovini. Tali pareri sono ripetutamente giunti alla conclusione che non era possibile ritenere negligibile l'esposizione umana ai patogeni contenuti negli intestini di bovini anche in caso di esclusione dell'ileo. Inoltre, l'EFSA ha ribadito la necessità di rafforzare la metodologia degli attuali studi quantitativi e ha formulato diverse raccomandazioni sui soggetti da affrontare negli studi futuri relativi a tale problematica.

Considerato quanto sopra, la Commissione ha chiesto all'EFSA di riesaminare sul piano quantitativo il rischio di BSE derivante dagli intestini bovini, freschi o insaccati. Tale nuova valutazione si baserà su un aggiornamento dei modelli quantitativi esistenti e terrà conto dei nuovi dati scientifici in tema di infettività dei tessuti bovini e dei dati attuali sulla prevalenza della BSE nell'UE.

Il parere finale dell'EFSA dovrebbe essere disponibile entro il febbraio 2014 e servire da base per un'eventuale revisione delle regole unionali in tema di SRM.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010642/12

to the Commission

Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Ban on consumption of bovine intestines: impact for sugo di pajata (pajata sauce)

Pajata sauce is a speciality of traditional Roman cuisine, used to flavour rigatoni and made from veal offal.

Following the spread of spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), which affects bovines and is commonly known as mad cow disease, the Parliament and the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 which, to reduce the risk of humans being affected by it, bans a range of products derived from bovines, including intestine. From 2001 to the present, with the gradual disappearance of mad cow disease, the list of banned products has been revised several times. The method usually adopted has been to raise the age limit for slaughter, allowing use of parts coming from animals younger than that limit.

Taking into account that:

pajata sauce is a typical Roman dish, and Romans have for some time been asking for it to be brought back;

pajata sauce is made from the small intestine of suckling calf (thus, young bovine);

the age limit for use of many other bovine parts has already been raised (see the case of bistecca alla fiorentina — Regulation (EC) No 357/2008), while for intestine there is still a total ban;

will the Commission say:

if the current Regulation on the use and consumption of bovine intestine can be amended to raise the age limit for removal of the animal's intestine;

failing that, if there is any other way to allow delicious pajata sauce to be restored to the dinner-tables of Rome?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

Specified Risk Materials (SRM) are the organs considered to harbour the infectivity in an animal affected by Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). Based on the results and recommendations of different scientific opinions adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee between December 1997 and June 2001, the intestines from the duodenum to the rectum and the mesentery of bovine animals of all ages are currently included in the list of SRM as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 (110) because they contain cells and tissues that may harbour BSE infectivity. Consequently, these tissues must be removed from the food and feed chain to protect public and animal health against the risk of BSE.

Between 2007 and 2011, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted three scientific opinions related to quantitative assessments of BSE risk in bovine intestines. These opinions consistently concluded that it was not possible to consider as negligible the human exposure from bovine intestines, even when the ileum was excluded. Moreover, EFSA emphasised the need to strengthen the methodology of existing quantitative studies and a number of recommendations were made on the topics that should be addressed in future studies on the subject.

In view of the above, the Commission has requested EFSA to re-assess quantitatively the BSE risk posed by bovine intestines, fresh or after processing into casings. This assessment will be based on an update of existing quantitative models and will take into account any new scientific data available on infectivity of bovine tissues and the current data prevalence as regards BSE in EU.

The final EFSA opinion should be available in February 2014 at the latest and will serve as a basis for a possible revision of EU SRM rules.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010643/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Violazioni del diritto umanitario da parte del governo sudanese nelle regioni in guerra del Kordofan meridionale

Diverse fonti riportano la notizia che il governo sudanese starebbe perpetrando dei comportamenti che violano i più basilari diritti umani nelle zone in guerra del Kordofan meridionale, attualmente controllate dal movimento di liberazione SPLM-North. In particolare, si afferma che il governo starebbe deliberatamente affamando la popolazione, circa 400 000 persone, come tattica di guerra, al fine di provocare una ribellione della stessa contro il movimento SPLM-North.

Considerando che il governo nega l'esistenza del problema e impedisce la fornitura di aiuti umanitari da parte della comunità internazionale;

considerando che il 6 novembre il governo sudanese ha annunciato di aver dichiarato «persona non grata» un'inviata delle Nazioni Unite incaricata di investigare sulla situazione dei diritti umani;

considerando il comunicato ufficiale rilasciato dal Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante Catherine Ashton il 4 agosto scorso, in cui si dichiarava lieta della decisione del governo del Sudan ad acconsentire a un intervento di assistenza umanitaria nelle zone di conflitto, indicando la necessità di attuare tale accordo in tempi rapidi;

considerando che l'Unione europea ha stanziato, nel solo 2012, aiuti per 127 milioni di euro per il Sudan e il Sud Sudan;

considerando che il Sudan ha ratificato vari strumenti internazionali e regionali sui diritti umani, tra cui la Carta africana dei diritti dell'uomo e dei popoli;

Si chiede al Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante:

quali iniziative ha intenzione di intraprendere;

con quale livello di priorità l'Unione europea farà pressioni sul governo sudanese per far sì che queste violazioni dei diritti umani finiscano.

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

(30 gennaio 2013)

L'AR/VP nutre serie preoccupazioni per il conflitto in corso nel Kordofan meridionale e nello Stato del Nilo azzurro in Sudan e per le conseguenze sui diritti umani e a livello umanitario. A causa delle restrizioni all'accesso, poste principalmente dal governo del Sudan, non è ancora stato possibile consegnare aiuti umanitari nelle zone controllate dal Movimento per la liberazione del popolo sudanese — nord (SPLM/N). Eppure, i civili continuano a subire le penose conseguenze dei costanti scontri e dell'insicurezza, dovendo far fronte a gravi carenze alimentari e alla mancanza di un'assistenza sanitaria adeguata e di altri servizi di base.

L'AR/VP ha sostenuto attivamente il gruppo tripartito (UA, Lega araba e ONU) e i protocolli d'intesa che quest'ultimo ha sottoscritto con il governo e con il movimento SPLM/N, rispettivamente il 4 e il 5 agosto 2012, per permettere la consegna degli aiuti umanitari. Il 27 settembre 2012, data la mancata attuazione dei protocolli, l'AR/VP ha chiesto a entrambe le parti di consentire alle agenzie internazionali di fornire assistenza ai civili coinvolti nei conflitti. Inoltre, l'AR/VP ha esortato le parti ad avviare immediatamente e senza condizioni colloqui diretti per raggiungere un accordo sulla cessazione delle ostilità e trovare una soluzione politica duratura al conflitto. L'UE incita i membri dell'Unione africana, della Lega araba e del Consiglio di sicurezza dell'ONU a continuare a trasmettere questo messaggio, ottenendo risultati positivi come il comunicato del Consiglio per la pace e la sicurezza dell'UA del 24 ottobre 2012. L'UE continuerà le proprie iniziative diplomatiche, intervenendo subito prima dell'elaborazione da parte del Consiglio per la pace e la sicurezza dell'UA di una relazione globale sui rapporti tra il Sudan e il Sud Sudan, da presentare al Consiglio di sicurezza dell'ONU entro la fine del 2012.

L'UE ha inoltre deciso di subordinare l'assegnazione al Sudan di ulteriori aiuti economici e per lo sviluppo alla piena attuazione della tabella di marcia dell'Unione africana del 24 aprile 2012 e della risoluzione 2046 (2012) del Consiglio di sicurezza dell'ONU (UNSCR).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010643/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations by the Sudanese Government in the areas at war in Southern Kordofan

According to a number of reports, the Sudanese Government is perpetrating acts which violate the most fundamental human rights in the areas at war in Southern Kordofan, which is currently controlled by the SPLM-North liberation movement. In particular, the Government is said to be deliberately starving the population, some 400 000 people, as a tactic of war, to induce them to rebel against the SPLM-North movement.

Considering that the Government denies the existence of the problem and is preventing the international community from delivering humanitarian aid;

considering that on 6 November the Sudanese Government announced that it had declared a UN official investigating the human rights situation ‘persona non-grata’;

in view of the official statement released by High Representative/Vice-President Catherine Ashton on 4 August 2012, in which she welcomed the Government of Sudan's decision to agree to an intervention to deliver humanitarian assistance to the areas affected by the conflict, and stressed the need to implement the agreement rapidly;

considering that, in 2012 alone, the European Union has allocated EUR 127 million in aid to Sudan and South Sudan;

considering that Sudan has ratified a number of international and regional instruments on human rights, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights;

the High Representative/Vice-President is asked to state:

what initiatives she intends to take;

what priority the European Union will give to putting pressure on the Sudanese Government to ensure that these human rights violations cease.

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

(30 January 2013)

The HR/VP is very worried about the conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nile State, in Sudan, and its human rights and humanitarian consequences. Because of access restrictions, mainly due to the Government of Sudan, it has so far not been possible to deliver humanitarian assistance to the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM/N) controlled areas. However, civilians are continuing to suffer immensely from the ongoing fighting and insecurity, experiencing serious food shortages and lack of adequate healthcare and other basic services.

The HR/VP actively supported the ‘Tripartite Group’ (AU, Arab League and UN) and the Memoranda of Understanding they signed with the Government and SPLM/N resp. on 4/5 August 2012 aiming at delivering humanitarian assistance. Due to non-implementation, on 27 September 2012, the HR/VP called on both parties to allow international humanitarian agencies to deliver assistance to civilians caught up in the conflict. The HR/VP has also urged them to enter immediately and unconditionally into direct talks to agree on a cessation of hostilities and to find a lasting political solution to the conflict. The EU lobbies members of the AU, Arab League and UN Security Council to continue impressing this message, with positive results such as the AU Peace and Security Council (PSC) Communiqué of 24 October 2012. The EU will continue with diplomatic efforts, most immediately ahead of the preparation by the AU PSC of a comprehensive report on relations between Sudan and South Sudan to be submitted to the UN Security Council before the end of 2012.

Also, the EU has conditioned the allocation of further EU economic and developmental support to Sudan to full implementation of the AU Roadmap of 24 April 2012 and UN Security Council resolution (UNSCR) 2046(2012).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010644/12

alla Commissione

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: In Bosnia carceri piene e centinaia di condannati in libertà

Il ministro della Giustizia bosniaco, Zoran Mikulic, ha rivelato a testate giornalistiche locali che centinaia di responsabili di reati di vario tipo, con condanne definitive, sono ancora in libertà perché nelle carceri della Federazione BiH (entità a maggioranza croato-musulmana di Bosnia) non ci sono posti liberi. Secondo i dati del ministero della Giustizia, i detenuti che stanno scontando la pena sono 1 788, compresi coloro che sono agli arresti domiciliari.

Il ministro sostiene inoltre che, nonostante quanto sopra e sebbene esista la possibilità di sostituire la reclusione con multe in denaro per pene inferiori a 12 mesi, i condannati che aspettano l'esecuzione della pena sono 859. Tra questi, ci sono 58 condannati con turbe psichiche che hanno commesso il reato in condizioni di infermità mentale e per i quali non esistono strutture sanitarie adeguate. Un altro grave problema è rappresentato dal fatto che 244 persone con condanna definitiva sono latitanti.

La Commissione europea, nella sua comunicazione del 10 ottobre 2012 dal titolo «Strategia di allargamento e sfide principali per il periodo 2012-2013» (COM(2012)0600), sostiene che «si è fatto qualche passo avanti per quanto riguarda le condizioni nelle carceri. La nuova struttura psichiatrica di Sokolac non è ancora operativa. Occorre ancora intraprendere una riforma globale del sistema carcerario e adottare la legge quadro sul gratuito patrocinio. Il paese ha fatto qualche progresso per quanto riguarda l'accesso alla giustizia […]».

1.

Come commenta la Commissione quanto riportato dalla stampa bosniaca, in netto contrasto con quanto sostenuto nel suo rapporto?

2.

Come intende la Commissione intervenire?

Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione

(17 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione è consapevole delle difficoltà incontrate dalla Bosnia-Erzegovina nell’esecuzione delle sanzioni penali. Tale questione è stata per l’appunto sollevata, assieme ai relativi problemi legati alle strutture carcerarie, ai diritti umani e al personale penitenziario, con gli interlocutori pertinenti, ivi compreso con lo stesso ministro della Giustizia Mikulic nell’ambito del dialogo strutturato sulla giustizia tra l’UE e la Bosnia-Erzegovina.

Nel corso della seconda sessione plenaria del dialogo, nel novembre 2011, la Commissione ha rivolto una raccomandazione alle autorità della Bosnia-Erzegovina, esortandole ad adottare tutte le misure possibili per ridurre l’arretrato nell’esecuzione delle sanzioni penali. Tale richiesta era stata corredata dall’invito a organizzare un seminario regionale per lo scambio di buone pratiche riguardo all’esecuzione di sanzioni penali, tenutosi il 30 novembre 2012 a Sarajevo e finanziato dalla Commissione attraverso lo strumento TAIEX. Dall’inizio dell’intervento della Commissione in materia, l’arretrato giudiziario è diminuito di oltre il 17 %.

La Commissione ha chiesto alle autorità competenti di fare tutto il possibile per garantire soluzioni tempestive e l’allineamento sostenibile del sistema alle norme internazionali ed europee pertinenti. Oltre a fornire una continua assistenza mirata mediante lo strumento di preadesione, la Commissione proseguirà la propria azione nel settore e continuerà a riferire al riguardo.

In aggiunta, la Commissione sostiene la costruzione di un carcere statale di massima sicurezza con due sovvenzioni per un importo complessivo di 9,15 milioni di euro.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010644/12

to the Commission

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: In Bosnia, the jails are full and hundreds of convicted criminals are at large

The Bosnian Minister of Justice, Zoran Mikulic, has disclosed to local newspapers that hundreds of individuals who have been sentenced for crimes of various kinds are still at large because there are no prison places available in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (the Bosnian state with a Croat-Muslim majority). According to the data held by the Ministry of Justice, there are 1 788 individuals serving a sentence in detention, including those under house arrest.

The Minister also maintains that, despite this and although the possibility exists of substituting fines for terms of imprisonment of less than 12 months, there are 859 convicted persons waiting to serve their sentence. Among them there are 58 who are mentally disturbed and committed a crime while suffering from a mental illness, for whom there are no suitable healthcare facilities. Another serious problem is the fact that 244 convicted individuals have absconded.

The European Commission, in its communication of 10 October 2012 entitled ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2012-2013’ (COM(2012)0600), maintains that ‘some progress has been made in improving prison conditions. The new psychiatric facility in Sokolac is not operational yet. A comprehensive reform of the prison system remains outstanding. Adoption of the framework law on free legal aid is still pending. Some progress has been made as regards access to justice […]’.

1.

What comment does the Commission have to make concerning the reports in the Bosnian press, which stand in stark contrast to what it asserts in its report?

2.

How does the Commission intend to intervene?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2013)

The Commission is aware of the difficulties encountered by the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) in the execution of criminal sanctions. This issue, along with related problems of prison facilities, human rights, prison personnel and others, have consistently been raised with the relevant interlocutors, also in the framework of the EU-BiH Structured Dialogue on Justice directly with the FBiH Minister of Justice Mikulic.

At the second plenary of the Dialogue in November 2011, the Commission issued the following recommendation: ‘Urges FBiH authorities to undertake all possible measures to reduce the backlog in the execution of criminal sanctions’. This request was complemented with the invitation to organise a regional workshop for the exchange of good practices on execution of criminal sanctions, which was held on 30 November 2012 in Sarajevo and was financed by the Commission through the TAIEX instrument. Since the Commission begun its engagement on the matter, a reduction of the backlog of over 17% was observed.

The Commission has requested that competent authorities do all that is in their powers to guarantee timely solutions and sustainable alignment of the system to relevant international and European standards. The Commission will continue to engage and report on these matters, in addition to continuing targeted assistance through the Instrument for Pre-Accession.

In addition, the Commission supports the construction of a high security state prison with two grants with a total of EUR 9.15 million.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010645/12

alla Commissione

Mario Borghezio (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Fondi europei alle famiglie mafiose

Da fonti di stampa si apprende che esponenti della criminalità organizzata italiana avrebbero ricevuto contributi europei per gli agricoltori.

Tra questi il fratello di un noto boss mafioso siciliano, in carcere da 4 anni, che ha ricevuto tali fondi dal 1997 al 2004; un altro riceveva ingenti somme europee, nonostante fosse anch'egli in carcere e avesse presentato le richieste attraverso associazioni di categoria.

Considerato che i fondi europei non possono essere erogati a chi è sotto sorveglianza speciale o ha una condanna per mafia, può la Commissione precisare quanto segue:

è essa a conoscenza di questo fatto?

È la Commissione dotata di un sistema di monitoraggio che verifichi la corretta gestione dei fondi dall'erogazione all'utilizzatore finale?

Risposta di Dacian Cioloș a nome della Commissione

(29 gennaio 2013)

1.

La Commissione è a conoscenza dei fatti citati.

2.

Conformemente al principio della gestione concorrente [regolamento (CE) n. 1290/2005 del Consiglio

2.

Conformemente al principio della gestione concorrente [regolamento (CE) n. 1290/2005 del Consiglio

 (111)] gli Stati membri sono incaricati dei pagamenti dei fondi agricoli dell'UE ai beneficiari, oltre che dei relativi controlli.

D'altro lato la Commissione, nell'ambito del suo ruolo nella gestione della PAC, verifica i sistemi di gestione e di controllo messi in atto dagli Stati membri al fine di verificarne la conformità con le norme dell'UE. Le singole operazioni che danno adito a sospetto di frodi o irregolarità sono oggetto di indagine da parte dell'OLAF, l'Ufficio europeo per la lotta antifrode della Commissione europea, nel quadro del suo ruolo specifico.

In ogni caso la Commissione darà seguito alla questione sollevata dall'onorevole parlamentare con le autorità italiane competenti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010645/12

to the Commission

Mario Borghezio (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: European funds paid to mafia families

According to the press, members of organised criminal groups in Italy have received European farm payments.

They include the brother of a well-known Sicilian mafia boss who had been in prison for 4 years, who received payments from 1997 to 2004; another received huge amounts of European funding although he, too, was in prison and had submitted applications through producers' associations.

Considering that payments from European funds cannot be made to persons who are under special surveillance or have been convicted of belonging to the mafia, can the Commission indicate:

Whether it is aware of this fact?

Whether the Commission has a monitoring system which checks that funds are properly managed, from the authorisation of payments through to the end user?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

1.

The Commission is aware of these discussions.

2.

According to the principle of shared management (Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005

2.

According to the principle of shared management (Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005

 (112)), Member States are responsible for the payments of EU agricultural funds to the beneficiaries, including the related controls.

On the other side, the Commission, in the context of its role in the management of the CAP, audits the management and control systems put in place by the Member States in order to verify their compliance with EU rules. Individual transactions which give raise to suspicion of fraud or irregularity are investigated by OLAF, the European Anti-Fraud Office of the European Commission, in the context of its specific role.

In any case, the Commission will follow up on the issue raised by the Honourable Member with the competent Italian authorities.

(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)

Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-010646/12

Komisijai

Juozas Imbrasas (EFD)

(2012 m. lapkričio 21 d.)

Tema: ES paskolų garantijų priemonė (angl. EU Loan Guarantee Facility)

Vienas iš pagrindinių programos „Erasmus visiems“ principų – mobilumas. Jo reikšme tiek asmeniui, tiek visai visuomenei jau seniai neabejojama. Mobilumas labai svarbus siekiant užtikrinti, kad kuo daugiau besimokančių asmenų, ypač iš vargingesnių ekonominių sluoksnių, turėtų galimybę įgyti kokybišką išsilavinimą. Naujas Europos Komisijos pasiūlymas – ES paskolų garantijų priemonė, skirta nuolatinėms vienų (numatoma skirti daugiausia 12 tūkst. eurų) ar dvejų (numatoma skirti daugiausia 18 tūkst. eurų) metų tarpvalstybinėms magistro studijoms finansuoti. Studentams paskolas teiktų privatūs tarpininkai, o laiduotojo vaidmenį šiuo atveju atliktų ES. Tačiau jau daug įvairių studentų organizacijų išreiškė savo susirūpinimą šia priemone, kuri galbūt ne padėtų pasiekti savo tikslo – suteikti jaunam žmogui geresnį gyvenimą, o pridarytų dar daugiau žalos.

Pirma, dėl to, kad ši paskolų schema nebus patraukli studentams iš žemesnių ekonominių sluoksnių, o labiau pasitarnaus kaip papildoma pagalba tiems studentams, kurie ir taip jau turi galimybę būti mobilūs. Antra, gali būti, kad ši priemonė dar labiau paskatins protų nutekėjimą. Pavyzdžiui, studentas iš Lietuvos, pasiėmęs 12 ar 18 tūkstančių eurų paskolą studijoms vienoje iš ekonomiškai stipresnių ES valstybių ir baigęs studijas, tikėtina, neplanuos grįžti į Lietuvą, nes paprasčiausiai ekonominė padėtis ten nebus palanki grąžinti paskolą. Todėl studentas bus priverstas rinktis tą šalį, kurioje matys geresnes perspektyvas, o ne tą, kurioje galbūt jo įgytos žinios būtų labiau reikalingos. Trečia, šiuo metu jaunimas susiduria su didžiule nedarbo problema. Todėl apimti desperatiškų nuotaikų ir tikėdamiesi, kad galbūt pabaigę magistro studijas gaus geresnį darbą, studentai griebsis šitos galimybės net nepagalvoję apie tai, kad pasiimtą paskolą reikės grąžinti, ir tai tik dar labiau padidins jaunų žmonių įsiskolinimą.

1.

Ar Komisija nemano, kad tokia paskolų schema paskatins protų nutekėjimą, kadangi studentams iš vargingesnių ES valstybių nebus naudinga grįžti į gimtąją šalį, kadangi ten įvykdyti savo finansinius įsipareigojimus bus daug sunkiau arba tiesiog neįmanoma?

2.

Ar Komisija galėtų atsakyti, ar prieš pasiūlant šią schemą buvo konsultuojamasi su pačiais studentais, kuriuos tiesiogiai gali paliesti ši paskolų priemonė?

3.

Ar Komisija nemano, kad teikiamų paskolų dydį reikėtų diferencijuoti pagal atitinkamos ES valstybės narės, kurioje studentas sieks magistro studijų, pragyvenimo lygį?

A. Vassiliou atsakymas Komisijos vardu

(2013 m. sausio 18 d.)

Komisija siūlo, kad studentų paskolų garantijų sistema turėtų būti įgyvendinta taip, kad ja galėtų naudotis studentai, kilę iš sunkiomis socialinėmis sąlygomis gyvenančių šeimų. Panaikinus įprastus reikalavimus skolą garantuoti užstatu arba tėvų garantijomis tokiems studentams bus daug lengviau gauti tokių rūšių finansavimą, kuris dabar jiems neprieinamas.

Tik vienoje Europos aukštojo mokslo erdvės šalyje (Norvegijoje) šiuo metu vyrauja atvykstančių ir išvykstančių studentų srautų pusiausvyra. Europos studentų paskolų garantijų priemonė yra skirta tokiai studentų grupei, kuri sudarys mažiau nei 0,25 % visų programoje „Erasmus visiems“ dalyvaujančių šalių studentų, todėl, nors ji labai pakeis šia priemone besinaudosiančių studentų galimybes, bendri studentų srautai dėl to nepasikeis.

Suinteresuotųjų asmenų grupės dalyvavo visais šio pasiūlymo rengimo etapais nuo pat 2008 m., kai kilo ši idėja. Atliekant šios priemonės įgyvendinamumo tyrimą, studentai ir jiems atstovaujančios organizacijos dalyvavo tarptautinėje politikos formavimo konferencijoje, Europos ir nacionalinio lygmens renginiuose, seminaruose ir pokalbiuose. Per 2011 m. Eurobarometro apklausą 57 000 jaunuolių teirautasi apie studijas užsienyje ir kas joms trukdo. Nustatyta, kad viena iš didžiausių kliūčių kitur studijuoti pageidaujančiam jaunimui yra sunkumai gauti lėšų.

Komisija mano, kad dėl paskolos dydžio turi susitarti studentas ir finansinis tarpininkas, atsižvelgdami į studento poreikius per studijų laikotarpį kitoje šalyje ir garantuojamos paskolos dydžio ribas, apie kurias užsiminė gerbiamas Europos Parlamento narys.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010646/12

to the Commission

Juozas Imbrasas (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: EU Loan Guarantee Facility

Mobility is one of the fundamental principles of the ‘Erasmus for all’ programme. There has long been no doubt about its value both for individuals and society as a whole. Mobility is very important for ensuring that as many students as possible, particularly from poorer economic sections, have access to quality education. The European Commission’s new proposal is the EU Loan Guarantee Facility, intended to finance full-time one-year (an allocation of up to EUR 12 000) or two-year (an allocation of up to EUR 18 000) cross-border Masters studies. Private intermediaries would provide students with loans and in this respect the EU would act as guarantor. However, many different student organisations have already expressed their concern about this facility, which may not perhaps achieve its objective of giving young people a better life, but do even more damage.

Firstly, because this loan scheme will not be attractive to students from lower economic backgrounds, and will instead serve as additional aid for students who already have the opportunity to be mobile. Secondly, it is possible that this facility will exacerbate brain drain. For example, it is likely that a student from Lithuania who has taken out a EUR 12 000 or EUR 18 000 loan for studies in one of the economically stronger EU Member States and has graduated will not plan to return to Lithuania because the economic situation there will simply not be favourable to repaying the loan. The student will therefore be forced to choose the country in which he sees better prospects, perhaps not the one which most needs the knowledge he has gained. Thirdly, young people at the moment face a huge unemployment problem. In a mood of desperation with the expectation that on completion of their Masters studies they will perhaps get a better job, students will therefore grab this opportunity without even thinking about the fact that they will have to pay back the loan they have taken out, and this will only increase debt among young people even more.

1.

Does the Commission believe that such a loan scheme will encourage brain drain because it will not be in the interests of students from poorer EU Member States to return to their native country as it will be more difficult or simply impossible for them to honour their financial obligations there?

2.

Could the Commission say whether, prior to offering this scheme, there were consultations with those very students who may be directly affected by this loan instrument?

3.

Does the Commission believe that the size of loans provided should be differentiated according to the standard of living of the EU Member State in which the student will pursue Masters studies?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission proposes that the Student Loan Guarantee Facility should be delivered in such a way as to ensure that it is accessible to students from disadvantaged backgrounds. By removing the usual requirements for collateral or parental guarantees, it will be particularly helpful for such students by opening up access to forms of finance which are currently denied to them.

Only one country in the European Higher Education Area (Norway) currently has a balance between incoming and outgoing student flows. The Student Loan Guarantee Facility is targeted at a group of graduate students which will amount to less than 0.25% of the total student body in the countries participating in the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme. Therefore while it will have a significant impact on the opportunities for the graduates involved, it will not affect student flows overall.

Stakeholder groups have been involved in the development of the proposal at all stages since the idea emerged in 2008. Students and their representative bodies participated in an international policy conference, European and national events, as well as workshops and interviews as part of the feasibility study for the instrument. A 2011 Eurobarometer interviewed 57 000 young people on mobility and barriers to mobility, identifying access to finance as one of the major difficulties faced by young people who wanted to be mobile.

The Commission believes that the size of loan should be agreed between the student and the financial intermediary, taking account of the student's needs during their study period in the host country and respecting the limits of the guarantee referred to by the Honourable Member.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-010647/12

an die Kommission

Franziska Katharina Brantner (Verts/ALE)

(21. November 2012)

Betrifft: Konversionsflächen und EU-Beihilferecht

Im Rahmen des Abzugs der US-Armee aus Teilen Deutschlands stellt sich für die betroffenen Städte und Gemeinden die Frage der Konversion und Nutzung der freiwerdenden Flächen. Zum Erwerb solcher Konversionsflächen von der Bundesanstalt für Immobilienaufgaben (Bima) durch Städte und Gemeinden stellt sich in diesem Zusammenhang folgende Frage:

Am 20. Dezember 2011 erließ die Kommission einen Beschluss über die Anwendung von Artikel 106 Absatz 2 des Vertrags über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union auf staatliche Beihilfen in Form von Ausgleichsleistungen zugunsten bestimmter Unternehmen, die mit der Erbringung von Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse betraut sind (Aktenzeichen K(2011)9380). Mit Blick auf dessen Artikel 2 nehmen wir an, dass die Bima die Flächen ohne vorherige Anmeldung bei der Kommission gemäß Artikel 108 Abs. 3 AEUV unter Marktpreis an Städte und Gemeinden verkaufen kann, ohne europäisches Beihilferecht zu brechen, wenn die Flächen für sozialen Wohnungsbau bestimmt sind und die übrigen Voraussetzungen, die in dem Beschluss vorgesehen sind, eingehalten werden. Ist diese Annahme zutreffend?

Antwort von Herrn Almunia im Namen der Kommission

(8. Januar 2013)

Die Vorschriften über staatliche Beihilfen gelten für alle Unternehmen, d. h. für jede eine wirtschaftliche Tätigkeit ausübende Einheit, unabhängig von ihrer Rechtsform. Somit kann die staatliche Finanzierung einer von einer Stadt ausgeübten wirtschaftlichen Tätigkeit wie das Anbieten von Sozialwohnungen ebenfalls eine staatliche Beihilfe darstellen.

In dem Beschluss über die Anwendung von Artikel 106 Absatz 2 AEUV auf staatliche Beihilfen in Form von Ausgleichsleistungen zugunsten bestimmter Unternehmen, die mit der Erbringung von Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse betraut sind (im Folgenden „DAWI-Beschluss“) sind die besonderen Voraussetzungen festgelegt, unter denen Ausgleichsleistungen für die Erbringung von Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse (im Folgenden „DAWI“) mit dem Binnenmarkt vereinbar und von der Anmeldepflicht befreit sind.

Der soziale Wohnungsbau kann in der Tat als eine Dienstleistung von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse definiert werden, auf die der DAWI-Beschluss Anwendung findet. Dazu muss der Dienstleistungserbringer mit einer bestimmten Aufgabe betraut werden, die als DAWI anzusehen ist und zu deren Erfüllung der Dienstleistungserbringer verpflichtet ist. Der Beschluss enthält ferner ausführliche Vorschriften zur Höhe der Ausgleichsleistungen, die der Dienstleistungserbringer für die Erbringung der DAWI erhalten kann, insbesondere die Bestimmungen, dass die Parameter für die Berechnung des Ausgleichs zuvor klar aufzustellen sind und die Höhe der Ausgleichsleistungen unter Berücksichtigung eines angemessenen Gewinns für den Dienstleistungserbringer nicht über die zur Erfüllung der gemeinwirtschaftlichen Verpflichtung nötigen Nettokosten hinausgehen darf. Im Prinzip können die nationalen Behörden die Form der staatlichen Beihilfe bestimmen, die sie zum Ausgleich dieser Kosten gewähren wollen, sofern der Ausgleichsmechanismus im Betrauungsakt beschrieben und die Höhe der Beihilfe genau festgelegt ist, um sicherzustellen, dass die Beihilfe nicht über die obengenannten Kosten hinausgeht.

Die Anwendung des DAWI-Beschlusses auf den von der Frau Abgeordneten vorgebrachten Sachverhalt setzt in jedem Fall voraus, dass sämtliche in diesem Beschluss festgelegten Voraussetzungen erfüllt sind. Dann braucht die Maßnahme nicht nach den EU‐Beihilfevorschriften angemeldet zu werden.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010647/12

to the Commission

Franziska Katharina Brantner (Verts/ALE)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Redevelopment areas and EU state aid rules

As a result of the withdrawal of the US army from parts of Germany, the cities and towns affected must decide what to do with the areas of land thereby released. The following issue arises in connection with any decision by local authorities to purchase such areas for redevelopment from the BImA (Institute for Federal Real Estate):

On 20 December 2011 the Commission issued a decision on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to state aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (C(2011) 9380). In the light of Article 2 thereof, we presume that the BImA can, without having to inform the Commission in advance pursuant to Article 108(3) TFEU, sell the areas below market value to cities and towns without thereby violating European state aid rules provided that the areas in question are to be used for social housing and provided the other conditions set out in the decision are fulfilled. Is this assumption correct?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

State aid rules apply to all undertakings, which are defined as all entities engaged in an economic activity irrespective of their legal status. Therefore, State financing of an economic activity performed by a city, such as offering social housing, can also constitute state aid.

The decision on the application of Article 106(2) TFEU to state aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (‘SGEI Decision’) sets out specific requirements under which compensation for the provision of an SGEI is compatible with the internal market and exempt from notification.

Social housing can indeed be defined as a service of general economic interest, to which the SGEI Decision applies. It requires that a provider be entrusted with a specific task, which qualifies as an SGEI and which the provider is obliged to perform. The decision also contains detailed rules on the amount the provider may receive for performing the SGEI, most notably that the compensation parameters have to be set out clearly in advance and that the compensation cannot go beyond the net costs of the public service obligation, including a reasonable profit for the provider. In principle, the national authorities can decide the form of state aid they want to grant to compensate for those costs, as long the compensation mechanism is set out in the entrustment act and the amount of aid is precisely quantified so as to ensure that it does not go beyond those costs.

In any case, the application of the SGEI decision to the case mentioned by the Honourable Member presupposes that all the requirements of the decision are fulfilled. In that case, the measure does not need to be notified under EU State aid rules.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris P-010648/12

adresată Comisiei

George Sabin Cutaş (S&D)

(21 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: O definiție și o listă UE a paradisurilor fiscale

Conform unui studiu realizat de organizația Tax Justice Network în luna iulie, fondurile deținute în paradisuri fiscale reprezentau cel puțin 21 de trilioane de dolari la sfârșitul anului 2010. Totodată, evaziunea fiscală cauzează statelor membre pierderi de aproximativ 1 trilion de euro în fiecare an.

Taxarea stă la baza bunei guvernări și este calea către dezvoltare. Paradisurile fiscale contribuie la creșterea inegalității și a sărăciei, la corodarea democrației, promovarea corupției, subminarea reglementărilor financiare și a creșterii economice.

Parlamentul European a subliniat în repetate rânduri necesitatea luptei împotriva evaziunii fiscale, cu atât mai importantă în contextul de criză și a propus o definiție a paradisurilor fiscale în cadrul Regulamentului privind fondurile europene cu capital de risc.

O listă europeană a acestora lipsește însă, în continuare, iar instituții precum Banca Europeană de Investiții continuă să fie criticate în mod repetat pentru folosirea jurisdicțiilor necooperante prin intermediul proiectelor finanțate.

Pachetul legislativ privind combaterea evaziunii fiscale urmează a fi lansat pe 5 decembrie. În contextul în care lista Organizației pentru Cooperare și Dezvoltare Economică și cea a Grupului de Acțiune Financiară Internațională sunt considerate ca fiind insuficiente:

Intenționează Comisia să propună o definiție europeană a paradisurilor fiscale?

Dorește Comisia să realizeze o listă proprie a paradisurilor fiscale?

