JOC_2014_456_R_0001

Language
- My EUR-Lex
- Sign in
- Register
- My recent searches (0)

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Search tips

Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

EUROPA
EUR-Lex home
EUR-Lex - JOC_2014_456_R_0001 - EN

Document JOC_2014_456_R_0001

Help

Az Európai Parlament tagjai által feltett, írásbeli választ igénylő kérdések és az európai uniós intézmények által rájuk adott válaszok

OJ C 456, 18.12.2014, p. 1–164 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

HTML

PDF

Official Journal

18.12.2014

Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja

C 456/1

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB
ÍRÁSBELI VÁLASZT IGÉNYLŐ KÉRDÉSEK VÁLASSZAL

Az Európai Parlament tagjai által feltett, írásbeli választ igénylő kérdések és az európai uniós intézmények által rájuk adott válaszok

(2014/C 456/01)

Tartalom

E-003771/14 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Update on trade talks between the US and the Mercosur bloc

English version

E-005245/14 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: The Uber company

Version française

English version

E-003983/14 by Oreste Rossi and Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Market for private car hire and taxi services: legal developments and compatibility with EU legislation

Versione italiana

English version

E-004889/14 by Marc Tarabella and Jean Louis Cottigny to the Commission

Subject: Morocco and the entry price system for fruit and vegetables

Version française

English version

E-004913/14 by Richard Howitt to the Commission

Subject: ‘Mission for Growth to Israel’: business and human rights

English version

E-004950/14 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: Christians murdered for their faith

Versione italiana

English version

E-005024/14 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Socialisation of the debt arising from the Castor gas storage facility

Versión española

English version

E-005027/14 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Proposal for Data Protection Regulation and combating paedophilia

Dansk udgave

English version

E-005036/14 by Monica Luisa Macovei to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations by Sharia courts in Syria

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-005063/14 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: E-books

Version française

English version

E-005073/14 by Juozas Imbrasas to the Commission

Subject: Persons with disabilities

Tekstas lietuvių kalba

English version

E-005124/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Anti-Semitic flyers in Donetsk

Versione italiana

English version

E-005133/14 by Anna Hedh to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Saudi Arabia and human rights

Svensk version

English version

P-005136/14 by Linda McAvan to the Commission

Subject: Promoting research into the experimental off-label use of medicines

English version

E-005143/14 by Salvador Sedó i Alabart to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — neighbourhood policy: Egypt

Versión española

English version

E-005144/14 by Salvador Sedó i Alabart to the Commission

Subject: Neighbourhood policy: Egypt

Versión española

English version

E-005173/14 by Marisa Matias and Alda Sousa to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Israel's ongoing demolitions of EU-funded humanitarian aid projects

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-005189/14 by Marisa Matias and Alda Sousa to the Commission

Subject: Bairro do Sobreiro — Maia, Portugal

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-005204/14 by Eija-Riitta Korhola to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU reaction to recent problems in the field of democracy and the rule of law in Turkey

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-005209/14 by Zigmantas Balčytis to the Commission

Subject: Standardisation of glass containers in the EU

Tekstas lietuvių kalba

English version

E-005217/14 by Theodoros Skylakakis to the Commission

Subject: Terms relating to the HRADF call for tenders for the Hellinikon site

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-005241/14 by Charles Tannock to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Persecution of Christians in Iran

English version

P-005258/14 by Marie-Christine Vergiat to the Commission

Subject: The SNCM

Version française

English version

E-005260/14 by Francisco Sosa Wagner to the Commission

Subject: Restrictions on European citizens' right to reside freely within the Union

Versión española

English version

E-005303/14 by Gilles Pargneaux to the Commission

Subject: MyFerryLink

Version française

English version

E-005306/14 by Gilles Pargneaux to the Commission

Subject: Building smart power grids in Europe

Version française

English version

E-005342/14 by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy to the Commission

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-005350/14 by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy to the Council

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-005351/14 by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy to the Council

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-005352/14 by Ana Gomes to the Commission

Subject: Human and labour rights violations resulting from undue pressure by large EU retailers on Brazilian juice manufacturers to reduce prices

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-005354/14 by Astrid Lulling to the Commission

Subject: Free movement of goods and persons

Version française

English version

E-005418/14 by Kriton Arsenis to the Commission

Subject: Lack of transparency in relations between the Troika and consultancies and law firms in Greece — Request to disclose the list of contacts with private entities

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-005425/14 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Structural reforms vs. investment

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-005430/14 by Rachida Dati to the Commission

Subject: Abolition of roaming charges: guarantees for consumers?

Version française

English version

E-005438/14 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Traffic on Commission websites

Version française

Versione italiana

English version

E-005439/14 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Continuing identity checks at the border between France and Luxembourg

Version française

Versione italiana

English version

E-005440/14 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Problem of the mark-up (‘la tabelle’) on foreign books in Belgium

Version française

Versione italiana

English version

E-005442/14 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Acts of aggression against EU citizens by the Belgian police: absence of procedural safeguards during these procedures

Version française

Versione italiana

English version

E-005458/14 by Roberta Metsola to the Council

Subject: Trafficking in human beings

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-005496/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: South Korean ferry disaster

Versione italiana

English version

E-005555/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: The fate of imported exotic animals

Versione italiana

English version

E-005556/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Chinese agricultural espionage

Versione italiana

English version

E-005557/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Smart Work for the digital sector

Versione italiana

English version

E-005558/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Risk of a ‘Crimea effect’ in Nagorno-Karabakh

Versione italiana

100

English version

101

E-005559/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Security risks linked to European citizens signing up for the jihad in Syria

Versione italiana

102

English version

103

E-005560/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: In favour of inclusive teaching

Versione italiana

104

English version

105

E-005561/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: New anticoagulants: a potential area for investment

Versione italiana

106

English version

107

E-005562/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Intermodal mobility: a pilot project

Versione italiana

108

English version

109

E-005563/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: A study on environmental externalities

Versione italiana

110

English version

111

E-005564/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Which strategies can be used to tackle the effects of climate change in Southern Europe?

Versione italiana

112

English version

113

E-005565/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Two specific concerns regarding the TTIP

Versione italiana

114

English version

115

E-005566/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: EU involvement in the elimination of antipersonnel mines

Versione italiana

116

English version

117

E-005567/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Marine industry and development

Versione italiana

118

English version

119

E-005568/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Tropicalisation of the Mediterranean

Versione italiana

120

English version

121

E-005569/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Lighting of heritage buildings

Versione italiana

122

English version

123

E-005570/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: New ways of mapping neural pathways

Versione italiana

124

English version

125

E-005571/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: New anti-violence ‘app’

Versione italiana

126

English version

127

E-005572/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Anti-corruption school for civil servants

Versione italiana

128

English version

129

E-005573/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Guidelines for eco-friendly hospitality

Versione italiana

130

English version

131

E-005574/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Archeomedsites project

Versione italiana

132

English version

133

E-005575/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Kyoto Protocol: some figures

Versione italiana

134

English version

135

E-005576/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Comparison of energy systems and conservation of water resources

Versione italiana

136

English version

137

E-005577/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Protection of Caretta caretta (loggerhead) sea turtles

Versione italiana

138

English version

139

E-005578/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: European funds received under the ‘European territorial cooperation’ objective

Versione italiana

140

English version

141

E-005586/14 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Seventh research and technological development Framework Programme

Versione italiana

142

English version

143

E-005587/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Impact in Galicia of the abolition of milk quotas: need for a transitional compensation fund during the phasing-out of the milk quota system

Versión española

144

English version

145

E-005588/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Investigation into the use of EU funds by the council in Pontevedra (Galicia)

Versión española

146

English version

147

E-005589/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Use of EU funding in the Monterry Castle restoration project in Verín, Ourense (Galicia)

Versión española

148

English version

149

E-005590/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Discrimination in the distribution of quotas to the Galician seine fishing fleet

Versión española

150

English version

151

E-005591/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Tax discrimination by the Spanish Government against Galician emigrants returning from European countries

Versión española

152

English version

154

E-005592/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Inclusion of Galicia's cephalopod fishing fleet in the EU-Mauritania Fisheries Agreement

Versión española

155

English version

156

E-005593/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Construction of the A-76 motorway through Ribeira Sacra (Galicia), a Natura 2000 site

Versión española

157

English version

158

E-005594/14 by Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández to the Commission

Subject: Wastewater treatment plant in Gandarío (A Coruña, Spain)

Versión española

159

English version

160

E-005595/14 by Sonia Alfano to the Commission

Subject: Tackling family crisis for the sake of children

Versione italiana

161

English version

162

E-005596/14 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Correlation between allergies and too many caesarean births

Versione italiana

163

English version

164

(English version)

Question for written answer E-003771/14

to the Commission

Diane Dodds (NI)

(27 March 2014)

Subject: Update on trade talks between the US and the Mercosur bloc

Could the Commission give an update on the bilateral trade talks which are currently taking place between the United States and the Mercosur bloc?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2014)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it does not comment on trade negotiations between third countries.

This notwithstanding, the Commission notes would like to point out that to its knowledge, there are no ongoing trade negotiations between the United States and Mercosur as a bloc.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005245/14

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Société Uber

La société américaine Uber va contester «de toutes les manières possibles» la décision du tribunal de commerce de Bruxelles lui ordonnant de cesser ses activités de covoiturage entre particuliers dans la capitale belge. Uber précise qu'elle continuera d'y offrir le service UberPop, qui permet aux particuliers, grâce à une application mobile, de proposer leurs services à leurs concitoyens en tant que chauffeurs occasionnels, pour une somme modique.

1.	Qu'en pense la Commission?

2.	Uber doit‐elle être taxée?

3.	Faut‐il encourager l'utilisation des services proposés par Uber, qui avantagent de fait considérablement le citoyen? Ou la commission préfère-t-elle protéger les sociétés de transport?