Răspuns dat de dl Šemeta în numele Comisiei

(18 decembrie 2012)

Comisia împărtășește preocupările exprimate de distinsul membru și, drept urmare, a prezentat, la 6 decembrie 2012, un pachet cuprinzător de acțiuni pe termen scurt, mediu și lung [Un plan de acțiune în vederea consolidării luptei împotriva fraudei și a evaziunii fiscale COM(2012)722].

În recomandarea sa privind măsurile menite să încurajeze țările terțe să aplice standarde minime de bună guvernanță în chestiuni fiscale [C(2012)8805], Comisia a stabilit criteriile pentru a determina dacă o țară terță respectă sau nu standarde minime cu privire la transparență, schimbul de informații și concurența fiscală loială. Comisia recomandă tuturor statelor membre să se bazeze pe aceste standarde în relațiile lor cu țări terțe și să întocmească o listă neagră a țărilor terțe care nu le respectă.

Simpla înscriere pe o listă neagră poate încuraja țările terțe să respecte standardele minime menționate. Cu toate acestea, Comisia recomandă, de asemenea, o serie de măsuri pe care statele membre ar trebui să le ia împotriva țărilor terțe care nu îndeplinesc aceste standarde, precum și măsuri în favoarea celor care le respectă. Comisia nu va evalua ea însăși, în mod sistematic, toate țările terțe. Această sarcina le revine statelor membre care au efectiv relații cu țările terțe în cauză. Cu toate acestea, ținând cont de rolul mai extins al platformei pentru buna guvernanță fiscală, pe care Comisia intenționează să o introducă, aceasta ar trebui să contribuie mai ales la aplicarea coerentă de către statele membre a recomandării menționate anterior.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010648/12

to the Commission

George Sabin Cutaş (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: EU definition and list of tax havens

According to a study carried out by the organisation Tax Justice Network in July 2012, the funds held in tax havens amounted to at least USD 21 trillion at the end of 2010. At the same time, the Member States are losing around EUR 1 trillion every year as a result of tax evasion.

Taxation is the foundation of good governance and represents the path towards development. Tax havens contribute to increasing inequality and poverty and help to corrode democracy, foster corruption and undermine financial regulations and economic growth.

The European Parliament has repeatedly stressed the need to combat tax evasion, particularly in the context of the current crisis, and has proposed a definition of tax havens as part of the regulation on European venture capital funds.

Nevertheless, there is still no European list of tax havens, and institutions such as the European Investment Bank are still repeatedly criticised for using uncooperative jurisdictions in connection with projects being financed.

The package of legislation to combat tax evasion is to be launched on 5 December 2012. Bearing in mind that the lists drawn up by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the International Financial Action Task Force are considered insufficient:

Will the Commission propose a European definition of tax havens?

Will the Commission draw up its own list of tax havens?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2012)

The Commission shares the concerns raised by the Honourable Member and as a result has presented a comprehensive package of immediate, mid-term and long-term actions on 6 December 2012 (Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion COM(2012) 722).

In its Recommendation regarding measures intended to encourage third countries to apply minimum standards of good governance in tax matters (C(2012) 8805), the Commission has set out the criteria for determining whether a third country does or does not comply with minimum standards on transparency, exchange of information and fair tax competition. The Commission recommends all Member States to base themselves on these standards in their relationships with third countries and to establish a blacklist of third countries not complying with them.

Blacklisting in itself may encourage third countries to comply with the said minimum standards. However, the Commission also recommends a series of measures that Member States should take against third countries which do not meet such standards, as well as measures in favour of those that do. The Commission will not systematically assess all third countries itself. That is for the Member States who actually deal with the third countries concerned. However, as part of its wider role the Platform for Tax Good Governance that the Commission plans to establish should help to achieve notably the consistent application of the said Recommendation by Member States.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010649/12

an die Kommission

Bernd Lange (S&D)

(21. November 2012)

Betrifft: Dienstleistungsverkehr

In letzter Zeit häufen sich die Beschwerden deutscher Handwerker, die einen Auftrag in Dänemark ausführen wollen. Bisher benötigten deutsche Handwerker, die in den Bereichen Elektro-, Gas‐ und Wasserinstallation tätig werden wollten, eine dänische Zulassung hierfür. Diese Zulassung wurde gemäß der Zertifizierungsnorm DIN EN IS 9001 erteilt, die von Dänemark anerkannt und im Dänischen Standard (DS) umgesetzt ist.

Nun wurden die Anforderungen erheblich erhöht. So muss beispielsweise eine gesonderte Zertifizierung beigebracht werden, die explizit die Einhaltung der dänischen Gesetzgebung im Qualitätsmanagement bescheinigt. Ebenfalls werden bereits erteilte und bestehende dänische Zulassungen infrage gestellt.

Dies vorausgeschickt frage ich die Kommission:

In welchem Umfang sind der Kommission diese Vorkommnisse oder weitere Einschränkungen des freien Dienstleistungsverkehrs bekannt?

Steht die Vorgehensweise der dänischen Behörden mit der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie (Artikel 16, Absatz 1a) im Einklang?

Ist eine rückwirkende Aufhebung von Zulassungen mit dem Gemeinschaftsrecht vereinbar?

Welche Maßnahmen wird die Kommission ergreifen, um eine diskriminierungsfreie Tätigkeit deutscher Handwerker in Dänemark sicherzustellen?

Antwort von Herrn Barnier im Namen der Kommission

(1. Februar 2013)

Der Kommission ist bekannt, dass Gewerbetreibende aus anderen Mitgliedstaaten auf Schwierigkeiten stoßen, wenn sie in Dänemark Dienstleistungen in den Bereichen Elektro-, Gas‐ und Wasserinstallation erbringen. In der Arbeitsunterlage der Kommissionsdienststellen mit detaillierten Angaben zur Umsetzung der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie wurde festgestellt, dass das bisherige Zulassungsverfahren für Erbringer grenzüberschreitender Dienstleistungen in den genannten Bereichen überprüft werden muss, um Konformität mit der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie herzustellen.

Die dänischen Behörden bereiten zurzeit einen Legislativvorschlag vor, der bis zum Jahresende in das Parlament eingebracht werden soll und sicherstellen dürfte, dass die einschlägigen dänischen Rechtsvorschriften voll und ganz in Einklang mit den Binnenmarktvorschriften für Dienstleistungen stehen. Die Kommission wird diese Reform im Zuge der Follow-up-Maßnahmen zu der im Juni 2012 veröffentlichten Mitteilung über eine Partnerschaft für neues Wachstum im Dienstleistungssektor (113) genau im Auge behalten.

In der Zwischenzeit wenden die dänischen Behörden vorläufige Verfahren an, um die Erbringung von Dienstleistungen in Dänemark durch Anbieter zu erleichtern, die im Mitgliedstaat ihrer Niederlassung internationalen Standards genügen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010649/12

to the Commission

Bernd Lange (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Trade in services

In recent years, an increasing number of complaints have been lodged by German tradesmen wishing to fulfil orders in Denmark. German tradesmen wishing to work as technicians in the electrical, gas and plumbing sectors have hitherto been required to have the relevant Danish licence, which was granted under the DIN EN IS 9001 international quality standard, which Denmark recognises and has incorporated into its own standards.

Now, however, the requirements have been made significantly stricter. For example, tradesmen must now provide a specific certificate demonstrating that they comply with the criteria laid down in Danish quality management legislation. Danish authorisations that have already been granted may no longer be valid.

1.

How much does the Commission know about these facts or other cases of restraint of trade in services?

2.

Is the Danish authorities’ approach in accordance with the Services Directive (Article 16(1)(a))?

3.

Is the retroactive withdrawal of such authorisations compatible with EC law?

4.

What measures will the Commission take to ensure that German tradesmen are not discriminated against in Denmark?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2013)

The Commission is aware of the fact that traders from other Member States have been encountering problems in providing services in the sectors of electrical, gas and plumbing installations in Denmark. The Commission Staff Working Document with detailed information on the implementation of the Services Directive indicated that authorisation schemes currently being applied to cross-border providers in these areas needed to be revised to ensure conformity with the Services Directive.

The Danish authorities are working on a legislative proposal (to be submitted to Parliament by the end of the year) that should ensure that their legislation in this area is in full conformity with internal market legislation relating to services. The Commission will closely monitor this reform in the context of the follow-up actions to the communication on a Partnership for new growth in Services (114) published in June 2012.

In the meanwhile, provisional mechanisms are currently being applied in practice by the Danish authorities to facilitate the provision of services in Denmark by providers complying with an international standard in their Member State of establishment.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010650/12

an die Kommission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(21. November 2012)

Betrifft: Kooperations‐ und Förderprogramme EU-Japan

In seiner Antwort auf Anfrage E-008430/2012 von Hans-Peter Martin schreibt Kommissar De Gucht: „Ein Freihandelsabkommen zwischen der EU und Japan würde eine Gelegenheit bieten, die bestehenden Kooperations‐ und Förderprogramme auszubauen und neue Exportförderprogramme vor allem für KMU aufzulegen“.

1.

Hat die Kommission bereits konkrete Vorschläge für neue Exportförderprogramme — insbesondere solche für KMU?

2.

Welche der bestehenden Kooperations‐ und Förderprogramme könnten noch ausgebaut werden, um den verstärkten Handel zwischen der EU und Japan zu nutzen?

Antwort von Herrn De Gucht im Namen der Kommission

(7. Januar 2013)

1.

Die Kommission arbeitet derzeit an der Umsetzung ihrer Mitteilung zur Internationalisierung von KMU

„Kleine Unternehmen — große Welt“. Im Hinblick auf die Förderung der Internationalisierung ist hier als eines der wichtigsten Ergebnisse die Schaffung eines spezifischen Online-Portals zu nennen, das umfangreiche Informationen für Ausführer sowie eine Auflistung der Dienstleistungen für KMU in den Mitgliedstaaten und in Drittländern (zur stärkeren Nutzung von Synergien) bietet. Über das Finanzierungsinstrument ICI Plus (2011‐2013) werden gegenwärtig Unterstützungs‐angebote für KMU in Indonesien, Malaysia, den Philippinen und Vietnam finanziert, wodurch das Netz der Unterstützungszentren für Unternehmen in Indien, China und Thailand ergänzt wird. Die Unterstützung wird entsprechend den Leitlinien aus der Mitteilung zur Internationalisierung von KMU erfolgen.

Zudem wird derzeit intern erörtert, wie die künftigen EU-Mittel aus dem Partnerschaftsinstrument (2014-2020) und dem Programm für die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von Unternehmen und für KMU — COSME (2014-2020) effektiv genutzt werden können, dies u. a. zur Förderung der Internationalisierung von KMU.

Ferner ist darauf hinzuweisen, dass auch die EU-Handelspolitik zur Erleichterung des Ausfuhrgeschäfts kleiner und mittlerer Unternehmen beiträgt. Durch neue Freihandels‐abkommen und themenspezifische Dialoge — z. B. zu den Rechten des geistigen Eigentums, zu gesundheitspolizeilichen und pflanzenschutzrechtlichen Maßnahmen oder zum Beschaffungswesen — öffnen sich neue Märkte, während die Marktzugangsstrategie der EU zur Durchsetzung bestehender Handelsabkommen beitragen soll. Mit der Marktzugangsdatenbank stehen den EU-Ausführern zudem Informationen über die für die verschiedenen Märkte weltweit geltenden Einfuhrverfahren zur Verfügung.

2.

Als wichtigste Instrumente zur Förderung des Handels mit Japan dienen das EU-Japan-Zentrum für Industrielle Zusammenarbeit, das Programm

„Gateway to Japan and Korea“ und das Managementschulungsprogramm „Executive Training Programme“ (ETP), die spezifische Dienstleistungen, gerade für KMU und Unternehmensmitarbeiter, bieten. Der Ansatz der künftig in Bezug auf Japan verfolgt wird, wird im Rahmen der internen Erörterungen zum Partnerschaftsinstrument (2014-2020) und zum COSME-Programm (2014) behandelt.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010650/12

to the Commission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: EU-Japan cooperation and support programme

In his answer to my Question E-008430/2012, Commissioner De Gucht writes: ‘An EU-Japan FTA would be an opportunity to strengthen existing cooperation and support programmes and create new programmes that focus on helping SMEs to increase their exports’.

1.

Does the Commission already have specific proposals for new export support programmes, particularly ones that would benefit SMEs?

2.

Which of the existing cooperation and support programmes could be strengthened in order to take advantage of the increased levels of trade between the EU and Japan?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2013)

1.

The Commission is now in the implementation phase of the communication on SME internationalisation

‘Small Business, Big World’. The main outcomes to support internationalisation include a specific online portal with comprehensive information for exporters and a mapping of existing services for SMEs in Member States and abroad in order to enhance synergies. The financial instrument ICI+ (2011-2013) is funding new business support for SMEs in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam, which will extend the network of existing business centres in India, China and Thailand This business support will follow the guidelines of the SME internationalisation Communication.

Internal discussions are ongoing on how to use the future EU funds of the ‘Partnership Instrument’ (2014-2020) and the ‘Competitiveness of enterprises and SMEs — COSME’ (2014-2020) effectively, including supporting SME internationalisation.

It should also be noted that export of SMEs are facilitated through EU trade policy. New free trade agreements and specific dialogues such as on IPR, SPS or procurement are opening new markets, whereas the Market Access Strategy aims at enforcing existing trade agreements and the Market Access Database provides EU exporters with information on import procedures in global markets.

2.The Japan Centre, the programmes ‘Gateway to Japan and Korea’ and the ‘Executive Training Programme — ETP’ are the main instruments to facilitate more trade with Japan. They offer specific services in particular for SMEs and company staff. The future approach towards Japan is covered by the internal discussions on the ‘Partnership Instrument’ (2014-2020) and ‘COSME’ (2014).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010651/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(21 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Τίτλοι σπουδών από παρόχους με το σύστημα της δικαιόχρησης

Με πράξη νομοθετικού περιεχομένου (ΦΕΚ Α' 229/19.11.2012), κατ' εφαρμογή του Μνημονίου που υιοθέτησε η ελληνική κυβέρνηση, θεσπίζεται ότι μεταπτυχιακοί τίτλοι σπουδών θα μπορούν εφεξής να χορηγούνται και από ιδιωτικά ελληνικά κολέγια, είτε συνεργάζονται με ευρωπαϊκά ΑΕΙ είτε με πανεπιστήμια εκτός ΕΕ. Στη δεύτερη περίπτωση, θα είναι αρκετό τα εν λόγω ιδρύματα να έχουν πιστοποίηση από ένα διεθνή οργανισμό πιστοποίησης. Δεδομένου ότι στην ίδια πράξη νομοθετικού περιεχομένου γίνεται επίκληση νεότερης οδηγίας του Συμβουλίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, για την αναγνώριση πτυχίων κολεγίων συνεργαζόμενων με πανεπιστήμια χωρών εκτός ΕΕ, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποιο είναι το νομοθετικό πλαίσιο που ορίζει τα σχετικά με το λεγόμενο «άνοιγμα της αγοράς υπηρεσιών τριτοβάθμιας εκπαίδευσης» και ιδίως όσον αφορά τους παρόχους εκπαίδευσης με το σύστημα της δικαιόχρησης;

Στη νομοθεσία ποιών χωρών της ΕΕ δεν έχουν μέχρι σήμερα μεταφερθεί όλες οι οδηγίες που αναφέρονται στους παρόχους εκπαίδευσης με το σύστημα της δικαιόχρησης;

Τι προβλέπεται ως προς τον ανταγωνισμό της νέας «αγοράς» υπηρεσιών τριτοβάθμιας εκπαίδευσης, που θα δημιουργηθεί; Οι πάροχοι εκπαίδευσης με το σύστημα της δικαιόχρησης δικαιούνται να συμμετέχουν επί ίσοις όροις στα προγράμματα ευρωπαϊκών χρηματοδοτήσεων από το ΕΣΠΑ ή άλλα Ταμεία, ομοίως με τα δημόσια εκπαιδευτικά ιδρύματα; Πώς θα διασφαλιστεί ότι η χρηματοδότηση των δημόσιων εκπαιδευτικών ιδρυμάτων από τον προϋπολογισμό των κρατών μελών δεν θα συνιστά διακριτική μεταχείριση που στρέφεται κατά των ιδιωτικών επιχειρήσεων;

Απάντηση του κ. Barnier εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(16 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί στενά τις πρόσφατες τροποποιήσεις της ελληνικής νομοθεσίας σχετικά με τα κολέγια και τα άλλα εκπαιδευτικά κέντρα και ιδιωτικά ιδρύματα επαγγελματικής κατάρτισης, οι οποίες επήλθαν με τον ν. 4093/2012 (ο οποίος εγκρίθηκε στις 12 Νοεμβρίου 2012). Με αυτόν επιδιώκεται η απλούστευση των διαδικασιών πιστοποίησης με την καθιέρωση γενικού πλαισίου το οποίο εφαρμόζεται στο σύνολο των παρόχων ιδιωτικής εκπαίδευσης.

Δεν υπάρχει συγκεκριμένη οδηγία σε επίπεδο ΕΕ που να καλύπτει την αναγνώριση των πτυχίων τα οποία χορηγούνται από κολέγια συνεργαζόμενα με μη ευρωπαϊκά πανεπιστήμια. Το θέμα αυτό αντιμετωπίζεται έμμεσα από την οδηγία 2005/36/ΕΚ σχετικά με την αναγνώριση των επαγγελματικών προσόντων, που εκδόθηκε στις 5 Σεπτεμβρίου 2005 και μεταφέρθηκε στο ελληνικό δίκαιο με το π.δ. αριθ. 38/2010. Η ως άνω οδηγία δεν ρυθμίζει τα τρία ζητήματα που τέθηκαν από το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου, δεδομένου ότι καλύπτει μόνο την αναγνώριση των επαγγελματικών προσόντων, συμπεριλαμβανομένων εκείνων που αποκτώνται υπό καθεστώς δικαιόχρησης. Ωστόσο, δεν υπάρχει συγκεκριμένη οδηγία που να αφορά τους παρόχους εκπαίδευσης με το σύστημα δικαιόχρησης, την οποία θα όφειλε να εφαρμόσει η Ελλάδα.

Η Επιτροπή έχει κινήσει διαδικασία επί παραβάσει κατά της Ελλάδας από το 2008 — η οποία βρίσκεται σε εξέλιξη — σχετικά με κανονιστική ρύθμιση για τα κολέγια και εξετάζει ήδη το νέο νομοθετικό καθεστώς (νόμος 4093/2012 και τις σχετικές νομοθετικές πράξεις).

Οι πάροχοι τριτοβάθμιας εκπαίδευσης με το σύστημα δικαιόχρησης μπορούν να έχουν πρόσβαση σε κονδύλια της ΕΕ στο πλαίσιο του προγράμματος για τη δια βίου μάθηση, εφόσον έχουν αναγνωριστεί ως ίδρυμα τριτοβάθμιας εκπαίδευσης από τις αρμόδιες αρχές της χώρας στην οποία βρίσκονται και τους έχει απονεμηθεί ο Πανεπιστημιακός Χάρτης Erasmus.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010651/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Study certificates issued by franchised service providers

Under a legislative act adopted by the Greek Government in application of the Memorandum (Government Gazette I/229/19.11.2012), it is now possible for private Greek colleges working in collaboration with European higher education establishments or non-EU universities to issue postgraduate study certificates. In the latter case, it suffices if the establishment in question has been certified by an international certification organisation. Given that the legislative act cites a recent Council directive on the recognition of diplomas awarded by colleges working in collaboration with non-EU universities, will the Commission say:

What is the legislative framework that lays down requirements for the so-called liberalisation of higher education services, especially in respect of franchised service providers?

Which EU Member States have transposed all directives relating to franchised education service providers?

What provisions have been made regarding competition in the new higher education ‘market’ that will be created? Are franchised education service providers entitled to participate on an equal footing with State education establishments in programmes financed by Europe under the NSRF or other Funds? What will be done to ensure that financing for State education establishments under Member States’ budgets will not be used to discriminate against private undertakings?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2013)

The European Commission is closely following the latest amendments in Greek legislation regarding colleges and other education centres and private vocational training institutions which were introduced by law 4093/2012 (adopted on 12 November 2012). This law aims to simplify the licensing procedures by establishing a general framework applicable to all private education providers.

There is no specific directive at EU level covering the recognition of diplomas awarded by colleges working in collaboration with non-EU universities. This issue is indirectly covered by Directive 2005/36/EC on the Recognition of Professional Qualifications which was adopted on 5 September 2005 and implemented into Greek law by Presidential Decree no. 38/2010. This directive does not address the three issues raised by the Honourable Member, as it only covers the recognition of professional qualifications, including those delivered under franchise arrangements. However, there is no specific directive related to franchised education service providers that would require implementation by Greece.

The Commission has an ongoing infringement case against Greece since 2008, in respect of the regulation of colleges and is now in the process of analysing the new legislative regime (law 4093/2012 and the relative legislative acts).

Franchised higher education providers may have access to EU funds under the Lifelong Learning Programme if they are recognised as an institution of higher education by the competent authorities of the country where they are located and hold the appropriate Erasmus University Charter.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010653/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(21 novembre 2012)

Objet: Subventions pour les panneaux solaires chinois

La Commission américaine du commerce international vient de décider que les importations de cellules et de modules photovoltaïques en provenance de Chine ont nui à l'industrie américaine de l'énergie solaire.

Selon un analyste, cette décision va conduire à une guerre commerciale sur le marché mondial des énergies renouvelables, entravant le développement des technologies de l'énergie solaire.

1.

. Quelle est la position de la Commission?

2.

La Commission

convient-elle que le gouvernement chinois accorde des subventions aux fabricants de panneaux solaires?

Les États-Unis ont déclaré qu'ils allaient imposer des droits punitifs allant jusqu'à 250 % du coût des panneaux solaires photovoltaïques importés de Chine au cours des cinq prochaines années.

Ces droits de douane ne seront cependant pas imposés aux modules solaires qui sont assemblés en Chine à partir de cellules achetées dans un pays tiers.

3.

Quelle est la réaction de la Commission

?

4.

Ce genre de sanctions est-

il imaginable en Europe si une entreprise chinoise est reconnue coupable de dumping?

5.

Quelle réponse la Commission

pourrait-elle donner à certains analystes en énergies renouvelables qui déclarent que «l'énergie solaire doit voir son prix baisser» et que «cette guerre commerciale va empêcher le solaire de faire des progrès»?

Réponse donnée par M. De Gucht au nom de la Commission

(8 janvier 2013)

La Commission reconnaît aux pays tiers le droit d'utiliser des instruments de défense commerciale dans des conditions strictes, conformément aux règles de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC). Les procédures de défense commerciale doivent servir à rétablir des conditions commerciales équitables. Il est donc erroné de qualifier leur utilisation de «guerre commerciale».

Le 8 novembre 2012, la Commission a ouvert une enquête antisubventions sur les importations de panneaux solaires en provenance de Chine. Cette enquête faisait suite à l'enquête antidumping lancée au début de septembre 2012. La décision d'ouvrir ces enquêtes a été fondée sur des plaintes déposées par l'industrie des panneaux solaires de l'UE, qui reposaient sur des éléments de preuve suffisants à première vue. Ces enquêtes en sont encore à leurs débuts. Pour que la Commission puisse instituer des mesures, certaines conditions doivent être remplies (détermination du dumping, des subventions, du préjudice, du lien de causalité et d'un intérêt de l'Union).

Des conclusions provisoires devraient, le cas échéant, être livrées pour juin 2013 en ce qui concerne la procédure antidumping, et pour août 2013 en ce qui concerne la procédure antisubventions. Toute décision finale devrait être prise au début de décembre 2013.

La directive sur les énergies renouvelables (115) exige que, d'ici à 2020, 20 % de l'énergie consommée dans l'UE soit produite à partir de sources renouvelables et permet la mise en place de régimes d'aide à l'échelon des États membres pour faciliter la réalisation de cet objectif. La concurrence entre fabricants peut contribuer à apporter des améliorations technologiques et une réduction des prix demandés aux consommateurs.

S'il est vrai que la Commission préconise l'ouverture des marchés et la libre concurrence, il est tout aussi important que le commerce international observe les règles commerciales convenues au niveau international. Par conséquent, la concurrence internationale doit reposer sur des pratiques commerciales loyales.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010653/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Subsidies for Chinese solar panel manufacturers

The United States International Trade Commission has concluded recently that imports of photovoltaic cells and modules from China have damaged the US solar energy industry.

According to an analyst, the commission's decision will lead to a trade war in the global renewable energy market and hinder the development of solar energy technology.

1.

. What is the Commission's position on this issue?

2.

Is the Commission aware that the Chinese Government is subsidising the manufacture of solar panels?

The United States has announced its intention to impose punitive duties of up to 250% of their cost on photovoltaic solar panels imported from China over the next five years.

However, these customs duties will not be imposed on solar models that are assembled in China using cells purchased from third countries.

3.

What is the Commission's response to this announcement?

4.

Is there a possibility that similar sanctions would be imposed in Europe if a Chinese company was found to be dumping products on the EU market?

5.

What is the Commission's response to those renewable energy analysts who say that solar energy must become cheaper and that a trade war will hamper progress in the solar energy sector?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

The Commission recognises the right of third countries to use Trade Defence instruments under strict conditions in accordance with World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. The launching of trade defence cases should be aimed at restoring fair trading conditions. Therefore it is incorrect to qualify their use as a ‘trade war’.

On 8 November 2012 the Commission initiated an anti-subsidy investigation on imports of solar panels from China. This followed the anti-dumping investigation that was initiated early September 2012. The decision to open these investigations was based on complaints with sufficient prima facie evidence lodged by the EU solar panel industry. The investigations are still at an early stage. For the Commission to impose measures, certain conditions (determination of dumping, subsidisation, injury, causal link and Union interest) need to be met.

Provisional findings, if any, are due to be issued by June 2013 for the anti-dumping case and by August 2013 for the anti-subsidy case. Any final decision should be taken early December 2013.

The Renewable Energy Directive (116) requires that by 2020, 20% of energy consumed in the EU must be from renewable sources and allows for support schemes at the Member States level to facilitate this objective. Competition among manufacturers can help bring technological improvements and lower prices for consumers.

While the Commission advocates open markets and competition, it is equally important that international trade takes place in line with internationally agreed trade rules. Hence, international competition should be based on fair trade practices.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010654/12

alla Commissione

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Documento d'identità italiano «non valido per l'espatrio»

Lo Stato italiano rilascia ai cittadini dell'Unione europea residenti in Italia documenti d'identità nazionali «non validi per l'espatrio». La predetta dicitura è apposta in calce al documento stesso.

Ritiene la Commissione che, nonostante la dicitura «non valido per l'espatrio», il titolare del documento possa utilizzare comunque lo stesso per spostamenti tra Stati aderenti all'area Schengen?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(29 gennaio 2013)

In base all’attuale normativa dell’UE, il rilascio delle carte d'identità rientra nelle competenze degli Stati membri. In situazioni disciplinate dal diritto dell’UE, le norme nazionali in materia devono tenere debito conto di quest’ultimo, in particolare delle disposizioni del trattato riguardanti la libertà di circolare e di soggiornare nel territorio degli Stati membri.

Ai sensi dell’articolo 20 e dell’articolo 21 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, i cittadini dell'Unione hanno il diritto di circolare e di soggiornare liberamente nel territorio degli Stati membri.

A tal fine, l’articolo 4, paragrafo 3, della direttiva 2004/38/CE stabilisce che gli Stati membri «rilasciano o rinnovano ai loro cittadini, […] una carta d'identità o un passaporto dai quali risulti la loro cittadinanza». Gli Stati membri non sono tenuti a rilasciare a cittadini di un altro Stato membro residenti nel loro territorio una carta d’identità valida per l’espatrio. A norma della direttiva, in determinate circostanze gli Stati membri devono rilasciare ai cittadini dell'UE un semplice attestato d’iscrizione presso le autorità competenti.

Inoltre, ai sensi dell’articolo 5, paragrafo 1, della direttiva 2004/38/CE, gli Stati membri sono tenuti ad ammettere nel loro territorio i cittadini dell'Unione muniti di una carta d'identità o di un passaporto in corso di validità. I cittadini dell’UE devono pertanto essere muniti di una carta di identità o di un passaporto in corso di validità per recarsi in un altro Stato membro.

Il documento cui fa riferimento l’onorevole parlamentare non può essere considerato una carta d’identità ai sensi dell’articolo 4, paragrafo 3, della direttiva 2004/38/CE e non può pertanto essere utilizzato come documento di viaggio valido. Tuttavia, in base all'articolo 5, paragrafo 4, della stessa direttiva, in mancanza di una carta d'identità o di un passaporto validi, lo Stato membro interessato dovrebbe valutare se tale documento costituisca una prova sufficiente dell'identità e della cittadinanza del viaggiatore ai fini dell'ingresso nel paese.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010654/12

to the Commission

Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Italian identity document ‘not valid for travel abroad’

The Italian state issues, to citizens of the European Union who are resident in Italy, national identity cards which are ‘not valid for travel abroad’. This wording (‘non valido per l’espatrio’) is printed at the bottom of the document.

Does the Commission consider that, irrespective of the phrase ‘not valid for travel abroad’, the bearer of such a document may nevertheless use it to travel to states belonging to the Schengen area?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

As EC law stands at present, the issuance of identity cards falls within the competence of the Member States. In situations covered by European Union law, the national rules concerned must have due regard to the latter, including the Treaty provisions on the freedom to move and reside within the territory of the Member States.

According to Articles 20 and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.

To this end, Article 4(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC obliges Member States to ‘issue to their own nationals, and renew, an identity card or passport stating their nationality’. There is no obligation on Member States to provide nationals of another Member State residing on their territory with an identity card valid for expatriation. According to the directive, Member States are, under certain circumstances, obliged to issue EU citizens with a simple registration certificate.

Furthermore, according to Article 5(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC, Member States must allow Union citizens holding a valid identity card or passport to enter their territory. Thus, EU citizens must hold a valid ID card or passport when travelling to another Member State.

The document referred to by the Honourable Member cannot be considered as an identity card within the meaning of Article 4(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC and may thus not be used as a valid travelling document. Nevertheless, under Article 5(4) of the same Directive, in the absence of a valid identity card or passport, the Member State concerned should consider whether it is sufficient proof of identity and nationality for the purpose of entry.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010655/12

to the Commission

David Martin (S&D)

(21 November 2012)

Subject: Foie gras production

Force-feeding for foie gras production is prohibited in most EU countries because of the cruelty involved for ducks and geese. Council Directive 98/58/EC on the protection of animals kept for farming purposes states that ‘no animal shall be provided with food or liquid in a manner […] which may cause unnecessary suffering or injury’.Thus, force-feeding does not comply with the minimum EU standards for the protection of animals.

1.

Will the Commission clarify the ban on providing food in a manner that compromises the health and welfare of ducks and geese raised for foie gras, by explicitly prohibiting force-feeding in the Animal Welfare Framework Law that it plans to present in 2014?

2.

Moreover, at least two EU Member States which produce foie gras — France and Hungary — infringe the European ban on keeping ducks in individual cages. Will the Commission ensure that effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions are applied to such non-compliant countries?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2013)

Animal welfare aspects in foie gras production are covered by Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (117) and the recommendation of the Council of Europe concerning Muscovy ducks and their hybrids (118).

The above Recommendation puts countries allowing foie gras production, such as Hungary and France, under certain obligations; in particular, it requires them to encourage research on its welfare aspects and on alternative methods, which do not include gavage. The recommendation also foresees that, until new scientific evidence on alternative methods and their welfare aspects is available, the production of foie gras shall be carried out only where it is current practice.

The Commission does not plan to present any legislative proposal on this issue at the moment.

At this stage, the Commission is mainly concentrating its actions to ensure enforcement of the existing EU welfare legislation in the Member States. In particular, the Commission inspection services carried out on-the-spot audits in the Member States producing foie gras (119). In the case of France, the state of implementation of the ban of individual cages for ducks was examined during the audit carried out in November 2012. Commission services will continue to monitor the situation in France and Hungary with a view to obtaining in these countries compliance with the ban on individual cages for ducks.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej P-010657/12

do Komisji

Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE)

(22 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Zamierzenia oraz plany Komisji Europejskiej w kontekście bezzałogowych statków latających

Sterowanie, określanie położenia oraz nawigowanie UAV odbywa się m.in. w oparciu o sensor GPS. Operacyjnie działający europejski satelitarny system wspomagający GNSS/SBAS/EGNOS obecnie funkcjonuje w oparciu o GPS. Powołany został na szczeblu europejskim provider, dostarczający danych dotyczących operacyjności EUPOS i możliwości jego stosowania w różnych fazach lotu. Mimo scertyfikowania providera, za realizowanie procedur lotniczych w oparciu o system europejski EGNOS (jego poprawne działanie) w obszarze danego państwa – odpowiada państwo. Oznacza to, że należy również kontrolować stan satelitów GPS oraz archiwizować dane o statusie satelitów.

Skoro istnieje provider europejski związany z systemem EGNOS, to nasuwa się pytanie, czy nie byłoby możliwe przyjęcie rozwiązania, aby uzyskane dane od providera można było bezpośrednio zastosować w całej Europie w działalności operacyjnej przez służby ATS, również przez państwa objęte działaniem systemu wspomagania satelitarnego. Pojawia się sugestia, czy nie można by na szczeblu europejskim ujednolicić procedur certyfikacji użytkowników systemu EGNOS (jednolite wymagania dla lotnisk, przewoźników, służb, krajowych i providerów).

Pytanie jest istotne, gdyż powołana firma ESSP może zbankrutować – wówczas zagrożona może być ciągłość, dostępność, dokładność, wiarygodność dostarczanej informacji lotniczej z systemu EGNOS. Skoro EGNOS jest europejskim systemem wspomagającym, to Europa powinna dokonać jego ujednolicenia oraz zagwarantować operacyjne 24/7 H dostarczanie niezbędnych danych z EGNOS na odpowiednim poziomie.

Kolejna kwestia to sprawa UAV i ich przemieszczanie się w europejskiej przestrzeni powietrznej. Czy Komisja planuje jakieś rozwiązania legislacyjne w kontekście poruszania się po Europejskiej Przestrzeni Powietrznej bezzałogowych statków powietrznych oraz sposób ich nadzoru?

Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Antonia Tajaniego w imieniu Komisji

(8 stycznia 2013 r.)

Dane dotyczące satelitów EGNOS i GPS przechowywane są zgodnie z wymogami ICAO przez usługodawcę EGNOS (ESSP – European Satellite Service Provider). Dane te są dostępne dla każdego podmiotu zainteresowanego realizacją operacji opartych na EGNOS.

ESSP, jako certyfikowanego usługodawcę w rozumieniu rozporządzenia o jednolitej europejskiej przestrzeni powietrznej, uznaje się za instytucję zapewniającą służby żeglugi powietrznej w całej Europie, co gwarantuje, że sygnały i dane EGNOS mogą być używane bez potrzeby odrębnej certyfikacji przez władze lokalne.