4.	Un compromis pourrait-il être trouvé, comme à Berlin, entre les citoyens et les entreprises, qui imposerait une attente de 15 minutes entre chaque prise en charge?

Réponse commune donnée par M. Kallas au nom de la Commission

(11 août 2014)

La Commission soutient le développement de nouveaux services de mobilité innovants, car ils peuvent accroître la transparence, le choix et la commodité des transports et réduire les coûts pour les consommateurs.

La Commission est consciente du fait que de nouveaux modèles d'entreprise dans le secteur du transport de voyageurs suscitent des discussions sur un certain nombre de questions, y compris de nature juridique.

Dans sa réponse à la question écrite 6643/2013 (1), la Commission avait émis des considérations générales sur les règles juridiques qui pourraient être pertinentes s'agissant du transport de moins de huit passagers et souligné l'absence de législation spécifique de l'UE en ce qui concerne cette catégorie d'activités. Elle s'était également référée à des affaires jointes pendantes devant la Cour européenne de justice (renvois préjudiciels, C-162/12 et C-163/12) qui auraient pu apporter quelques précisions. Or la Cour a clôturé ces affaires en février 2014 sans se prononcer sur le fond au motif qu'elle n'était pas compétente en l'espèce.

La Commission examine actuellement la question, notamment à la lumière des principes généraux du traité tels que la liberté d'établissement. La Commission tiendra les Honorables Parlementaires informés de l'évolution de l'analyse menée par ses services.

En ce qui concerne la question spécifique de la fiscalité en Belgique, les entreprises sont soumises à la réglementation fiscale belge, appliquée par les autorités nationales compétentes.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-003983/14

alla Commissione

Oreste Rossi (PPE) e Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(31 marzo 2014)

Oggetto: Mercato dei servizi di autonoleggio privato e taxi: evoluzioni giurisprudenziali e compatibilità con norme diritto UE

In Italia è attivo ormai da diversi mesi un servizio di taxi privato prenotabile via smartphone. Si tratta un'applicazione, scaricabile sugli smartphone e sui tablet, che consente direttamente da questi dispositivi il noleggio auto con conducente. «Il conducente personale per tutti», recita il claim dell'azienda che propone il servizio, attivo già in 25 città tra cui New York, Londra, Parigi e Amsterdam.

Il servizio costa un po' di più dei normali taxi (rispetto alle tariffe dei taxi il 20 % in più, mentre rispetto alle auto prese a noleggio il prezzo si abbassa fino al 50 %) ed è sicuramente innovativo. Tuttavia diverse associazioni di categoria hanno rilevato eventuali profili d'illegittimità rispetto alla Legge n. 21 del 1992, quella che distingue chiaramente il servizio taxi, caratterizzato dalla corsa presa al volo (su piazza) o tramite radiotaxi, dal servizio di noleggio con conducente, da attivarsi mediante contatto diretto. Nel primo caso la contrattazione è vietata e le tariffe sono predeterminate — proprio per impedire la possibilità del rifiuto della corsa (a garanzia dell'utente) — nell'altro la «contrattazione» è l'elemento centrale. L'utente può valutare l'offerta migliore, scegliendo liberamente la rimessa e mettendosi d'accordo sul prezzo.

Il Comune di Milano ha deciso di recente di limitare il servizio con un provvedimento amministrativo. Il TAR della Lombardia ne ha sospeso l'efficacia ed ora il Comune l'ha reso inefficace, senza aspettare un giudizio in merito.

Alla luce delle menzionate evoluzioni giurisprudenziali e del contesto normativo del diritto UE, considerato che:

—	la Commissione si era già espressa in merito (risposta all'interrogazione n. E-006643/2013); — la questione era stata deferita alla Corte di giustizia europea per una pronuncia pregiudiziale nelle cause riunite C-162 e C-163/12,

si chiede alla Commissione se ritiene di poter esprimere un parere circa la compatibilità del servizio descritto e della normativa italiana rispetto agli articoli 101 TFUE e 102 TFUE, aventi ad oggetto le pratiche anticoncorrenziali, e all'articolo 49 TFUE, che sancisce la libertà di stabilimento.

Risposta congiunta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione

(11 agosto 2014)

La Commissione sostiene lo sviluppo di servizi di mobilità nuovi e innovativi poiché essi possono incrementare trasparenza, scelta e praticità dei servizi di trasporto e ridurre i costi per gli utenti.

La Commissione è consapevole che i nuovi modelli d'impresa in materia di trasporto di passeggeri hanno condotto a dibattiti su una serie di questioni, anche di natura giuridica.

Nella sua risposta all'interrogazione scritta n. 6643/2013 (2), la Commissione ha esposto alcune considerazioni di carattere generale sulle norme giuridiche che potrebbero essere pertinenti ai fini della valutazione del trasporto di meno di otto passeggeri e ha sottolineato l'assenza di una legislazione specifica dell'Unione europea per servizi di questo tipo. Ha altresì fatto riferimento a cause riunite pendenti dinanzi alla Corte di giustizia europea (pronuncia pregiudiziale, C-162/12 e C-163/12) che potrebbero fornire chiarimenti in merito. Tuttavia, la Corte ha archiviato le cause nel febbraio 2014 senza una decisione di merito, per difetto di competenza.

La Commissione sta attualmente valutando la questione, in particolare alla luce dei principi generali del trattato, come la libertà di stabilimento. La Commissione terrà informati gli onorevoli parlamentari sugli sviluppi dell'analisi da parte dei servizi della Commissione.

In riferimento al caso specifico della tassazione in Belgio, le compagnie sono soggette alle norme di tassazione belghe, applicate dalle autorità nazionali competenti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-003983/14

to the Commission

Oreste Rossi (PPE) and Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(31 March 2014)

Subject: Market for private car hire and taxi services: legal developments and compatibility with EU legislation

For several months now a private taxi service has been operating in Italy which uses an application (app) for bookings. The app can be downloaded onto smartphones and tablets and allows users to hire a car with a driver straight from their smartphone or tablet. ‘Everyone's private driver’ is the slogan of the company offering this service, already available in 25 cities including New York, London, Paris and Amsterdam.

The service costs a little more than a normal taxi would (20% more than a taxi fare, but up to 50% less than car hire prices) and is most definitely innovative. Nonetheless, various trade associations have noted aspects that may possibly be unlawful under Law No 21 of 1992, which makes a clear distinction between a taxi service, where the primary feature is that a vehicle is hired on the spot (in the street) or via a radio-controlled taxi, and the hiring of a car with driver, arranged through direct contact. Negotiating is forbidden in the first case and fares are preordained — precisely to avoid any possibility of the ride being refused (safeguarding the user) — while in the other case, ‘negotiating’ is the prime factor. The user can assess which is the best offer, choosing freely which firm to use and coming to an agreement on the price.

Milan City Council recently decided to restrict the service through an administrative regulation. The Regional Administrative Court in Lombardy suspended this regulation and the Council has now cancelled it, without waiting for a ruling in this respect.

In light of the aforementioned legal developments and the applicable EC law, and given the fact that:

the Commission has already commented on this matter (in its answer to written question No E006643/2013);

this matter was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling in joined cases C-162/12 and C-163/12;

Is the Commission able to issue an opinion on the compatibility of the service described and of Italian law with Articles 101 and 102 TFEU on anti-competitive practices and Article 49 TFEU, which sanctions freedom of establishment?

Question for written answer E-005245/14

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: The Uber company

The American company Uber intends to contest ‘in all possible ways’ the decision of the Brussels Commercial Court ordering it to halt its person-to-person car-sharing service in Brussels. Uber says it will continue to offer its UberPop service which enables individuals, via a mobile app, to offer occasional driving services to other individuals for a modest sum.

1.	What is the Commission’s view of this?

2.	Should Uber be taxed?

3.	Should the services offered by Uber, which are actually of considerably benefit to the public, be encouraged? Or does the Commission prefer to protect transport companies?

4.	Could a compromise be reached, as in Berlin, between members of the public and companies, whereby there would be a 15-minute waiting time after each call-out?

Joint answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(11 August 2014)

The Commission supports the development of new and innovative mobility services since they can increase transparency, choice and convenience of transport services and reduce costs for consumers.

The Commission is aware that new business models in the field of passenger transport have led to discussions about a number of issues, including of a legal nature.

In its answer to written question 6643/2013 (3), the Commission provided some general considerations on the legal rules that might be pertinent when assessing transport of less than eight passengers and underlined the absence of any specific EU legislation for these kind of activities. It also referred to joint cases pending before the European Court of justice (preliminary ruling, C-162/12 and C-163/12) which might provide some clarification. However, the case was closed by the Court in February 2014 without a decision on the substance, on the basis of lack of jurisdiction of the Court.

The Commission is currently assessing the matter, in particular in the light of the general principles of the Treaty such as the freedom of establishment. The Commission will keep the Honourable Members informed of the developments of analysis by the Commission services.

As regards the specific issue of taxation in Belgium, companies are subject to Belgian taxation rules, applied by the competent national authorities.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-004889/14

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D) et Jean Louis Cottigny (S&D)

(16 avril 2014)

Objet: Maroc et prix d'accès des fruits et légumes

L'Europe a approuvé, lundi, le système des prix d'accès des fruits et légumes sur son marché, une révision des prix qui inquiète le Maroc, craignant notamment des retombées négatives sur la tomate exportée.

1.	Une rencontre est prévue dans les prochaines semaines entre le Maroc et la Commission, quelle en est le but?

2.	Quelle est la position de la Commission?

3.	La Commission a-t-elle une analyse d'impact à transmettre sur ce dossier?

Réponse donnée par M. Cioloş au nom de la Commission

(4 juin 2014)

La Commission et les autorités marocaines ont des contacts étroits sur la question des prix d'entrée des fruits et légumes afin d'expliquer la portée de la nouvelle réglementation. Outre le sous-comité Agriculture et des réunions bilatérales tenues dans le cadre du Salon International de l'Agriculture du Maroc, la Commission envisage d'autres réunions techniques avec le même objectif.