Za publikację procedur podejścia odpowiedzialne są organy krajowe działające na podstawie przepisów, które są stopniowo harmonizowane. Na szczeblu międzynarodowym ICAO ustanowiło specjalne kryteria dla procedur podejścia z zastosowaniem systemu wspomagającego opartego na wyposażeniu satelitarnym (SBAS). Na szczeblu europejskim Eurocontrol ułatwia harmonizację krajowych programów dotyczących SBAS oraz przedstawia wytyczne na temat autoryzacji procedur SBAS. We wspomnianą harmonizację ma także wkład Europejska Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Lotniczego (EASA), która ostatnio ustanowiła dopuszczalne sposoby potwierdzania zgodności do celów lotniczej walidacji podejść SBAS. Komisja uważnie monitoruje przebieg wspomnianego procesu harmonizacji.

UE zobowiązała się do długoterminowego uruchomienia usługi EGNOS „bezpieczeństwo życia” i musi zawiadomić społeczności użytkowników o jej ewentualnym przerwaniu z co najmniej sześcioletnim wyprzedzeniem.

Określając zakres kompetencji UE, prawodawca wykluczył bezpilotowe statki powietrzne o masie operacyjnej poniżej 150 kg.

Komisja (przy wsparciu ze strony EASA), w ramach swoich kompetencji i z uwagi na zmianę 43 do załącznika 2 do konwencji chicagowskiej ICAO, wdroży przepisy lotnicze odnośnie do zdatności do lotu, licencjonowania personelu powietrznego oraz do operacji lotniczych, niezbędne do bezpiecznej eksploatacji wspomnianych bezpilotowych statków powietrznych latających w niezarezerwowanej przestrzeni powietrznej.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010657/12

to the Commission

Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Commission's plans and intentions concerning unmanned airborne vehicles (UAVs)

GPS sensors are used to guide UAVs and to locate their positions. The European satellite network supporting GNSS, SBAS and EGNOS currently operates on the basis of GPS. A company, ESSP, was appointed to supply data at European level on the operability of EUPOS and its possible use in different phases of flight. Although the company is certified, responsibility for carrying out aviation procedures on the basis of the EGNOS system — the activity for which the system is primarily intended — in a given country rests at national level. This means that the status of GPS satellites should be monitored, and data on the status of satellites should be archived.

Since it is a European company that is associated with EGNOS, would it not be possible to adopt a solution whereby the data received from that company could be used directly by the ATS in its activities throughout the EU, as well as by countries covered by the satellite support system?

Could certification procedures for users of the EGNOS system be harmonised (uniform requirements for airports, carriers, national services and providers) at European level?

These are important considerations, since ESSP could go bankrupt. This would potentially endanger the continuity, availability, accuracy and credibility of the aviation data supplied by the EGNOS system. Since EGNOS is a European support system, it should be Europe that carries out this harmonisation and ensures that vital EGNOS data is provided 24/7 at the appropriate level.

The next question relates to the issue of UAVs and their movements through European airspace.

Is the Commission planning to introduce legislation concerning the movements of unmanned airborne vehicles through European airspace and a mechanism for monitoring such vehicles?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

EGNOS and GPS satellites data are stored by the EGNOS Service Provider (ESSP) in accordance with ICAO requirements. Such data is available for use by any entity wishing to implement operations based on EGNOS.

As a certified service provider under the Single European Sky regulation, ESSP is recognised as an Air Navigation Service Provider throughout Europe, which guarantees that EGNOS signals and data can be used without the need for local authorities to proceed with their own certification.

The publication of approach procedures falls under the responsibility of national authorities, which operate in a progressively harmonised context. At international level, ICAO has set specific design criteria for SBAS approach procedures. At European level, Eurocontrol facilitates the harmonisation of national programmes for SBAS and provides guidance on the way to authorise SBAS procedures. The EU Agency for Aviation Safety (EASA) also contributes to this harmonisation, with its recently established acceptable means of compliance for the airborne approval of SBAS approaches. The Commission closely monitors these harmonisation developments.

The EU has committed to delivering EGNOS Safety-of-Life service on the long term and must warn user communities at least 6 years ahead of service termination.

When establishing the scope of the EU competence, the legislator excluded unmanned aircraft with an operating mass below 150 kg.

Within its remit and with reference to Amendment 43 to Annex A to the ICAO Chicago Convention, the Commission (with the support of EASA) will implement the aviation rules in the domains of airworthiness, crew licensing and air operations necessary for a safe integration of these unmanned aircraft in a non-segregated airspace.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010658/12

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(22 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Ámbito de aplicación en la propuesta de Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión (COM(2011)0897)

El Anexo III de la propuesta de Directiva especifica las actividades objeto de la misma. En el punto 4 se detallan las redes de transporte. Las definiciones en este punto dan lugar a confusiones, puesto que se basan en el medio de transporte empleado y no en la actividad para la que se realiza dicho transporte, el criterio de ser una actividad contemplada en la Directiva. En España las competencias de transporte de viajeros están transferidas a las autoridades regionales. La Ley 12/2022 de Transporte por Cable de la Generalitat de Cataluña hace una diferenciación entre los distintos tipos de transporte público según la naturaleza del servicio que prestan. Tienen consideración de «servicio público», están sujetas a un régimen de concesión aquellas destinadas a satisfacer las necesidades de desplazamiento de personas, garantizando el derecho a la movilidad y que prestan el servicio de forma continuada, sujeto a un calendario y horario aprobados por la Administración. Tienen consideración de servicio privado las destinadas a transportar personas para practicar actividades deportivas o de ocio, considerando de este tipo las instalaciones situadas en las estaciones de esquí. En este caso para su explotación se requiere una autorización administrativa.

Las instalaciones de transporte público por cable se diferencian por la naturaleza del servicio que prestan:

Las que tienen la consideración de servicio público, que son las instalaciones destinadas a satisfacer las necesidades de desplazamiento de las personas, garantizando los derechos de movilidad y que prestan servicios de forma continua, sujetas a un calendario y horarios aprobados por la Administración.

Las que no tienen la consideración de servicio público, que son las instalaciones destinadas a transportar habitualmente personas para practicar una actividad deportiva o de ocio. Se consideran incluidas en este apartado las instalaciones situadas en las estaciones de esquí o similar.

¿Contempla la comisión la posibilidad de diferenciar, en función del servicio prestado, la exclusión de algunas actividades?

En caso de contemplarse, ¿por qué motivo no se excluyen los sistemas de transporte que no tienen consideración de servicio público del ámbito de la Directiva?

Respuesta del Sr. Barnier en nombre de la Comisión

(8 de febrero de 2013)

La Comisión desea informar a Su Señoría de que la propuesta de Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión es de aplicación transversal y, por lo tanto, abarca todos los tipos de actividades realizadas con arreglo a dichos regímenes jurídicos. La Comisión observa también que la propuesta recoge todos los tipos de servicios de transporte por cable (independientemente de que hayan sido o no definidos como públicos a nivel nacional) cuando estos se prestan con arreglo a contratos de concesión. No obstante, el transporte de personas por cable (especialmente para actividades deportivas o de ocio) se lleva a cabo, en la mayoría de los casos, mediante agentes económicos privados en virtud de un régimen de autorización y no con arreglo a concesiones. Por lo tanto, estas situaciones no están cubiertas por las normas propuestas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010658/12

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Scope of the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts (COM(2011)0897)

Annex III to the proposal for a directive COM(2011)0897 specifies the activities which are subject to its provisions. Point 4 defines transport networks. The definitions provided in this point give rise to confusion since they are based on the mode of transport used and not on the activity to be pursued by making use of the transport, and because the criteria provided for determining the applicability of the directive are activities themselves. In Spain, regional authorities are responsible for managing passenger transport services. Law 12/2022 on Cable Transport put into place by the Catalan government makes a distinction between the different modes of public transport depending on the type of service which they provide. Public services, which are subject to concession regulations, are considered to be those aimed at meeting people’s transport needs, by guaranteeing the right to mobility and providing a continuous service according to a timetable approved by the authorities. Private services are considered to be those which provide transport to people for sporting or leisure activities, such as the transport facilities used in ski resorts. In such cases, public authorisation is required to operate them.

Public cable transport facilities are distinguished according to the type of service which they provide.

— Public services are considered to be those facilities which are intended to meet people’stransport needs, by guaranteeing the right to mobility and providing a continuous serviceaccording to a timetable approved by the authorities.

— Those facilities not considered to be public services are those which generally providetransport to people for sporting or leisure activities. Included in this category are thefacilities found in ski resorts or similar places.

1.

Does the Commission envisage differentiating between the types of activities which areexcluded from the directive, depending on the service provided?

2.

If so, for what reason do transport systems which are not considered to be publicservices not fall outside the scope of the directive?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2013)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts is of horizontal application and thus covers all types of activities conducted on the basis of such legal arrangements. The Commission also notes that the proposal covers all types of transport services by cable (irrespectively whether they have been defined at national level as public or not) where they are provided on the basis of concession contracts. However, the transport of passengers by cable (notably for sporting or leisure) is conducted, in most cases, by private economic operators under an authorisation regime and not on the basis of concessions. Such situations are therefore not covered by the proposed rules.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010659/12

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(22 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Posible inseguridad jurídica en la aplicación de la Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión (COM(2011)0897)

Se desprende de la lectura de la propuesta de Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión que su espíritu es el de garantizar la coherencia dentro de la CE en los criterios y procedimientos para la adjudicación de contratos de concesión de los servicios básicos que deben garantizarse a los ciudadanos. En alguno de estos servicios coexisten operadores que ya en la actualidad operan bajo el régimen de concesión de acuerdo con la legislación de los distintos países y operadores privados que ofrecen los mismos servicios. El caso de los servicios postales y las empresas de mensajería es tal vez uno de los más evidentes y conocidos, y posiblemente de los que mayor volumen mueve. Otro caso es el del sector del esquí; en España, al igual que en otros países de la CE, parte de las estaciones de esquí han nacido a partir de la iniciativa pública para dinamizar unas zonas de creciente despoblación y otras se pusieron en marcha con capital privado.

1.

¿Cómo contempla la Comisión la adaptación de las situaciones actuales a la situación que se desprendería de aplicar la nueva Directiva tal y como está en su propuesta actual?

2.

¿Ha valorado la Comisión la inseguridad jurídica que representaría para las empresas que han tomado decisiones y efectuado importantes inversiones en sistemas de transporte la imposición de un plazo de tiempo cuando en su momento esta limitación no existía y ello permitía amortizar dichas inversiones?

3.

¿No cree la Comisión que la Directiva debería incluir explícitamente la descripción de esta realidad excluyendo de la Directiva las iniciativas privadas?

Respuesta del Sr. Barnier en nombre de la Comisión

(8 de febrero de 2013)

La Comisión desearía informar a Su Señoría de que el objetivo de la propuesta de Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión es aportar más seguridad jurídica en el proceso de adjudicación tanto a las autoridades públicas como a los agentes económicos, y garantizar que la oferta seleccionada es la que presenta la mejor relación calidad-precio para las inversiones públicas.

La propuesta no fija ninguna duración específica para los contratos de concesión, pero establece que debe limitarse al tiempo que se calcule necesario para que el concesionario recupere las inversiones realizadas para explotar las obras o los servicios, junto con un rendimiento razonable sobre el capital invertido. No obstante, las normas sobre la duración de la concesión tienen la finalidad de asegurar la igualdad de acceso a las oportunidades económicas a todas las empresas de la UE y de garantizar que los mercados no excluyan indefinidamente a la competencia.

La Directiva no regula las adquisiciones de bienes y servicios por agentes económicos privados, con la única excepción de aquellos que disfrutan de derechos exclusivos y desarrollan su actividad en el sector de los servicios regulados por la Directiva 2004/17/CE.

Por último, la propuesta de Directiva relativa a la adjudicación de contratos de concesión no se aplicará a las concesiones ofertadas o adjudicadas antes de su entrada en vigor. Por tanto, ninguna de las situaciones descritas por Su Señoría que pudieran entrar en la categoría de concesiones se regiría por las normas propuestas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010659/12

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Possible legal uncertainty concerning the implementation of the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts (COM(2011)0897)

Reading the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts, it seems that its aim is to ensure consistency in the criteria and procedures used in the EU to award concession contracts for basic services that must be provided to citizens. Some providers of certain services already function alongside one another as concessions in accordance with their own national legislation, and there are also private service providers offering the same services as each other. Postal services and courier companies are perhaps one of the most visible and well-known examples of this, and possibly one of the services which command the greatest amount of business. The ski sector is another example; in Spain, as in other EU countries, some ski resorts were set up with public funding as part of initiatives to revive areas with a decreasing population, while others were started with private capital.

1.

What is the Commission’s view on adapting the current circumstances to those whichwould result from the new Directive being implemented as it stands?

2.

Has the Commission evaluated the legal uncertainty that the introduction of a time limitwould pose for businesses that have taken decisions and made significant investments intransport systems at a time when this restriction was not in place, meaning that it waspossible to recoup the investment made?

3.

Does the Commission not think that the directive should include a clear description ofthis situation and that private initiatives should be excluded from it?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2013)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the objective of the proposal for a directive on the award of concessions contracts is to provide more legal security in the process of the award of concession for both public authorities and for the economic operators and to ensure that the offer chosen in the process of selection represents the best value for public money.

The proposal does not lay down any specific time limit on the duration of the concession contracts: it provides that such duration shall be limited to the time estimated to be necessary for the concessionaire to recoup the investments made in operating the works or services together with a resonable return on invested capital. However, rules on the duration of the concession serve the purpose of ensuring equal access to the economic opportunities to all EU companies and guarantee that the markets are not foreclosed for indeterminate period of time.

The directive does not cover acquistions of goods or services by private economic operators with the sole exception of those which enjoy exclusive rights and operate in the Utilities sectors, covered by Directive 2004/17.

Finally, the proposal for a directive on the award of concession contracts will not apply to concessions tendered or awarded before its entry into force. Hence none of the situations described by the Honourable Member which may qualify as concessions will be covered by the proposed rules.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010660/12

to the Commission

Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Anti-dumping duties imposed on SME importers, wholesalers and retailers in the EU

Early this year, on behalf of many concerned London constituents, I asked the Commission about the anti-dumping duties (ADD) imposed on ceramic tableware and kitchenware currently being imported into the EU from China. I specifically asked the Commission whether it had considered the severe financial consequences that a large increase in duties would have for some of the EU’s small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) ‘should a proposed increase of 60-70% (based on recent ADD increases for candles and tiles) go ahead’.

On 27 April 2012, the Commission responded to my question and informed me that ‘if any definitive measures were to be taken, they would have to be imposed by 15 May 2013’. I was also told that ‘Commission findings in anti-dumping investigation are the results of a proper and impartial investigation to which all interested parties can contribute’.

However, in recent days, numerous SMEs operating in my constituency of London have informed me that they have suddenly, and without warning, been given notice that they now have to pay an arbitrary 58.8% duty on Chinese porcelain shipments entering the EU (instead of the 12% duty they have been paying until now).

Given these circumstances, could the Commission please answer the following questions:

Would it not agree that this sudden increase in the duty to be paid is very disconcerting for EU SMEs operating in this sector?

Would it not agree that SME importers, wholesalers and retailers have not been informed, and that their situation, which it acknowledges to be ‘part of the Union interest analysis’, has not been taken into consideration in an adequate manner?

Can the Commission explain why the duty has been increased excessively, according to my constituents from 12% to 58.8%?

Can the Commission explain what action these SMEs can take to remove or reduce the severity of this duty on the operating costs to their businesses?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(4 January 2013)

The 12% customs duty applicable to porcelain tableware and kitchenware is not linked to the ongoing anti-dumping investigation.

The imposition of provisional anti-dumping duties was the result of the preliminary findings by the Commission and the reasons that led to such action were published in the Official Journal of the European Union  (120) on 15 November 2012. The calculations of such duties have also been provided to the companies concerned, due regard being paid to the protection of confidential information. While such duties are not without impact in the EU market, it should be noted that only one-third of the imports of these products from China are subject to the highest duty rate.

The Commission would like to underline that these anti-dumping duties are provisional ones. Any definitive duties need to be imposed by the Council of Ministers by mid-May 2013.

All parties which came forward have been invited to make comments by 17 December 2012 and the situation of SME importers, wholesalers and retailers will be further analysed in the remainder of the proceeding. For instance, the Commission sent specific questionnaires to importers and retailers that were known to the Commission, as well as to relevant multipliers (e.g. associations). The Commission is pursuing a proper and impartial investigation to which all interested parties can contribute.

The Commission cannot find a one-size-fits-all action that SMEs could take to reduce the impact, if any, of the duty on their operating costs. The impact and then the action will heavily depend on their activities. It is noted that the investigation showed that, besides other import sources, Union manufacturers are capable of further serving the Union market.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010661/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Farhad and Rafiq Aliyev

On 25 September 2012 video material was made public which shows Gular Ahmadova and Elshad Abdullayev haggling over the price of a parliamentary seat in Azerbaijan. In the same video Ms Ahmadova reminds Mr Abdullayev about the fate of arrested former ministers Ali Insanov and Farhad Aliyev and threatens him with a warning: ‘This is serious, this is politics — this is about power’.

As depicted also in this video, the arrests of Farhad and Rafiq Aliyev were clearly politically motivated. Court proceedings were held under circumstances of constant and serious human rights violations, and the brothers were treated in a biased and prejudiced manner both at the stage of the preliminary investigation and during trial. In two separate judgments the European Court of Human Rights found Azerbaijan in violation of several provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.

On 23 October 2012 several NGOs wrote an appeal letter to President Aliyev calling on him to release all political prisoners with health problems. Farhad, who suffers from a heart condition which was aggravated following his arrest and imprisonment, is also included in this appeal. Article 78 of the Criminal Code stipulates the release from prison for a person with a serious illness such as Farhad’s.

1.

What pressure is the Vice-President/High Representative exerting on the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, following this video? And is the Vice-President/High Representative confronting the Azeri authorities regarding the Aliyev case?

2.

What measures has the Vice-President/High Representative undertaken to request that the Government of Azerbaijan complies with the two ECHR judgments?

3.

Will the Vice-President/High Representative demand that the state authorities in Baku consider Farhad’s early release, as foreseen in Article 78 of the Criminal Code in Azerbaijan?

4.

Will the Vice-President/High Representative approach the question of political prisoners more decisively with Azerbaijan, particularly given that other organisations such as the Council of Europe have stepped up their efforts to this end with the approval of the definition of the term political prisoner?

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

(11 February 2013)

The European Union is concerned about the situation of human rights and the level of corruption in Azerbaijan. Despite efforts carried out to improve the situation on both accounts, outstanding commitments made by Azerbaijan in the context of the Council of Europe, the OSCE and in its relations with the European Union, need to be honoured. Let me assure you that the EU expresses its concerns about the human rights situation on a regular basis at the highest political level, including at the recent Cooperation Council of 17 December, as well as through the structured dialogue on these matters.

The report by Mr Strasser to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the follow up to the issue of political prisoners in Azerbaijan includes the brothers Aliyev in the list of alleged political prisoners for which specific recommendations have been proposed. As you know the report will be discussed at the plenary in early 2013. The EU is following very closely this discussion.

My services in Headquarters and on the ground are following up the case of Farhad Aliyev including its legal components and detention conditions, in cooperation with the Red Cross, the Council of Europe and the OSCE.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010662/12

an die Kommission

Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl (PPE)

(22. November 2012)

Betrifft: Ausfuhrbeschränkungen Chinas in Bezug auf die Seltenen Erden

Da sich 97 % der weltweiten Vorkommen von Seltenen Erden auf chinesischem Hoheitsgebiet befinden, verfügt China über eine absolute Vormachtstellung im Hinblick auf die weltweite Verteilung und den Handel mit Seltenen Erden. Durch die Aufrechterhaltung der geltenden Ausfuhrabgaben, Ausfuhrkontingente und weiterer unnötiger Ausfuhrverfahren und ‐auflagen beeinträchtigt China die Tätigkeit der Industriezweige und Sektoren, die die Seltenen Erden in ihren Produktionsprozessen verarbeiten. Die Folgen dieser Ausfuhrbeschränkungen sind unlautere Vorteile für die chinesische Industrie und gleichzeitig eine Marktverzerrung durch den künstlichen, vonseiten des Staates geschaffenen Nachteil für europäische und andere Unternehmen außerhalb Chinas.

Diese Beschränkungen bei der Ausfuhr von Seltenen Erden aus China in die übrige Welt behindern die Produktion und die Bereitstellung von Erzeugnissen, die für den Ausbau einer fortschrittlichen, den Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts gewachsenen Wirtschaft in Europa von Bedeutung sind. Die Seltenen Erden kommen in Windkraftanlagen, energieeffizienten Lampen, Motoren für Fahrzeuge mit Elektro‐ und Hybridantrieb, Flachbildschirmen und Anzeigen (LED, LCD, Plasmatechnologie), Katalysatoren, Festplattenlaufwerken, Kameraobjektiven, Glasanwendungen, Industriebatterien und medizinischen Geräten zum Einsatz, um nur einige Beispiele zu nennen. Die Marktverzerrungen durch den fehlenden Zugang zu diesen Stoffen wirken sich auf Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber sowohl in Europa als auch in der übrigen Welt negativ aus.

1.

Karel De Gucht, für Handel zuständiges Mitglied der Kommission, hat kürzlich seine Absicht bekundet, die Klärung dieses Problems durch ein Schlichtungsverfahren der Welthandelsorganisation (WTO) herbeizuführen. Es gibt jedoch bislang keine Anzeichen dafür, dass China die Aufhebung seiner Beschränkungen plant, obwohl die WTO diese chinesische Strategie in der Vergangenheit bereits für mit den Regeln der WTO unvereinbar erklärt hat. Was beabsichtigt die Kommission zu unternehmen, falls China Aufrufe zur Aufhebung dieser Beschränkungen weiterhin unberücksichtigt lässt?

2.

Verfügt die Kommission für den Fall, dass das Schlichtungsverfahren scheitert, über einen Alternativplan, der den Unternehmen die Sicherheit gibt, dass die Kommission das Thema weiterverfolgen wird?

3.

Auf welche Weise gewährleistet die Kommission für den Fall der Aufhebung einiger Beschränkungen durch China, dass dies in einer für die Handelspartner Chinas akzeptablen Weise geschieht?

4.

Ist die Kommission der Ansicht, dass es sich hierbei um eine nicht verhandelbare und wesentliche Frage in allen bilateralen Gesprächen mit China handelt, für die eine Lösung zu suchen ist, um auch in Zukunft gute Wirtschaftsbeziehungen mit der Europäischen Union zu gewährleisten?

Antwort von Herrn De Gucht im Namen der Kommission

(15. Januar 2013)

Die Ausfuhrbeschränkungen Chinas auf Rohstoffe und insbesondere auf seltene Erden geben seit langem in wirtschaftlicher, rechtlicher und systemischer Hinsicht Anlass zur Sorge. Anfang 2012 gewann die EU gegen China einen WTO-Streit über Ausfuhrbeschränkungen auf bestimmte Rohstoffe (ausgenommen seltene Erden). Während mit der WTO-Entscheidung zugunsten der EU die Regelungen für Ausfuhrbeschränkungen geklärt werden, bezieht sich die Verpflichtung Chinas, die WTO-Entscheidung umzusetzen, nur auf die in diesem Fall abgedeckten Stoffe.

Trotz der eindeutigen Entscheidung und der zahlreichen diplomatischen Bemühungen der EU hat China bisher nicht signalisiert, dass es seine umfassendere Ausfuhrregelung, auch in Bezug auf seltene Erden, überarbeiten werde. Daher musste die EU (gemeinsam mit den USA und Japan) erneut auf rechtliche Schritte zurückgreifen, um für seltene Erden, Wolfram und Molybdän eine Lösung herbeizuführen. Obwohl die vorherige WTO-Entscheidung eine feste Grundlage für weitere Anfechtungen bildet, wird jeder Fall für sich beurteilt. Ein Abschlussbericht des WTO-Panels, dem die Einlegung von Rechtsmitteln und Durchführungsverfahren folgen könnten, ist möglicherweise Ende 2013 zu erwarten.

Damit will die Kommission die chinesischen Beschränkungen vollständig abbauen. Jeder Schritt Chinas zur Lockerung der Ausfuhrregelung müsste sorgfältig geprüft werden, um zu beurteilen, ob das Vorgehen WTO-kompatibel und für die EU-Industrie zufriedenstellend ist.

Diese Angelegenheit bleibt ein zentrales Element in unseren Beziehungen zu China. Die Kommission wird außerdem weiterhin bestrebt sein, die Interessen der europäischen Unternehmen durch zahlreiche politische Maßnahmen zu schützen. Dazu gehört sicherzustellen, dass die Wirtschaftsakteure der EU faire Bedingungen für Investitionen in neue Produktionsprojekte in Ländern erhalten, die über umfangreiche Vorkommen an seltenen Erden verfügen, und dass Handelsabkommen über den Zugang zu Rohstoffen angemessene Regelungen enthalten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010662/12

to the Commission

Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: China's export restrictions on rare earth elements

As 97% of the world’s rare earth deposits are within Chinese territory, China has an absolute monopoly over the global distribution and trade of rare earth elements. By maintaining current export duties, quotas and additional, unnecessary export procedures and requirements, China disrupts the industries and sectors that have incorporated these rare earths into their production processes. The effect of these export restrictions is to unfairly benefit Chinese industry, while distorting the market by putting European and other non-Chinese companies at an artificial, state-engineered disadvantage.

The restrictions placed on the export of rare earths from China to the rest of the world disrupt the production and supply of products that are vital to Europe’s continued construction of an advanced, 21st century economy. Rare earth elements are used in wind power turbines, energy-efficient bulbs, engines for electric and hybrid vehicles, flat screens and displays (LED, LCD, plasma), catalysers, hard drives, camera lenses, glass applications, industrial batteries and medical equipment, to name various examples. Both European and global consumers and employers are impacted negatively by the market distortions caused by lack of access to these materials.

1.

EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht has recently stated that he intends to solve this issue by litigation through the World Trade Organisation (WTO); however, there have so far been no signals from China that it has any plans to remove its restrictions, even though the WTO has in the past declared this Chinese policy incompatible with WTO rules. What does the Commission intend to do if China keeps ignoring calls for these restrictions to be eased?

2.

If litigation fails, does the Commission have a back-up plan to reassure the business community that it will continue pursuing this issue?

3.

If China does ease restrictions somewhat, how will the Commission ensure that it does so to an extent acceptable to China’s trading partners?

4.

Does the Commission consider that this issue remains a non-negotiable and vital point in all bilateral talks with China, which must be addressed in order to ensure a good future economic relationship with the European Union?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2013)

China's export restrictions on raw materials, and on rare earths in particular, are of longstanding economic, legal and systemic concern. Earlier in 2012, the EU prevailed against China in a WTO dispute on export restrictions on certain raw materials (not including rare earths). While this first WTO ruling in favour of the EU clarifies the disciplines on export restrictions, China's obligation to implement the WTO ruling relates only to the materials covered in that case.

Despite that clear ruling, and the EU's numerous diplomatic efforts, China has not sent any signal that it would review its broader export regime, including on rare earths. Therefore, the EU had to resort once more to legal proceedings (jointly with the US and Japan) to seek a solution regarding rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum. While the previous WTO ruling sets a firm basis for further challenges, each case is judged on its own merits. A final report by the WTO Panel may possibly be expected at the end of 2013 and might be followed by appeal and possible implementation procedures.

Through that action, the Commission's intention is to fully remove the Chinese restrictions. Any possible move by China to relax the export regime would have to be carefully assessed to judge on whether it is WTO-compatible and satisfactory for EU industry.

This matter will at the same time remain a key element in our relations with China. The Commission will also pursue its efforts to protect European companies’ interests through various policies. This includes, among others, striving to ensure that EU operators enjoy fair conditions of investment in new production projects in countries abundant in rare earths reserves, and enshrining adequate rules on access to raw materials in trade agreements.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010663/12

à la Commission

Jean-Paul Besset (Verts/ALE)

(22 novembre 2012)

Objet: Règlement (CE) no 1224/2009 du Conseil instituant un régime communautaire de contrôle afin d'assurer le respect des règles de la politique commune de la pêche

D'après les informations du Conseil international pour l'exploration de la mer (CIEM) figurant dans sa dernière évaluation des stocks d'eau profonde publiée en juillet 2012, les chiffres provisoires des captures de sabre noir par l'Union européenne dans les eaux européennes et internationales des zones V, VI, VII et XII atteignent 3 001 tonnes en 2011 alors que le total admissible de captures (TAC) en 2011 était de 2 356 tonnes pour ces zones (soit un dépassement de 27 %). Ce dépassement est principalement le fait de la surpêche pratiquée par la France, qui a déclaré 2 407 tonnes de captures pour un TAC de 1 884 tonnes.

En vertu de l'article 105, paragraphe 1, du règlement (CE) no 1224/2009, «lorsque la Commission a établi qu'un État membre a dépassé les quotas qui lui ont été attribués, la Commission procède à des déductions sur les futurs quotas dudit État membre». Le paragraphe 2 de cet article fixe les montants à déduire, en fonction de l'importance du dépassement, tandis que le paragraphe 3, point b), indique qu'un facteur multiplicateur de 1,5 s'applique si «il ressort des avis scientifiques, techniques et économiques disponibles et, en particulier, des rapports établis par le CSTEP que le dépassement constitue une menace grave pour la conservation du stock concerné».

À la lumière de ce qui précède, la Commission voudrait-elle répondre aux questions suivantes?

— Entre 2003 et 2011, quels sont les États membres à avoir dépassé les quotas qui leur avaient été attribués pour les diverses espèces d'eau profonde, et de combien? La Commission pourrait-elle communiquer, pour chacune des espèces d'eau profonde figurant à l'annexe I du règlement (CE) no 2347/2002 du Conseil, les captures déclarées par année et par stock et indiquer, à titre de comparaison, les divers quotas attribués aux États membres en question?

— Si un ou plusieurs États membres ont dépassé ces quotas pendant la durée d'application du règlement de contrôle, quelles mesures la Commission a-t-elle prises ou compte-t-elle prendre en vertu de l'article 105 de ce règlement?

Réponse donnée par Mme Damanaki au nom de la Commission

(21 janvier 2013)

La Commission attire l'attention de l'Honorable Parlementaire sur le fait que les données publiées par le Conseil international pour l'exploration de la mer (CIEM) auxquelles il fait référence sont de simples estimations. Elles ne constituent pas une preuve d'infraction aux règlements de l'UE sur les TAC et les quotas.

La Commission envoie directement à l'Honorable Parlementaire et au secrétariat du Parlement un tableau contenant les informations demandées relatives aux stocks d'eau profonde pour lesquels des quotas ont été attribués aux États membres. Veuillez noter que certaines des espèces d'eau profonde définies à l'annexe I du règlement (CE) n° 2347/2002 du Conseil (121) n'ont pas fait l'objet d'une attribution de quotas aux États membres.

L'article 105 du règlement (CE) n° 1224/2009 du Conseil (122) prévoit un certain nombre de mesures que la Commission peut prendre pour répondre à diverses situations de surpêche (dépassement du quota au cours de l'année précédente, comportant différents niveaux de surpêche pour lesquels des déductions sont opérées sur la base de coefficients multiplicateurs; dépassement historique, c'est-à-dire au cours des années précédentes; déductions en l'absence de quota ou de quota suffisant). En application de cette disposition et des lignes directrices pour la déduction de quotas publiées au JO C 72 du 10 mars 2012, la Commission a adopté un certain nombre de règlements prévoyant des déductions de quotas comportant, le cas échéant, l'utilisation des coefficients multiplicateurs prévus à l'article 105, paragraphe 3 [règlements (UE) nos 1004/2010 (123), 1016/2011 (124), 1021/2011 (125), 700/2012 (126) et 1136/2012 (127)].

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010663/12

to the Commission

Jean-Paul Besset (Verts/ALE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy

According to documentation provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) in its latest evaluation of deep-sea stocks, made public in July 2012, preliminary EU catches of black scabbardfish in EU and international waters in areas V, VI, VII and XII amounted to 3 001 tonnes in 2011, as compared to a 2011 total allowable catch (TAC) for those areas of 2 356 tonnes (27% in excess). Most of this excess is due to overfishing by France, which has a reported catch of 2 407 tonnes, as compared to a TAC of 1 884 tonnes.

According to Article 105(1) of the Control Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, ‘when the Commission has established that a Member State has exceeded the quotas which have been allocated to it, the Commission shall operate deductions from future quotas of that Member State’. Paragraph 2 of the same article establishes the amounts to be deducted, based on the extent of overfishing, while paragraph 3(b) establishes that a multiplying factor of 1.5 shall apply if ‘the available scientific, technical and economic advice and in particular the reports drawn up by STECF have established that overfishing constitutes a serious threat to the conservation of the stock concerned’.

In light of the above, we would like to ask the Commission the following questions:

For the years 2003 to 2011, which Member State(s) have exceeded any existing deep sea species quotas allocated to them, and by what amounts? Can the Commission provide the reported catches for each of the deep sea species, as defined in Annex I of Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002, broken down by year and stock and compared with each of the quotas allocated to the Member States in question?.

If any Member State(s) have exceeded such quotas for years in which the Control Regulation is applicable, what action has the Commission taken or is it planning to take pursuant to Article 105 of the Control Regulation?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that the data published by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) to which he refers to are merely estimates. They are not evidence of an infringement to the EU regulations on TAC and quotas.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested with regard to the deep sea stocks for which quotas have been allocated to Member States. Please note that some of the deep sea species defined in Annex I of Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 (128) have not been the subject of quota allocation to Member States.

Article 105 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 (129) provides for a number of measures by the Commission to cater for different situations of overfishing (overfishing in the previous year with various levels of overfishing with qualified deductions on the basis of multiplying factors; historical overfishing, i.e. in earlier years; deductions without having a quota or a sufficient quota). In application of this provision and the guidelines for the deduction of quotas, published in OJ 2012, C 72, the Commission has adopted a number of regulations foreseeing quota deductions, including, where appropriate, the utilisation of multiplying factors foreseen in Article 105(3) (Regulations (EU) No 1004/2010 (130), 1016/2011 (131), 1021/2011 (132), 700/2012 (133) and 1136/2012 (134)).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010664/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Allegations that the Egyptian Government has passed a decree restricting property rights in Sinai

On behalf of many of my concerned London constituents, I would like to know whether the European External Action Service (EEAS) is aware of allegations that the Egyptian Government has passed a decree restricting the property rights in Sinai of non-Egyptians, even those of dual nationals or of one Egyptian-parental origin.

In light of this, what action is the EEAS putting into place to protect EU investments in Sinai, and has it petitioned the Egyptian Government on behalf of EU citizens who face the confiscation of their property or are being forced to sell their investments?

In responding, could the EEAS please take into account of the following points:

The decree is retroactive, so citizens who in good faith invested in Sinai before the decree was issued are now being forced to comply.

Due to the large number of sales at this time in Sinai, the value of property is likely to be reduced significantly and could potentially leave individuals and their families in financial difficulty, both in my constituency of London, and in the wider European Union.