La mesure porte indifféremment sur tous les fruits et légumes quelle que soit leur origine et ne vise pas spécifiquement le Maroc.

Le changement vise à mettre en conformité le mode de dédouanement des fruits et légumes soumis au prix d'entrée avec le Code Douanier Communautaire. Il permettra d'assurer que la valeur déclarée en douane reflète la situation réelle du marché.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004889/14

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D) and Jean Louis Cottigny (S&D)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: Morocco and the entry price system for fruit and vegetables

The EU recently approved a revision of the entry price system for fruit and vegetables, arousing fears in Morocco that the change in prices will have a negative impact on its tomato exports.

1.	What is the forthcoming meeting between the Commission and Morocco designed to achieve?

2.	What is the Commission's stance on this issue?

3.	Has the Commission assessed the impact of the change to the system?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M. Cioloş au nom de la Commission

(4 juin 2014)

La mesure porte indifféremment sur tous les fruits et légumes quelle que soit leur origine et ne vise pas spécifiquement le Maroc.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004913/14

to the Commission

Richard Howitt (S&D)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: ‘Mission for Growth to Israel’: business and human rights

On 22 and 23 October 2013, 65 companies from 17 Member States travelled to Israel as part of the ‘Mission for Growth’ organised and led by DG Trade, with the aim of fostering business links between European and Israeli businesses. To this end, a number of business‐to‐business networking or ‘match-making’ events were organised as part of the mission. Ahava — an Israeli settlement-owned business which is known to conduct a significant part of its activities from an illegal settlement in the occupied Palestinian territory, and to participate in the internationally unlawful exploitation of its natural resources — was listed as a participant in these events.

The EU has affirmed at the UN that it ‘believes that the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights need to be applied globally and calls on European companies to implement the Guiding Principles in all circumstances, including in Israel and occupied Palestinian territory.’

As the organiser of this mission, what guidance did the Commission give to the businesses involved in order to clarify their responsibilities in light of the Guiding Principles and other relevant frameworks? If it did not give any such guidance, when and how does it plan to set out clear expectations for the businesses in this delegation as regards respect for human rights in this context, to give effective guidance in this regard, and to help ensure that they do not become involved in conflict-related human rights abuses or violations of international humanitarian law?

In light of the EU’s position on the illegality of settlements and its obligation to ensure respect for international humanitarian law, were businesses in the delegation informed of the potential legal and other risks of business deals linked to the settlement enterprise? Is the Commission aware of the policies of caution or discouragement adopted in this regard by some Member States, in which a number of companies involved in the mission are domiciled?

What is the Commission’s policy on the participation of settlement-linked companies in EU‐supported networking fora? In particular, how does the Commission explain Ahava’s participation in Mission for Growth networking events? What steps will be taken to avoid this form of support for settlement-linked businesses in future?

Answer given by Mr Nelli Feroci on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2014)

The Commission has taken all necessary steps to ensure that all relevant entities participating in EU programmes and all businesses involved in the Mission are aware of the content of Commission notice 2013/C 205/05. As regards the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights, they constitute a pillar of the Commission’s policy, whereby the Commission calls on EU businesses to adhere to these principles.

2.	The EU’s position on illegality of settlements is of public domain.

The Commission’s policy on EU supported networking events is described in the Commission Notice 2013/C-205/05. In conformity with point 22 of the Notice, engagement with Israeli entities, for example meetings, visits or events, for the purpose of the award of EU support in the form of grants, prizes or financial instruments will not take place in the occupied territories. The Notice does not limit the attendance by natural persons of such events, insofar as the latter are held within Israel's pre-1967 borders. Although this Notice is applicable from the 2014 financial year, point 22 summarises and codifies long established practices relevant for EU representatives.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004950/14

alla Commissione

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(16 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Cristiani uccisi a causa della loro fede

Secondo una recente ricerca del «The Pew Research Center», la religione maggiormente perseguitata al mondo sarebbe il cristianesimo e solo nello scorso anno sarebbero state 70 000 le vittime per la loro fede.

Considerando che con l'affermarsi della cosiddetta «primavera araba», la situazione pare essere peggiorata;

considerando che solo in Siria sarebbero circa 2 123 i cristiani siriani uccisi per la loro fede nel 2013 e che in un massacro dello scorso novembre, nel villaggio di Sadad, sarebbero stati passati per le armi circa 45 credenti;

considerando che la situazione sarebbe preoccupante anche per i cristiani d'Egitto, la maggiore comunità del Medio Oriente, dove dalla caduta di Hosni Mubarak, nel 2011, sarebbero circa 200 mila i copti fuggiti dal Paese e che nei disordini dello scorso agosto, in seguito all'arresto del presidente Mohammed Morsi, in soli due giorni il gruppo dei Fratelli musulmani avrebbe assaltato circa 80 tra chiese, conventi, scuole, abitazioni e negozi cristiani;

considerando che i paesi più pericolosi per i cristiani sarebbero proprio quelli del Medio Oriente, tra cui anche l'Arabia Saudita;

può la Commissione riferire:

se è al corrente di questa situazione;

quale posizione intende assumere nei confronti di tali atti di intolleranza religiosa?

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

(29 luglio 2014)

La Commissione è al corrente delle conclusioni del Pew Research Center e delle ultime relazioni di Open Doors, due organizzazioni con cui mantiene contatti regolari. La Commissione desidera precisare che il riferimento ai 70 000 cristiani uccisi nel 2013 menzionato dall'onorevole deputato non è stato riscontrato in nessuno dei rapporti del Pew Research Center e non sembra essere confermato neanche dai comunicati di Open Doors che allude invece a 2 123 cristiani uccisi in tutto il mondo nel 2013 (e non solo in Siria dove Open Doors riferisce di 1 213 vittime cristiane).

A prescindere dai numeri, la Commissione concorda sul fatto che la situazione dei cristiani, in particolare in Medio Oriente, è estremamente preoccupante, così come lo è la situazione di altre minoranze religiose nella regione. Nelle conclusioni del novembre 2011, il Consiglio aveva già espresso le proprie preoccupazioni riguardo al crescente numero di atti di intolleranza religiosa e violenza, «contro i cristiani e i loro luoghi di culto, i pellegrini musulmani e altre comunità religiose» e li aveva condannati con fermezza.

Con l'adozione degli orientamenti sulla libertà di religione o di credo (FoRB) nel giugno 2013, l'UE ha potenziato il suo impegno nel promuovere e proteggere questa libertà universale. Questi orientamenti forniscono, in particolare ai funzionari dell'UE, indicazioni pratiche su come prevenire le violazioni degli stessi, su come analizzare i vari casi, e rispondere efficacemente alle violazioni ogniqualvolta si verifichino.

L'UE continuerà a utilizzare la sua vasta gamma di strumenti diplomatici, a livello bilaterale e multilaterale, così come schemi di supporto al progetto e finanziamenti per difendere il diritto di tutti coloro che fanno parte di comunità religiose di fede e di minoranze di praticare la propria religione e il proprio culto liberamente, individualmente o in comune con altri, senza temere intolleranza o attentati.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004950/14

to the Commission

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: Christians murdered for their faith

According to recent research by the ‘Pew Research Center’, the most persecuted religion in the world is Christianity; last year alone, 70 000 people were killed on account of their faith.

Considering that since the declaration of the so-called ‘Arab spring’ the situation appears to have worsened;

considering that in Syria alone around 2 123 Syrian Christians were killed on account of their faith in 2013 and in a massacre last November, in the village of Sadad, around 45 believers were executed;

considering that the situation of Christians in Egypt, the largest community in the Middle East, is also alarming, as since the fall of Hosni Mubarak in 2011 around 200 000 Coptic Christians have fled the country and during the disorder last August, following the arrest of President Mohammed Morsi, in two days alone the Muslim Brothers group attacked some 80 Christian churches, convents, schools, homes and shops;

considering that the most dangerous countries for Christians are the Middle Eastern states including Saudi Arabia;

can the Commission state:

whether it is aware of this situation;

what position it intends to take with regard to such acts of religious intolerance?

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

(29 July 2014)

The Commission is well aware of the findings of the Pew Research Center as well as of the latest reports of Open Doors, two organisations it maintains regular contact with. The Commission would like to underline that it could not find the number of 70 000 christians killed in 2013 in any of the Pew Research Center reports and that such a number does not seem to be corroborated by Open doors own findings, which alludes to 2 123 Christians killed worldwide in 2013 (and not in Syria alone where Open Doors refers to 1 213 Christian casualties).

Regardless of the numbers, the Commission agrees that the situation of Christians, notably in the Middle-East, is deeply troubling, as is the situation of other religious minorities in the region. In its November 2011 Conclusions, the Council had already expressed its concern about the increasing number of acts of religious intolerance and violence, ‘against Christians and their places of worship, Muslim pilgrims and other religious communities’ and firmly condemned them.

With the adoption of guidelines on freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in June 2013, the EU stepped up its dedication to promote and protect this challenged universal freedom. The guidelines notably provide EU officials with practical guidance on how to seek to prevent violations of FoRB, to analyse cases, and to react effectively to violations whenever they occur.

The EU will carry on using the full range of its diplomatic tools, at bilateral and multilateral level, as well as project support schemes and funding to defend the right for all persons belonging to religious or belief communities and minorities to practice their religion or belief and worship freely, individually or in community with others, without fear of intolerance and attacks.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005024/14

a la Comisión

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)

(16 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Socialización de la deuda del almacén de gas Castor

El almacén de gas Castor, situado en Vinaròs (Castellón, España), es un almacén de la empresa Escal— UGS financiado con Project Bonds por el BEI.

Considerando que:

—	en octubre del 2013 el almacén provocó más total de 500 terremotos (2 de ellos de 4,1 grados en la escala de Richter) y como consecuencia de estos seísmos fue paralizado;

—	el proyecto Castor es un proyecto con fuertes impactos ambientales y sociales que se encuentra con una fuerte oposición por parte de la población.