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

(1 February 2013)

The EU is fully aware of the Law 14 of 2012 that regulates investment of projects and ownership and use of lands in Sinai.

The EU shares the concern raised by the Honourable Member. These developments are alarming and the timeframe for the implementation of the regulations by the property and land owners is very tight. The EU Delegation in Cairo and Member States’ Embassies are closely following up the matter and are coordinating a joint response to the Egyptian authorities.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010665/12

to the Commission

Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia in Greece

Given that Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia does not give the Commission the power to launch infringement proceedings until 1 December 2014, what information does the Commission have on the transposition of the framework Decision by Greece?

With reports of a number of incidents of anti-immigrant violence in Greece, are the Greek courts, in the Commission’s opinion, satisfactorily determining whether or not these incidents amount to incitement to racist or xenophobic hatred or violence?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2013)

The Commission's role is to verify the compliance with the framework decision of the transposition done at national level. The Commission cannot pronounce itself about the situation in Greece until it receives and analyses the notification of the transposition measures. The Commission intends to prepare the first report on the implementation of Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA in 2013.

Greece informed the Commission on January 2012 that the draft law transposing Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA into Greek law was ready to be submitted to the plenary session of the Greek Parliament for discussion and voting. Since then the Commission has not received further information and Greece has not notified its transposition measures to the Commission.

(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)

Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-010666/12

Komisijai

Rolandas Paksas (EFD)

(2012 m. lapkričio 22 d.)

Tema: Jūrų reikalų ir žuvininkystės politikos fondas

Žuvininkystė svarbi daugeliui Europos Sąjungos regionų. 2014‐2020 m. laikotarpiu siūlomas įsteigti naujas ES jūrų reikalų ir žuvininkystės politikos fondas sudarys tinkamas sąlygas, kad būtų galima pasiekti bendros žuvininkystės politikos reformos plataus užmojo tikslus.

1.

Atsižvelgdamas į šio būsimo fondo reikšmę, prašau Komisijos patikslinti, kokius paramos skirstymo principus ir metodiką numatoma taikyti siekiant kuo objektyvesnių kriterijų ir paramos teikimo skaidrumo.

2.

Ar numatoma galimybė visoms šalims taikyti bendras visiems

ES regionams veiklos programas (t. y. neatskirti konvergencijos ir ne konvergencijos regionų ir tuo pagrindu suvienodinti visiems paramą) ir ar tai neturės neigiamų padarinių tokioms šalims, kaip Lietuva, kurios vis dar atsilieka nuo senųjų ES šalių, todėl joms būtina didesnė pagalba?

3.

Ar yra svarstomos galimybės tokiems regionams, kaip Lietuva, nustatyti didesnį paramos akvakultūrai ir savai produkcijai perdirbti intensyvumą 25 procentiniais punktais? Pažymėtina, kad atokiems regionams pagalbos intensyvumas didinamas net 35 proc.

4.

Kokiomis priemonėmis, siekiant sukurti ekonomiškai gyvybingą, konkurencingą ir ekologišką akvakultūrą, ketinama skatinti socialinio dialogo struktūrizavimą žvejybos ir akvakultūros sektoriuose?

5.

Kokią paramą numatoma skirti gamintojų organizacijoms ir gamintojų organizacijų asociacijoms, vykdančioms partnerystę su mokslininkais ir žvejais?

6.

Kokiomis priemonėmis bus siekiama užtikrinti, kad Europos vartotojai būtų geriau aprūpinami Europos akvakultūros ūkiuose užaugintomis žuvimis?

M. Damanaki atsakymas Komisijos vardu

(2013 m. sausio 21 d.)

1.

EJRŽF pasiūlyme išdėstyti lėšų paskirstymo valstybėms narėms kriterijai susiję su kiekvienos valstybės narės žuvininkystės ir akvakultūros sektorių apimtimi, veiklos rodikliais ir poreikiais. Tai, kad taikomi sektoriams pritaikyti kriterijai, atspindi metodo objektyvumą ir skaidrumą

2.

EJRŽF yra konkrečiam sektoriui skirtas fondas, o jo svarbiausia paskirtis – teikti paramą žuvininkystės ir akvakultūros sektoriams vykstant bendros žuvininkystės politikos reformai. Lėšų paskirstymo kriterijai nustatyti atsižvelgiant į šį tikslą

3.

EJRŽF visų pirma orientuotas į pagrindines žuvininkystės ir akvakultūros sektorių sritis. Parama perdirbimo pramonei gali būti skiriama ir per kitus ES fondus, pavyzdžiui, Europos regioninės plėtros fondą, t. y. gali būti skiriama veiksmingų investicijų technologijų vystymui skatinti, inovacijoms ir verslo infrastruktūrai. Kalbant apie akvakultūros sektorių, EJRŽF pasiūlyme šio sektoriaus įmonėms numatoma teikti labai įvairią paramą, skirtą ekonominėms perspektyvoms ir aplinkos tvarumui užtikrinti.

4.

EJRŽF pasiūlymo 31 ir 49 straipsniuose numatoma padėti užmegzti naudingus ryšius, keistis patirtimi ir žiniomis apie geriausius darbo metodus bei skatinti socialinį dialogą žuvininkystės ir akvakultūros srityje.

5.

30 straipsnyje numatyta EJRŽF parama žvejų ir mokslininkų partnerystėms taip pat gali būti skirta gamintojų organizacijoms bei gamintojų organizacijų asociacijoms.

6.

EJRŽF pasiūlyme numatyta priemonių, kuriomis būtų skatinamos inovacijos, veiksmingos investicijos, modernizavimas, pridėtinės vertės kūrimas akvakultūros sektoriuje, bei rinkodaros priemonių, skirtų akvakultūros produktų reklamai, siekiant kuo labiau padidinti rinkos potencialą ir informuoti vartotojus.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010666/12

to the Commission

Rolandas Paksas (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: European Maritime and Fisheries Fund

Fishing is important for many regions of the European Union. The new EU Maritime and Fisheries Fund policy, which is proposed to be established in the period 2014-2020, will create the right conditions to achieve the ambitious goals of the reform of the common fisheries policy.

1.

Given this significance of this future fund, I ask the Commission to specify the assistance distribution principles and methodology that are envisaged with a view to ensuring criteria that are as objective as possible and transparency in the provision of assistance.

2.

Is it possible for a joint programme of activities for all EU regions to be applied to all countries (i.e. not to separate convergence and non-convergence regions and, on this basis, harmonise assistance for all), and would this have negative consequences for countries like Lithuania, which are still lagging behind old EU Member States and therefore need greater aid?

3.

Are the possibilities of increasing aid intensity for aquaculture and the processing of own production by 25% being considered for regions like Lithuania? It should be noted that aid intensity for remote regions is being increased by as much as 35%.

4.

What measures, to achieve economically viable, competitive and green aquaculture, are planned to promote the structuring of social dialogue in the fisheries and aquaculture sector?

5.

What support is to be allocated to producer organisations and associations of producer organisations working in partnership with scientists and fishermen?

6.

What measures will be aimed at ensuring that European consumers are better provided with fish raised in European fish farms?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

1.

Criteria set out in EMFF proposal for financial distribution among Member States are linked to the size, performance and needs of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors in every Member State. The application of sector-specific criteria reflects an objective and transparent approach.

2.

EMFF is a sector-specific fund with its main objective to provide support for fisheries and aquaculture sectors in implementing the reform of Common Fisheries Policy. The criteria for financial allocations reflect that objective.

3.

EMFF is designed to focus on core areas in fisheries and aquaculture sectors. Support for processing industry can also be granted through other EU Funds such as the European Regional Development Fund, i.e., productive investments for strengthening technological development, innovation and business infrastructure. As regards aquaculture sector, EMFF proposal foresees a broad scope of support for firms in the sector, designed to ensure economic viability and environmental sustainability.

4.

Articles 31 and 49 of EMFF proposal foresee support for networking, exchange of experience and best practice, and promoting the social dialogue in fisheries and aquaculture.

5.

EMFF support for partnerships between scientists and fishermen established in Article 30 can also be allocated to the producer organisations and associations of producers organisations.

6.

EMFF proposal contains measures to stimulate innovation, productive invesments, modernization, added value in aquaculture as well as marketing measures for the promotion activities of aquaculture products in order to maximise market potential and raise consumer awareness.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-010667/12

do Komisji

Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE)

(22 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Stan prawny bezzałogowych statków powietrznych zarejestrowanych lub odbywających loty na terytorium Unii Europejskiej

Wyraźnie trzeba określić, co jest modelem, a co UAV. Wynika, że UAV może też być wykonany w nanotechnologii. Zatem nie tylko rozmiary powinny decydować, ale przede wszystkim i przeznaczenie. Kolejne zagadnienie to kontakt z UAV. W przypadku wojska zazwyczaj prowadzi go operator naziemny i w momencie utraty łącza, następuje zniszczenie tego aparatu. Natomiast nie ma ustaleń – i to wymaga regulacji – odnośnie do strony cywilnej i zastosowania np. do monitoringu środowiska naturalnego. Kolejna sprawa to, czy jeżeli już będzie decyzja, że cywilny UAV musi mieć operatora, to sprawa certyfikatu/licencji dla tego typu specjalisty. Czy potrzeba uprawnień pilota, czy wystarczy zwykłe przeszkolenie?

Odnośnie do samych bezzałogowych statków latających spoza UE i ich przelotu przez Europejską Przestrzeń Lotniczą, trzeba ustalić, czy UAV to też statek powietrzny (mimo że jest bez pilota) i wtedy musiałby spełniać wymagania, jak każdy np. ultralight statek powietrzny, jeżeli wchodziłby w przestrzeń europejską. Zatem jak Unia Europejska oraz państwa członkowskie powinny interpretować bezzałogowce, czy jest może jakieś stanowisko w tej sprawie czy wytyczne?

Odpowiedź udzielona przez Wiceprzewodniczącego Siima Kallasa w imieniu Komisji

(14 stycznia 2013 r.)

Klasyfikacja bezpilotowych statków powietrznych pilotowanych ze stacji zdalnego sterowania jest obecnie opracowywana. Zgodnie z załącznikiem II do konwencji o międzynarodowym lotnictwie cywilnym modele samolotów uznaje się za przeznaczone jedynie do celów rekreacyjnych i nie podlegają one postanowieniom tej konwencji.

Każda operacja transgraniczna bezpilotowego statku powietrznego podlega przepisom art. 8 wyżej wspomnianej konwencji. Zgodnie z tym artykułem przelot nad terytorium umawiającego się państwa wymaga specjalnego upoważnienia ze strony tego państwa oraz musi być zgodny z warunkami takiego upoważnienia.

Jak wyjaśniono w odpowiedzi na pytanie P-010657/2012 (135), Komisja opracuje i przyjmie przepisy lotnicze odnośnie do zdatności do lotu, licencjonowania personelu powietrznego oraz do operacji lotniczych w celu wspierania transgranicznych operacji bezpilotowych statków powietrznych.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010667/12

to the Commission

Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Legal status of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) registered in or flying over EU territory

A clear distinction must be made between models and UAVs. Given that UAVs may also be made using nanotechnology, it should not be solely the device’s dimensions that determine its classification, but above all its intended purpose. Another issue is contact with UAVs. In military applications, UAVs are usually controlled by a ground‐based operator, and loss of contact leads to the immediate destruction of the device. However, rules — which are essential — have not been established concerning civilian applications and use in environmental monitoring. Furthermore, if it is decided that civilian UAVs must have an operator, what type of certificate or licence should such a specialist hold? Will a pilot’s licence be required, or will standard training be sufficient?

With regard to UAVs from outside the EU that use European airspace, it must be ascertained whether the UAV is also an aircraft, albeit a pilotless aircraft, in which case it would have to meet the same requirements that ultralight aircraft have to in order to enter European airspace.

How should the EU and the Member States classify UAVs? Is there an opinion or are there guidelines on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2013)

The classification of unmanned aircraft piloted from a remote pilot station is currently under development. In accordance with Annex 2 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, model aircraft are recognised as intended for recreational purposes only and fall outside the provisions of this Convention.

Any cross-border operation of an unmanned aircraft is subject to the provisions of Article 8 of the aforementoned Convention. This Article states that the flight over the territory of a Contracting State of this Convention must be submitted to a special authorisation by that Contracting State and must be conducted with the terms of such authorisation.

As explained in the answer to the Question P-010657/2012 (136) aviation rules will be developped and adopted by the Commission in the domains of airworthiness, crew licensing and air operations to support cross-border operation of unmanned aircraft.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010668/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Βιωσιμότητα ελληνικών μικρομεσαίων επιχειρήσεων

Σύμφωνα με την ετήσια έκθεση της Εθνικής Συνομοσπονδίας Ελληνικού Εμπορίου (ΕΣΕΕ) οι προοπτικές ανάκαμψης σε ορατό χρόνο για τις εμπορικές επιχειρήσεις θεωρούνται ελάχιστες, καθώς οι διαπιστώσεις για το 2011 και οι εκτιμήσεις για το 2012 είναι δυσοίωνες συμπεριλαμβανομένης και της αγοραστικής δύναμης των καταναλωτών, η οποία εκτιμάται ότι έχει επιστρέψει στα επίπεδα του '84 με τις τιμές να κινούνται συνεχώς ανοδικά σε πορεία το 2012. Συγκεκριμένα, το 2011, οι πωλήσεις και τα μεικτά κέρδη σημείωσαν για τρίτο συνεχές έτος πτώση, κατά 7,3% και 12,2% αντίστοιχα ενώ το ποσοστό μεικτού κέρδους περιορίστηκε σε 19,1%. Οι ζημίες των εμπορικών εταιρειών ξεπέρασαν το 1 δισ. ευρώ και ήταν σχεδόν πενταπλάσιες σε σχέση με το προηγούμενο έτος. Κανένας τομέας του εμπορίου δεν ήταν κερδοφόρος, ενώ το βαρύτερο πλήγμα δέχθηκε το χονδρικό εμπόριο. Επίσης το 2011 εντοπίζεται για πρώτη φορά πτώση των επενδύσεων παγίου κεφαλαίου στο ελληνικό εμπόριο συνολικά. Η αποεπένδυση αφορά και τους τρεις τομείς, ενώ ήταν ιδιαίτερα έντονη στο χονδρικό εμπόριο. Όμως και το 2012 το κλίμα δεν διαφέρει και πολύ καθώς περισσότερες από 8 στις 10 εμπορικές επιχειρήσεις εκτιμούν ότι οι πωλήσεις και τα κέρδη τους το 2012 είναι μειωμένα. Εν τω μεταξύ συνεχίζεται η επενδυτική άπνοια, καθώς 6 στις 10 επιχειρήσεις, δήλωσαν στασιμότητα στις επενδύσεις παγίου κεφαλαίου. Η πλειονότητα των εμπορικών επιχειρήσεων δήλωσε στασιμότητα απασχόλησης, ενώ για πρώτη φορά τα τελευταία 12 χρόνια η απασχόληση στο εμπόριο έπεσε κάτω από τις 700 000 θέσεις εργασίας με 98 000 λουκέτα και 93 500 απώλειες θέσεων εργασίας τον τελευταίο χρόνο. Τέλος, σχεδόν οι 9 στις 10 εμπορικές επιχειρήσεις εκτιμούν ότι επιδεινώθηκε η ρευστότητά τους το 2012.

Ερωτάται η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή:

Τυγχάνουν οι ελληνικές μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις (ΜΜΕ) ίσης αντιμετώπισης όσον αφορά τους όρους συνδιαλλαγής (π.χ. όροι πληρωμής, παραλαβής, παράδοσης) με συνεργαζόμενες επιχειρήσεις σε άλλα κράτη μέλη;

Δεδομένου ότι η πρόσβαση στη χρηματοδότηση των ΜΜΕ είναι ιδιαίτερης σημασίας τόσο για την οικονομική ανάπτυξη όσο και για τη δημιουργία θέσεων απασχόλησης εκτός από τα προγράμματα που έχει δρομολογήσει η ελληνική κυβέρνηση για την τόνωση της ρευστότητας, ποιές κατευθυντήριες γραμμές σκοπεύει να δώσει η Επιτροπή προς αυτό το σκοπό;

Ποιες είναι οι εκτιμήσεις και οι προβλέψεις της Επιτροπής για τη βιωσιμότητα των ΜΜΕ στην Ελλάδα το 2013; Διαθέτει επίσημα στατιστικά στοιχεία για το 2012;

Απάντηση του κ. Tajani εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(16 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

1.

Η Επιτροπή δεν συγκεντρώνει στοιχεία σχετικά με τις εμπορικές συναλλαγές μεταξύ των ιδιωτικών επιχειρήσεων στα κράτη μέλη.

2.

Η Επιτροπή προτρέπει την ελληνική κυβέρνηση να διευκολύνει την πρόσβαση στη χρηματοδότηση των ΜΜΕ, ιδιαίτερα κατά τη διάρκεια της τρέχουσας περιόδου, η οποία χαρακτηρίζεται από έλλειψη πόρων. Αναμένεται ότι η τελευταία εκταμίευση, η οποία εγκρίθηκε από την Ευρωομάδα στις 13 Δεκεμβρίου, θα δώσει στην ελληνική οικονομία την απαιτούμενη ρευστότητα, ώστε να ωφεληθούν άμεσα οι ΜΜΕ που αντιμετωπίζουν προβλήματα ρευστότητας.

Μέσα στα επόμενα τρίμηνα θα διεξαχθεί ένα κυβερνητικό σχέδιο για την αποπληρωμή των καθυστερημένων οφειλών, συμπεριλαμβανομένης και της επιστροφής φόρων, και οι ΜΜΕ θα είναι σημαντικοί δικαιούχοι. Επιπλέον, διάφοροι χρηματοδοτικοί μηχανισμοί έχουν αναπτυχθεί προς όφελος των ΜΜΕ. Μερικά από τα εν λόγω προγράμματα περιλαμβάνουν την υποστήριξη από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης. Στις 21 Μαρτίου 2012 οι ελληνικές αρχές και η ΕΤΕπ υπέγραψαν συμφωνία συγκρότησης ενός μηχανισμού, ο οποίος συνίσταται σε εγγύηση από τα διαρθρωτικά ταμεία (ανώτατου ύψους 500 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ), με σκοπό την υποστήριξη της χορήγησης πρόσθετων συνολικών δανείων από την ΕΤΕπ στις τράπεζες. Ο εν λόγω μηχανισμός θα επιτρέψει στις τράπεζες να χορηγήσουν δάνεια στις ΜΜΕ.

3.

Η Επιτροπή δεν έχει στη διάθεσή της στοιχεία όσον αφορά τον αντίκτυπο των οικονομικών πολιτικών που εφαρμόζονται επί του παρόντος, με σκοπό την προώθηση της βιωσιμότητας των ΜΜΕ. Δεν υπάρχουν επίσημες διαθέσιμες στατιστικές για το 2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010668/12

to the Commission

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Viability of Greek SMEs

According to the annual report of the National Confederation of Hellenic Commerce, commercial undertakings have little prospect for growth in the foreseeable future. Findings for 2011 and forecasts for 2012 are inauspicious, taking into account consumer purchasing power, which is forecast to return to 1984 levels, with prices set to rise continuously over 2012. Specifically, in 2011 sales and gross profits fell for the third consecutive year, by 7.3% and 12.2% respectively, and gross profit margins fell to 19.1%. Losses sustained by commercial companies exceeded EUR 1 billion, almost five times the losses sustained in the previous year. Not one commercial sector reported a profit, with the wholesale trade being the hardest hit. Investments in fixed capital by Greek commerce as a whole also fell for the first time in 2011. Disinvestment applied to all three sectors, but was most marked in the wholesale trade. However, there is no change in 2012, with more than 8 out of 10 commercial undertakings forecasting reduced sales and profits for 2012. In the meantime, the investment calm continues, with 6 out of 10 undertakings stating that investments in fixed capital stagnated. The majority of commercial undertakings declared that employment had stagnated and, for the first time in the past 12 years, employment in commerce fell below 700 000 jobs, with 98 000 businesses going bankrupt and 93 500 jobs lost in the past year. Finally, almost 9 out of 10 commercial undertakings expect their liquidity to deteriorate in 2012.

Will the Commission say:

Do Greek small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) receive the same treatment in respect of trading terms (such as terms of payment, receipt and delivery) as the enterprises in other Member States with which they do business?

Given that access to financing for SMEs is vital to both economic growth and job creation, what guidelines does the Commission intend to issue for that purpose over and above the programmes introduced by the Greek Government to stimulate liquidity?

What are the Commission’s estimates and forecasts for the viability of Greek SMEs in 2013? Does it have official statistics available for 2012?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2013)

1.

The Commission does not collect information regarding private business to business trading among Member States.

2.

The Commission encourages the Greek Government to facilitate access to finance for SMEs, in particular during this period of shortage of funds. It is expected that the latest disbursement agreed by the Eurogroup on 13 December will provide much needed liquidity to the Greek economy thus directly benefit SMEs that face liquidity problems.

A government plan for repayment of arrears including tax refunds will be carried out over the next quarters, and SMEs will be significant beneficiaries. In addition, various financial instruments have been developed for SMEs. Some of the schemes involve the support of the European Regional Development Fund. An agreement was signed by the Greek authorities and the EIB on 21 March 2012 for an instrument which consists of structural funds (up to EUR 500 million) to support additional EIB global loans to banks. This instrument will allow banks to lend to SMEs.

3.

The Commission does not have data on the impact of the economic policies currently being implemented to promote viability of SMEs. There are no available official statistics for 2012.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010669/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Αδικαιολόγητη η επιβολή πρόσθετων επιβαρύνσεων από τις τράπεζες για δάνεια

Με επίσημη ανακοίνωση, η ελληνική ανεξάρτητη αρχή «Συνήγορος του Καταναλωτή» επισημαίνει για μια ακόμη φορά το ζήτημα της επιβολής των αποκαλούμενων εξόδων «μελέτης» ή «φακέλου» ή «προέγκρισης» ή «διαχείρισης», καθώς και εξόδων με συναφείς διατυπώσεις κατά τη χορήγηση τραπεζικών δανείων και συστήνει στα τραπεζικά ιδρύματα να απέχουν από τη χρέωσή τους στους καταναλωτές (εκτός αν πρόκειται για έξοδα υπέρ τρίτων).

Δεδομένου ότι:

η εξέταση της πιστοληπτικής ικανότητας των υποψήφιων δανειοληπτών από τα τραπεζικά ιδρύματα είναι απαραίτητη και αποσκοπεί στη γενική προστασία του πιστωτικού συστήματος από επισφαλή δάνεια, αλλά και την προάσπιση των συμφερόντων των καταθετών- πελατών και πιστωτών.

το λειτουργικό κόστος διατήρησης εκ μέρους των τραπεζών, υπηρεσιών και οργανωτικών δομών για τη διεκπεραίωση των αναγκαίων ελέγχων και γραφειοκρατικών διαδικασιών, συνυπολογίζεται στο επιτόκιο με το οποίο χορηγούνται τα δάνεια στους καταναλωτές και άρα με την επιβολή πρόσθετων εξόδων «μελέτης» ή «φακέλου» ή «προέγκρισης» ή «διαχείρισης» ζητείται στην ουσία από τους καταναλωτές να πληρώσουν διπλά για τα λειτουργικά έξοδα των τραπεζικών ιδρυμάτων.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Με δεδομένο ότι οι συστάσεις δεν αποτελούν απαγορεύσεις, πώς προστατεύονται τελικά οι ήδη υπερχρεωμένοι, καταναλωτές-δανειολήπτες από τέτοιου είδους διπλοχρεώσεις που ακόμα και σε οξύτατες περιόδους ύφεσης συνεχίζουν και επιβάλλουν τα τραπεζικά ιδρύματα;

Υπεβλήθη η έκθεση σχετικά με την εφαρμογή της οδηγίας για τις αθέμιτες εμπορικές πρακτικές που είχε προγραμματιστεί για τον Ιούνιο του 2011; Ποια τα αποτελέσματα;

Η Επιτροπή σχεδίαζε την οργάνωση εργαστηρίου με τις εθνικές αρχές αρμόδιες για τον έλεγχο της εφαρμογής των εθνικών νομοθεσιών με τις οποίες υλοποιούνται η οδηγία σχετικά με τις καταχρηστικές ρήτρες των συμβάσεων και οι απαιτήσεις πληροφόρησης βάσει της οδηγίας για τις υπηρεσίες πληρωμών. Στόχος ήταν η ανταλλαγή πληροφοριών αναφορικά με αθέμιτες εμπορικές πρακτικές στις λιανικές χρηματικές και οικονομικές υπηρεσίες, ιδιαίτερα σε ότι αφορά τη διαφάνεια των τραπεζικών τελών. Υλοποιήθηκε η εν λόγω δράση; Ποια τα αποτελέσματα;

Απάντηση του κ. Barnier εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(1 Φεβρουαρίου 2013)

Η οδηγία για τις υπηρεσίες πληρωμών (137) (PSD) καθορίζει στον τίτλο III σειρά κανόνων για τη διασφάλιση της διαφάνειας των όρων και των απαιτήσεων ενημέρωσης όσον αφορά τις υπηρεσίες πληρωμών. Οι κανόνες αυτοί περιλαμβάνουν την υποχρέωση των παρόχων υπηρεσιών πληρωμών, όπως οι τράπεζες, να παρέχουν στους πελάτες τους τις πληροφορίες και τους όρους σχετικά με τις χρεώσεις, τα επιτόκια και τις συναλλαγματικές ισοτιμίες. Η Επιτροπή επιθυμεί να ενημερώσει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος ότι το έργο της παρακολούθησης της συμμόρφωσης των τραπεζών και των οργανισμών πληρωμών με την ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία αποτελεί, πρωτίστως, αρμοδιότητα των επιμέρους κρατών μελών.

Η έκθεση σχετικά με την εφαρμογή της οδηγίας 2005/29/EΚ (138) προβλέπεται για έγκριση στις αρχές του 2013. Θα περιλαμβάνει, ειδικότερα, κατάλογο των συνηθέστερων αθέμιτων εμπορικών πρακτικών που απαντώνται στα κράτη μέλη, συμπεριλαμβανομένου του κλάδου των χρηματοπιστωτικών υπηρεσιών.

Η Επιτροπή δεν σκοπεύει να οργανώσει συγκεκριμένο εργαστήριο με τα κράτη μέλη σχετικά με την εφαρμογή των απαιτήσεων ενημέρωσης που προβλέπονται στην PSD. Οι υπηρεσίες της Επιτροπής διατηρούν τακτική επαφή με τις εθνικές αρχές μέσω της επιτροπής πληρωμών, στην οποία εξετάζεται τακτικά το ζήτημα της διαφάνειας και των απαιτήσεων ενημέρωσης. Η τελευταία συζήτηση επ’αυτού πραγματοποιήθηκε στις 17 Οκτωβρίου 2012, ενόψει της αναθεώρησης της PSD. Επίσης, σε συμφωνία με το πρόγραμμα εργασίας της Επιτροπής για το 2013 (139) και την Πράξη για την Ενιαία Αγορά II (140), η Επιτροπή σκοπεύει να λάβει διορθωτικά μέτρα με στόχο, μεταξύ άλλων, την αύξηση της διαφάνειας και της συγκρισιμότητας των εξόδων που βαρύνουν τους τραπεζικούς λογαριασμούς. Η Επιτροπή βρίσκεται στο στάδιο της ολοκλήρωσης της προετοιμασίας της εν λόγω νομοθετικής πρωτοβουλίας.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010669/12

to the Commission

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Unwarranted additional bank charges for loans

The Greek Consumer Ombudsman, who is an independent authority, has once again noted in an official report that so-called ‘administration’ , ‘file’, ‘preliminary approval’, ‘management’ or similarly-worded costs are being charged for bank loans and has recommended that banks refrain from charging consumers such costs (unless they are third party costs).

Given that:

banks need to investigate the credit rating of potential borrowers in order to protect the credit system in general from bad debts and defend the interests of depositors and creditors;

the operating costs to banks for maintaining services and organisational structures to carry out the necessary checks and bureaucratic procedures are included in the interest rate on loans to consumers and thus, by charging additional ‘administration’, ‘file’, ‘preliminary approval’ or ‘management’ costs, they are essentially asking consumers to pay the bank’s operating costs twice,

Will the Commission say:

Given that a recommendation is not a ban, how are consumers/borrowers already deeply in debt protected from these double costs which the banks are still charging, even though we are in deep recession?

Has the report on the application of the directive on unfair trading practices scheduled for June 2011 been submitted? What were the results?

Does the Commission plan to organise a workshop with the national authorities responsible for monitoring the application of national laws implementing the Unfair Contract Terms Directive and information requirements based on the Payment Services Directive? The plan was to exchange information on unfair trading practices in retail monetary and financial services, especially regarding the transparency of banking charges. Was that action implemented? What were the results?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2013)

The Payment Services Directive (141) (PSD) in its Title III establishes a set of rules to ensure transparency of conditions and information requirements for payment services. These comprise the obligation of payment service providers, such as banks, to provide their customers with information and conditions on charges, interest and exchange rates. The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that the task of monitoring compliance of banks and payment institutions with the European legislation is, above all, the responsibility of individual Member States.

The report on the application of Directive 2005/29/EC (142) is foreseen for adoption early 2013. It will, in particular, provide a list of the most common unfair commercial practices encountered in the Member States, including in the area of financial services.

The Commission does not plan to organise a specific workshop with Member States on the application of the information requirements set out in the PSD. The Commission services are in regular contact with national authorities via the Payment Committee, where the issue of transparency and information requirements is being addressed regularly as appropriate. It was last discussed on 17 October 2012 in view of the revision of the PSD. Moreover, in line with the Commission's work programme for 2013 (143) and the single market Act II (144), the Commission intends to take concrete measures aiming inter alia at increasing transparency and comparability of bank account fees. The Commission is currently finalising the preparation of this legislative initiative.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010670/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Συνεχής αύξηση του δείκτη τιμών καταναλωτή στην Ελλάδα — άνοδος στις τιμές των προϊόντων

Σύμφωνα με την ανακοίνωση της Ελληνικής Στατιστικής Αρχής, από τη σύγκριση του γενικού δείκτη τιμών καταναλωτή του μηνός Οκτωβρίου 2012, προς τον αντίστοιχο δείκτη του Οκτωβρίου 2011, παρατηρείται αύξηση 1,6%, έναντι αύξησης 3%, που σημειώθηκε κατά την ίδια σύγκριση του έτους 2011 προς το 2010. Παράλληλα, ο μέσος δείκτης του δωδεκάμηνου Νοεμβρίου 2011-Οκτωβρίου 2012, σε σύγκριση προς τον αντίστοιχο δείκτη της ίδιας περιόδου για το 2010-2011, παρουσίασε αύξηση της τάξης του 1,8%, έναντι αύξησης 3,7%, που σημειώθηκε κατά τα αντίστοιχα προηγούμενα δωδεκάμηνα.

Πιο συγκεκριμένα η αύξηση του γενικού δείκτη τιμών καταναλωτή, κατά 1,6% το μήνα Οκτώβριο 2012, προήλθε κυρίως από τις αυξήσεις των δεικτών:

Κατά 1,0% της ομάδας «Διατροφή και μη αλκοολούχα ποτά», λόγω αύξησης των τιμών σε βασικά είδη διατροφής.

Κατά 1,9% της ομάδας «Ένδυση και υπόδηση», λόγω αύξησης των τιμών σε αυτά τα είδη.

Κατά 13,2% της ομάδας «Στέγαση», λόγω αύξησης των τιμών, κυρίως, του πετρελαίου θέρμανσης, του φυσικού αερίου και του ηλεκτρισμού.

Κατά 3,0% της ομάδας «Μεταφορές», λόγω αύξησης, κυρίως, των τιμών στα είδη: καύσιμα αυτοκινήτου, τέλη κυκλοφορίας, εισιτήρια αεροπλάνων.

Σύμφωνα με τα παραπάνω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Σε τι επίπεδα κυμαίνεται ο ετήσιος μέσος δείκτης τιμών καταναλωτή στα κράτη μέλη της ζώνης του ευρώ;

Δεδομένου ότι πολλές φορές οι τιμές καθορίζονται από μονοπώλια, ολιγοπώλια και καρτέλ, σε ποιες συστάσεις προτίθεται να προβεί η Επιτροπή προκειμένου να ενισχυθεί ο ανταγωνισμός στην ελληνική αγορά με λογικό επακόλουθο τη πολυπόθητη μείωση των τιμών;

Αφού ήδη έχει επιτευχθεί μείωση στο μισθολογικό κόστος, στους μισθούς και τις συντάξεις με παρέμβαση των εκάστοτε κυβερνήσεων, θα μπορούσε να εφαρμοστεί κατά παρέκκλιση και ως αναγκαιότητα, για συγκεκριμένο αριθμό βασικών ειδών διατροφής και για συγκεκριμένο χρονικό διάστημα μέχρι να αποκατασταθεί η λειτουργία της αγοράς, η πρακτική της διατίμησης;

Εφαρμόζονται ευνοϊκές τιμές ή άλλου τύπου εκπτωτικές πολιτικές τουλάχιστον σε είδη βασικής διατροφής για τις ευπαθείς και ευάλωτες ομάδες του πληθυσμού σε άλλα κράτη μέλη;

Πιστεύει ότι η μείωση των τιμών θα μπορούσε πράγματι να αποτελέσει σημαντικό στόχο για την ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής οικονομίας;

Πώς οι καταναλωτές μπορούν να κάνουν συνειδητές επιλογές, δεδομένου ότι είναι δυσκολότερο να συγκρίνουν τιμές, όταν αυτές αλλάζουν συχνά για ομοειδή προϊόντα και υπηρεσίες;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(27 Φεβρουαρίου 2013)

Δεδομένου του αντικτύπου τους στην αγοραστική δύναμη των Ελλήνων πολιτών και στους όρους ανταγωνιστικότητας στην οικονομία, η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί στενά την εξέλιξη των τιμών στην Ελλάδα. Σύμφωνα με τα τελευταία στοιχεία της ΕΛΣΤΑΤ, το προηγούμενο έτος ο πληθωρισμός ΕνΔΤΚ στην Ελλάδα επιβραδύνθηκε αισθητά από 2,1% σε ετήσια βάση τον Ιανουάριο του 2012 σε 0,3% τον Δεκέμβριο του 2012, ενώ, κατά μέσο όρο, ο πληθωρισμός στη ζώνη του ευρώ (Δείκτης Τιμών Καταναλωτή της Νομισματικής Ένωσης, ΔΤΚΝΕ) παρέμεινε πάνω από το 2%. Τα στοιχεία αυτά επιβεβαιώνουν ότι, αν και με κάποια καθυστέρηση, οι τιμές στην Ελλάδα προσαρμόζονται στις εξελίξεις στους μισθούς και τις συντάξεις. Άλλος παράγοντας που συμβάλλει στον μειωμένο πληθωρισμό είναι ο αντίκτυπος των διαρθρωτικών μεταρρυθμίσεων στην αγορά προϊόντων οι οποίες συντελέστηκαν στο πλαίσιο του προγράμματος οικονομικής προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα. Οι μεταρρυθμίσεις στοχεύουν, μεταξύ άλλων, στην ενίσχυση του εσωτερικού ανταγωνισμού και στη μείωση της δύναμης των επιχειρήσεων για τιμολόγηση, εξαλείφοντας κατά συνέπεια αδικαιολόγητες προσόδους επί υπερβολικών κερδών και τη μετακύλισή τους στους καταναλωτές.

Είναι σημαντικό η προσαρμογή των τιμών να συντελεστεί βάσει όρων οικονομίας της αγοράς, οι οποίοι εξασφαλίζουν αποτελεσματική κατανομή των πόρων της οικονομίας. Ο καθορισμός των τιμών εμφανίζει σημαντικά μειονεκτήματα που μπορεί να επηρεάσουν δυσμενώς την ταχύτητα της διαδικασίας μακροοικονομικής προσαρμογής της Ελλάδας και ως εκ τούτου περιορίζεται σε στενό φάσμα αγαθών και υπηρεσιών.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010670/12

to the Commission

Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Steady increase in consumer price index in Greece/rising prices for goods

According to an announcement by the Hellenic Statistical Authority, the general consumer price index rose by 1.6% in October 2012 compared with October 2011, against a 3% increase in 2011 compared with 2010. At the same time, the average index for the twelve months from November 2011 to October 2012 rose by 1.8% compared with the same period between 2010 and 2011, against a 3.7% increase in the previous twelve months.

The 1.6% increase in the general consumer price index in October 2012 was caused mainly by increases in the following indexes:

a 1.0% increase in the ‘food and non-alcoholic drinks’ index, due to rising prices for basic foodstuffs;

a 1.9% increase in the ‘clothing and footwear’ index, due to rising prices for such goods;

a 13.2% increase in the ‘housing’ index, mainly due to rising prices for heating oil, natural gas and electricity;

a 3.0% increase in the ‘transport’ index, mainly due to rising prices for vehicle fuel, road tax and aeroplane tickets.

In light of the above, will the Commission say:

To what extent does the average annual consumer price index fluctuate in the Member States of the euro area?

Given that prices are often set by monopolies, oligopolies and cartels, what recommendations does the Commission intend to make in order to improve competition in the Greek market and thus bring about a much-needed reduction in prices?

As a reduction in wage costs, wages and pensions has already been achieved following intervention by individual governments, could price-fixing be used, as a necessary exception, for a specific number of basic foodstuffs for a specific period of time, until the market starts to function properly again?

Are favourable prices or some other form of discount policy applied at least to basic foodstuffs for vulnerable sections of the population in other Member States?

Does the Commission believe that price reductions might in fact represent an important objective for the purpose of stimulating growth in the Greek economy?

How can consumers make informed choices, given that it is very difficult to compare prices, which often change for similar goods and services?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2013)

The Commission follows closely the price developments in Greece given their effects on the purchasing power of Greek citizens and competitive conditions of the economy. According to the latest ELSTAT data release, in the course of the last year, the HICP inflation in Greece visibly slowed down from 2.1% year-on-year in January 2012 to 0.3% in December 2012, while on average the inflation for the euro area (monetary union index of consumer prices, MUICP) remained above 2%. This evidence confirms that the prices in Greece are adjusting to wage and pension developments although with some lag. Another factor contributing to the decreasing inflation is the effect of product market structural reforms undertaken within the Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece. The reforms are aimed at, among others, enhancing internal competition and reducing pricing power of enterprises, therefore eliminating unwarranted rents on excessive profits, and transferring them to consumers.

It is important that the price adjustment occurs under market economy conditions, which provide an efficient allocation of the resources in the economy. Price-fixing has severe drawbacks that can have an adverse influence on the speed of the macroeconomic adjustment process in Greece, and therefore is limited to a narrow set of goods and services.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010671/12

to the Commission

Phil Bennion (ALDE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Nobel Peace Prize money

On 12 October 2012 the Nobel Prize Committee decided to award the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union for its contribution to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe. The Commission took the decision, that I welcome, to allocate the approximately EUR 930 000 in prize money to child victims of violent conflict.

In light of this, can the Commission answer the following:

Could it provide further details on how these projects will be selected?

Will the prize money be managed centrally, with a proportion lost in administrative costs, or does the Commission intend to donate the money directly to the organisations responsible for delivering the projects?

Answer given by Ms Georgieva on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission has formally accepted the Nobel Peace prize money on behalf of the European Union and decided to top up the amount of the prize, for a total of EUR 2 million to be allocated to projects for children affected by conflict.

The Commission has selected the projects in line with normal procedures for funding humanitarian actions based on professional selection criteria such as quality, impact, value for money, feasibility and sustainability. The results were announced on 18 December 2012 and these are the projects and humanitarian partner organisations that have been selected:

Norwegian Refugee Council

Save the Children UK: Protecting and teaching displaced children in Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo;

Unicef (145): providing learning opportunities for displaced children in Pakistan;

UNHCR (146): improving access to education in Colombia and Ecuador for Colombian children affected by the conflict;

ACTED (147): providing protection and education to Syrian refugee children in Iraq.

The entire EUR 2 million, including the amount received with the Nobel Peace Prize, will be directly attributed to the selected projects, and the Commission will not use the funds for administrative purposes. The projects will benefit over 23 000 conflict-affected children worldwide and will provide access to basic education and child-friendly spaces.

In 2013 it is intended to launch similar projects to the benefit of children in crisis.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010673/12

alla Commissione

Matteo Salvini (EFD)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Crisi della cantieristica navale italiana

Riguardo alla questione in oggetto vanno considerati i seguenti elementi:

la cantieristica navale italiana sta attualmente affrontando una grave crisi economica che sta portando il livello degli ordini ai minimi storici;

in Europa, dal 2008 ad oggi, 42.000 lavoratori dell'industria navale hanno perso il posto di lavoro;

la Cina e la Corea del Sud ricevono aiuti consistenti e grandi commesse pubbliche;

la Repubblica di Corea si sta rivelando il più pericoloso concorrente straniero, detenendo da sola il 53,2 % delle quote del mercato globale;

la dislocazione della domanda a favore dei cantieri coreani ha avuto come conseguenza un drastico crollo dei prezzi, soprattutto per quanto riguarda la costruzione delle navi di grande stazza e di quelle tecnicamente più avanzate;

Fincantieri, leader italiano nella costruzione navale, si trova con un portafoglio ordini dimezzato fino al 2014.

Ciò premesso, può la Commissione far sapere se intende intervenire per ripristinare la parità delle condizioni concorrenziali in questo settore, al fine di rafforzare le regole di concorrenza leale e di rispettare la clausola di salvaguardia della concorrenza inclusa negli accordi di libero scambio firmati con la Repubblica di Corea?

Come intende operare la Commissione al fine di rispettare il «Verbale concordato relativo al mercato cantieristico navale» siglato il 10 aprile 2000 con il governo coreano?

Risposta di Karel De Gucht a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione è a conoscenza della crisi che ha colpito il settore cantieristico in diversi paesi europei, tra cui l'Italia, in cui gli ordinativi sono a un livello estremamente basso e i prezzi continuano a calare, essenzialmente a causa del rallentamento della crescita dei commerci marittimi e della sovraccapacità della flotta mondiale. A partire dal 2000 la Corea è la maggiore economia cantieristica superata nel 2010 dalla Cina. I grandi produttori coreani si concentrano sempre di più sui mercati high-tech in cui i cantieri europei hanno tradizionalmente una posizione forte e la concorrenza coreana è forte per i cantieri europei di dimensioni molto più piccole.

La Commissione continua ad adoperarsi per creare condizioni eque nel settore cantieristico nell'ambito del gruppo di lavoro Cantieri (WP6) dell'Organizzazione per la cooperazione e lo sviluppo economici (OCSE) al fine di identificare e di ridurre i fattori che distorcono le normali condizioni di concorrenza. Inoltre, nell'ambito del WP6 sono in corso i lavori di revisione dell'intesa settoriale sui crediti all'esportazione relativi alle navi, aspetto questo importante poiché i crediti all'esportazione sono diventati la misura di sostegno predominante dall'inizio della crisi nel 2008.

La Commissione attualmente non dispone di informazioni su un aumento delle importazioni dalla Corea a seguito dell'entrata in vigore dell'accordo di libero scambio (ALS) che giustificherebbe l'applicazione della clausola di salvaguardia bilaterale. I «Verbali concordati» stipulati con la Corea per affrontare contratti specifici sono invocati per integrare, se del caso, l'ALS. Inoltre, poiché la gravità delle condizioni in cui versa il settore richiede un più ampio approccio politico, la Commissione ha rilanciato l'iniziativa LeaderShip per identificare le misure atte a promuovere la competitività delle industrie marittime europee.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010673/12

to the Commission

Matteo Salvini (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Crisis in Italian shipbuilding

Regarding the above issue, the following should be borne in mind:

the Italian shipbuilding sector is currently facing a major economic crisis, which has seen orders fall to an all-time low;

in Europe, since 2008, 42 000 workers in the shipbuilding industry have lost their jobs;

in China and South Korea, the industry receives substantial aid and large State-sector orders;

the Republic of Korea is proving to be the most dangerous foreign competitor, since it alone holds 53,2% of the world market;

the shift in demand to Korean shipyards has resulted in a dramatic fall in prices, especially as regards the construction of large-tonnage and technically advanced ships;

at Fincantieri, the leading Italian shipbuilder, the order book up to 2014 has halved in value.

In view of the above, can the Commission say whether it intends to intervene to re-establish a level playing-field in this sector, to strengthen the fair competition rules and comply with the competition safeguard clause included in the free trade agreements concluded with the Republic of Korea?

How does the Commission intend to act in order to ensure compliance with the ‘Agreed Minutes relating to the World Shipbuilding Market’ concluded on 10 April 2000 with the Korean Government?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission is aware of the shipbuilding crisis in many European countries, including Italy, with orders at a very low level and prices still decreasing, largely due to slow growth of maritime trade and overcapacity of the world fleet. Since 2000, Korea is the largest shipbuilding economy until China overtook it in 2010. Large Korean producers increasingly focus on high-tech markets in which European yards traditionally have a strong position, and they are strong competitors for the much smaller yards in Europe.

The Commission continues work to establish a level playing-field in the shipbuilding sector through the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Working Party on Shipbuilding (WP6) identifying and reducing factors distorting normal competitive conditions. Moreover, in WP6 work is ongoing on an overhaul of the Sector Understanding on Export Credits for Ships, which is important as export credits have become the dominant support measure since the outbreak of the 2008 crisis.

The Commission currently has no indication of increased imports from Korea as a result of the entry into force of the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) that would justify the application of the bi-lateral safeguard clause. The ‘Agreed Minutes’ concluded with Korea to address specific contracts are invoked to complement the FTA when relevant. Moreover, as the acute state in the sector requires a wider policy approach, the Commission has re-launched the LeaderShip initiative to identify measures to foster the competitiveness of the European maritime industries.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010674/12

alla Commissione

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Uccisioni di civili da parte di gruppi armati nella provincia del Nord Kivu (Congo)

Un rapporto dell'ONU afferma che almeno 264 civili, di cui 83 bambini, sono stati arbitrariamente uccisi da gruppi armati nella provincia orientale del Nord Kivu, dopo una serie di rastrellamenti avvenuti in diversi villaggi tra aprile e settembre. Il bilancio di questi scontri, che coinvolgono ormai dall'aprile scorso la Repubblica democratica del Congo e il Ruanda, potrebbe essere addirittura superiore. Oltre agli assassinii, si registrano anche saccheggi, stupri e sfollamenti forzati.

A tale riguardo vanno considerati i seguenti elementi:

secondo stime redatte dall'UNHCR, i profughi causati dallo scoppio delle nuove ostilità in aprile hanno raggiunto, a settembre, la cifra di 450.000 persone;

il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante Catherine Ashton ha rilasciato molteplici comunicati ufficiali, tra cui quello del 10 luglio scorso in cui si dichiarava profondamente preoccupata per la situazione nel paese, auspicando una veloce risoluzione del conflitto anche attraverso l'intervento dell'ONU;

l'Unione europea ha stanziato fondi per l'«Intervento sanitario d'urgenza per le popolazioni colpite dai conflitti armati nel Kivu Sud, Repubblica democratica del Congo»;

gli accordi di pace firmati nel 2009 da Ruanda e Repubblica democratica del Congo non sono mai stati veramente rispettati.

Ciò premesso, può il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante far sapere con quali mezzi intende esercitare pressione sui governi ruandese e congolese per far rispettare gli accordi di pace e in tal modo porre fine alla guerra e alle violazioni dei diritti umani che ne conseguono?

Può indicare se sono previsti finanziamenti, e in caso affermativo di quale portata, per migliorare le condizioni di vita della popolazione coinvolta?

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

(25 gennaio 2013)

L'ultima delle molteplici cause del conflitto in corso nell'est del Congo è la sollevazione di un gruppo di ex soldati congolesi, meglio noto come M23, che, secondo una recente relazione del gruppo di esperti del Consiglio di sicurezza dell'ONU, riceverebbe sostegno esterno, in particolare dal Ruanda. Tra quest'ultimo paese e la Repubblica democratica del Congo non si sono registrati scontri diretti. L'UE, in coordinamento con altri partner della comunità internazionale, ricorre al dialogo politico per chiarire ciò che ci si aspetta da tutte le parti coinvolte per contribuire a una soluzione duratura. L'AR/VP ha già trasmesso, in diverse occasioni, chiari messaggi ai presidenti Kabila e Kagamé.

A tal riguardo, l'UE ha chiaramente condannato la nuova sedizione militare nel Kivu (M23) e ha affermato che qualunque sostegno al movimento, anche esterno, è inaccettabile e che l'integrità territoriale della RDC deve essere rispettata. L'UE ha deciso di rinviare le decisioni su un sostegno di bilancio aggiuntivo al Ruanda. Nel dialogo politico con il governo della RDC, l'UE pone particolare enfasi sulla lotta all'impunità, sul rafforzamento dello Stato di diritto e sui rapidi progressi da effettuare nell'attuazione di una riforma autentica del settore della sicurezza.

In termini di cooperazione allo sviluppo, l'UE sostiene già la RDC in settori quali la sanità e la giustizia (nell'ambito del 10° FES si sono destinati all'est della RDC oltre 100 milioni di euro). La Repubblica democratica del Congo è uno dei principali beneficiari degli aiuti umanitari dell'UE: si è recentemente deciso di aggiungere ai 60 milioni di euro annuali già assegnati alla RDC nel 2012 15 milioni di euro da destinare alla regione orientale del paese. Tali aiuti sono utilizzati principalmente per alleviare le sofferenze della popolazione e migliorare le condizioni di vita nell'est della RDC.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010674/12

to the Commission

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: HR/VP — Civilians killed by armed groups in the province of North Kivu (Congo)

According to a UN report, at least 264 civilians, including 83 children, were arbitrarily executed by armed groups in the eastern province of North Kivu in a series of attacks on villages between April and September. The actual number of victims of the fighting between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda which has been going on since April this year could be even higher. In addition to the killings, there are also reports of looting, rapes and mass forced displacement.

Bearing in mind that:

according to UNHCR estimates, 450 000 refugees were forced to flee their homes between April, when fighting broke out anew, and September;

High Representative/Vice-President Catherine Ashton has issued a number of official statements, including a declaration on 10 July this year expressing deep worry at the situation in the country and calling for an speedy resolution of the conflict, including through UN intervention;

the European Union has earmarked funds for an ‘Emergency health response for the population affected by armed conflicts in South Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo’;

the peace agreements signed between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2009 have never been properly observed.

Can the High Representative/Vice-President say how she intends to put pressure on the Rwandan and Congolese Governments to comply with the peace agreements and thus put an end to the war and the resulting human rights violations?

Can she say whether financial provision has been made, and if so, how much, to improve living conditions for the people affected by the conflict?

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

(25 January 2013)

The latest amongst the many causes of the current conflic in eastern Congo is the uprising of a group of former congolese soldiers better know as M23. A recent report of the UN Security Council Group of Experts, suggests that this group has been receiving external support, mainly from Rwanda. No direct fighting has been recorded between this country and DRC. The EU, in coordination with other international community partners, is using political dialogue to clarify what is expected from all concerned parties to contribute to a lasting solution. On several occasions, the HR/VP has already passed clear messages to Presidents Kabila and Kagamé.

In this regard the EU has clearly condemned the new military sedition in the Kivus (M23), stated that any support to this movement, including external support, is not acceptable and that the territorial integrity of the DRC should be respected. The EU has decided to delay decisions on additional budget support to Rwanda. In its political dialogue with the DRC government, the EU puts a clear focus on fighting impunity, strenghtening the rule of law and swift progress in the implementation of a genuine Security Sector Reform.

In terms of development cooperation, the EU is already present in the Eastern DRC in areas such as Health and Justice (over EUR100 million have been commited in Eastern DRC from the 10th EDF). DRC is also one of the biggest beneficiary of EU humanitarian aid : EUR15 million has recently been decided for eastern DRC in addition to the annual EUR60 million already allocated to DRC in 2012. This money is mostly used to mitigate the suffering of the population and improve the living conditions in Eastern DRC.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010675/12

adresată Comisiei

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Inițiativa pentru antreprenoriatul social

Deși reprezintă aproximativ 2 milioane de întreprinderi cu 11 milioane de angajați în UE, întreprinderile sociale au parte de sisteme de finanțare subdezvoltate, prin comparație cu cele de care beneficiază întreprinderile clasice.

Astfel, este absolut necesar să intensificăm sprijinul acordat întreprinderilor din sectorul economiei sociale, prin promovarea unor mijloace financiare suplimentare atât la nivel național, cât și la nivelul Uniunii Europene.

În acest sens doresc să întreb Comisia dacă are în vedere simplificarea accesului întreprinderilor sociale la fondurile structurale relevante din cadrul financiar multianual 2014-2020 și dacă se are în vedere transmiterea unor recomandări pentru statele membre pentru a include în cadrul „Fondului Social European”, al „Fondului european de dezvoltare regională”, al „Programului Orizont 2020” și al „Programului pentru schimbări sociale și inovare socială” a unor axe special destinate microfinanțării și antreprenoriatului social?

Răspuns dat de dl Andor în numele Comisiei

(29 ianuarie 2013)

Comisia a subliniat în mod repetat necesitatea identificării de noi modalități de susținere a întreprinderilor sociale. Autoritățile naționale, regionale și locale încep să își dea seama de potențialul acestora și să revizuiască acțiunile în curs. Comisia este decisă să stimuleze și să sprijine acest proces pe tot parcursul lui. Prin urmare, în 2011, a prezentat Inițiativa privind antreprenoriatul social, care prevede trei categorii de măsuri:

pentru îmbunătățirea accesului la finanțare al întreprinderilor sociale;

pentru îmbunătățirea vizibilității și recunoașterii antreprenoriatului social și pentru facilitarea învățării reciproce și consolidării capacităților;

pentru îmbunătățirea cadrului juridic și de reglementare, astfel încât întreprinderile sociale să fie tratate în mod egal cu celelalte întreprinderi.

Ca parte din punerea în aplicare a primului punct, Comisia a propus un program pentru schimbări sociale și inovare socială, cu un buget de 92,28 de milioane de EUR dedicat sprijinirii întreprinderilor sociale (148). În prezent, programul este în curs de negociere între Parlament și Consiliu.

Mai mult, se pot desfășura activități punctuale și sub umbrela priorității de investiții în „întreprinderi sociale” din cadrul programelor FEDR și FSE pentru perioada 2014-2020. În acest scop, Comisia sprijină consolidarea capacităților autorităților de gestionare. În plus, sprijinul dedicat antreprenoriatului social se poate dovedi esențial și pentru realizarea obiectivelor specifice ale altor priorități de investiții.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010675/12

to the Commission

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Social entrepreneurship initiative

Although social enterprises account for two million entrepreneurs and 11 million employees in the EU, the systems for financing those enterprises are underdeveloped in comparison to those for traditional enterprises.

There is hence a clear need to increase the assistance provided to social economy enterprises by generating additional financial resources at both national and EU level.

Can the Commission state, in this respect, whether it will simplify access for social enterprises to structural funding under the 2014‐2020 multiannual financial framework, and whether it will recommend that Member States include specific measures on micro‐financing and social entrepreneurship under the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the Horizon 2020 Programme and the Programme for Social Change and Innovation?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

The Commission has repeatedly emphasised the need to find new ways to support social entrepreneurs. National, regional and local authorities are starting to recognise the potential of social enterprises and are reviewing actions in place. The Commission is committed to stimulating, backing and accompanying this process. Therefore in 2011 it presented the Social Business Initiative (SBI) which envisages three categories of measures:

To improve access to funding for social enterprises;

— To improve the visibility and recognition of social entrepreneurship, facilitating

mutual learning and capacity building;

— To improve the legal and regulatory framework, in order to ensure that social enterprises are considered on equal terms with other businesses.

As part of the implementation of the first point, the Commission has proposed a Programme for Social Change and Innovation with a budget of EUR 92.28 million earmarked for support to social enterprises (149). The programme is currently under negotiations between Parliament and Council.

Moreover, targeted activities can be carried out under the investment priority ‘social enterprises’ in the ERDF and ESF programmes 2014-2020. To this end, the Commission is supporting capacity-building of managing authorities. In addition, dedicated support to social entrepreneurship can also be instrumental for the achievement of specific objectives under other investment priorities.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010676/12

adresată Comisiei

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Securitatea informatică

La nivel mondial, mai mult de un milion de oameni devin victime ale criminalității informatice în fiecare zi și costul criminalității cibernetice ar putea ajunge la un total de 388 miliarde dolari la nivel mondial.

Având în vedere că infractorii cibernetici sunt din ce în ce mai profesioniști în ceea ce privește pătrunderea frauduloasă în rețele protejate, consider că singura cale reală de a câștiga războiul cu aceștia este de a avea de partea noastră specialiști cu cunoștințe și expertiză similară în lupta împotriva infracțiunilor informatice.

În acest sens doresc să întreb Comisia dacă are în vedere introducerea la nivelul Uniunii Europene a unei strategii de tipul „white hat”?

(Termenul „white hat” în limbajul de Internet se referă la un hacker cu comportament etic sau un expert în securitate informatică, care este specializat în teste de penetrare și în alte metodologii de testare utilizate pentru asigurarea securității sistemelor informatice ale unei organizații)

Răspuns dat de dna Kroes în numele Comisiei

(8 ianuarie 2013)

Comisia împărtășește opiniile domnului deputat conform cărora amenințările la adresa securității informatice, atât accidentale, cât și cu premeditare, constituie o provocare importantă pentru prosperitatea economiei și a societății noastre. Comisia consideră că orice organizație care intenționează să abordeze în mod adecvat securitatea rețelelor informatice și a datelor ar trebui să aibă la dispoziție personal calificat și să includă auditul securității în procesele sale de gestionare a riscurilor privind securitatea.

Viitoarea comunicare referitoare la o strategie privind securitatea informatică pentru Uniunea Europeană, pe care Comisia intenționează să o adopte, împreună cu Înaltul Reprezentant al Uniunii pentru afaceri externe și politica de securitate, va contura o viziune și va prezenta acțiuni strategice concrete menite să asigure siguranța și rezistența mediului digital și să prevină în mod eficient criminalitatea informatică, respectând și promovând drepturile fundamentale și valorile fundamentale ale UE.

Strategia propusă ar trebui să includă priorități strategice și acțiuni specifice care să stimuleze creșterea nivelului de competențe în materie de securitate informatică ale profesioniștilor domeniului tehnologiei informațiilor, ale studenților, ale industriei, ale administrațiilor publice, cât și ale utilizatorilor finali. Strategia va urmări, de asemenea, să consolideze educația și formarea în materie de securitate.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010676/12

to the Commission

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: IT security

Over a million people across the world fall prey to cybercrime each day, with such crime costing an estimated USD 388 billion worldwide.

Since cybercriminals are becoming increasingly expert at illegally penetrating protected networks, the only realistic way of defeating them is by having skilled specialists with a similar level of expertise at one’s disposal in order to combat cybercrime.

In this connection, can the Commission state whether it plans to introduce a ‘white hat’ type strategy across Europe?

(The term ‘white hat’ in Internet slang refers to an ethical computer hacker, or a computer security expert, who specialises in penetration testing and in other testing methodologies to ensure the security of an organisation’s information systems).

Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

The Commission shares the views of the Honorable Member that cybersecurity threats, be it accidental or malicious, pose significant challenges to the prosperity of our economy and society. The Commission believes that any organisation which intends to address network and information security in an adequate way should have at its disposal skilled professionals and include security audits in the security risk management process it carries out.

The upcoming Communication on a Cybersecurity Strategy for the European Union, that the Commission plans to adopt together with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, would outline a vision and present concrete policy actions to ensure a safe and resilient digital environment and effectively prevent cybercrime, while respecting and promoting fundamental rights and EU core values.

The proposed Strategy should include strategic priorities and specific actions setting incentives to raise the level of security skills for IT professionals, students, industry, public administrations and the end users. The strategy will also aim to step up security education and training.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010677/12

adresată Comisiei

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Programul Daphné: realizări și perspective

De la lansarea programului Daphné până în prezent, peste 500 de ONG-uri, autorități publice sau instituții au implementat cu succes proiecte finanțate ce au vizat protecția copiilor, a tinerilor și a femeilor împotriva tuturor formelor de violență, precum și atingerea unui nivel înalt de protecție a sănătății, de bunăstare și coeziune socială.

1.

Având în vedere că din 2014 Daphné va fi inclus în programul

„Drepturi și cetățenie”, are în vedere Comisia păstrarea obiectivelor inițiale ale programului, alături de obiectivele noului program „Drepturi și cetățenie”?

2.

În același timp, având în vedere reușitele, eficacitatea și popularitatea programului, ce va face Comisia pentru a spori vizibilitatea acestuia și pentru a asigura o finanțare corespunzătoare în cadrul noii generații de programe?

Răspuns dat de dna Reding în numele Comisiei

(8 ianuarie 2013)

Propunerea Comisiei de creare a programului „Drepturi și cetățenie” pentru perioada 2014-2020 include actualul program Daphne III. Deși denumirea Daphne nu este păstrată ca atare pentru perioada de după 2013, finanțarea va continua să se concentreze asupra obiectivelor, activităților și beneficiarilor acestui program.

Comisia va urmări să folosească vizibilitatea sporită a programului Daphne și în cadrul noului program. Fondurile programului „Drepturi și cetățenie” care acoperă prioritățile actuale ale programului Daphne vor fi completate de fonduri acordate în cadrul programului „Justiție” care a fost propus, în special pentru finanțarea activităților în domeniul drepturilor victimelor. Combinarea fondurilor provenind de la aceste două programe propuse ar avea ca rezultat un buget comparabil cu cel pus la dispoziție pentru perioada 2007-2013, cu condiția ca suma totală care urmează să fie alocată ambelor programe să nu fie redusă în mod semnificativ.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010677/12

to the Commission

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Daphne programme — achievements and outlook

Since the Daphne programme was launched, around 500 NGOs, public authorities and institutions have successfully implemented projects funded under the programme geared to protecting children, young people and women against all forms of violence and attaining a high level of health protection, well-being and social cohesion.

1.

Bearing in mind that Daphne will be included in the

‘Rights and citizenship’ programme from 2014 onwards, does the Commission intend to retain the programme's initial objectives alongside the objectives of the new ‘Rights and citizenship’ programme?

2.

At the same time, given the programme's success, effectiveness and popularity, what will the Commission do to raise its profile and guarantee corresponding funding under the new generation of programmes?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

The proposal of the Commission to establish the Rights and Citizenship Programme for the period 2014-2020 includes the current Daphne III programme. Although the Daphne name is not maintained as such for the period after 2013, funding will continue to be targeted at its objectives, its activities and its beneficiaries.

The Commission will aim to make use of the high profile of Daphne also in the framework of the new programme. The funds of the Rights and Citizenship Programme, covering the current Daphne priorities, will be supplemented by funds under the proposed Justice Programme, especially for funding activities in the area of victims' rights. The combination of funds from these two proposed programmes would result in a budget comparable to what has been made available for the period of 2007-2013, provided the total amount to be allocated to both programmes will not be reduced significantly.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010678/12

adresată Comisiei

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D)

(22 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Măsuri pentru dezvoltarea de competențe și crearea de locuri de muncă în domeniul industrial

Competitivitatea Uniunii depinde de dezvoltarea sectorului industrial. Traiul decent al cetățenilor europeni depinde de locurile de muncă pe care aceștia le au. Uniunea și statele membre trebuie să investească urgent într-o politică industrială capabilă să asigure locuri de muncă pe întreg teritoriul european. Politica industrială presupune și investiții în educație și cercetare.

Astăzi rata șomajului în UE depășește 10%, iar în cazul tinerilor și al lucrătorilor slab calificați, aceasta depășește 20%. De asemenea, în 2011, media investițiilor publice în cercetare și inovare era de doar 2,3% iar rata abandonului școlar era de 13,5%. Tot în 2011, doar unul din trei tineri europeni, cu vârste între 30 și 34 de ani, erau absolvenți de studii superioare.

1.

Cum intenționează Comisia să stimuleze investitorii europeni și străini să investească în industria europeană?

2.

Care sunt măsurile de sprijin pentru a stimula dezvoltarea de competențe și crearea de locuri de muncă în ramurile industriale în care Uniunea poate fi competitivă pe plan internațional?

Răspuns dat de dl Tajani în numele Comisiei

(29 ianuarie 2013)

Mediul de investiții plin de provocări este un aspect important în noua comunicare privind politica industrială (150) care propune un parteneriat între UE, statele membre și industrie, pentru a spori investițiile în noile tehnologii și pentru a conferi Europei un avantaj competitiv în contextul noii revoluții industriale. Revitalizarea investițiilor necesită creșterea încrederii întreprinderilor în mediul economic, creșterea cererii de pe piață, un acces mai bun și mai ușor la finanțare și concentrarea pe competențe. Ca atare, aceștia sunt cei patru piloni ai politicii industriale consolidate. Au fost selectate șase linii de acțiune prioritare, care vor pune accentul pe investiții și inovare pentru o nouă societate industrială.

Comunicarea invită la un mediu deschis și nediscriminatoriu pentru a spori și mai mult atractivitatea investițiilor în UE. În plus, politica de coeziune și politica comercială reprezintă instrumentele principale ale UE pentru creșterea gradului de atractivitate a UE pentru investițiile străine directe (ISD) și sunt esențiale pentru îmbunătățirea competitivității, a creșterii și a creării de locuri de muncă. În timp ce obiectivul politicii industriale este stabilirea condițiilor-cadru adecvate eliberării capacității creatoare a industriei europene și stimularea de noi investiții, întreprinderile însele vor fi întotdeauna responsabile în ultimă instanță pentru reușita sau eșecul lor pe piața mondială.

Vor fi luate o serie de măsuri adiacente pentru a crea locuri de muncă și pentru a crește investițiile în capitalul uman și competențe prin punerea la dispoziția forței de muncă a mijloacelor necesare pentru a face față transformărilor industriale, în special printr-o mai bună anticipare a nevoilor și a neconcordanțelor în materie de competențe. Comunicarea prezintă o serie de măsuri complementare în acest scop, la care Comisia lucrează deja, pentru a se asigura că sunt disponibile competențele necesare pentru dezvoltarea producției și a piețelor cu un potențial ridicat de stimulare a creșterii economice și a ocupării forței de muncă.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010678/12

to the Commission

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Measures to develop skills and create jobs in industry

The Union's competitiveness depends on the development of the industrial sector. Decent living standards for European citizens depend on the jobs they hold. The Union and Member States must urgently invest in an industrial policy that will be capable of safeguarding jobs across the whole of Europe. Industrial policy also requires investment in education and research.

The unemployment rate in the EU now stands at over 10%, while for young people and unskilled workers the rate is over 20%. In 2011, average public investment in research and innovation stood at only 2.3%, whilst the school dropout rate stood at 13.5%. At the same time, only one in three young Europeans aged between 30 and 34 had completed higher education in 2011.

1.

How will the Commission encourage European and foreign investors to invest in European industry?

2.

What measures are being taken to support and stimulate the development of skills and the creation of jobs in sectors of industry where the Union can compete at international level?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2013)

The challenging investment climate is an important issue in the new Communication on industrial policy (151) which proposes a partnership between the EU, Member States and industry to step up investment in new technologies and to give Europe a competitive lead in the new industrial revolution. Revitalising investment requires more business confidence, stronger market demand, better and easier access to finance and a focus on skills. As such, these are the 4 key pillars of the reinforced industrial policy. Six priority action lines have been selected that will focus on investment and innovation for a new industrial society.

The communication calls for an open and non-discriminatory environment in order to further increase the attractiveness of investing in the EU. In addition, cohesion and trade policy are major EU instruments for enhancing the attractiveness of the EU for FDI and are key to enhancing competitiveness, growth and job creation. While the objective of industrial policy is to establish the appropriate framework conditions to release the creative capacity of the European industry and stimulate new investments, businesses themselves will always be ultimately responsible for their success or failure in the global market.

Accompanying measures will be taken to create jobs and increase investment in human capital and skills by equipping the labour force for industrial transformation, notably through better anticipating skills needs and mismatches. The communication presents a number of complementary measures to that end on which the Commission is already working to ensure that the necessary skills are available for the development of production and markets with a high potential of boosting growth and employment.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010679/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Commenti del Primo ministro turco su Israele

Il 19 novembre 2012, fonti di informazione, hanno riferito che il premier turco Recep Tayyib Erdogan ha definito Israele «Stato terrorista» a seguito del bombardamento di Gaza. Al Consiglio islamico eurasiatico a Istanbul ha dichiarato: «Coloro che associano l'Islam al terrorismo chiudono gli occhi di fronte a uccisioni di massa di musulmani, distolgono lo sguardo dalla strage di bambini a Gaza».

Le relazioni tra i due paesi sono particolarmente tese. L'ambasciatore di Israele è stato espulso da Ankara e la cooperazione militare è stata congelata a seguito della pubblicazione del rapporto delle Nazioni Unite sull'attacco a bordo della Mavi Marmara nel 2010.

1.

Qual è la posizione della Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante in merito alle recenti dichiarazioni del Primo ministro turco?

2.

Quali iniziative ha intrapreso la Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante per avviare un processo di riconciliazione tra Turchia e Israele?

3.

Qual è la valutazione della Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante sull'escalation delle tensioni tra i due paesi?

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

(18 gennaio 2013)

Turchia e Israele sono partner fondamentali dell'Unione europea. Pertanto, il dialogo e le buone relazioni tra i due paesi sono nell'interesse dell'UE se si considerano il suo impegno a favore della pace e della stabilità nel nostro vicinato comune e soprattutto i problemi della regione, quali il difficile processo di pace in Medio Oriente. L'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente esorta la Turchia e Israele a dar prova di moderazione per evitare un ulteriore deterioramento delle loro relazioni bilaterali e attribuisce grande importanza al processo di ravvicinamento, al dialogo e a nuovi sforzi costruttivi per migliorare i rapporti tra i due paesi. L'Unione europea è pronta a contribuire a questo processo se invitata a farlo da entrambe le parti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010679/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Turkish Prime Minister's comments on Israel

On 19 November 2012, various news sources reported that Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had called Israel a ‘terrorist state’ following its bombardment of Gaza. He said: ‘those who associate Islam with terrorism close their eyes in the face of mass killing of Muslims, turn their heads from the massacre of children in Gaza’. He made his statements at the Eurasian Islamic Council in Istanbul.