—	en el contrato de Escal-UGS con el Gobierno sobre el almacenamiento subterráneo Castor existe una cláusula, recogida en el artículo 14 del Real Decreto 855/2008, en la que se recoge una indemnización por el valor residual del activo en caso de negligencia o dolo por parte de la empresa;

—	el Gobierno español impugnó esta cláusula por abusiva, en mayo de 2012, cinco días antes del plazo máximo para presentar una declaración de lesividad en contra del decreto, pero el Tribunal Supremo desestimó este recurso;

—	con el mantenimiento de la cláusula el Gobierno deberá indemnizar a la concesionaria en caso de que cierre;

—

el Gobierno cifró en cerca de 1 700 millones de euros el valor de Castor, incluidos sus costes financieros: una retribución reconocida por desarrollar esta actividad de 1 273 millones de euros, a lo que se añaden 186 millones por la inyección de gas colchón y 234 millones por los costes financieros soportados hasta su entrada en funcionamiento;

¿Qué opinión tiene la Comisión sobre la socialización una deuda que tiene origen en un proyecto privado? ¿Qué medidas piensa emprender la Comisión para evitar que los ciudadanos acaben pagando esta deuda?

Respuesta del Sr. Katainen en nombre de la Comisión

(28 de julio de 2014)

La Comisión no ha participado en los acuerdos contractuales entre el Estado español y el promotor del proyecto y no está en condiciones de hacer comentarios sobre la incidencia presupuestaria que podría tener para España la cláusula mencionada en la pregunta. El proyecto no ha recibido ninguna contribución del presupuesto de la Unión Europea.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005024/14

to the Commission

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: Socialisation of the debt arising from the Castor gas storage facility

The Castor gas storage facility, which is located in Vinaròs (Castellón, Spain), is an Escal UGS gas storage facility financed with EIB project bonds. In 2013, the storage facility triggered more than 500 earthquakes (two of them measuring 4.1 on the Richter scale) and was came to a standstill as a result. The Castor project is one with major social and environmental consequences and has met with strong opposition from the local population.

The agreement between Escal UGS and the Spanish Government concerning the Castor underground storage facility contains a clause that is also set out in Article 14 of Royal Decree 855/2008 and which covers compensation for the asset’s residual value in the event of negligence or damage occasioned by the company.

The Spanish Government contested this clause as being unfair in May 2012, five days before the deadline for declaring the decree to have detrimental effect, but the Supreme Court rejected that appeal. As that clause has been maintained, the government must compensate the concessionary company if the facility closes.

The government has estimated the value of the Castor project at approximately EUR 1 700 million, including the financing costs. The cost of developing the project has been recognised as being EUR 1 273 million, plus EUR 186 million for injecting the cushion gas and EUR 234 million for the financing costs incurred up to its commissioning.

What is the Commission’s view on the socialisation of debt arising from a private sector project? What steps will it take to ensure the public does not end up having to pay that debt?

Answer given by Mr Katainen on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2014)

The Commission has not been involved in the contractual arrangements between the Spanish state and the project promoter and is not in a position to comment on the possible budgetary implications for Spain of the clause referred to in the question. No EU budget contribution is involved in the project.

(Dansk udgave)

Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-005027/14

til Kommissionen

Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)

(16. april 2014)

Om: Forslag til persondataforordning og bekæmpelse af pædofili

Efter forslaget til ny persondataforordning, der for øjeblikket er til behandling i Rådet, vil danske idrætsforeninger ikke længere kunne få oplyst om frivillige og ansatte ledere og trænere er dømt for pædofili eller anden seksuelt krænkende adfærd mod børn og unge. I Danmark er der gjort et stort arbejde for at komme dette problem til livs. Således har det siden 2005 været lovfæstet, at alle danske idrætsforeninger skal indhente en såkaldt »børneattest«, som er en udvidet straffeattest, på alle nyansatte ledere og trænere, der skal arbejde med børn under 15 år. En »positiv« børneattest indebærer, at personen er dømt for en eller flere af straffelovsovertrædelserne incest, samleje eller anden kønslig omgang med børn under 15 år, blufærdighedskrænkelse og besiddelse eller udbredelse af børnepornografi. Dette vigtige redskab til bekæmpelse af pædofili vil blive frataget idrætsforeningerne, hvis forslaget vedtages uændret.

Er Kommissionen enig i, at forslaget utilsigtet medfører, at børn og unges retssikkerhed og beskyttelse mod overgreb forringes voldsomt, og at det er en særdeles utilfredsstillende konsekvens af forordningen?

Hvad agter Kommissionen at foretage sig i det videre forløb, således at den nuværende danske og eventuelle lignende ordninger i andre medlemsstater som det mindste kan opretholdes?

Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Viviane Reding

(30. juni 2014)

Ligesom de gældende EU-regler for databeskyttelse vil forslaget om en ny generel forordning om databeskyttelse ikke hindre databehandling, der er nødvendig for at overholde en retlig forpligtelse med henblik på at forhindre, at pædofile bliver ledere eller trænere i sportsklubber.

Uden at det berører de generelle principper i artikel 5 i Kommissionens forslag om en generel forordning om databeskyttelse (4), tillader forslagets artikel 6, stk. 1, litra c), udtrykkeligt behandling af personoplysninger, hvis dette er nødvendigt for at overholde en retlig forpligtelse som f.eks. den danske lovgivning, der forbyder personer, som har begået seksuelle overgreb, at få adgang til lokale idrætsforeninger og at blive ansat som trænere for børn. Selv om straffedomme er blandt de »følsomme oplysninger«, kan de ikke desto mindre behandles i henhold til forslagets artikel 9, stk. 2, litra j), bl.a. »… hvis behandlingen er nødvendig for at efterkomme love eller andre retsforskrifter, som den registeransvarlige er omfattet af, eller for at udføre en opgave af hensyn til vigtige samfundsinteresser, og for så vidt den er hjemlet i EU-retten eller medlemsstatslovgivning, som fastsætter de fornødne garantier«.

Derfor vil databehandling med de formål, der er fastsat i den danske lovgivning, som det ærede medlem henviser til, fortsat være mulig. Desuden giver EU-lovgivningen arbejdsgivere ret til at anmode om oplysninger om tidligere straffedomme, før de ansætter en person, som skal arbejde med børn (5). Som følge af de politiske valg, som Danmark traf, da Lissabontraktaten blev forhandlet, er disse regler ikke bindende for og finder ikke anvendelse i Danmark, jf. artikel 2 i protokol nr. 22 til traktaterne.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005027/14

to the Commission

Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: Proposal for Data Protection Regulation and combating paedophilia

Under the proposal for a new Data Protection Regulation, currently being debated in the Council, Danish sports clubs will no longer be able to find out whether voluntary and paid trainers and coaches have been convicted of paedophilia or other sexually abusive behaviour towards children or young people. In Denmark a great effort has been made to tackle this problem. Accordingly, since 2005 it has been required by law that all Danish sports clubs must obtain a ‘child protection certificate’, which is an extended police good conduct certificate, for all newly appointed trainers or coaches who will work with children under the age of 15. A ‘positive’ result on a child protection certificate would mean that the person had been convicted of the offences of incest, intercourse or other sexual acts with children under 15, sexual assault or the possession or distribution of child pornography. Sports clubs would be deprived of this important tool for combating paedophilia if the proposal were to be adopted unamended.

Does the Commission agree that the proposal would unintentionally lead to children’s and young people’s legal certainty and protection from molestation being seriously impaired, and that this is a particularly unsatisfactory consequence of the regulation?

What action does the Commission propose to take in future to ensure that the current Danish legislation, and possibly similar rules in other Member States, can at least be maintained?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2014)

The proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation will not hinder the processing of data which is necessary to comply with legal obligations for preventing paedophiles to become trainers and coaches in sports clubs, as it is the case under the existing EU data protection rules.

Without prejudice to the general principles set out in Article 5 of the EU's proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation (6) Article 6(1)(c) of the proposal explicitly authorises the processing of personal data if this is necessary to comply with a legal obligation, such as for example the Danish law prohibiting sexual offenders from accessing local sports clubs and being employed as trainers for children. Even if criminal convictions are included amongst the ‘sensitive data’, they can nevertheless be processed in line with Article 9(2)(j) of the proposal inter alia‘…when the processing is necessary for compliance with a legal or regulatory obligation to which the controller is subject, or for the performance of a task carried for important public interest reasons, and insofar authorised by Union law or Member State law providing for adequate safeguards’.

Therefore, the processing for the purposes laid down in the Danish legislation referred to by the Honourable Member will remain possible. In addition, EC law empowers employers when recruiting a person who will work with children to request information about past criminal convictions (7). As a result of Denmark's policy choices when the Treaty of Lisbon was negotiated, according to Article 2 of Protocol 22 to the Treaties, these rules are not binding upon or applicable in Denmark.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-005036/14

adresată Comisiei (Vicepreședintelui/Înaltului Reprezentant)

Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)

(16 aprilie 2014)

Subiect: VP/HR — Incălcări ale drepturilor omului de către tribunale Sharia în Siria

Potrivit unui raport publicat de agenția de știri iraniană Fars News la16 februarie 2014, o fată tânără a fost ucisă cu pietre de către grupurile militante sunnite din Siria pentru că avea un cont pe Facebook.

Fatoum Al-Jassem a fost dusă la un tribunal Sharia al al-Qaeda, în Rakka, Siria, după ce a fost prinsă că folosește un site internet de socializare. Tribunalul Sharia a declarat că utilizarea unui cont de Facebook este echivalentă cu adulterul și că fata ar trebui pedepsită prin lapidare.

Această interpretare extrem de strictă a Islamului reprezintă o încălcare gravă a drepturilor omului și a valorilor democratice. Condamnarea la moarte a unei tinere fete pentru folosirea unui un site de socializare este intolerabilă și de neconceput în secolul 21.

Având în vedere că au fost raportate cazuri similare, cum intenționează Vicepreședintele/ Înaltul Reprezentant să abordeze această încălcare continuă a drepturilor omului de către tribunalele Sharia ale Al-Qaeda?

Răspuns dat de Înaltul Reprezentant/doamna vicepreședinte Ashton în numele Comisiei

(28 iulie 2014)

UE este conștientă de faptul că grupurile extremiste care controlează anumite zone impun o interpretare strictă a legii islamice, care este incompatibilă cu drepturile omului.

Consiliul Afaceri Externe și-a exprimat în repetate rânduri îngrijorarea cu privire la răspândirea extremismului și a grupurilor extremiste, printre care se numără ISIL și Jabhat al-Nusra. Implicarea lor în conflicte reprezintă o amenințare la adresa procesului de pace, a integrității teritoriale a Siriei și a securității regionale și internaționale. Consiliul a invitat toate părțile implicate să nu mai acorde sprijin acestor grupuri. UE este deosebit de îngrijorată cu privire la situația dificilă în care se află toate grupurile vulnerabile, inclusiv femeile, și va menține contactul cu toate părțile interesate relevante, inclusiv în regiune, pentru a aborda problema răspândirii influenței extremiste în Siria.

UE a salutat publicarea, la 5 martie 2014, a celui de al 7-lea raport al Comisiei independente ONU de anchetă cu privire la Republica Arabă Siriană, precum și a recomandărilor corespunzătoare. UE reamintește că toate persoanele responsabile de crime împotriva umanității și de încălcarea drepturilor omului trebuie să fie trase la răspundere și că nu poate exista impunitate pentru astfel de încălcări și abuzuri.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005036/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)

(16 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — Human rights violations by Sharia courts in Syria

According to a news report published by Iran’s FARS News Agency on 16 February 2014, a young girl was stoned to death by Sunni militant groups in Syria for having a Facebook account.

Fatoum Al-Jassem was taken to an al-Qaeda-run Sharia court in Rakka, Syria, after she was caught using the social networking website. The Sharia court declared that the use of a Facebook account amounts to adultery and that the girl should be punished by stoning.

This extremely strict interpretation of Islam represents a serious breach of human rights and democratic values. The sentencing to death of a young girl for using a social networking website is intolerable and inconceivable in the 21st century.

Given that similar cases have also been reported, how does the Vice‐President/High Representative intend to address this continued violation of human rights by al-Qaeda-run Sharia Courts?

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

(28 July 2014)

The EU is aware that extremist groups in control of certain areas are imposing a strict interpretation of Islamic law, incompatible with human rights.

The Foreign Affairs Council has repeatedly voiced its concern about the spread of extremism and extremist groups, including ISIL and Jabhat al-Nusra. Their involvement in the conflict poses a threat to the peace process, the territorial integrity of Syria and to regional and international security. The Council has called on all relevant parties to halt the support to these groups. The EU is particularly concerned about the plight of all vulnerable groups, including women. The EU will continue to reach out to all relevant stakeholders, including in the region, to address the issue of spreading extremist influence in Syria.

The EU has welcomed the 7th report of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic published on 5 March 2014 and its recommendations. It recalls that all responsible for crimes against humanity and human rights violations must be held accountable and that there can be no impunity for any such violations and abuses.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005063/14

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(17 avril 2014)

Objet: Livre numérique

Après la campagne de sensibilisation, l'action. Sur la plateforme Change.org, le Bureau européen des bibliothèques et des associations d'information et de documentation (Eblida) entend mobiliser les citoyens européens sur la question du prêt de livres numériques en bibliothèque. L'organe vient de lancer une pétition pour donner aux usagers des services bibliothécaires «le droit de lire numérique en légalisant le prêt de livres numériques par les bibliothèques».

Quelle est la position de la Commission sur le livre numérique?

Réponse donnée par M. Barnier au nom de la Commission

(19 juin 2014)

La question du régime juridique s'appliquant au prêt de livres numériques en bibliothèque, qui est déjà légalement possible sur base d'accords de licence entre les bibliothèques et les titulaires des droits d'auteur, fait partie du réexamen du cadre européen du droit d'auteur que la Commission a engagé depuis fin 2013.

Ce sujet a été couvert par les études et la consultation publique que la Commission a récemment menées dans le contexte de ce réexamen.

La Commission n'a pas encore adopté de conclusions quant à ce réexamen, ni une orientation sur ce sujet spécifique mais prépare actuellement un livre blanc sur le cadre législatif du droit d'auteur.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005063/14

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: E-books

First the awareness campaign, now action. On the Change.org platform, the European Bureau of Library Information and Documentation Associations (Eblida) is planning to mobilise European citizens on the question of lending e-books in libraries. The organisation has just launched a petition to give users of library services the ‘right to e-read by legalising the lending of e-books by libraries’.

What is the position of the Commission on e-books?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M. Barnier au nom de la Commission

(19 juin 2014)

Ce sujet a été couvert par les études et la consultation publique que la Commission a récemment menées dans le contexte de ce réexamen.

(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)

Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-005073/14

Komisijai

Juozas Imbrasas (EFD)

(2014 m. balandžio 17 d.)

Tema: Asmenys su negalia

Europos Sąjungoje priskaičiuojama 10% asmenų su vidutine negalia ir 4,5% su sunkia negalia. 75% asmenų, kurie naudojasi asmeninio asistento teikiamomis paslaugomis ir todėl priklauso nuo jų dalyvaudami ekonominiame, socialiniame bei kultūriniame gyvenime, yra išskiriami iš bendrosios visuomenės, t. y. patiria diskriminaciją dėl savo funkcinių sutrikimų.

Jungtinių Tautų Neįgaliųjų teisių konvencija įtvirtina asmeninio asistento pagalbos būtinumą siekiant asmenų nepriklausomo gyvenimo (19 str.).

Asmeninė pagalba yra būtina siekiant, kad asmenys su funkciniais sutrikimais (negalia) galėtų pilnai naudotis savo galimybėmis laisvai ir oriai priimti sprendimus, kontroliuoti savo gyvenimo įvairius aspektus ir realizuoti šias galimybes, įgydami tokias pačias teises ir pareigas kaip ir kiti piliečiai.

Prieinama asmeninio asistento pagalbos sistema užtikrina šią teisę, atliepia asmenų su funkciniais sutrikimais poreikius, jiems suteikdama tinkamas, efektyvias bei nuoseklias paslaugas, bei sutaupo apie 30% ilgalaikės priežiūros išlaidų.

Kaip Komisija ketina skatinti bei užtikrinti nepriklausomą gyvenimą funkcinių sutrikimų turintiems asmenims, atsižvelgiant į neįgalių asmenų kaip Europos piliečių poreikius, galimybes bei siekius, atitinkamai užtikrinant asmeninės pagalbos ir socialinių teisių užtikrinimo realizavimo standartus?

J. Hahno atsakymas Komisijos vardu

(2014 m. liepos 7 d.)

Komisija norėtų atkreipti gerbiamo Europos Parlamento nario dėmesį į savo atsakymą į raštu užduotą klausimą E-010955/2013 (8). Atsakyme į tą klausimą paminėtas Komisijos pasiūlymas dėl Europos socialinio fondo (ESF) reglamento priimtas kaip Reglamentas (ES) Nr. 1304/2013 (9). 3 straipsnio b punkto iv papunktyje nurodyta, kad „galimybių naudotis įperkamomis, tvariomis ir aukštos kokybės paslaugomis, įskaitant sveikatos priežiūrą ir visuotinės svarbos socialines paslaugas, didinimas“ yra vienas iš šešių investavimo prioritetų siekiant skatinti socialinę įtrauktį, kovoti su skurdu ir bet kokia diskriminacija.

2014‐2020 m. ne mažiau kaip 20 proc. ESF lėšų bus skirta socialinės įtraukties, kovos su skurdu ir bet kokia diskriminacija sritims. Vadovaujantis 2010‐2020 m. Europos strategija dėl negalios, siekiant šio tikslo, remiamas perėjimas nuo institucinės prie bendruomeninės globos paslaugų žmonėms su negalia, daug dėmesio skiriant sveikatos ir socialinių paslaugų integravimui.

Perėjimo prie bendruomeninių paslaugų rėmimas taip pat yra vienas iš Europos regioninės plėtros fondo investavimo prioritetų, siekiant gerinti galimybes naudotis aukštos kokybės paslaugomis, investuojant į tradicinės sveikatos apsaugos ir socialinę infrastruktūrą, švietimą, būstą ir specializuotas paslaugas.

Komisija valstybes nares nuolat skatino keistis asmeninės paramos finansavimo planų įgyvendinimo gerąja patirtimi, ypač pasitelkiant aukšto lygio grupę neįgaliųjų klausimams spręsti. Be to, Komisija remia bendrų veiksmų planą, į kurį įtraukta Europos ekspertų grupės perėjimo nuo institucinės prie bendruomeninės globos klausimais (EEG) veikla. EEG įvairiose šalyse rengia informavimo ir mokymo seminarus, kurių tikslas – praktiškai skatinti gyventi savarankiškai.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005073/14

to the Commission

Juozas Imbrasas (EFD)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: Persons with disabilities

In the European Union, 10% of people live with a moderate disability and 4.5% with a severe disability. As many as 75% of people use personal assistance services, and therefore depend on them in their economic, social and cultural lives, and are not treated in the same way as ordinary members of the general public, i.e. they are discriminated against because of their functional impairment.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities recognises that persons with disabilities are entitled to personal assistance services in order to enable them to live independently (Article 19).

Personal assistance is necessary to ensure that persons with functional impairments (disabilities) can develop their full potential with dignity and have the freedom to make decisions, control various aspects of their lives, on the basis of the same rights and obligations as other citizens.

The personal assistance system safeguards this right and responds to the needs of people with functional impairments by giving them proper, efficient and consistent service, thus saving about 30% of long-term care costs.