Relations between the two countries are particularly strained. Israel’s ambassador was expelled from Ankara and military cooperation has been frozen as a result of the release of the UN report on the attack on board the Mavi Marmara in 2010.

1.

What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative regarding the recent comments of the Turkish Prime Minister?

2.

What efforts have been made by the Vice-President/High Representative to help start a process of reconciliation between Turkey and Israel?

3.

What is the assessment of the Vice-President/High Representative regarding the escalation of tension between the two countries?

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

(18 January 2013)

Turkey and Israel are crucial partners of the EU. Therefore, dialogue and good and functional relations between them are in the interest of the EU in the quest for peace and stability in our shared neighbourhood, especially when considering the difficult problems in the region, such as the Middle East Peace Process. The HR/VP urges both Turkey and Israel to exercise restraint in order to avoid further deterioration of bilateral relations and places great importance on a constructive rapprochement process, dialogue and further efforts to improve ties. The EU stands ready to assist in this process if invited by both parties.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010680/12

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Possibili finanziamenti per la realizzazione di un progetto giovanile per la promozione culturale e sociale nel Comune di Roma

YUT è un network di associazioni giovanili del XIII Municipio del Comune di Roma, nato grazie a un progetto europeo del programma Youth in Action. Nel rispetto delle libertà individuali e sulla base dei principi di democrazia e di partecipazione, YUT si propone di creare un progetto atto a promuovere le iniziative dei propri associati a favore dei giovani del territorio di Ostia. Tra le attività proposte rientrano: la formazione, l'attivazione di laboratori, seminari, spettacoli, concerti, mostre e attività di volontariato. Proprio per venire incontro alle esigenze del XIII Municipio, il Comune di Roma ha recentemente individuato uno spazio di circa 1200 mq da far utilizzare ai giovani aderenti allo YUT per la promozione di iniziative culturali.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere:

se sono previsti finanziamenti per la realizzazione delle attività suesposte attraverso il Programma cultura;

se esiste un quadro generale della situazione?

Risposta di Androulla Vassiliou a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione desidera informare l'onorevole deputata che l'attuale programma Cultura ha l'obiettivo di promuovere la mobilità transnazionale delle persone che operano nel campo della cultura, incoraggiare la circolazione transnazionale di opere d'arte e culturali e agevolare il dialogo interculturale. Questo programma si concluderà nel 2013 e la Commissione ha proposto di rimpiazzarlo con il programma «Europa creativa» che offrirà possibilità di cofinanziamento a condizioni analoghe. Poiché la dimensione transnazionale delle attività patrocinate rimarrà della massima importanza, una delle condizioni per la selezione dei progetti continuerà ad essere la partecipazione di diverse organizzazioni di paesi diversi.

Ulteriori informazioni sono reperibili al seguente indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/culture/index_en.htm

Ulteriori informazioni sul programma Youth in Action menzionato dall'onorevole deputata sono reperibili all'indirizzo:

http://ec.europa.eu/youth/news/20121207_yia.htm.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010680/12

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Possible funding for a youth project for cultural and social advancement in the municipality of Rome

YUT is a network of youth associations in the 13th sub-municipality of the municipality of Rome, and was created thanks to an EU project under the Youth in Action programme. In compliance with individual freedoms and on the basis of the principles of democracy and participation, YUT proposes to create a project to promote the initiatives of its associations for young people in the Ostia area. The proposed activities include: training, holding workshops, seminars, shows, concerts, exhibitions and volunteering activities. To meet the 13th sub-municipality’s needs, the municipality of Rome recently identified a space of around 1200 m2 for use by young people who are part of YUT for the promotion of cultural initiatives.

1.

Can the Commission say whether there is any funding earmarked for the above activities under the cultural programme?

2.

Can it give an overview of the situation?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the objectives of the current Culture programme are to promote the transnational mobility of people working in the field of culture, encourage the transnational circulation of artistic and cultural works, and enhance the intercultural dialogue. This programme will end in 2013 and the Commission has proposed to replace it by the Creative Europe programme, which will provide co-funding opportunities under similar conditions. As the transnational dimension of supported activities will remain of paramount importance, one of the conditions for projects to be selected will continue to be the involvement of a number of organisations from different countries.

Further information can be found on the following website:

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/index_en.htm

Further information on the Youth in Action programme, mentioned by the Honourable Member in the question, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/youth/news/20121207_yia.htm.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010681/12

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Possibile finanziamento per la costruzione di una seggiovia tra il Santuario francescano e il «Sacro Speco», presso il comune di Poggio Bustone

Il Comune di Poggio Bustone, in provincia di Rieti, è situato a 756 m di altitudine ed è classificato come totalmente montano. Esso domina la cosiddetta Valle Santa, una pianura dove sono situati quattro Santuari francescani. Tale luogo è considerato di grande importanza storica e attrae moltissimi pellegrini da tutto il mondo che vengono a visitare uno dei più importanti e suggestivi itinerari di San Francesco d'Assisi. Il «Sacro Speco», invece, è una cappella situata all'interno di una piccola grotta tra due rocce, luogo di preghiera di San Francesco dove, secondo la tradizione cristiana, vi dimorò nell'anno 1209. Tuttavia, oggi, per raggiungere la cappella partendo dal Santuario francescano, bisogna percorrere un sentiero nel bosco che sale per circa 600 metri. Si tratta di un percorso difficilmente percorribile soprattutto per le persone anziane o quelle con problemi motori. Proprio per questo motivo, il Circolo Diurno di Poggio Bustone è impegnato nella realizzazione di una seggiovia che colleghi il Santuario francescano al «Sacro Speco».

Dato il valore turistico del progetto, con ricadute in termini di valorizzazione del territorio e creazione di posti di lavoro, può la Commissione far sapere:

se vi sono finanziamenti o programmi per la costruzione della seggiovia;

se esiste un quadro generale della situazione?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(8 gennaio 2013)

Il programma 2007-2013 per la regione Lazio, cofinanziato dal Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale, prevede la protezione e la valorizzazione del patrimonio naturale e culturale. L'obiettivo è generare crescita economica con un'attenzione particolare per il turismo sostenibile e per la sostenibilità finanziaria e gestionale degli interventi selezionati.

A condizione che siano soddisfatti le condizioni e i requisiti specifici del programma, il progetto menzionato dall'onorevole deputata sembrerebbe in linea con le attività previste nell'ambito della priorità II «Ambiente e prevenzione dei rischi», e in particolare dell'obiettivo 4 «Valorizzazione delle strutture di fruizione delle aree protette» (che intende promuovere gli itinerari storico-religiosi) e l'obiettivo operativo 5 «Valorizzazione e promozione del patrimonio culturale e paesistico».

Tuttavia, in linea con il principio di gestione condivisa utilizzato per l'implementazione della politica di coesione, la selezione dei progetti e la loro attuazione rientrano nelle responsabilità delle autorità nazionali. Per ulteriori informazioni la Commissione suggerisce pertanto all'onorevole deputata di mettersi direttamente in contatto con l'autorità di gestione del programma:

Autorità di gestione del programma operativo regionale della Regione Lazio 2007-2013

Via R. R. Garibaldi, 7

00145 Romaadgcomplazio@regione.lazio.it

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010681/12

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Possible funding for the construction of a chairlift between the Franciscan monastery and the ‘Sacro Speco’ in the municipality of Poggio Bustone

The municipality of Poggio Bustone, in the province of Rieti, is 756 m above sea level and is entirely mountainous. It dominates the ‘Holy Valley’, a plain on which there are four Franciscan monasteries. This place is considered to be of great historic importance and attracts huge numbers of pilgrims from around the world who come to visit one of the most important and evocative routes travelled by Saint Francis of Assisi. The ‘Sacro Speco’ is a chapel located inside a small cave between two rocks, a place of prayer to Saint Francis where, according to Christian tradition, he stayed in 1209. However, today the chapel is reached from the Franciscan monastery along an uphill path through the woods, which is around 600 m long. The path is very difficult to walk along, particularly for elderly people or those with mobility problems. For that very reason, the Poggio Bustone social club is constructing a chairlift to connect the Franciscan monastery to the ‘Santo Speco’.

Given the project’s value with regard to tourism, with knock-on effects in terms of promoting the area and job creation, can the Commission answer the following:

Is there any funding or programmes for the construction of the chairlift?

Is there an overview of the situation?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

The 2007-2013 programme for the region of Lazio, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, foresees the protection and exploitation of natural heritage and cultural attractions. The aim is to generate economic growth with a particular focus on sustainable tourism and on the financial and managerial sustainability of the selected interventions.

Provided that the programme-specific conditions and requirements are met, the project mentioned by the Honourable Member, would appear to be in line with the activities foreseen under priority II ‘Environment and risk prevention’, and in particular objective 4 ‘Development of infrastructures for the exploitation of protected areas’ (which also aims to promote historic and religious itineraries) and operational objective 5 ‘Development of cultural and natural resources’.

However, in line with the shared management principle used for the implementation of cohesion policy, project selection and implementation is the responsibility of the national authorities. For more information, the Commission therefore suggests that the Honourable Member contact directly the managing authority of the programme:

Autorità di gestione del programma operativo regionale della Regione Lazio 2007-2013

Via R. R. Garibaldi, 7 00145 Romaadgcomplazio@regione.lazio.it

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010682/12

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Possibili finanziamenti per l'Istituto Calasanzio di Frascati, nella provincia di Roma

L'Istituto Calasanzio è il nome dato nel 1918 alle Scuole Pie, alle quali San Giuseppe Calasanzio (1557-1648) diede vita a Frascati, nella provincia di Roma, il 14 settembre 1616. Da questa scuola del Calasanzio è derivata la scuola moderna occidentale, che già da allora, attraverso le fondazioni in Italia, Moravia, Boemia e Polonia, si è diffusa in ogni nazione europea. Questa istituzione ancora in funzione rappresenta, pertanto, un punto di riferimento storico e pedagogico per tutte le famiglie del territorio, e non solo.

Di fatto è «la scuola popolare pubblica più antica d'Europa» (L.v. Pastor), che custodisce la storia e le radici della tradizione educativa cristiana; è un luogo della memoria del patrimonio culturale europeo nonché mondiale.

La struttura rischia attualmente di essere chiusa per mancanza di fondi e, conseguentemente, di essere destinata ad altro uso, di tipo commerciale. Inoltre la scuola conta, tra personale didattico e amministrativo, più di venti posti di lavoro, che andrebbero persi senza un intervento da parte delle Istituzioni.

La Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'Unione europea sancisce all'articolo 14 il diritto all'istruzione e in particolare, al paragrafo 3, il diritto dei genitori di provvedere all'educazione e all'istruzione dei loro figli secondo le loro convinzioni religiose, filosofiche e pedagogiche. L'accesso a tale servizio educativo andrebbe quindi garantito e supportato al fine di tutelare i diritti di diverse famiglie del territorio, come sancito dalla Carta europea dei diritti fondamentali.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione:

far sapere se vi sono programmi o finanziamenti a sostegno di questa tipologia di struttura e di tale progetto educativo e culturale;

fornire un quadro generale della situazione?

Risposta di Androulla Vassiliou a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

L'onorevole deputata saprà già che, conformemente all'articolo 165 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, la responsabilità dell'organizzazione e del finanziamento dei sistemi di istruzione e formazione ricade sugli Stati membri. Di conseguenza, i fondi dell'Unione europea non possono essere usati a sostegno dei costi di gestione di una scuola come l'Istituto Calasanzio.

Si tenga presente tuttavia che, mentre il programma di apprendimento permanente dell'UE (Lifelong Learning Programme-LLP) nel campo dell'istruzione e della formazione non implica un'azione specifica a sostegno dell'infrastruttura scolastica, esso supporta attività che possono innalzare il profilo delle scuole contribuendo indirettamente al loro ulteriore sviluppo. L'onorevole deputata potrà trovare una sintesi delle attività attualmente supportate per il tramite di Comenius, un sotto-programma dell'LLP, dedicato all'istruzione scolastica, sul sito web:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/comenius_en.htm.

Il programma Cultura può stimolare la cooperazione tra gli operatori culturali dei diversi paesi partecipanti su progetti volti a evidenziare e promuovere il patrimonio culturale europeo a patto che essi rispondano ai criteri e ai requisiti del programma. Ulteriori informazioni sono reperibili all'indirizzo:

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/index_en.htm.

Il Fondo sociale europeo (FSE) non può intervenire nel finanziamento delle scuole. Esso, tuttavia, può cofinanziare iniziative come la formazione degli insegnanti. La Commissione rammenta che, conformemente al principio di gestione condivisa, i programmi del FSE sono gestiti a livello nazionale o regionale sotto la responsabilità delle autorità di gestione. La Commissione invita pertanto l'onorevole deputata a mettersi in contatto con le autorità di gestione del FSE per il Lazio (152).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010682/12

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Possible funding for the Istituto Calasanzio in Frascati, in the province of Rome

‘Istituto Calasanzio’ is the name given in 1918 to the Pious Schools founded by Saint Joseph Calasanctius (1557-1648) in Frascati, in the province of Rome, on 14 September 1616. Calasanctius’s school inspired the modern Western school, which has since spread throughout Europe through foundations in Italy, the Czech Republic and Poland. This institution is still operating and therefore represents an historical and educational reference point for all families in the area and beyond.

According to Ludwig von Pastor, it is the oldest public free school in Europe, which preserves the history and roots of the Christian educational tradition. It is a memorial to Europe’s and the world’s cultural heritage.

The building is currently facing closure due to a lack of funds and, consequently, is at risk of being used for other, commercial uses. Moreover, the school employs more than 20 teaching and administrative staff, whose jobs would be lost without any intervention by the institutions.

Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrines the right to education and, in particular, paragraph 3 enshrines the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical and pedagogical convictions. Access to this education service should thus be guaranteed and supported to protect the rights of families in the area, as enshrined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.

1.

Can the Commission say whether there are any programmes or funding to support this kind of organisation and this educational and cultural project?

2.

Can it provide an overview of the situation?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Honourable Member will be aware that in accordance with Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union the responsibility for the organisation and funding of education and training systems rests with Member States. Accordingly, European Union funds cannot be used to support the running costs of a school such as the Istituto Calasanzio.

It should be borne in mind, however, that while the EU Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP) in the field of education and training does not have a specific action in support of school infrastructure, it does support activities which can raise the profile of schools contributing indirectly to their further development. The Honourable Member will find an overview of activities which are currently supported through Comenius, a sub-programme of the LLP addressed to school education, on the website http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/comenius_en.htm.

The Culture Programme can stimulate cooperation between cultural operators from different participating countries for projects aiming at highlighting and promoting European Cultural heritage provided they match the criteria and requirements of the Programme. More information can be found on: http://ec.europa.eu/culture/index_en.htm.

The European Social Fund (ESF) cannot intervene in the financing of schools. However, it can co-fund initiatives such as the training of teachers. The Commission recalls that, according to the principle of shared management, ESF programmes are managed at national or regional level under the responsibility of a managing authority. Therefore, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to contact the Lazio ESF managing authority (153).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010683/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Rilancio del porto di Taranto

Da notizie giornalistiche rileviamo che nel giugno scorso è stato firmato un piano per il rilancio del traffico portuale di Taranto, con lo stanziamento di 187 milioni di euro, al fine di rendere il porto un hub efficiente ed attrattivo. Altri 219 milioni verranno dal piano di investimenti nella piattaforma logistica. 80 milioni saranno investiti dagli operatori privati, mentre i restanti lo saranno da investitori pubblici. Le opere da intraprendere sono diverse: da una diga foranea di protezione dai flutti, al collegamento del bacino logistico del porto con la rete ferroviaria nazionale, dal dragaggio dei fondali alla realizzazione di una piattaforma logistica e all'allargamento della banchina San Cataldo. Dal 2014 il piano prevede l'operabilità di un milione di container. Un accordo con il porto di Rotterdam e con la Cina farebbe del terminal di Taranto una delle piattaforme logistiche marittime più importanti dell'Europa e del Medio Oriente.

Che il progetto sia realizzato nei tempi previsti è l'auspicio di tutte le parti interessate e dei lavoratori di Taranto, che ora sono iscritti alla cassa integrazione, dopo la chiusura dell'acciaieria dell'Ilva.

Può la Commissione riferire:

se conosce questo progetto;

in caso affermativo, se ha un'opinione sulla qualità del piano e sulle prospettive di sviluppo dell'attività portuaria commerciale nel Mediterraneo;

se partecipa in modo diretto o indiretto (fondi strutturali) al suo finanziamento?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(25 gennaio 2013)

1.

La Commissione è a conoscenza del fatto che un accordo per lo sviluppo delle attività marittime e commerciali nel porto di Taranto è stato firmato nel giugno 2012. Per quanto concerne il piano più ampio riguardante lo stanziamento di 219 milioni di euro, la Commissione non è a conoscenza dello stato attuale di implementazione dei progetti in questione.

2.

La Commissione non è a conoscenza dei dettagli dell'accordo e non può formulare commenti sulla qualità del piano. Le prospettive di breve termine relative ai volumi del traffico portuale nel Mediterraneo sono condizionate dalla situazione di incertezza in cui versa attualmente l'economia europea e mondiale. Nel medio e lungo termine le prospettive per i porti del Mediterraneo dovrebbero migliorare.

3.

Soltanto il collegamento ferroviario tra il porto di Taranto e la rete ferroviaria nazionale è attualmente cofinanziato dal Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale tramite il programma

3.

Soltanto il collegamento ferroviario tra il porto di Taranto e la rete ferroviaria nazionale è attualmente cofinanziato dal Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale tramite il programma

«Reti e Mobilità». Il porto di Taranto, tuttavia, è stato posto in prima fila (154) dalla Commissione come uno dei porti che presentano la massima importanza strategica nell'ottica del raggiungimento degli obiettivi di sviluppo della rete transeuropea dei trasporti (nodo della rete centrale da completarsi entro il 2030).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010683/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Revival of the port of Taranto

According to press reports, in June, a plan was signed to revitalise port traffic in Taranto and given a budget of EUR 187 million, to make the port into an efficient and attractive hub. A further EUR 219 million will come from the logistics platform investment plan. EUR 80 million will be invested by private operators, while the remaining funds will come from public investors. There is a substantial amount of work to be done: the building of a storm-surge barrier, connection of the logistics area of the port to the national rail network, dredging of the sea bed to build a logistics platform and extension of the San Cataldo quay. From 2014, according to the plan, the port will be able to handle one million containers. An agreement with the port of Rotterdam and with China would make the Taranto terminal one of the most important maritime logistics platforms in Europe and the Middle East.

All the stakeholders and workers of Taranto, who have now been made redundant after the closure of the Ilva steelworks, hope that the project can be delivered on time.

1.

Is the Commission aware of this project?

2.

If so, does it have an opinion on the quality of the plan and on the prospects for the development of commercial port facilities in the Mediterranean?

3.

Is it participating, directly or indirectly (Structural Funds), in its funding?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 2013)

1.

The Commission is aware that an agreement for the development of maritime and trade activities in the port of Taranto was signed in June 2012. As concerns the wider plan of EUR 219 million , the Commission is not aware of the actual state of implementation of the relevant projects.

2.

The Commission is not aware of the details of the agreement and cannot comment about the quality of the plan. Short term prospects for port traffic volumes in the Mediterranean are affected by the current uncertainties of the European and world economies. In the medium and long term, prospects for Mediterranean ports should improve.

3.

Only the rail link between the port of Taranto and the national rail network is currently co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the

3.

Only the rail link between the port of Taranto and the national rail network is currently co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the

‘Reti e Mobilità’ programme. Nevertheless, the port of Taranto has been put forward (155) by the Commission as one of the ports with the highest strategic importance for achieving the development objectives of the Trans-European transport network (node of the core network to be completed by 2030 at the latest).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010684/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Rapporti con il Bangladesh

Come è tristemente noto, l'industria del Bangladesh è la prostituzione. Le cronache giornalistiche sono esplicite nel parlare di fanciulle di undici-dodici anni vittime di stupri quotidiani o di ragazzini che ogni giorno si accoppiano con più uomini diversi per qualche soldo da portare a casa. Incessante, inoltre, è l'attività dei bordelli legalmente autorizzati della città di Faridpur, dove un migliaio di prostitute è al lavoro sette giorni la settimana senza tregua, così come avviene nell'isola di Bani Shanta, interamente popolata dalle «operaie del sesso». Uno dei postriboli più grandi del mondo si trova a Daulatdia, forte di un esercito di 1 600 donne che ogni giorno accolgono circa 3 000 uomini. Le prostitute nel Paese sono circa 100 000. Nel 2004 l'Unicef calcolava in 10 000 le prostitute minorenni, mentre stime ufficiose arrivano a 30 mila. Il 90 per cento delle giovani prostitute — secondo dati forniti da ActionAid, una Onlus che si occupa a tempo pieno del Bangladesh — ricorre alla «cow pill» (l'Oradexon), un farmaco che viene dato anche alle mucche perché raggiungano il giusto peso e adeguate dimensioni fisiche. Gli steroidi, dicono però gli esperti, comportano anche effetti negativi come il diabete, la pressione alta, gli sfoghi cutanei e il mal di testa. La cow pill ha pure la capacità di invecchiare gradualmente le ragazzine di 13-15 anni che dovrebbero aspettare i 18 anni per intraprendere — come stabilito dalla legge — la carriera di famiglia, così tenacemente onorata dalle loro donne. Le schiave del sesso vengono regolarmente vendute dalle famiglie e l'industria dei bordelli incrementa il turismo.

Di fronte a questa stupefacente realtà incredibile a credersi, se non fosse vera, può la Commissione dire:

quali relazioni intrattiene con il Bangladesh;

se ha la possibilità di esercitare pressioni per fare in modo che dal punto di vista sanitario siano garantite maggiori tutele nei confronti delle minorenni;

quali eventuali aiuti può negoziare, al fine di favorire lo sviluppo dell'istruzione e la realizzazione di programmi scolastici per avviare le giovani donne verso mestieri diversi dalla prostituzione;

quali iniziative può suggerire per smantellare il turismo «sessuale»?

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

(16 gennaio 2013)

L'UE intrattiene relazioni di lunga data con il Bangladesh, di cui è attualmente il principale donatore in materia di aiuti allo sviluppo (UE e Stati membri congiuntamente), e solleva regolarmente la questione dei diritti delle donne e dei minori nell’ambito dei suoi contatti con il governo e la società civile del Bangladesh.

Benché la prostituzione sia indubbiamente un problema diffuso, contrastarla è difficile. È necessario farvi fronte adottando misure nei settori della protezione giuridica, dell’azione penale, della politica sociale e dell’istruzione. L’UE ha cercato di farlo intervenendo su istruzione, salute e diritti e mediante una serie di progetti volti a contrastare lo sfruttamento sessuale e i relativi problemi legati alla tratta di esseri umani e all’abuso sessuale. Nello stesso spirito, l’UE ha sostenuto l'attuazione della politica nazionale per i minori (2010), della politica di lotta contro il lavoro minorile (2010) e della politica nazionale di sviluppo delle donne (2011), nonché il diritto delle lavoratrici a retribuzioni che garantiscano loro un'esistenza dignitosa, l’esecuzione di controlli nell'ambito del lavoro minorile nei settori pericolosi e la realizzazione di campagne di sensibilizzazione sociale.

L'UE è uno dei principali donatori nel settore dell'istruzione. L’ammontare totale dei programmi in corso destinati a tale ambito è approssimativamente di 144 milioni di euro, compresi i circa 14 milioni stanziati a favore dell’alimentazione nelle scuole per i bambini più vulnerabili. I recenti programmi di sostegno all’istruzione non formale dell’UE, per un importo di 52 milioni di euro, sono destinati a 650 000 bambini che altrimenti non riceverebbero alcun tipo di istruzione. L'UE ha inoltre concentrato la propria assistenza sulla creazione di opportunità di sussistenza per le donne e le famiglie monoparentali guidate da una donna più indigenti (oltre 86 milioni di euro), sostenendo la sicurezza alimentare e mediante vie d’uscita sostenibili dalla povertà.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010684/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Relations with Bangladesh

It is a sad fact that the main industry of Bangladesh is prostitution. News reports explicitly refer to girls of 11 or 12 who are the victims of daily rapes, and youngsters who have sex with different men each day to make some money to take home. The legally authorised activities of brothels in the city of Faridpur, moreover, where a thousand or so prostitutes work seven days a week without respite, are incessant, as they are on the island of Bani Shanta, which is entirely populated by sex workers. One of the world's largest brothels is in Daulatdia, where an army of 1 600 women welcome around 3 000 men every day. There are approximately 100 000 prostitutes altogether in the country.

In 2004, Unicef calculated that there were 10 000 underage prostitutes, while according to unofficial estimates there may be as many as 30 000. 90% of young prostitutes, according to data provided by ActionAid, a non-profit organisation that works full-time in Bangladesh, use the so-called cow pill (Oradexon), a drug that is also given to cows to enable them to grow big and heavy enough. Steroids, however, according to experts, also have adverse side-effects such as diabetes, high blood pressure, rashes and headaches. Cow pills also have the ability to gradually age girls aged 13-15 years, who are supposed to wait until they are 18 to begin, as required by law, playing their role as wives and mothers, which is so important to women there. The sex slaves are regularly sold by families and the brothel industry increases tourism.

Given this astonishing situation, which would be impossible to believe were it not true, can the Commission say:

what kind of relations it has with Bangladesh;

whether it is able to exert pressure to ensure that, from a health point of view, children can receive greater protection;

what, if any, aid it can negotiate in order to promote the development of education and the implementation of educational programmes to give young women the option of choosing jobs other than prostitution;

what measures it would suggest to dismantle sex tourism?

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

(16 January 2013)

The EU has had a longstanding relationship with Bangladesh and it is currently its largest development aid contributor (EU and Member States together). The EU regularly raises women’s and children’s rights in its contacts with the Government of Bangladesh and civil society.

Although it is clear that prostitution is a widespread problem, action against prostitution is difficult. It must be addressed through measures in the fields of legal protection and prosecution, social policy and education. The EU has sought to do so from the angles of education, health and rights and in a number of projects specifically targeting sex work and related problems of human trafficking and sexual abuse. The EU has consistently advocated the implementation of the National Child Policy (2010), Child Labour Elimination Policy (2010) and the National Women Development Policy (2011), including the provision of living wages for women workers, the monitoring of child labour in hazardous sectors and the implementation of social sensitisation campaigns.

The EU is one of the largest contributors to the education sector. The total amount of ongoing education programmes is almost EUR 144 million, including approximately EUR 14 million towards school-feeding for the most vulnerable children. Recent EU supported non-formal education programmes amounting to EUR 52 million aim to reach 650 000 children who would otherwise not receive any instruction. EU assistance has also concentrated on providing livelihood opportunities to ultrapoor women and women-headed households (more than EUR 86 million) through support for food security and sustainable graduation from poverty.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010685/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Violenza contro le bambine in India

È appena trascorsa la Giornata delle bambine organizzata dall'Onu, ma la violenza nei loro confronti continua imperterrita e si accampano giustificazioni che sembrano un sopruso. È emblematico il caso di una povera sedicenne dell'Haryana, in India, che è stata violata da cinque uomini, fra cui un poliziotto, e, incapace di sostenere la vergogna, si è suicidata. Interrogata sui possibili interventi da mettere in atto per evitare gli stupri delle minorenni, una personalità politica dello stesso Stato in cui si è svolta la tragedia della sedicenne ha risposto: «Il miglior modo per evitare lo stupro è quello di farle sposare presto, anche prima dei 15 anni». Secondo un avvocato-donna della Corte Suprema, legittimare le nozze delle minorenni col sopruso dello stupro è come giustificare tale atto senza condannarlo. Le bambine, infatti, non potrebbero difendersi dalla violenza dei mariti all'interno del matrimonio, compito difficile anche per una donna adulta. Il fenomeno della violenza sui minori è un delitto assolutamente inaccettabile che deve essere condannato legalmente e in modo inesorabile, trattandosi di una palese violazione dei diritti umani fondamentali.

1.

Non ritiene la Commissione che, ogni volta che un paese partner con cui è stato stipulato un accordo commette una grave violazione dei diritti umani, l'UE debba applicare le opportune sanzioni, come previsto nelle clausole sui diritti umani dell'accordo stesso?

2.

Non crede che la riaffermazione di questo principio possa influenzare positivamente la classe dirigente dei paesi che negoziano accordi con l'UE rispetto alla questione dei diritti umani?

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

(31 gennaio 2013)

L'UE segue con estrema attenzione la situazione dei diritti umani in India e prende atto con preoccupazione delle segnalazioni di casi quali quello descritto nell'interrogazione. L'ampia copertura mediatica degli incidenti, riportati dalla stampa locale e commentati dai canali di informazione 24 ore su 24, rispecchia l'indignazione dell'opinione pubblica al riguardo. Anche la Commissione nazionale indiana per le donne esamina la situazione nell'ambito del suo mandato e invita la popolazione a presentare suggerimenti per ampliare il lavoro del comitato di esperti per le questioni di genere e l'istruzione, istituito di recente. La violenza nei confronti delle donne è inoltre un tema ricorrente nell'ambito del dialogo UE-India in materia di diritti umani, un incontro periodico la cui prossima sessione è prevista tra alcune settimane a Delhi.

Le attività dell'UE in materia di sviluppo in India sono incentrate principalmente su donne e bambini mediante il sostegno a programmi nazionali attuati dal governo nei settori dell'istruzione e della sanità. Tali attività sono integrate da una serie di progetti di ONG, di cui alcuni destinati ai diritti dei bambini.

L'UE deplora gli episodi di violenza nei confronti delle donne e, in linea con le clausole di natura politica previste dagli accordi bilaterali tra l'UE e i paesi terzi, solleva regolarmente queste questioni, nonché altri argomenti relativi ai diritti umani.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010685/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Violence against girls in India

The UN’s International Day of the Girl was celebrated only recently, but violence against girls continues unabated and proposals put forward concerning ways of combating it themselves often betray an inherently abusive attitude towards women. The problem is symbolised by the case of a poor 16 year-old in India’s Haryana province, who was raped by five men, one of them a policeman, and, unable to bear the shame, committed suicide. When questioned about possible ways of preventing the rape of under-age girls, a leading politician from Haryana replied that the best way is to ‘ensure that girls marry early, even before the age of 15’. According to a woman lawyer who sits on the Indian Supreme Court, legitimising the marrying-off of under-age girls by arbitrarily portraying it as a means of preventing rape amounts to a failure to recognise where the real problem lies, namely that girls would be unable to defend themselves against acts of violence by their husbands within marriage, something which is already beyond many adult women. Violence against minors is a completely unacceptable crime and a flagrant violation of fundamental human rights, which must be punished with the full force of the law.

1.

Does the Commission not take the view that, when a partner country with which the EU has concluded an agreement commits a serious human rights violation, the EU should impose appropriate sanctions, as provided for in the human rights clauses of the agreement itself?

2.

Does it not believe that reaffirming this principle could encourage political leaders in countries which are negotiating agreements with the EU to pay closer attention to the issue of respect for human rights?

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

(31 January 2013)

The EU monitors the human rights situation in India very closely and notes with concern reports on situations as described in the question. The incidents were widely reported in the local press and commented in 24/7 media, reflecting the public opinion's outcry to these incidents. The Indian National Commission for Women is also looking into the situation as part of its mandate. It currently invites suggestions from the general public to expand the work of the recently established Expert Committee on Gender and Education. Furthermore, violence against women is a regular discussion point at the EU-India Human Rights Dialogue, a regular meeting which is expected to take place again in Delhi within a few weeks. 

The EU development portfolio in India is overwhelming centered on women and children through support in Government national programmes in education and health. A series of NGO projects complement these actions, including a few dedicated to children's rights.

The EU deplores the instances of violence against women, and in line with the political clauses in bilateral agreements between the EU and third countries raises these and other human rights issues on a regular basis.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010686/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Libera concorrenza per il gioco d'azzardo online

È d'attualità il caso recentemente scoppiato in Belgio che vede contrapposti lo Stato e i gestori di siti online di gioco d'azzardo. Il gioco online è stato legalizzato in Belgio nel 2002 ed oggi i siti che vi operano legalmente sono 239. I siti stranieri che hanno ottenuto la licenza per accogliere giocatori belgi sono 9. Un'altra cinquantina invece operano senza licenza ed ora figurano su una lista nera compilata dal governo. Questi gestori tuttavia, protestano ed invocano presunte regole dell'UE: nei 27 Stati membri dell'Unione — secondo questi operatori stranieri — deve valere la libera concorrenza anche per il gioco online e nessuno può imporre norme protezionistiche per favorire i propri operatori. Il Belgio, a quanto pare, ha giustificato le sue norme con la necessità di proteggere i propri cittadini da troppe truffe e dal pericolo di ritrovarsi schiavi del gioco, vale a dire ludopatici. Nella vicenda figura anche il fermo di due ore, per interrogatorio, del capo di un colosso del gioco d'azzardo online «Bwin Party» che opera a Gibilterra.

Può la Commissione riferire:

se è già stata adottata la comunicazione annunciata sul gioco d'azzardo online nel mercato interno;

in caso affermativo, se c'è un riferimento alla libera concorrenza anche per il gioco d'azzardo online;

considerato il volume vieppiù crescente di questo tipo di gioco e valutata altresì la crescita esponenziale dei ludopatici, soprattutto tra i minori, se ritiene opportuno prevedere clausole di salvaguardia che limitino la libertà di concorrenza al fine di evitare derive altamente negative provocate dall'azzardo?

Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione

(21 gennaio 2013)

Il 23 ottobre 2012 la Commissione ha adottato la comunicazione «Verso un quadro normativo europeo approfondito relativo al gioco d’azzardo on-line»; è disponibile, insieme ad altri documenti pertinenti, sul sito web della Commissione: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/gambling_en.htm.

In linea di massima gli Stati membri sono liberi di fissare gli obiettivi delle rispettive politiche sui giochi di sorte e di definirne nei dettagli il grado di tutela; possono restringere o limitare l’offerta di tutti o di determinati servizi di raccolta a distanza sulla base degli obiettivi di interesse generale che cercano di proteggere. Tuttavia, la comunicazione sottolinea anche che il quadro normativo nazionale deve rispettare i principi e le regole del mercato interno.