In what way does the Commission intend to promote and ensure independent living for persons with functional impairments, taking into account the needs, opportunities and aspirations of persons with disabilities as EU citizens, by providing them with personal assistance and guaranteeing them the same social rights as other citizens?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2014)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-010955/2013. (10) The Commission's proposal for the European Social Fund (ESF) Regulation mentioned in the answer to that question has resulted in the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013. (11) Article 3 (b) (iv) thereof identifies ‘enhancing access to affordable, sustainable and high quality services including healthcare and social services of general interest’ as one of the six investment priorities for achieving the objective of promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination.

In 2014-2020 at least 20% of funding available under the ESF will target social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination. In line with the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020, this objective will support the transition from institutional care to community-based care services for people with disabilities, with a focus on integrating health and social services.

Promoting the transition to community-based services is also one of the investment priorities of the European Regional Development Fund with the objective to improve access to high quality services through investments in mainstream health and social infrastructure, education, housing and specialised services.

The Commission has been promoting the exchange of good practices among Member States on personal assistance funding schemes, in particular through the Disability High Level Group. Moreover the Commission supports the Joint Action covering the activities of the European Expert Group on the Transition from Institutional to Community-Based Care (EEG). The EEG is running national information and training seminars on promoting independent living in practice.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005124/14

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(17 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Volantini antisemiti a Donetsk

Volantini recanti la firma della «Repubblica popolare di Donetsk» e diffusi in una sinagoga della città capoluogo dell'omonima provincia, invitano «i cittadini ebrei sopra i 16 anni [a] presentarsi per la registrazione obbligatoria», in quanto rei di aver appoggiato la «giunta nazionalista» di Kiev e di essere «ostili agli ortodossi di Donetsk». Secondo la comunità ebraica locale si tratta solo di una provocazione che mira a esacerbare il conflitto, ma non del primo attacco contro cittadini ucraini di fede ebraica. Attacchi analoghi sono avvenuti infatti anche in Crimea, prima dell'autoproclamata secessione, e dopo.

Intende il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante prendere posizione contro questo nuovo attacco, che rappresenta chiaramente un caso di «hate speech»?

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

(24 luglio 2014)

Il razzismo, la xenofobia e i discorsi di incitamento all'odio di ogni genere sono intollerabili. È di fondamentale importanza garantire la sicurezza e il rispetto dei diritti umani, compresi i diritti delle minoranze, per tutte le persone presenti sul territorio ucraino, indipendentemente dall'appartenenza etnica, dalla religione o dall'origine nazionale.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005124/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — Anti-Semitic flyers in Donetsk

Flyers bearing the signature ‘People's Republic of Donetsk’, circulated at a synagogue in the capital of that province, ordered ‘Jewish citizens over the age of 16 to present for compulsory registration’ because they were guilty of supporting the ‘nationalist Junta’ in Kiev and ‘hostile to the orthodox citizens of Donetsk’. According to the local Jewish community, this was merely a provocation designed to exacerbate the conflict, but is not the first attack against Ukrainian citizens of the Jewish persuasion. There have in fact been comparable attacks in Crimea, both before and after the self-proclaimed secession.

Does the Vice-President/High Representative intend to adopt a position against this fresh attack, clearly an example of ‘hate speech’?

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

(24 July 2014)

Racism, xenophobia and hate speech of any kind are unacceptable. Ensuring security and respect for human rights, including minority rights, for all those present on Ukrainian territory, regardless of ethnicity, religion or national origin is essential.

(Svensk version)

Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-005133/14

till kommissionen (Vice-ordföranden/Höga representanten)

Anna Hedh (S&D)

(17 april 2014)

Angående: VP/HR – Saudiarabien och mänskliga rättigheter

Saudiarabien fortsätter att begå omfattande brott mot grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter trots att landet har förklarat att det godtar många rekommendationer i den allmänna återkommande utvärderingen från 2009 inför FN:s råd för mänskliga rättigheter. Saudiarabien kränker religiösa minoriteters rättigheter regelbundet och människor som tillhör dessa minoriteter lever under hot och flera av dem har blivit gripna.

I maj 2012 fängslades Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi och Saud Falih Awad al-Enezi, för att de blivit medlemmar av Ahmadiyyasamfundet i Saudiarabien. Sedan dess har de hållits fängslade utan åtal. Deras nuvarande vistelseort och status är okänd, och de har inte fått tillgång till juridiskt biträde.

Situationen är ohållbar och EU har ansvar att i sina relationer med Saudiarabien ta upp frågan och kräva att alla religiösa minoriteters grundläggande rättigheter respekteras.

Med bakgrund av detta vill jag ställa följande frågor till VP/HR:

Hur jobbar EU med att uppmana Saudiarabien att säkerställa verklig religionsfrihet, särskilt med avseende på offentligt utövande och religiösa minoriteter?

Om situationen fortsätter vara oförändrad vad finns det för strategier framåt i EU:s relation med landet?

Hur jobbar EU:s delegation i Riyadh med dessa frågor?

Gör EU något konkret för att Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi och Saud Falih Awad al‐Enezi ska släppas?

Svar från den höga representanten/vice ordföranden Catherine Ashton på kommissionens vägnar

(4 juli 2014)

EU följer genom sin delegation och sina diplomatiska beskickningar i Riyadh noga situationen för de mänskliga rättigheterna i Saudiarabien, bl.a. när det gäller religionsfrihet, som ett led i sin regelbundna rapportering. EU för också en informell dialog med de saudiska myndigheterna om människorättsfrågor i landet, däribland religiös tolerans.

2.	EU har för avsikt att inleda en dialog om olika sätt att främja en interreligiös och interkulturell dialog i Saudiarabien, som bygger på den interreligiösa dialog som inleddes av kung Abdullah 2008 och inrättandet av King Abdullah International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue.

3.	När det gäller situationen för Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi och Saud Falih Awad Al-Enezi träffade EU-delegationen företrädare för Ahmadiyyasamfundet tidigare i år för att diskutera deras fall. EU-delegationen kommer att fortsätta att göra påtryckningar för att de ska friges.

Mot bakgrund av ovanstående tog EU-delegationen upp fallet Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi och Saud Falih Awad Al-Enezi med det saudiarabiska utrikesministeriet i slutet av maj och fick bekräftelse på att ärendet skulle undersökas av myndigheterna, särskilt av den nationella föreningen för mänskliga rättigheter och kommissionen för mänskliga rättigheter.

5.	EU-delegationen kommer att fortsätta att följa upp denna fråga.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005133/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Anna Hedh (S&D)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — Saudi Arabia and human rights

Saudi Arabia is continuing to commit widespread breaches of fundamental human rights, in spite of having declared its acceptance of many recommendations in the 2009 Universal Periodic Review by the UN Human Rights Council. Saudi Arabia regularly violates the rights of religious minorities; people who belong to these minorities are living under threat and many of them have been arrested.

In May 2012 Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi and Saud Falih Awad al-Enezi were arrested for becoming members of the Ahmadiyya community in Saudi Arabia. Since then they have been kept in prison without being charged. Their present whereabouts and status are not known, and they have not had access to legal representation.

This situation is intolerable and the EU has a responsibility, in its relations with Saudi Arabia, to take up the matter and demand that the fundamental rights of all religious minorities should be respected.

In the light of the above, I should like to ask the Vice-President/High Representative:

What action is the EU taking to urge Saudi Arabia to ensure genuine freedom of religion, particularly with a view to the public practice of religion and religious minorities?

If the situation remains unchanged, what strategies does the EU propose to adopt in future in relations with Saudi Arabia?

How is the EU delegation in Riyadh dealing with these issues?

Is the EU doing anything specifically to ensure the release of Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi and Saud Falih Awad al-Enezi?

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

(4 July 2014)

The EU through the EU Delegation and EU diplomatic missions in Riyadh is closely following the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, including religious freedom, as part of its regular reporting. Further, the EU consistently engages with the relevant Saudi authorities in an informal dialogue on human rights concerns in the kingdom, including religious tolerance.

The EU intends to start a dialogue on possible ways of promoting interreligious and intercultural dialogue in Saudi Arabia, building on the Interfaith Dialogue Initiative launched by the king in 2008 and the subsequent establishment of the King Abdullah International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue.

3.	With regard to the situation of Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi and Saud Falih Awad Al-Enezi, the EU Delegation met with representatives of the Ahmadiyya Community earlier this year to discuss the case of the two converts the EU Delegation will continue pressing for their release.

In light of the above, the EU Delegation raised the case of Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi and Saud Falih Awad Al-Enezi with the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the end of May and got confirmation that the case would be looked into by the authorities, notably the National Society for Human Rights and the Human Rights Commission.

5.	The EU Delegation will continue to follow up on this issue.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-005136/14

to the Commission

Linda McAvan (S&D)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: Promoting research into the experimental off-label use of medicines

A number of academic researchers and senior doctors have raised with me the problem of a lack of funding for drug repurposing (i.e. experimental research into whether medicines developed for a certain use can be used to treat other things). They are having to find their own funding for clinical trials into the experimental off-label use of medicines, as the pharmaceutical industry has less economic incentive to invest in this area.

Does the Commission agree that this is an area where big breakthroughs could potentially be made relatively easily, because of the fact that the medicines have already been through clinical trials for their other indications, and so we already have a good picture of their general safety and impact? Is the Commission or the European Medicines Agency doing any work in this area to promote research into new off-label uses? Does the Commission think there is scope for an incentive scheme to encourage companies to invest in this area, along the lines of the schemes we have developed for antibiotics, orphan and paediatric medicines?

I understand that the revised Clinical Trials Regulation will make it much easier and cheaper to carry out clinical trials for established off-label use (i.e. where it is standard clinical practice to prescribe a certain medicine off-label), as these fall into a new category for low-intervention trials. But this does not cover experimental off-label use.

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2014)

The Honourable Member is referred to the follow up to the European Parliament resolution on the report from the Commission to the Council on the basis of Member States' reports on the implementation of the Council Recommendation (2009/C 151/01) on patient safety, including the prevention and control of healthcare‐ associated infections. This was adopted by the Commission on 29 January 2014 (12) and transmitted to the European Parliament on 7 March 2014. In its answer, the Commission acknowledged that the issue of off-label use of medicinal products is complex and deserves consideration and informed that it is planning to commission a study in 2014 in order to understand the ramification of the issue of off-label use of medicinal products.

The Commission would also like to confirm to the Honourable Member that the recently adopted Regulation on Clinical Trials will facilitate clinical research with medicinal products used off-label when their use is established at least in one of the participating Member States.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005143/14

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(17 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: VP/HR — Política de vecindad con Egipto

Como consecuencia de la sucesión de acontecimientos que se han producido en el último año en Egipto, no se han realizado progresos significativos en relación con el Plan de Acción actualmente en marcha. El Gobierno de Egipto está todavía en proceso de renovación tras haberse aprobado mediante referéndum un proyecto constitucional.

Por otro lado, la situación actual en Siria está ocasionando el desplazamiento de un gran número de refugiados a Egipto, con un total de 129 031 ciudadanos sirios registrados como residentes en Egipto, si bien se estima que la cifra real está por encima de los 300 000. Un gran número de estos inmigrantes y refugiados llegan a Egipto para utilizar este país como plataforma de acceso al territorio de la Unión Europea, lo que da lugar a la proliferación de redes de tráfico de seres humanos y de mafias especializadas en el transporte de inmigrantes irregulares hacia los Estados miembros de la UE, hasta el punto de que en ocasiones se llegan a producir torturas para obligar al pago o a la colaboración en la comisión de delitos.

Teniendo en cuenta todo lo anterior, ¿de qué manera se están llevando a cabo o planeando proyectos de colaboración con el Gobierno de Egipto y con el Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) para normalizar la situación de los ciudadanos sirios desplazados por el conflicto que sufre su país, así como de los ciudadanos provenientes de otros países de África, y poner fin al tráfico de seres humanos que se está produciendo como consecuencia del desplazamiento masivo de personas que huyen de conflictos u otras situaciones de necesidad, y a las actividades delictivas que de él se derivan, y especialmente para que el colectivo sirio pueda encontrar una situación estable dentro de esta emergencia compleja que está viviendo?

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005144/14

a la Comisión

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(17 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Política de vecindad con Egipto

Respuesta conjunta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Ashton en nombre de la Comisión

(10 de julio de 2014)

La UE es plenamente consciente de la situación de los refugiados sirios y africanos en Egipto, a quienes a veces se detiene y expulsa sin fundamento jurídico suficiente, lo que vulnera el Derecho internacional.

La Unión ha planteado este asunto al ponerse en contacto con los interlocutores egipcios pertinentes, a quienes ha solicitado que se aclare el proceso jurídico y se establezca un régimen de visados temporales.

La UE está atenta a la situación del tráfico de seres humanos en Egipto, en especial en el Sinaí. La UE mantiene contactos periódicos con el Ministerio egipcio de Asuntos Exteriores y con el del Interior, así como con las oficinas regionales de la ACNUR y la OIM.

En numerosas ocasiones, hemos trasladado nuestras preocupaciones a las autoridades egipcias: la UE continúa pidiéndoles que adopten las medidas adecuadas para garantizar el pleno respeto de los derechos humanos de migrantes y refugiados y la observación del principio de no devolución para todos los migrantes que necesiten protección internacional. Asimismo, la Unión Europea ha solicitado a la ACNUR que cumpla su mandato en la totalidad del territorio de Egipto, incluida la región del Sinaí, de conformidad con los compromisos internacionales del país.

La Delegación de la UE en El Cairo sigue atentamente la situación sobre el terreno, con la participación tanto de Estados miembros de la Unión como del coordinador regional de la ACNUR.

Sin embargo, de no emprenderse reformas profundas en el sector de la seguridad y adoptarse medidas complementarias que aborden el tráfico de seres humanos y la delincuencia organizada, resulta improbable que la situación mejore. La Unión Europea está preparada para apoyar a las autoridades egipcias en la lucha contra los traficantes y para controlar más eficazmente sus fronteras, al tiempo que cumplen sus compromisos internacionales en materia de derechos humanos. Hasta la fecha, las autoridades egipcias no se han mostrado abiertas en cuanto a la oferta de cooperación en las reformas del sector de la seguridad.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005143/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — neighbourhood policy: Egypt

Because of the events which have taken place in Egypt over the course of the last year, no real progress has been made in connection with the country’s current Action Plan. The Egyptian Government is still in a process of renovation, following the approval by referendum of a draft constitution.

On the other hand, the current situation in Syria is causing many refugees to flee to Egypt. A total of 129 031 Syrian citizens are now registered as resident in Egypt, although the real figure is calculated to be over 300 000. Many of these immigrants and refugees come to Egypt with the intention of using it as springboard for access to EU territory, which has led to a proliferation of human trafficking networks and mafias specialising in transporting irregular migrants on towards EU Member States, which sometimes even use torture to force their victims to pay money or participate in criminal activities.

In light of the above, what is being done to plan or implement projects in collaboration with the Egyptian Government and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to regularise the situation of Syrian citizens displaced by the war in their country, and that of people from other African countries, and to put an end to the human trafficking which has arisen from the mass displacement of people fleeing from conflict and other desperate situations and the criminal activities linked to it and, in particular, to ensure that displaced Syrians can find some stability within the complex emergency situation affecting them?

Question for written answer E-005144/14

to the Commission

Salvador Sedó i Alabart (PPE)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: Neighbourhood policy: Egypt

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

(10 July 2014)

The EU is fully aware of the situation of Syrian and African refugees in Egypt, sometimes detained and expelled without sufficient legal grounds, in violation of international law.

The EU has raised this issue in its contacts with relevant Egyptian interlocutors asking to clarify the legal process and introduce a temporary visa scheme.

The EU follows closely the situation of human trafficking in Egypt, in particular in Sinai. The EU keeps 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.

Our concerns have been expressed at numerous occasions to the Egyptian authorities: the EU continues to ask them to take the appropriate measures to ensure that the human rights of migrants and refugees are fully respected, and that the principle of non-refoulement is observed for all migrants in need of international protection. The EU has further asked 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 Delegation in Cairo is following this matter closely on the ground, involving EU Member States and the UNHCR Regional Coordinator.

However, without a thorough reform of the security sector as well as complementary measures addressing trafficking in human beings and organised crime, it is unlikely that the situation will improve. The EU stands ready to support the Egyptian authorities' fight against traffickers and to control the borders in a more efficient manner while fulfilling their international human rights commitments. The Egyptian authorities, to date, have not been forthcoming on the offer for cooperation on Security Sector Reforms.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-005173/14

à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)

Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL) e Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL)

(17 de abril de 2014)

Assunto: VP/HR — demolições em curso por Israel de projetos de ajuda humanitária financiados pela UE

Em 8 de abril de 2014, Israel desmantelou três projetos de ajuda humanitária financiados pela UE em Ras-a-Baba, que se situa no corredor E1 da Cisjordânia. Em 2012, cerca de 79 estruturas financiadas pela UE foram demolidas na zona C da Cisjordânia e na região de Jerusalém, e mais 54 foram destruídas durante os primeiros seis meses de 2013.

De acordo com informações prestadas pela Comissão Europeia, entre 2002 e 2012, Israel destruiu projetos de desenvolvimento estimados em 49,2 milhões EUR, dos quais 29,4 milhões EUR foram financiados pela UE ou pelos seus Estados-Membros.

Desde o início das negociações, no verão de 2013, foram iniciados os trabalhos de construção de 10.509 unidades habitacionais ilegais.

O Conselho dos Negócios Estrangeiros da UE reconheceu em 2012 a urgência da situação no terreno e reiterou que os aglomerados habitacionais permanecem ilegais ao abrigo do direito internacional.

A destruição de bens móveis ou imóveis viola o artigo 53.° da Quarta Convenção de Genebra bem como o artigo 2.° do Acordo de Associação UE-Israel. Este último artigo refere expressamente que as relações entre ambos os atores se baseiam na adesão mútua aos direitos humanos e aos princípios democráticos. Pese embora este acordo, Israel continua porém a violar os direitos dos palestinianos em todos os territórios ocupados.

Face a isto, poderá a Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante:

Descrever cada instrumento de que a UE dispõe e a que pode recorrer para obrigar Israel a modificar a sua política a fim de respeitar o direito internacional?

Explicar em que situação a Alta Representante consideraria justificada a suspensão do Acordo de Associação UE-Israel, tendo em conta o malogro da política da UE de protesto verbal e a sua obrigação de respeitar as obrigações internacionais a que está vinculada?

Descrever os passos que a Comissão dará nas suas relações com Israel, na eventualidade muito provável de malogro da iniciativa Kerry em 29 de abril?

Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão

(10 de julho de 2014)

A UE, em especial através das conclusões do Conselho de 14 de maio de 2012 e de 16 de dezembro de 2013, manifestou a sua grande preocupação quanto às demolições de habitações e apelou a Israel para que cumpra as suas obrigações no que diz respeito às condições de vida da população palestiniana, fazendo cessar as transferências forçadas de população e a demolição das habitações e infraestruturas palestinianas. A AR/VP salientou igualmente a posição da UE sobre os colonatos e as demolições através de várias declarações da UE (13) e a questão é regularmente discutida no Conselho e com as autoridades israelitas. Além disso, a bem conhecida posição da UE sobre a ilegalidade dos colonatos (14) é traduzida nas suas políticas.

A Comissão está a aplicar orientações no sentido de impedir que os colonatos beneficiem dos programas da UE e está a trabalhar no estabelecimento de orientações em matéria de rotulagem.