Nella comunicazione, la Commissione propone un insieme completo di azioni e principi comuni sulla tutela del consumatore, con misure destinate soprattutto a proteggere meglio i giovani. La Commissione incoraggia in particolare lo sviluppo di più efficienti strumenti di controllo dell’età e di filtri on line del contenuto. Intende promuovere inoltre una pubblicità più responsabile e una maggiore consapevolezza dei genitori sui pericoli associati ai giochi d’azzardo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010686/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Free competition for online gambling

A case has recently emerged in Belgium in which the government is opposing operators of online gambling sites. Online gambling was legalised in Belgium in 2002 and there are now 239 sites that operate there legally. Nine foreign sites have obtained a licence for Belgian players, while another fifty are operating without a licence and are now on a government blacklist. The latter operators, however, are complaining and invoking alleged EU rules: according to these foreign operators, there must be free competition among the 27 EU Member States for online games too and nobody can lay down protectionist rules to benefit their own operators. The justification given by Belgium for its rules, apparently, is the need to protect its citizens from too many scams and from the danger of becoming gambling addicts. In connection with this case, the head of a giant online gambling company ‘Bwin Party’ operating in Gibraltar, was even held for questioning for two hours.

1.

Has the Commission already adopted its pre-announced communication on online gambling in the internal market?

2.

If so, is there any reference to free competition for online gambling?

3.

Given the ever increasing volume of such gambling and the exponential growth of gambling addicts, particularly among young people, does the Commission not think it should provide safeguard clauses that restrict freedom of competition in order to avoid the extremely negative impact that gambling can have?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

The Commission has adopted its communication ‘Towards a comprehensive European framework for online gambling’ on 23 October 2012. The communication and other relevant documents are available on the Commission's website: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/gambling_en.htm.

Member States are in principle free to set the objectives of their policy on games of chance and to define in detail the level of protection sought. They may indeed restrict or limit the supply of all or certain types of online gambling services on the basis of public interest objectives that they seek to protect in relation to gambling. However, the communication also stresses that national regulatory frameworks have to comply with internal market principles and rules.

With the communication the Commission is proposing a comprehensive set of actions and common principles on consumer protection. These measures aim in particular at a better protection of young people. The Commission is inter alia encouraging the development of better age-verification tools and online content filters. It is also pushing for more responsible advertising and increased parental awareness of the dangers associated with gambling.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010687/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Diga di Ilisu sul Tigri

È un progetto del governo turco che ha l'inconveniente, se verrà realizzato — come tutto sembra far credere — di sommergere il millenario sito archeologico di Hasankeyf. Per protesta, 12 scultori di 9 paesi appartenenti a «Scultori senza frontiere» creeranno dodici opere d'arte da collocare nella città che verrà sommersa per attirare l'attenzione del mondo civile su un'operazione che ritengono funesta. Il sito archeologico, infatti, si trova nel cuore della Mesopotamia ed è una delle perle del patrimonio giunto fino a noi dall'antichità. Il progetto fa parte di un piano molto più ampio per favorire la sviluppo di un'area depressa con 22 dighe e 19 centrali idroelettriche. Lo sbarramento previsto, comunque, costerà la perdita di un'eredità che risale a 12.000 anni fa e l'evacuazione forzata della popolazione. Ambientalisti e archeologi sono contro il governo turco, che ora sta accelerando i lavori e mira a completare la diga entro il 2015, dopo anni di incertezze dovute anche al ritiro di alcuni investitori internazionali, dubbiosi sulla sostenibilità del progetto.

Sembra però che l’interesse strategico del governo per questa zona curda superi quello culturale, che verrebbe risolto qualora il ministro per le acque assicurasse di salvare i manufatti archeologici in un apposito museo. I progetti sui fiumi Tigri ed Eufrate rappresentano tuttavia la chiave per il controllo delle risorse idriche delle regioni contese con Iraq e Siria. Anche la proposta di introdurre nella nuova Costituzione un «diritto all'ambiente» — che avrebbe lasciato alle popolazioni coinvolte l'ultima parola — è stata sonoramente bocciata.

Può la Commissione dire se:

ha un'opinione sulla questione, dato che la Turchia è candidata all'adesione,

considera che la distruzione di un patrimonio di così alto valore sia un passaggio obbligato verso il cosiddetto progresso;

ha la possibilità di far sentire la sua voce nei confronti del governo Erdogan;

è in grado di assicurare che nessun finanziamento dell'UE è coinvolto nel progetto della diga di Ilisu?

Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione

(18 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione ha già sollevato la questione della costruzione della diga in occasione di incontri bilaterali con la Turchia per sottolineare la necessità di prendere in considerazione le preoccupazioni in materia di diritti dell’uomo. Essa incoraggia la Turchia a consultare tutte le parti interessate, comprese le ONG, al fine di garantire il rispetto dei diritti della popolazione, nonché la protezione dei siti archeologici e il rispetto della legislazione in materia di ambiente. La Commissione ha inoltre sollecitato le autorità turche a fornire informazioni sulle autorizzazioni rilasciate per le centrali idroelettriche.

Come indicato nella relazione 2012, l’eventuale impatto negativo di grandi progetti infrastrutturali sullo sviluppo sostenibile nella parte sudorientale del paese resta un problema importante da risolvere. La Commissione continuerà a monitorare da vicino tutti gli aspetti connessi alla costruzione di dighe in Turchia.

L’Unione europea, che finanzia soltanto i progetti che rispettano l’acquis, ha precisato in diverse occasioni che il progetto per la diga di Ilisu non è conforme all’acquis dell’UE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010687/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Ilisu Dam on the Tigris River

The Ilusu Dam is a Turkish Government project which, if implemented — as it is highly likely to be — will have the disadvantage of engulfing the age-old archaeological site of Hasankeyf. In protest, 12 sculptors from nine countries belonging to ‘Sculptors without borders’ will create 12 works of art to be placed in the town that is going to be submerged, to attract the attention of the civilised world to an operation they consider to be tragic.

The archaeological site, in fact, is in the heart of Mesopotamia and is one of the jewels of the heritage that has been handed down to us from ancient times. The project is part of a much broader plan to encourage the development of a depressed area by installing 22 dams and 19 hydroelectric power plants. The dam in question, however, will involve the loss of a 12 000-year old heritage and the forced evacuation of the population. Environmentalists and archaeologists are opposing the Turkish Government, which is now stepping up the work and aims to complete the dam by 2015, after years of uncertainty also due to the withdrawal of several international investors who doubted the sustainability of the project.

However, it would appear that the government's strategic interest in this Kurdish area exceeds its cultural interest. This is a matter which would be resolved if the Minister for Water undertook to save archaeological artefacts in a special museum. The projects on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, however, are the key to controlling water resources in these disputed regions shared with Iraq and Syria. Even the proposal to insert a ‘right to the environment’ into the new constitution — which would have given the last word to the people involved — was firmly rejected.

1.

Does the Commission have an opinion on this issue, given that Turkey is a candidate for EU membership?

2.

Does it believe that the destruction of such a precious heritage is a necessary step towards so-called progress?

3.

Can it make the Erdogan government listen to its views?

4.

Can it ensure that no EU funding is involved in the Ilisu Dam project?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2013)

The Commission has raised the issue of dam projects on a number of occasions in its bilateral relations with Turkey to underline the need to take into account human rights concerns. The Commission is encouraging Turkey to consult with all interested stakeholders, including NGOs, in order to assure respect for the rights of the inhabitants as well as the protection of the archaeological sites and the respect for environmental legislation. The Commission has also requested the Turkish authorities to provide information on authorisations given for hydropower schemes.

As indicated in the 2012 Progress Report, the possible negative impact of major infrastructure projects on sustainable development in the South-East remains a major issue. The Commission will continue to closely monitor all aspects related to the construction of dams in Turkey.

The EU does not fund projects that do not comply with the EU acquis, and the EU has indicated at various instances that the Ilisu Dam project does not comply with the acquis.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010688/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Mattanza di elefanti

Nel giugno scorso si è riunito a Ginevra il comitato permanente della Convenzione sul commercio internazionale delle specie minacciate, che costituisce l'accordo internazionale in base al quale è stata messa al bando la compravendita mondiale dell'avorio. All'ordine del giorno figurava un rapporto intitolato «Salvaguardia degli elefanti, uccisioni illegali e commercio dell'avorio» dal quale emergono i seguenti dati catastrofici: 8 575 elefanti uccisi tra il 2002 e il 2011 in 27 paesi diversi, di cui 1 408 nel solo 2011, con l'intercettazione in operazioni di polizia di 24,3 tonnellate di avorio. La rete del traffico illegale di avorio copre l'intero continente africano e il prezzo dell'avorio sul mercato clandestino continua ad aumentare. È passato infatti da 120 a 280 euro al chilo tra il 2002 e il 2004 ed ora ha raggiunto la soglia dei 600 euro. La domanda, attualmente concentrata in Cina e, in secondo luogo, in Tailandia, cresce senza posa e l'offerta non riesce a soddisfarla. Si tratta di un effetto paradossale della messa al bando del commercio dell'avorio che risale al 1989. Corruzione e inadeguatezza del sistema giudiziario dei paesi coinvolti contribuiscono al disastro.

1.

Può la Commissione far sapere se ha la possibilità di intervenire per combattere questa mattanza, destinata presumibilmente ad aumentare, e questa funesta tendenza?

2.

Non crede che la presenza controllata di questi animali contribuisca a un equilibrio ecologico ambientale assolutamente necessario anche per le popolazioni che vivono in quei territori?

3.

Non ritiene che un'azione concertata, in collaborazione con le Nazioni Unite e con i governi interessati, a sostegno della lotta alla criminalità internazionale responsabile del mercato clandestino dell'avorio, e quindi della mattanza in corso, possa dare frutti migliori rispetto a quelli ottenuti fino ad ora?

4.

Non ritiene opportuno subordinare gli eventuali accordi commerciali con i paesi in cui si verificano queste stragi ai risultati da essi raggiunti nella lotta alla mattanza e al mercato clandestino dell'avorio?

5.

Dispone di dati relativi all'eventuale mercato dell'avorio nell'Unione europea?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(30 gennaio 2013)

La Commissione riconosce l'importanza dell'elefante africano per l'equilibrio ecologico delle zone in cui esso vive, con il conseguente beneficio degli abitanti di quei territori e dell'ambiente. La Commissione è molto allarmata dalle proporzioni che hanno assunto il bracconaggio di elefanti e il commercio illegale dell'avorio. La quantità di avorio sequestrato nell'UE nel 2011 si aggirava intorno ai 100 kg, trattandosi nella maggior parte dei casi di articoli in transito dall'Africa verso l'Asia.

Per affrontare questo problema l'UE sostiene varie iniziative, tra cui le seguenti:

il programma MIKE (Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants — Controllo delle uccisioni illegali di elefanti), realizzato dal segretariato della CITES e gestito dall'UNEP. Da dieci anni l'UE finanzia questo programma (10 milioni di euro) e continuerà a farlo nella nuova fase nella quale, forti del successo, della reputazione e delle competenze acquisite nell'ultimo decennio, si cercherà di consolidare gli investimenti effettuati e garantire massima continuità con le due fasi precedenti del programma;

le attività del Consorzio internazionale per la lotta ai reati contro le specie selvatiche, entità di recente creazione che, costituita da cinque organizzazioni internazionali con esperienza in fatto di attività di contrasto, traffico illecito di flora e fauna selvatiche e gestione di progetti, ha il compito di fronteggiare i reati contro le specie selvatiche, nonché vari progetti volti a migliorare la gestione della popolazione di elefanti e a intensificare l'attività di contrasto e la cooperazione internazionale tra gli Stati d'origine delle specie, i paesi di transito e quelli di destinazione.

L'UE fa sì che negli accordi bilaterali di libero scambio siglati con paesi terzi figurino disposizioni sullo sviluppo sostenibile, in modo da poter sollevare problemi e ricercare soluzioni in merito a questioni ambientali quali il bracconaggio di elefanti e il traffico di avorio.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010688/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Elephant slaughter

In June 2012, the Standing Committee of CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) met in Geneva. This Convention is the international agreement under which the world sale of ivory was banned. On the agenda for the meeting was a report entitled ‘Elephant conservation, illegal killing and ivory trade’, which gave the following disastrous information: 8 575 elephants were killed between 2002 and 2011, in 27 different countries, 1 408 of which in 2011 alone, and 24.3 tonnes of ivory were intercepted in various police operations. The network of illegal ivory trafficking covers the entire African continent and the price of ivory on the black market continues to increase. It rose from EUR 120 to EUR 280 per kilo between 2002 and 2004 and has now almost reached EUR 600. Demand for ivory, currently mainly in China, followed by Thailand, is constantly growing, and supply is unable to meet it. This is a paradoxical effect of the ban on the ivory trade, which dates back to 1989. Corruption and the inadequacy of the legal systems in the countries concerned are contributing to this disaster.

1.

Can the Commission say whether it is able to take any action to combat this deadly trend and this slaughter, which is presumably destined to increase?

2.

Does it not agree that the controlled presence of these animals contributes to an environmental balance that is vital also for the people who live in those areas?

3.

Does it not agree that a concerted effort, in cooperation with the United Nations and the governments concerned, to support the fight against the international criminal organisations that are responsible for the black market in ivory, and therefore for the current slaughter, might yield better results than those achieved so far?

4.

Does it not think that any trade agreements with the countries in which these massacres are taking place should be made subject to the results they achieve in the fight against this elephant slaughter and the black market in ivory?

5.

Does it have any information relating to the ivory market in the European Union, if there is one?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2013)

The Commission agrees that the African elephant contributes to an environmental balance throughout the zones it inhabits, which is beneficial for the inhabitants of the region as well as the environment. The Commission is deeply concerned about the high levels reached by elephant poaching and illegal ivory trade. In 2011, it is estimated that around 100 kg of ivory was seized in the EU; most of the seized items were on transit from Africa to Asia.

To address that problem, the EU supports initiatives like:

the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) programme carried out by the CITES Secretariat and administered by UNEP. It has been funded by the EU for the last decade (10 million EUR), and continues to do so with a new phase of this programme that seeks to build on the strong success, reputation and expertise that have been established over the past decade of operation of MIKE, consolidating previous investments and ensuring a high degree of continuity with the two previous phases of the programme.

the activities of the recently created International Consortium for Combating Wildlife Crime, which comprises five international organisations with expertise in law enforcement, wildlife trafficking and project management and is tasked to tackle transnational wildlife crime and various projects to enhance elephant population management, enforcement and international cooperation between range States, transit countries and countries of final destination.

The EU makes sure that its bilateral free trade agreements with third countries contain provisions on sustainable development, which would allow the EU to raise concerns and seek solutions on environmental issues such as elephant poaching and ivory trade.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010689/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Università a Dadaab

Nel più grande campo profughi del mondo, a Dadaab, situato nel Kenia, al confine con la Somalia e che ospita oltre 470mila persone, sta per aprirsi una facoltà universitaria vera e propria: management, finanza, marketing, scienza dell'educazione, gestione dei conflitti. È la Kenyatta University ad organizzarla, primo ateneo al mondo ad avviare un campus in un campo profughi, dove 5.000 ragazzi raggiungono la fine degli studi della scuola superiore. I corsi saranno frequentati dai rifugiati, la maggior parte dei quali sono somali fuggiti dal Corno d'Africa a causa della siccità e delle violenze dei fondamentalisti islamici, ma anche giovani keniani potranno frequentarli. L'Agenzia dell'Onu per i rifugiati sta pensando ad un pacchetto di borse di studio.

1.

Perché la Commissione non promuove un'iniziativa analoga e predispone borse di studio per i somali, così tanto colpiti dalla guerra civile che insanguina il loro Paese da più di vent'anni?

2.

Perché non invita i governi degli Stati membri a promuovere partnership tra l'università del campus e università dei rispettivi paesi aventi le stesse facoltà?

Risposta di Andris Piebalgs a nome della Commissione

(31 gennaio 2013)

Si invita l'onorevole parlamentare a consultare la risposta all'interrogazione scritta E‐0010151/2012, anch'essa relativa al campo di Dadaab (156).

L'UE è il principale donatore nel settore dell'istruzione in Somalia, con un sostegno di 85 milioni di euro (2008-2013) destinato ai sottosettori «istruzione» e «sviluppo delle capacità» del ministero dell'Istruzione. 

Una parte del programma (2 milioni di euro) prevede di fornire assistenza mediante l'assegnazione di borse di studio ai somali e ai diplomati della scuola secondaria del campo profughi di Dadaab, che in tal modo avranno la possibilità di intraprendere gli studi in Somalia o nella regione, ivi compreso nella nuova università di Dadaab. Obiettivo della parte del programma riguardante le borse di studio per i rifugiati di Dadaab è promuovere il miglioramento di mezzi di sussistenza, livelli di reddito, competenze e prospettive di rimpatrio, o altre soluzioni durature. Un'altra parte (3,5 milioni di euro) è destinata specificamente ai rifugiati di Dadaab e mira, da un lato, a fornire loro, e in una certa misura anche alla popolazione locale ospitante di Dadaab, conoscenze e competenze personali, necessarie per il loro ritorno in Somalia e, dall'altro, a offrire a 240 insegnanti di Dadaab la possibilità di beneficiare di borse di studio per seguire corsi di formazione per docenti prima dell'entrata in servizio e in servizio.

La Francia è stata in prima linea per quanto concerne l'ampliamento delle opportunità di istruzione superiore offerte mediante borse di studio ai giovani rifugiati di Dadaab e, in consultazione con l'UE, ha assegnato a 10 giovani somali del campo profughi di Dadaab borse di studio per seguire corsi universitari nelle università del Kenya, compresa l'università Kenyatta. L'università di Dadaab è stata inaugurata nell'ottobre 2012 e sarà possibile avviare un dialogo sulle relazioni con le università europee quando il campus universitario aprirà le porte ai primi studenti nel 2013 e le strutture amministrative e operative saranno in funzione.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010689/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: University in Dadaab

In the largest refugee camp in the world, in Dadaab, Kenya, on the border with Somalia, which is home to over 470 000 people, a university faculty is about to open, dealing with management, finance, marketing, educational science and conflict management. It will be run by Kenyatta University — the first university in the world to launch a campus in a refugee camp, where 5 000 children manage to reach the end of their secondary school studies. The courses will be attended by refugees, most of whom are Somalis who have fled from the Horn of Africa because of drought and the violence of Islamic fundamentalists, but young Kenyans will also be able to attend. The UN Refugee Agency is considering introducing a scholarship package.

1.

Why does the Commission not support a similar initiative and establish scholarships for Somalis, who have been so severely affected by the civil war that has been bloodying their country for over twenty years?

2.

Why does it not call on the governments of the Member States to promote partnerships between this campus university and universities in their respective countries which have the same faculty?

Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2013)

The Honourable Member is kindly referred to written reply to Question E-0010151/2012 also concerning the Dadaab camp (157).

The EU is the largest donor to the education sector in Somalia with a support of EUR 85 million (2008-2013) to address all sub-sectors of education and capacity development of the Ministry of Education.

Part of the programme (EUR 2 million) provides scholarship assistance to Somalis including secondary school leavers in the Dadaab refugee camps, so that they will be able to take up studies inside Somalia or in the region including the new Dadaab University. The objective of the Dadaab refugee's scholarship component is to promote improved livelihoods, income levels, skills and prospects for repatriation or other durable solutions. Another part (EUR 3.5 million) is targeting Dadaab's refugees specifically aiming to equip them and to a certain extent the local host population in Dadaab with education and life skills to enable them return to Somalia and also to provide scholarship opportunities to 240 teachers in Dadaab to undertake pre-service and in-service teacher training courses.

France has been in the forefront of expanding higher education opportunities for young refugees in Dadaab through scholarships and has offered, in consultation with the EU, scholarships to 10 young Somalis from the Dadaab refugee camps to undertake undergraduate degree courses in Kenyan universities, including Kenyatta University. Dadaab University was launched in October 2012 and dialogue on linkages with European Universities will be possible when the university campus opens its door to the first intake of students in 2013 and administrative and operational structures of the campus are in place.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010690/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Η αποτελεσματικότητα των ελληνικών αποκρατικοποιήσεων εν μέσω οικονομικής κρίσης

Η πρόσφατη έρευνα της εταιρείας επιχειρηματικών συμβούλων BDO έδειξε ότι η Ελλάδα θεωρείται πιο επικίνδυνη χώρα ακόμα και από την εμπόλεμη Συρία ως προς την επένδυση από το εξωτερικό. Το 11% των ερωτηθέντων CFOs κατέταξε την Ελλάδα στον λιγότερο ασφαλή προορισμό για επενδύσεις, ενώ το 80% των συμμετεχόντων σχολίασε πως θεωρεί τη χώρα μας επισφαλή προορισμό λόγω των οικονομικών της προβλημάτων. Μόνο το Ιράν και το Ιράκ θεωρούνται πιο επικίνδυνες χώρες από την Ελλάδα!

Είναι σαφές ότι οι οικονομικοί διευθυντές (ιδιαίτερα εκείνοι που προέρχονται από τις αναπτυσσόμενες οικονομίες όπως είναι η Βραζιλία και η Κίνα) δείχνουν απροθυμία να επενδύσουν σε υπερχρεωμένες χώρες της Ευρώπης, κάτι το οποίο είναι εξαιρετικά μεγάλης σημασίας αφού σε μεγάλο βαθμό το μέλλον αυτών των χωρών και η οικονομική τους αποκατάσταση εξαρτάται από τις επενδύσεις του ιδιωτικού τομέα.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Όταν μεγάλο μέρος υποψηφίων επενδυτών έχουν την προαναφερόμενη άποψη για την Ελλάδα, πόσο ωφέλιμο μπορεί να είναι το επιβεβλημένο πρόγραμμα αποκρατικοποιήσεων κατά την τρέχουσα χρονική περίοδο;

Δεν κινδυνεύει η Ελλάδα, ιδιαιτέρως από τη στιγμή που όλοι γνωρίζουν ότι η είσπραξη εσόδων από τις αποκρατικοποιήσεις αποτελεί μνημονιακή δέσμευση προκειμένου να μειωθεί το δημόσιο χρέος, να αντιμετωπίσει καταστάσεις όπου τα προσφερόμενα οικονομικά ανταλλάγματα να μην ανταποκρίνονται στην πραγματική αξία των ελληνικών περιουσιακών στοιχείων;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(21 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Η συμμετοχή του ιδιωτικού τομέα στον εκσυγχρονισμό των δημόσιων επιχειρήσεων μπορεί να ενισχύσει την αποτελεσματικότητα, τη διαφάνεια, τη λογοδοσία και τη στήριξη των επενδύσεων και της καινοτομίας. Η απόφαση όσον αφορά τα περιουσιακά στοιχεία του Δημοσίου ή τις δημόσιες επιχειρήσεις που θα ιδιωτικοποιηθούν, τον βαθμό και τη σειρά με την οποία θα διεξαχθούν οι εν λόγω ιδιωτικοποιήσεις, θα ληφθεί αποκλειστικά και μόνον από τα κράτη μέλη, αφού ληφθούν υπόψη οι ανάγκες που αντιμετωπίζουν και οι στόχοι που τα ίδια έχουν θέσει.

Η προσέλκυση ιδιωτικών επενδύσεων έχει ιδιαίτερη σημασία σε χώρες με σοβαρές χρηματοδοτικές ανάγκες και δημοσιονομικές δυσχέρειες. Μολονότι τα έσοδα από ιδιωτικοποιήσεις δεν υποκαθιστούν άμεσα τις προσπάθειες δημοσιονομικής εξυγίανσης, εντούτοις μειώνουν τις δαπάνες για τοκοχρεολύσια, τις επιδοτήσεις και άλλου είδους πληρωμές ή κρατικές εγγυήσεις σε κρατικές επιχειρήσεις και, ως εκ τούτου, συμβάλλουν στη δημοσιονομική βιωσιμότητα, βοηθούν στη μείωση του χρέους και ελευθερώνουν πόρους για άλλους σκοπούς.

Η πολιτική ιδιωτικοποιήσεων που εφαρμόζεται στην Ελλάδα λαμβάνει υπόψη τη βέλτιστη διεθνή πρακτική και ακολουθεί ενδελεχή διαδικασία σύναψης δημοσίων συμβάσεων που διασφαλίζει διαφάνεια και ισότιμη πρόσβαση για τους δυνητικά ενδιαφερόμενους και, ως εκ τούτου, τη δημιουργία των κατάλληλων συνθηκών που θα οδηγήσουν στην μεγιστοποίηση του οφέλους για τον δημόσιο τομέα. Συνεπώς, το αποτέλεσμα θα αντικατοπτρίζει την εύλογη αξία τους λαμβανομένων υπόψη των συνθηκών στη διεθνή αγορά και των προοπτικών που προσφέρονται στους επενδυτές, η οποία μπορεί να ενισχυθεί με το κατάλληλο μείγμα οικονομικών πολιτικών.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010690/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: The efficiency of the Greek privatisation programme in the midst of an economic crisis

According to a recent survey conducted by BDO Consulting, Greece is considered a riskier country even than war-torn Syria for inward investment. 11% of the CFOs surveyed ranked Greece as the least safe destination for investments, while 80% of the participants stated that they consider our country a risky destination due to its economic problems. Only Iran and Iraq are viewed as riskier countries than Greece!

It is clear that the CFOs (especially the ones from developing economies such as Brazil and China) are reluctant to invest in highly indebted European countries: this is an extremely important observation, since the future of these countries and their economic recovery depends to a great extent on private sector investments.

Will the Commission say:

When a large section of potential investors have the abovementioned view of Greece, how beneficial can the imposed privatisation programme be during this period?

Is there not a risk, since everyone knows that income from privatisations is an obligation under the Memorandum in order to reduce public debt that Greece may be facing a situation where the financial compensation offered is not equivalent to the real value of the Greek assets?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2013)

Involving the private sector in the modernization of the public companies can reinforce efficiency, transparency, accountability and support investment and innovation. The choice of what, how far and in which sequence public assets or companies should be privatised remains entirely with the Member States, taking into account the various constraints they face and objectives they set for themselves.

Attracting private sector investors is particularly important in countries that have severe financing needs and budgetary difficulties. Although privatisation proceeds are not a direct substitute for fiscal consolidation efforts, they reduce debt interest payments, subsidies and other transfers or state guarantees to state-owned enterprises and hence contribute to fiscal sustainability, help put the debt ratio on a declining trend and free resources for other purposes.

Privatisation policy in Greece is implemented taking into account international best practices models and is following a thorough public procurement process guaranteeing transparency and equal access for potential bidders and thus creating the proper conditions for maximisation of the public sector benefit. The resulting outcome should thereby reflect fair value given the international market conditions and the prospects offered to investors, which can be reinforced by a sound and consistent mix of economic policies.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010691/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Κίνητρα για την δημιουργία ψηφιακά ανεπτυγμένων πόλεων

Η πόλη του Ηρακλείου Κρήτης βρίσκεται για 2η χρονιά στον κατάλογο με τις 21 πιο έξυπνες — ψηφιακά πόλεις του κόσμου, σύμφωνα με τον οργανισμό Intelligent Community Forum (ICF) που εδρεύει στη Νέα Υόρκη. Ας σημειωθεί ότι στον κατάλογο συμπεριλαμβάνονται μόλις 5 ευρωπαϊκές πόλεις, ενώ από αυτές μόνο 2 (η μία είναι το Ηράκλειο) διακρίνονται για 2η συνεχή χρονιά. Ο λόγος της διάκρισης, σύμφωνα με το δήμο Ηρακλείου, είναι οι ποιοτικές ψηφιακές υπηρεσίες προς τους πολίτες αλλά και οι υποδομές ευρυζωνικότητας.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποιά είναι τα κίνητρα που δίδονται στα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ έτσι ώστε περισσότερες ευρωπαϊκές πόλεις να αναπτυχθούν σε ψηφιακό επίπεδο, κάτι που αποτελεί απαίτηση της εποχής μας προκειμένου να διευκολυνθούν αλλά και να απλοποιηθούν πολλές λειτουργίες;

Απάντηση της κ. Kroes εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(10 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή αναπτύσσει πολιτικές και χρηματοδοτεί την έρευνα και καινοτομία με σκοπό να βοηθά τις ευρωπαϊκές πόλεις να προσφέρουν αποδοτικότερες δημόσιες υπηρεσίες, να ανταποκρίνονται και επικεντρώνονται περισσότερο στις ανάγκες του πολίτη και να επιτυγχάνουν όλα αυτά κατά περιβαλλοντικώς αειφόρο και οικονομικώς βιώσιμο τρόπο.

Ειδικότερα, η προσέγγισή μας για έξυπνες πόλεις στοχεύει στην αξιοποίηση του ανεκμετάλλευτου δυναμικού καινοτομίας στο σημείο τομής των πεδίων της ενέργειας, των μεταφορών και της ΤΠΕ (τεχνολογίας πληροφοριών και επικοινωνιών). Στη δέσμη πρωτοβουλιών για τις «έξυπνες πόλεις» εντάσσεται σειρά δραστηριοτήτων όπως λόγου χάρη η προτεινόμενη ευρωπαϊκή σύμπραξη καινοτομίας (ΕΣΚ) για τις έξυπνες πόλεις και κοινότητες και, εν μέρει, η ΕΣΚ για την ενεργό και υγιή γήρανση, η ευρωπαϊκή πρωτοβουλία «πράσινων» οχημάτων και η σύμπραξη ιδιωτικού και δημόσιου τομέα (ΣΔΙΤ) για ενεργειακά αποδοτικά κτίρια, καθώς και οι πολιτικές μας περί ανοιχτών δεδομένων.

Οι δύο ΕΣΚ στοχεύουν στον συντονισμό πολυποίκιλων δραστηριοτήτων και, ειδικότερα, στην προσέλκυση σημαντικών επενδύσεων πέρα από την ενωσιακή χρηματοδότηση. Το τρέχον έβδομο πρόγραμμα πλαίσιο χρηματοδοτεί τις προαναφερθείσες πρωτοβουλίες και τις ΣΔΙΤ, καθώς και άλλα έργα, υποβοηθώντας τις πόλεις στην αντιμετώπιση των προβλημάτων τους και στη βελτίωση της αποδοτικότητας των δημόσιων υπηρεσιών τους. Στο πλαίσιο του προγράμματος «Ορίζοντας 2020», εν αναμονή συμφωνίας του Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου, η Επιτροπή εξετάζει ακόμα πιο ολοκληρωμένες δραστηριότητες με σκοπό την εφαρμογή ΤΠΕ ώστε οι πόλεις να μπορούν να προσφέρουν περισσότερα στους πολίτες και στις επιχειρήσεις τους, και να καταστούν φιλικότερες για το περιβάλλον.

Για το διάστημα 2014-2020, η Επιτροπή πρότεινε να προβλεφθούν περίπου 370 εκατ. ευρώ από το ΕΤΠΑ για καινοτόμες αστικές δράσεις μέσω των οποίων αναμένεται να προωθηθούν νέοι και καινοτόμοι τρόποι αντιμετώπισης των αστικών προκλήσεων και οι οποίες ίσως αφορούν πιλοτικά έργα ή έργα επίδειξης ευρωπαϊκού ενδιαφέροντος.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010691/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Incentives for the creation of digitally advanced cities

Heraklion, Crete, has been included for the second year in the list of the 21 digitally smartest cities in the world, according to the Intelligent Community Forum (ICF), a New York-based organisation. It should be noted that the list features only 5 European cities, of which only 2 (one is Heraklion) have been honoured for the second consecutive year. According to the municipality of Heraklion, this is due to the high-quality digital services provided to the citizens, as well as the available broadband infrastructure.

Will the Commission say:

What are the incentives put in place in the EU Member States so that more European cities become digitally advanced, which is a requirement of our times as a means of facilitating and simplifying numerous operations?

Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2013)

The European Commission develops policy and funds research and innovation designed to help Europe's cities to provide more efficient public services; to be more responsive and citizens-centred, and to achieve all this in an environmentally sustainable and economically viable way. In particular, our approach towards Smart Cities aims at exploiting the untapped innovation potential at the intersection of the energy, transport and ICT sectors. Several activities fall under the smart cities umbrella, such as for instance the proposed Smart Cities and Communities European Innovation Partnership (EIP) and parts of the Active and Healthy Ageing EIP, the European Green Vehicle Initiative and the Energy-efficient Buildings Public-Private Partnership (PPP), as well as our policies on Open Data.

The two EIPs are aimed at coordinating a large variety of activities and, in particular, triggering substantial investments beyond just EU funding. The current Seventh Framework programme finances the mentioned Initiatives and PPPs as well as other projects helping cities to address their problems and improve the efficiency of their public services. With Horizon 2020, pending agreement of Parliament and Council, the Commission considers even more integrated activities with the purpose of applying ICT so that cities can better deliver to their citizens and businesses and become greener.

For 2014-2020 Commission proposed to set aside approximately 370 million Euro from ERDF for Urban Innovative Action which should foster new and innovative ways of dealing with urban challenges and could be pilot or demonstration projects that are of European interest.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010692/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Στήριξη των ανασφάλιστων ανέργων

Με τις αλλαγές που έχει φέρει η κρίση στην Ελλάδα αλλά κυρίως τα μνημόνια και τα μέτρα λιτότητας που αυτά επιβάλλουν, είναι πολλοί εκείνοι που χάνουν καθημερινά τη δουλειά τους. Ένα από τα κυριότερα προβλήματα είναι και το γεγονός ότι όσοι χάνουν τη δουλειά τους μένουν, μετά από ένα σύντομο χρονικό διάστημα, ανασφάλιστοι και έτσι αναγκάζονται να πληρώνουν μόνοι τους (όσοι μπορούν βεβαίως) τα ιατρικά τους έξοδα. Οι εθελοντικές οργανώσεις αναφέρουν ότι την κατάσταση αυτή αντιμετωπίζουν στην πραγματικότητα εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες Ελλήνων. Ειδικότερα στην περίπτωση των καρκινοπαθών όμως το πρόβλημα μεγιστοποιείται, αφού οι θεραπείες κοστίζουν πολύ ακριβά και ως εκ τούτου οι περισσότεροι εξ’ αυτών δεν έχουν πρόσβαση σε χημειοθεραπείες ή χειρουργεία, πολλές φορές ούτε καν σε απλά φάρμακα.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποιά είναι η πολιτική στήριξης των ανασφάλιστων ασθενών και ειδικότερα των καρκινοπαθών στις χώρες της ΕΕ;

Υπάρχει σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο μέριμνα για την υποστήριξη τέτοιων περιπτώσεων σε χώρες όπως η Ελλάδα, όπου το τελευταίο χρονικό διάστημα πλήττονται βαριά από τα υψηλότατα και ΣΥΝΕΧΩΣ ΑΥΞΑΝΟΜΕΝΑ ποσοστά ανεργίας;

Απάντηση του κ. Borg εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(30 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Σύμφωνα με τις πληροφορίες που δόθηκαν από τις ελληνικές αρχές, οι Έλληνες πολίτες χάνουν το δικαίωμα της ιατροφαρμακευτικής κάλυψης ύστερα από δύο έτη ανεργίας και μη καταβολής των εισφορών κοινωνικής ασφάλισης, ένας κανόνας ο οποίος ίσχυε ήδη πριν από την εμφάνιση της οικονομικής κρίσης. Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 168 της Συνθήκης για την λειτουργία της ΕΕ, η δράση της Ένωσης αναπτύσσεται χωρίς να θίγονται οι αρμοδιότητες των κρατών μελών όσον αφορά την οργάνωση και την παροχή υγειονομικών υπηρεσιών και ιατρικής περίθαλψης. Επομένως, με βάση αυτή τη διάταξη, δεν προβλέπεται καμία πρωτοβουλία σε επίπεδο ΕΕ, με σκοπό την υποστήριξη των ανασφάλιστων Ελλήνων ασθενών.

Ωστόσο, η Επιτροπή ανησυχεί για τη δύσκολη κατάσταση που διέπει το ελληνικό σύστημα υγειονομικής περίθαλψης. Συνεπώς, στο Μνημόνιο Συμφωνίας σχετικά με τους ειδικούς όρους της οικονομικής πολιτικής ανάμεσα στην Ελλάδα, την Επιτροπή, την Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα και το Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο, αναφέρεται ότι η διατήρηση της καθολικής πρόσβασης στην ιατροφαρμακευτική περίθαλψη αποτελεί έναν από τους στόχους που πρέπει να υλοποιηθεί.

Επιπλέον, η ομάδα δράσης της Επιτροπής για την Ελλάδα εργάζεται ενεργά με σκοπό να υποστηρίξει τις προσπάθειες μεταρρύθμισης της Ελλάδας, οι οποίες στοχεύουν στη βελτίωση της μακροπρόθεσμης βιωσιμότητας του ελληνικού συστήματος υγείας. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινωνικό Ταμείο υποστηρίζει, για παράδειγμα, την αναδιάρθρωση του τομέα ψυχικής υγείας, την ανάπτυξη της πρωτοβάθμιας υγειονομικής περίθαλψης, καθώς και την προστασία της υγείας των ανθρώπων, παρέχοντας κονδύλια ύψους 268 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ περίπου.

Η Επιτροπή θα συνεχίσει να υποστηρίζει την Ελλάδα στις προσπάθειες παροχής ιατροφαρμακευτικής περίθαλψης στους πολίτες της σε διαρκή βάση.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010692/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Support for uninsured unemployed persons

Due to the changes caused by the crisis in Greece, but mostly due to the Memoranda and the austerity measures imposed as a result, many people are losing their jobs every day. One of the main problems is the fact that those losing their jobs are left, after a short period of time, without any insurance cover and are therefore forced to cover their medical expenses themselves (if they can afford to do so). Voluntary organisations report that this situation is indeed being faced by hundreds of thousands of Greek citizens. For cancer patients especially the problem is even worse, since treatments are very expensive and therefore most patients do not have access to chemotherapy or surgery and often not even to basic medicines.

Will the Commission say:

What is the policy to support patients without insurance and, more particularly, cancer patients in the EU Member States?

Has any attention been paid at a European level to support cases of this kind in countries such as Greece, which have been heavily affected recently by the extremely high and constantly increasing unemployment rates?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2013)

According to information provided by the Greek authorities, Greek citizens lose health insurance coverage after two years in unemployment and failing to pay social security contributions, a rule which was already in place before the financial crisis started. According to Article 168, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, Union action shall respect the responsibilities of the Member States for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care. Hence, in respect of this provision, no initiative at EU level is envisaged to provide support to Greek patients who do not have an insurance.

The Commission is however concerned with the difficult situation of the Greek healthcare system. Hence, the memorandum of understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality between Greece, the Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund mentions that maintaining universal access to healthcare is one of the objectives to be met.

Furthermore, the Commission's Task Force for Greece has been working actively to support Greek reform efforts to improve the long-term viability of the Greek health system. The European Social Fund supports for example the reform of the mental health sector, as well as the development of primary healthcare and the protection of people's health with a budget of approximately EUR 268 million.

The Commission will continue to support Greece in its efforts to deliver healthcare to its citizens on a sustainable basis.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010693/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — La libertà di parola a rischio in India: una donna viene arrestata a motivo del suo post su Facebook

Questa settimana le restrizioni alla libertà di parola in India sono state evidenziate dall'arresto di Shaheen Dhada per aver criticato la serrata di Mumbai dopo la morte, sabato, del politico nazionalista indù Bal Thackeray. La sua amica, Renu Srinivasan, è stata arrestata per aver «apprezzato» il suo commento. Le due sono state poi liberate su cauzione. Le donne sono state accusate di «creare o promuovere inimicizia, odio o rancore tra le classi» e anche di reati a titolo della legge sulla tecnologia dell'informazione.

Si è riferito che negli ultimi tempi la polizia ha arrestato un certo numero di persone per accuse che gli attivisti definiscono violazioni della libertà di parola. Sebbene gli arresti siano stati ampiamente criticati in India, il fatto che si siano verificati dimostra il persistere dell'intolleranza in India per la libertà di parola e di espressione. Quest'anno delle persone sono state arrestate anche per tweets e cartoni animati che criticavano il governo. Considerato quanto sopra, può la Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante rispondere alle seguenti domande:

La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è a conoscenza degli arresti di Shaheen Dhada e Renu Srinivasan per un commento espresso su facebook? In caso affermativo, qual è la posizione della Commissione in merito?

La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è a conoscenza di altri casi di restrizione della libertà di espressione in India quest'anno, e constata l'emergenza di una tendenza negativa in termini di abuso da parte dell'autorità nell'applicazione della legislazione allo scopo di limitare la libertà di espressione?

Dato che l'Unione europea intrattiene relazioni estese con l'India, incoraggerà l'India ad essere più tollerante nei confronti delle opinioni dei propri cittadini?

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

(5 febbraio 2013)

Nel corso dell’ultimo anno, la delegazione UE in India ha riferito all’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente di una tendenza negativa per quanto riguarda la libertà di espressione su Internet nonché degli arresti di Shaheen Dhada e Renu Srinivasan a Mumbai. La delegazione ha riportato le azioni intraprese nei confronti dei poliziotti responsabili di aver interpretato la legge in maniera scorretta. Da allora, le accuse nei confronti di Shaheen Dhada e Renu Srinivasan sono state ritirate.

Questi arresti hanno sollevato una protesta pubblica in seguito alla quale il governo ha pubblicato nuove linee direttrici sulla imputabilità per i commenti pubblicati online. In base alle nuove linee direttrici, prima di poter registrare la denuncia a norma della sezione 66A della legge indiana sulla tecnologia dell’informazione, è necessaria l’approvazione di un funzionario di grado superiore. La Corte Suprema è intervenuta a sua volta e ha annunciato che intende conoscere la controversia di interesse pubblico che riguarda la sezione in questione.

Le autorità indiane sono a conoscenza dell’importanza che la libertà di espressione riveste per l’UE. La tematica della libertà di espressione su Internet è regolarmente discussa con le autorità indiane nel quadro del dialogo sui diritti umani con l’India e delle consultazioni in materia di sicurezza informatica.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010693/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Freedom of speech at risk in India as woman is arrested over her Facebook post

This week the curtailment of freedom of speech in India was highlighted by the arrest of Shaheen Dhada for having criticised the shutdown of Mumbai after the death on Saturday of Hindu nationalist politician Bal Thackeray. Her friend Renu Srinivasan was also arrested for having ‘liked’ the comment. However, the two were later freed on bail. The women were charged with ‘creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes’ and also with offences under the Information Technology Act.

It has been reported that police have recently arrested a number of people in cases which campaigners call a breach of freedom of speech. Despite the arrests having been widely criticised in India, the fact that they took place shows the continuing intolerance in India for freedom of speech and expression. This year, people have also been jailed over tweets and cartoons criticising the Government. Considering the above, can the Vice-President/High Representative answer the following:

Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the arrests of Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan over a comment made on Facebook? If so, what stance does the Commission take on this matter?

Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of other freedom of expression cases in India this year, and does it see a negative trend emerging, in terms of the authorities misusing the law to quash freedom of expression?

Given that the EU has extensive relations with India, will the EU encourage India to be more tolerant of its citizens’ opinions?

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

(5 February 2013)

The EU Delegation in Indiahas reported to the HR/VP about the negative trend in freedom of expression on the Internet over the last year and also on the arrests of Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan in Mumbai. It has reported on the action taken against the policemen responsible for interpreting the law in an abusive manner. Charges against Ms. Dhada and Ms. Srinavasan have since been dropped.

The arrests led to a public outcry and as a result the government has issued new guidelines on the culpability of comments made online. These include a requirement for the approval of a senior officer before a complaint can be registered under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act. The Supreme Court has also stepped in and announced that it will hear a public-interest litigation challenging the section.

The EU attachment to the freedom of speech is well known to the Indian authorities. The issue of freedom of speech on the Internet is regularly raised with the Indian authorities in the context of the Human Rights Dialogue with India and the Cybersecurity consultations.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010694/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — L'inferno del Sinai

Nella risposta data alla mia interrogazione E-010998/2011 del 25 novembre 2011, avente per oggetto «I martiri del Sinai», il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante Catherine Ashton afferma che la Commissione è pienamente consapevole della tragica situazione dei profughi sub sahariani in Egitto e che l'UE ha continuato a far pressione sulle autorità egiziane «affinché affrontino la questione e garantiscano il rispetto dei diritti dei profughi conformemente agli impegni assunti».

Nel frattempo, mentre nella zona sud della penisola cuscinetto tra Israele e l'Egitto il turismo internazionale affolla i resort sul Mar Rosso, nella zona nord i beduini imperversano violentemente contro i malcapitati che attraversano la penisola in cerca di salvezza. I servizi giornalistici riportano episodi di rapimento, d'assassinii finalizzati al traffico di organi, di violenze d'ogni genere. Quell'angolo del Sinai è diventato un vero triangolo della morte, dove si combatte una guerra di cui nessuno parla.

A distanza di un anno dalla risposta riportata più sopra, può il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante dire:

se le sue pressioni sulle autorità egiziane hanno portato a qualche risultato;

in caso negativo, quali iniziative intende finalmente intraprendere per far pesare maggiormente le sue rimostranze a tutela della sicurezza dei profughi, a prescindere dalla loro provenienza;

se non ritiene opportuno un suo intervento a carattere umanitario, magari coi fondi previsti per il sostegno della democrazia, al fine di garantire un minimo d'aiuto alle vittime predestinate al peggio?

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

(7 febbraio 2013)

L’UE continua a seguire la situazione della tratta di esseri umani e dei rifugiati in Egitto, in particolare nella regione del Sinai. A tal proposito, l’UE intrattiene contatti regolari con il ministro degli Affari esteri e il ministro dell’Interno egiziani, così come con gli uffici regionali dell’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni unite per i rifugiati (UNHCR) e dell’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni (OIM). L’UE ha espresso alle autorità competenti le sue preoccupazioni in numerose occasioni.

L’UE continuerà a esortare le autorità egiziane affinché prendano le misure appropriate per assicurare che i diritti umani dei migranti e dei rifugiati siano pienamente rispettati. L’UE fa pressione sulle autorità egiziane perché assicurino che il principio di non respingimento sia rispettato per tutti i migranti bisognosi di protezione internazionale. Le ha inoltre incitate a permettere all’UNHCR di eseguire il proprio mandato su tutto il territorio egiziano, compresa la regione del Sinai, nel rispetto degli impegni internazionali del paese.

L’UE segue attentamente la situazione umanitaria nei paesi del Maghreb e del Mashrek, grazie alla sua rete di esperti che lavorano direttamente in quest’ambito e in stretta cooperazione con i suoi partner, vale a dire le agenzie delle Nazioni Unite, le organizzazioni internazionali non governative e le organizzazioni della Croce rossa e della Mezzaluna rossa. Fino a oggi, la Commissione non ha sostenuto alcun programma umanitario in Egitto poiché dalle valutazioni effettuate non sono emerse finora esigenze umanitarie critiche in questo paese. La questione delle esigenze umanitarie va distinta da quella relativa ai diritti umani di cui sopra, che viene al momento affrontata dall’UE di concerto con le autorità egiziane.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010694/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Cristiana Muscardini (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — The hell of Sinai

In her answer to my question E-010998/2011 of 25 November 2011, on the ‘martyrs of the Sinai’, Vice-President/High Representative Ashton stated that the Commission was well aware of the tragic situation of Sub-Saharan refugees in Egypt and that the EU had kept the pressure on the Egyptian authorities ‘to address this issue and to ensure the respect of refugees’ rights in accordance with the commitments undertaken in this regard’.

In the meantime, while international tourists flock to the Red Sea resorts in the south of the peninsula, which acts as a buffer between Israel and Egypt, in the north the Bedouins are inflicting cruel violence on the unfortunate people crossing the peninsula in search of salvation. There are media reports of abductions, murder for organ trafficking, and violence of all kinds. That corner of Sinai has become a real triangle of death, where an unspoken war is being fought.

One year on from the above answer, can the Vice-President/High Representative please state:

Whether her pressure on the Egyptian authorities has produced any results?

If not, what steps does she intend to take at last to object more strongly to protect the safety of refugees, regardless of where they come from?

Does she not think she should provide humanitarian aid, perhaps using the funds earmarked to support democracy, in order to guarantee a minimum amount of aid for the victims who face a terrible fate?

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

(7 February 2013)

The EU continues to follow the situation of human trafficking and refugees in Egypt, in particular in the Sinai. The EU maintains regular contacts with the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Interior as well as with the regional offices of UNHCR and IOM on these matters. The EU's concerns have been expressed on numerous occasions to the competent authorities.

The EU will continue to urge the Egyptian authorities to take the appropriate measures to ensure that the human rights of migrants and refugees are fully respected. The EU has pressed the Egyptian authorities to ensure that the principle of non-refoulement is observed for all migrants in need of international protection. The EU has called on them to allow UNHCR to implement its mandate on the entire territory of Egypt, including the Sinai region in compliance with Egypt's international commitments.

The EU is monitoring closely the humanitarian situation in the Maghreb and Mashrek countries. The EU is constantly assessing the humanitarian situation via its own network of experts working directly in the field and in close cooperation with its partners, namely UN agencies, International Non-Governemental Organisations, and Red Cross/Red Crescent Organisations. To date, the Commission does not support any humanitarian programme in Egypt since the humanitarian needs assessments carried out so far have not led to the identification of significant unmet humanitarian needs in Egypt. Humanitarian needs are to be distinguished from the abovementioned human rights issues which are currently addressed by the EU with the Egyptian authorities.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010695/12

a la Comisión

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(22 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Transparencia fiscal y jurisdicciones no cooperantes

La evasión y el fraude suponen siempre una sangría inaceptable para las cuentas públicas y son intolerables en los actuales momentos de crisis que afecta a todos los sectores de la sociedad y, especialmente, a los más vulnerables.

A lo largo de los últimos meses se ha divulgado en distintos países de la Unión Europea la existencia de datos relativos a cuentas bancarias en terceros países no declaradas o sospechosas de suponer una conducta irregular fuera del control de las autoridades fiscales. Ni el derecho a la privacidad ni el secreto bancario pueden justificar esta situación que daña la economía de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea y es, por tanto, una cuestión de interés común. No es admisible que terceros Estados establezcan sanciones contra quienes realizan prácticas de legítima cooperación con los miembros de la UE ni que las jurisdicciones de los Estados miembros puedan contribuir de alguna manera a su persecución.

Cabe tener en cuenta las posiciones reiteradas por el Parlamento Europeo y las conclusiones del Consejo Europeo de marzo en las que se solicitaba al Consejo y a la Comisión que desarrollasen con celeridad vías concretas para mejorar la lucha contra el fraude y la evasión fiscales, también con respecto a terceros países.

1.

¿Qué iniciativas tiene previsto adoptar la Comisión en legítima defensa de los intereses de las haciendas públicas de los integrantes de la Unión Europea?

2.

¿Qué medidas va a adoptar la Comisión para responder a las sanciones contra quienes cooperen con los miembros de la Unión Europea?

3.

¿Qué medidas va a adoptar la Comisión para proteger a quienes puedan ser perseguidos por cooperar con los miembros de la Unión Europea?

4.

¿Va a impulsar la Comisión el intercambio automático de información entre las autoridades fiscales?

Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión

(31 de enero de 2013)

1)

El 6 de diciembre, la Comisión adoptó un Plan de Acción

 (158)  (159)  (160)

2) y 3)

La Comisión no tiene competencias en lo que respecta los sistemas judiciales penales de terceros países. La Comisión puede comunicar sus inquietudes a las autoridades de esos países a través de los canales diplomáticos.

1)

El 6 de diciembre, la Comisión adoptó un Plan de Acción

2) y 3)

La Comisión no tiene competencias en lo que respecta los sistemas judiciales penales de terceros países. La Comisión puede comunicar sus inquietudes a las autoridades de esos países a través de los canales diplomáticos.

4)

Por lo que se refiere al intercambio automático de información entre las autoridades fiscales a escala internacional

1)

El 6 de diciembre, la Comisión adoptó un Plan de Acción

 (158) para reforzar la lucha contra el fraude y la evasión fiscal, junto con dos recomendaciones (159). Se trata de mejorar la eficacia de las actuaciones de los Estados miembros para proteger sus sistemas fiscales contra la erosión desleal de la base imponible, en consonancia con los principios de transparencia, intercambio de información y competencia leal en materia fiscal. Este planteamiento incluye, en particular, los llamados «paraísos fiscales». Además, la Comisión remite a su Comunicación de 27 de junio de 2012 (160), en la que analiza la situación actual y propone soluciones concretas que se consignan detalladamente en el Plan de Acción.

2) y 3)

La Comisión no tiene competencias en lo que respecta los sistemas judiciales penales de terceros países. La Comisión puede comunicar sus inquietudes a las autoridades de esos países a través de los canales diplomáticos.

4)

Por lo que se refiere al intercambio automático de información entre las autoridades fiscales a escala internacional

 (161), la Comisión ha presentado sus puntos de vista en el mencionado Plan de Acción.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010695/12

to the Commission

Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Fiscal transparency and uncooperative jurisdictions

Evasion and fraud are an unacceptable drain on public finances, and they are particularly deplorable given the crisis currently affecting society as a whole, especially the most vulnerable.

Over the last few months, information has come to light in several EU Member States revealing the existence of data relating to bank accounts in third countries that have either not been declared or that are suspected of being used illegally, outside the control of the tax authorities. Neither the right to privacy nor the principle of banking secrecy can justify this situation, which is hurting the economies of EU Member States and which is, therefore, a matter of common interest. It is unacceptable that third countries can impose sanctions against those who cooperate legally with EU Member States and that the jurisdictions of EU Member States can contribute in some way to their prosecution.

The views repeatedly expressed by Parliament, and the Council’s conclusions of March 2012 — in which it called on the Council and the Commission to rapidly develop concrete ways to improve the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion, including in relation to third countries — need to be taken into account.

1.

What measures is the Commission planning to adopt in order to defend the legitimateinterests of the public budgets of EU Member States?

2.

What measures will the Commission adopt to respond to the sanctions being imposed onthose who cooperate with EU Member States?

3.

What measures will the Commission adopt to protect those who might be prosecuted forcooperating with EU Member States?

4.

Will the Commission push for automatic information-sharing between tax authorities?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2013)

1.

On 6 December the Commission adopted an Action Plan

1.

On 6 December the Commission adopted an Action Plan

 (162) to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion together with two recommendations (163). The aim is to improve the effectiveness of Member States’ actions to protect their tax systems against unfair tax base erosion, in line with established principles of transparency, information exchange and fair tax competition. This approach includes in particular so-called ‘tax havens’. Furthermore, the Commission refers to its communication of 27 June 2012 (164) which analyses the existing situation and proposes concrete ways forward which are further detailed in the action plan.

2 and 3. The Commission has no competence regarding the criminal justice systems of third countries. The Commission can address its concerns to the authorities of those countries through its diplomatic channels.

4.

With regard to automatic information-sharing between tax authorities on an international level

4.

With regard to automatic information-sharing between tax authorities on an international level

 (165), the Commission presented its views as part of the abovementioned Action Plan.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010696/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(22 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Le Moschee nei territori palestinesi inneggiano all'attentato esplosivo su un autobus a Tel Aviv

Il 22 novembre 2012, fonti di informazione britanniche riferivano che attraverso annunci degli altoparlanti a Gaza, si era celebrato l'attentato esplosivo a un autobus che ha ferito 27 persone a Tel Aviv. Si è trattato del primo attentato a Tel Aviv dal 2006. Ha fatto saltare in aria un autobus in una delle strade più trafficate della città, nei pressi del Quartier generale militare israeliano. Il ministro israeliano della sicurezza interna ha detto che la bomba è stata collocata all'interno dell'autobus da un uomo che è poi sceso dal veicolo. L'esplosione è avvenuta mentre l'autobus era in movimento.

Un portavoce di Hamas, Fawzi Barhoum ha dichiarato: «Lo consideriamo come una risposta naturale ai crimini dell'occupazione e ai massacri in corso ai danni della popolazione civile nella Striscia di Gaza».

Secondo il Jerusalem Post, una certa Brigata dei martiri di Al-Aqsa affiliata ad Al-Fatah ha rivendicato l'attentato, ma la rivendicazione non è stata ancora confermata.

Gli Stati Uniti hanno condannato l'attentato e un addetto stampa della Casa Bianca ha osservato: «Gli Stati Uniti rimarranno al fianco dei nostri alleati israeliani, e forniranno tutta l'assistenza necessaria per individuare e assicurare alla giustizia chi ha perpetrato l'attentato».

1.

Qual è la posizione della Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante sulla notizia delle manifestazioni di giubilo decretate da Hamas per l'esplosione sull'autobus a Tel Aviv il 21 novembre 2012?

2.

Qual è la valutazione della Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante sul mantenimento dell'attuale cessate il fuoco tra Israele e Hamas?

3.

Quale sarà il ruolo dell'Unione europea per contribuire a mantenere il cessate il fuoco?

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

(5 febbraio 2013)

Le conclusioni del Consiglio Affari esteri sul Processo di pace in Medio Oriente del 10 dicembre riguardano anche la situazione nella Striscia di Gaza e il recente intensificarsi della violenza a Gaza e in Israele. Le conclusioni non fanno esplicitamente riferimento alle reazioni scatenate nella Striscia di Gaza dall'esplosione di una bomba su un autobus a Tel Aviv che si è verificata 21 novembre. Tuttavia, l'Unione europea ha ribadito il suo impegno fondamentale a favore della sicurezza di Israele e ha confermato la sua opposizione contro coloro che abbracciano e promuovono la violenza come strumento per raggiungere obiettivi politici. Allo stesso modo, l'UE non smetterà di adoperarsi per combattere contro il terrorismo, che tenta di minare l'apertura e la tolleranza delle società attraverso atti indiscriminati di violenza contro i civili.

In riferimento all'accordo di cessate il fuoco del 21 novembre, il Consiglio Affari esteri di dicembre ha sottolineato che è di vitale importanza che questo accordo sia attuato in tutte le sue parti e ha confermato l'impegno dell'UE a favore della promozione dello sviluppo sociale ed economico della Striscia di Gaza. Inoltre, l'UE ha affermato che la questione del trasferimento illegale di armi nella Striscia di Gaza deve essere affrontata urgentemente in maniera efficace. L'UE ha espresso la propria disponibilità ad avvalersi degli strumenti di cui dispone a sostegno degli sforzi delle parti, compresa la possibilità di riattivare, nel modo opportuno, la missione EUBAM Rafah. L'UE ha evidenziato di essere disposta a esplorare nuove vie per affrontare la situazione nella Striscia di Gaza, anche in collaborazione con le parti interessate nella regione, conformemente alla risoluzione 1860 (2009) del Consiglio di Sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010696/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Mosques in Palestinian Territories celebrate Tel Aviv bus bombing

On 22 November 2012, British media sources reported that announcements had been made over loudspeakers in Gaza, celebrating the attack on a bus which injured 27 people in Tel Aviv. This was the first attack in Tel Aviv since 2006. It blew up a bus on one of the city’s busiest streets, near the Israeli military headquarters. The Israeli Minister of Internal Security said that a bomb had been placed inside the bus by a man who then left the vehicle. The explosion occurred while the bus was moving.

A spokesman for Hamas, Fawzi Barhoum, has said: ‘We consider it as a natural response to the occupation crimes and the ongoing massacres against civilians in the Gaza Strip.’

According to the Jerusalem Post, a Fatah-affiliated al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade has claimed responsibility for the attack, but this has yet to be confirmed.

The United States has condemned the attack, and a White House press secretary has stated: ‘The United States will stand with our Israeli allies, and provide whatever assistance is necessary to identify and bring to justice the perpetrators of this attack.’

1.

What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative regarding reports of Hamas-sanctioned celebrations of the bus bombing in Tel Aviv on 21 November 2012?

2.

What is the assessment of the Vice-President/High Representative as regards the maintenance of the current ceasefire between Israel and Hamas?

3.

What will be the EU’s role in helping maintain the ceasefire?

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

(5 February 2013)

The Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) conclusions on MEPP of 10 December address, among others, the situation in the Gaza Strip and the latest escalation of violence in Gaza and Israel. The conclusions do not specifically refer to the reactions in the Gaza Strip to the bus bombing in Tel Aviv on 21 November. However, the EU reiterates its fundamental commitment to the security of Israel and states that it will remain opposed to those who embrace and promote violence as a way to achieving political goals nor cease its efforts in combatting terrorism, which seeks to undermine the openness and tolerance of societies through indiscriminate acts of violence against civilians.

In reference to the cease-fire agreement of 21 November, the December FAC stessed that it is vital that all parts of the ceasefire agreement are implemented and confirmed that the EU is committed to facilitating the social and economic development of the Gaza Strip. In addition, the EU assesses that the issue of illegal weapons’ transfer into the Gaza Strip has to be effectively addressed as a matter of urgency. The EU expressed its readiness to make use of its instruments in support of the parties’ efforts, including the possible reactivation, in the appropriate way, of the EUBAM Rafah mission, and underlined its readiness to explore further ways to address the situation in the Gaza Strip, including with concerned parties in the region, in line with UNSC Resolution 1860 (2009).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010697/12

to the Commission

David Campbell Bannerman (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: EU employees working in London but residing outside the UK

Can the Commission state how many people employed by the European Union work in London but reside outside the UK?

Question for written answer E-010698/12

to the Commission

David Campbell Bannerman (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: EU employees working in London

The Commission is asked to state how many people employed by the European Union work in London.

Joint answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2013)

The Commission can only reply for its own employees.

On 1 November 2012 the Commission employed 32 persons in London.

According to Article 20 of the Staff Regulations, ‘An official shall reside either in the place where he is employed or at no greater distance there from as is compatible with the proper performance of his duties’. The Commission can confirm that all the 32 employees of the Commission working in London reside in the United Kingdom.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-010699/12

to the Commission

David Campbell Bannerman (ECR)

(22 November 2012)

Subject: Single farm payments to recipients in the UK

How much did it cost to administer the single farm payments to recipients in the UK in the financial years 2011-12, 2010-11 and 2009-10?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2013)

The information available to the Commission on the administrative costs of EU Funds in Member States does not provide a comprehensive overview of administering single farm payments to recipients in the United Kingdom.

However, for the common agricultural policy, the Commission Communication (166) of 26 May 2010 on ‘More or less controls? Striking the right balance between the administrative costs of control and the risk of error’ includes information on the costs incurred by Member States in 2008 for controlling agricultural expenditure financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), on the basis of data provided by Member States to the Commission. The analysis shows that the costs of controls amounted to EUR 2.7 billion in total for the EU-27. Comparing these figures with the total agricultural expenditure across the EU-27, the average cost of controls in the common agricultural policy in 2008 was estimated to represent 4.94% of total expenditure (on average 2.73% for the EAGF and 7.27% for the EAFRD).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-010700/12

an die Kommission

Jan Philipp Albrecht (Verts/ALE)

(23. November 2012)

Betrifft: Tätigkeit als Immobilienmakler

Für die Tätigkeit als Immobilienmakler gibt es in den EU-Staaten unterschiedliche Voraussetzungen.

1.

Welche Voraussetzungen gelten in den einzelnen EU-Staaten für die Ausübung des Berufs des Immobilienmaklers?

2.

Gibt es Überlegungen in der EU-Kommission, die Voraussetzungen für die Tätigkeit als Immobilienmakler einheitlich zu regulieren? Wenn ja, wie?

Antwort von Herrn Barnier im Namen der Kommission

(19. Dezember 2012)

Nach dem durch die Richtlinie über Berufsqualifikationen  (167) („die Richtlinie“) festgelegten Rechtsrahmen können Immobilienmakler ihren Beruf in einem anderen EU-Mitgliedstaat als jenem, in dem sie ihre Berufsqualifikation erworben haben, als Selbstständige oder Angestellte ausüben. Sie können entweder im Rahmen der Regelung für die vorübergehende Erbringung von Dienstleistungen (auf der Grundlage einer jährlichen vorherigen Meldung, wenn dies vom Aufnahmemitgliedstaat gefordert wird) oder im Rahmen der Regelung für die dauerhafte Niederlassung arbeiten. Die besonderen Regeln und Anforderungen für die Arbeit im Rahmen der beiden Regelungen sind in der Richtlinie aufgeführt. Immobilienmakler, die sich im Einzelnen über die Voraussetzungen für die Ausübung ihres Berufs in einem EU-Mitgliedstaat informieren möchten, können den Benutzerleitfaden der Kommission  (168) zu Rate ziehen oder sich an die jeweiligen nationalen Kontaktstellen zu Berufsqualifikationen  (169) wenden.

Die Kommission beabsichtigt derzeit nicht, einheitliche Voraussetzungen für die Tätigkeit als Immobilienmakler in einem anderen Mitgliedstaat einzuführen. Weder der aktuelle Wortlaut der Richtlinie noch der von der Kommission im Dezember 2011 angenommene Vorschlag für ihre Modernisierung  (170) sind darauf ausgerichtet, harmonisierte Regeln für die grenzüberschreitende Ausübung dieses Berufs festzulegen. In diesem Zusammenhang würde das im Vorschlag dargelegte System des Europäischen Berufsausweises besonders der Vereinfachung und Erleichterung der vorübergehenden Mobilität und der Anerkennung der Qualifikationen für die betreffenden Berufe dienen, die mittels des bestehenden Binnenmarkt-Informationssystems (IMI) von diesem freiwilligen System profitieren könnten.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010700/12

to the Commission

Jan Philipp Albrecht (Verts/ALE)

(23 November 2012)

Subject: Working as an estate agent

Various conditions must be met in the EU Member States in order to work as an estate agent.

1.

What conditions apply in the individual EU countries in order to exercise the profession of estate agent?

2.

Is the Commission considering introducing uniform conditions that must be met in order to work as an estate agent? If so, how?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2012)

Pursuant to the legal framework established by the Professional Qualifications Directive (171) (‘the directive’), real estate agents can pursue their profession in an EU Member State other than that in which they obtained their professional qualifications, on either a self-employed or employed basis. They can work either under the regime for provision of temporary services (on the basis of an annual prior declaration, if such is required by the host Member State), or under the permanent establishment regime. The specific rules and requirements for working under both regimes are set out in the directive. Should real estate professionals wish to obtain specific details on the conditions of exercising their profession in any of the EU Member States, they could refer to the Commission's User Guide (172) or consult the relevant national contact points (173) on professional qualifications.

The Commission is currently not considering the introduction of uniform conditions that must be met in order to work as a real estate agent in another Member State. Neither the current text of the directive, nor the proposal for its modernisation (174) adopted by the Commission in December 2011 aim to set out harmonised rules for the cross-border practice of this profession. In this context, the European professional card mechanism set out in the proposal would be specifically intended to simplify and facilitate temporary mobility and recognition of qualifications for interested professions that could ultimately benefit from this voluntary system mediated by the existing Internal Market Information System (IMI).

(English version)

Question for written answer P-010701/12

to the Commission

John Stuart Agnew (EFD)

(23 November 2012)

Subject: Reality of grassland

Is the Commission aware that productive grasslands are re-sown, on average, every 8 to 10 years across the EU, and in some Member States every 20 years or more? This being the case, how does the Commission intend to address the matter of sowing practices in the context of the CAP reform proposals for permanent grasslands?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2012)

The Commission in its proposal on future direct payments (175) defined in Article 4(h) ‘permanent grassland’ as ‘land used to grow grasses or other herbaceous forage naturally (self-seeded) or through cultivation (sown) and that has not been included in the crop rotation of the holding for five years or longer’. In the ‘Concept paper on greening’ presented at the Council in May the Commission mentioned that it would be favourable to increasing the number of years during which grassland has to be out of rotation before becoming ‘permanent’ from five to possibly eight years. Notwithstanding the number of years it is clear that in the definition it is the ‘rotation’ that matters and not the re-sowing (as it can potentially occur without rotating).

As regards the details of the future management of areas declared as ‘permanent grassland’ in 2014, these will be laid down based on Article 31(3) of the abovementioned proposal, which empowers the Commission to set rules on ‘the renewal of permanent grassland’. It is in this framework that the Commission, keeping in mind the policy goal of the measure (carbon sequestration) could define the rules for re-seeding permanent grassland.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-010702/12

à la Commission

Karima Delli (Verts/ALE)

(23 novembre 2012)

Objet: Décision de la Commission de mettre fin à l'activité du Crédit immobilier de France et de procéder au licenciement de ses 2 600 salariés

Lors d'une séance de l'Assemblée nationale, en France, le ministre de l'économie et des finances a déclaré publiquement que la Commission européenne posait comme condition à l'octroi d'une garantie de l'État au Crédit immobilier de France (CIF), un établissement bancaire spécialisé dans l'accession sociale à la propriété des ménages à revenus modestes, la cessation de l'activité de cet établissement, avec pour conséquence le licenciement de ses 2 600 salariés.

Établissement centenaire, le Crédit immobilier de France accompagne les familles modestes et les primo-accédants à la propriété dans l'accès à un logement décent et abordable. Ne collectant aucun dépôt, il doit se refinancer uniquement sur les marchés financiers et se trouve aujourd'hui confronté à une crise de liquidités à la suite de la soudaine dégradation de sa notation, alors même qu'il possède 2,5 milliards d'euros de capitaux propres et un ratio de solvabilité de plus de 14 %.

L'État français a pris des mesures d'urgence en vue d'apporter des garanties au Crédit immobilier de France pour lui éviter de sombrer. Toutefois, les inquiétudes restent nombreuses, notamment en ce qui concerne les difficultés d'accession sociale à la propriété des ménages à revenus modestes de par leur exclusion croissante de l'offre de prêt des banques commerciales et en raison de la décision de la Commission, annoncée par le ministre devant l'Assemblée nationale, d'imposer la cessation d'activité du Crédit immobilier de France en contrepartie de l'octroi de la garantie.

Alors qu'un nombre toujours croissant de banques commerciales ont obtenu un accord pour des mesures analogues de sauvetage:

Sur quelle base juridique la Commission a-t-elle pris cette décision d'extinction de l'activité de financement de l'accès au logement des personnes à revenus modestes assurée par le Crédit immobilier de France?

Quelles seraient les options alternatives pour maintenir cette activité d'utilité sociale du Crédit immobilier de France face à la défaillance de l'offre de prêts des banques commerciales pour les ménages à revenus modestes, au regard des dispositio