A ação diplomática junto das autoridades israelitas continua a ser a melhor forma de transmitir as posições da UE e não estamos a equacionar a possibilidade de uma suspensão do acordo de associação. Contudo, o Conselho tornou claro que uma atualização do plano de ação UE-IL só pode ter lugar com base em valores partilhados e na consecução de progressos no Processo de paz no Médio Oriente (PPMO).

Nas conclusões do Conselho dos Negócios Estrangeiros de maio de 2014, a UE reafirma o seu apoio ao relançamento das negociações de paz e o seu empenhamento numa solução «dois Estados» (15).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005173/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL) and Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — Israel's ongoing demolitions of EU-funded humanitarian aid projects

On 8 April 2014, Israel dismantled three EU-funded humanitarian aid projects in Ras‐a‐Baba, which lies in the E1 corridor of the West Bank. Some 79 EU-funded structures were demolished in the West Bank’s ‘Area C’ and Jerusalem region in 2012 and 54 more were destroyed in the first six months of 2013.

According to the information provided by the Commission between 2002 and 2012, Israel destroyed development projects worth EUR 49.2 million, of which EUR 29.4 million was funded by the EU or its Member States.

Since the beginning of the negotiations in the summer of 2013, work has begun on 10 509 illegal settlement units.

In 2012 the EU Foreign Affairs Council recognised the urgency of the situation on the ground and reiterated that ‘settlements remain illegal under international law’.

Destruction of real and personal property is a violation of Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which explicitly states that relations between the two actors will be based on mutual adherence to human rights and democratic principles. However, in spite of this agreement, Israel continues to violate the rights of Palestinians throughout the occupied territories.

In this context could the Vice-President/High Representative::

describe each of the instruments that the EU has at its disposal and that it will use to make Israel modify its policy so as to comply with international law?

explain in what situation she would consider the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement as being justified, taking into account the failure of the EU’s policy of verbal protests and its duty to respect its international obligations?

describe the steps that the Commission is going to take in its relations with Israel in the very likely case of a failure of the Kerry Initiative by 29 April 2014?

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

(10 July 2014)

The EU, in particular through the Council conclusions of 14 May 2012 and 16 December 2013, has expressed its grave concern at house demolitions and called upon Israel to meet its obligations regarding the living conditions of the Palestinian population, including by halting the forced transfer of population and demolitions of Palestinian housing and infrastructure. The HR/VP has also expressed the EU position on settlements and demolitions through several EU statements (16) and the issue is regularly discussed in the Council and with the Israeli authorities. In addition, the EU's well-known position on the illegality of settlements (17) is translated in its policies.

The Commission is implementing the guidelines on preventing settlements from benefitting from EU programmes and work is underway on guidelines on labelling.

Engagement with the Israeli Authorities remains the best way to convey EU positions, and we are not contemplating a suspension of the Association Agreement. However, the Council made it clear that an upgrade of the EU-IL Action Plan can only take place on the basis of shared values and progress in the MEPP.

In the May 2014 FAC conclusions, the EU reiterated its support to the resumption of peace negotiations and reaffirms its commitment to a two-state solution (18).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-005189/14

à Comissão

Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL) e Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL)

(17 de abril de 2014)

Assunto: Bairro do Sobreiro — Maia, Portugal

O Bairro do Sobreiro, no concelho da Maia, é um bairro de habitação social construído nos anos 80 e cuja gestão compete atualmente a uma empresa municipal designada «Espaço Municipal».

Este bairro alberga atualmente cerca de 800 famílias, mas, à semelhança do que aconteceu no passado, poderia albergar muitas mais se não fosse a falta de manutenção dos edifícios e a consequente degradação e insalubridade dos mesmos. Há aliás alguns edifícios que estão em perigo iminente de derrocada, havendo 2 edifícios onde nem sequer há luz nas zonas comuns do prédio.

Acresce que este bairro foi construído com placas de fibrocimento com amianto, o que coloca em sério risco a saúde de todos os que habitam naqueles edifícios, sobretudo tendo em conta o estado de degradação dos mesmos.

Num momento em que em Portugal se vive uma crescente crise social em consequência da aplicação das políticas de austeridade, cresce a necessidade de respostas em termos de habitação social e de custos controlados. É, pois, fundamental a requalificação das habitações existentes e a criação de novas.

Face ao exposto, perguntamos:

Que medidas pretende a Comissão tomar face a esta situação?

Entende a Comissão que é viável manter 800 famílias nestes fogos com cobertura de fibrocimento com amianto?

Pode um Estado-Membro manter edifícios destinados a habitação social nestas condições?

Que medidas tem a Comissão previstas para promover a oferta de habitação social nos Estados-Membros?

Resposta dada por Siim Kallas em nome da Comissão

(10 de julho de 2014)

A Comissão está ciente do impacto adverso que a crise económica teve sobre a situação social em Portugal. Consequentemente, apoia firmemente os esforços do governo para limitar, na medida do possível, o impacto das medidas adotadas no âmbito do programa de ajustamento macroeconómico nos setores vulneráveis da sociedade. Além disso, a Comissão apoia igualmente o reforço dos programas sociais ao abrigo dos fundos estruturais e sociais da UE, particularmente na área das políticas de emprego.

Embora lamente a precária situação da habitação social no Bairro do Sobreiro, a Comissão salienta que os projetos de habitação nos Estados-Membros que aderiram à UE antes de 2004 não são elegíveis para financiamento ao abrigo dos fundos estruturais da UE. Além disso, do ponto de vista regulamentar, a Comissão não tem competência para interferir em projetos de habitação social nos Estados-Membros, cabendo a estes garantir que as normas relativas às condições de alojamento condigno e saudável em matéria de habitação social sejam respeitadas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005189/14

to the Commission

Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL) and Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: Bairro do Sobreiro — Maia, Portugal

Bairro do Sobreiro, in Maia, is a social housing estate built in the 1980s, which is currently managed by a municipal enterprise called ‘Espaço Municipal’ (Municipal Space).

The estate is currently home to some 800 families but could, as in the past, house many more were it not for the fact that the buildings have not been maintained and, as a result, are in a poor state of repair and pose health and safety risks. There are also some buildings that are in danger of imminent collapse, and two buildings where there is not even any lighting in the communal areas.

In addition, the estate was built using fibre-cement boards containing asbestos, which is a serious health risk to everyone living in these buildings, especially given their poor state of repair.

At a time when Portugal is experiencing a growing social crisis because of the implementation of austerity policies, there is an increasing need for a response in the form of social and low-cost housing. This means it is vital to renovate existing homes and build new ones.

Can the Commission answer the following questions in the light of the above:

What measures is the Commission planning to take as regards this situation?

Does the Commission think it is appropriate to continue to house 800 families in homes with fibre-cement roofing containing asbestos?

Is a Member State allowed to leave buildings used for social housing in this condition?

What measures does the Commission plan to take to promote the supply of social housing in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2014)

The Commission is aware of the adverse impact the economic crisis has had on the social situation in Portugal. As a consequence, it strongly supported the government's endeavour to limit, to the extent possible, the impact of the measures taken under the Macroeconomic Adjustment Programme on the vulnerable sectors of the society. Moreover, the Commission also supports the reinforcement of social programmes under the EU Structural and Social Funds, particularly in the area of labour market policies.

While regretting the dismal situation of social housing in the Barris do Sobrero the Commission emphasises that housing projects in Member States that became EU members before 2004 are not eligible for financing under EU Structural Funds. Also, from a regulatory perspective, the Commssion is not competent to interfere in social housing projects in Member States as it is up to the Member States themselves to ensure that rules regarding decent and healthy lodging conditions in social housing are respected.

(Suomenkielinen versio)

Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-005204/14

komissiolle (Varapuheenjohtajalle/Korkealle edustajalle)

Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE)

(17. huhtikuuta 2014)

Aihe: VP/HR – EU:n reaktio demokratiaan ja oikeusvaltioperiaatteen noudattamiseen liittyviin äskettäisiin ongelmiin Turkissa

Vuonna 2012 ja vuoden 2013 alussa osa kaikkein vastahakoisimmista jäsenvaltioista ilmoitti, että ne olisivat valmiit avaamaan ainakin yhden uuden neuvotteluluvun (aluepolitiikkaa ja rakennepolitiikan välineiden yhteensovittamista koskeva luku 22) osana neuvotteluja Turkin liittymisestä EU:hun. Neuvottelujen oli määrä alkaa kesäkuussa 2013.

Innostus laantui kuitenkin EU:n taholta nopeasti touko–kesäkuussa 2013, kun poliisi vastasi laajalle levinneisiin hallituksen vastaisiin protesteihin kohtuuttomalla voimankäytöllä. Kaikesta huolimatta EU ilmoitti 5.11.2013, että se oli sopinut luvun 22 avaamisesta (tosin liittymisneuvottelujen uudelleenkäynnistämistä lykättiin loppusyksyyn 2013). Lisäksi Turkin kanssa käynnistettiin takaisinottosopimusta ja viisumivapausjärjestelmään tähtäävää etenemissuunnitelmaa koskevat neuvottelut 16.12.2013. Samaan aikaan Turkin hallitusta vastaan esitettiin väitteitä massiivisesta korruptiosta, mikä johti uuteen vastalauseaaltoon eri puolilla maata.

1.	Miksi EU päätti jatkaa liittymisneuvotteluja ja viisumivapausjärjestelmän suunnittelua huolimatta väitteistä laajamittaisesta korruptiosta?

2.	Miten varapuheenjohtaja/korkea edustaja arvioi maaliskuussa 2013 pidettyjä kunnallisvaaleja? Olivatko ne vapaat ja oikeudenmukaiset?

3.	Mitä tulevia toimia on suunniteltu Turkin EU:hun liittymisen suhteen, ja ovatko nämä suunnitelmat muuttuneet johtuen maan nykyhallituksen ongelmista noudattaa demokraattisia perusnormeja ja oikeusvaltioperiaatetta?

Štefan Fülen komission puolesta antama vastaus

(24. kesäkuuta 2014)

Turkin kanssa käytävät liittymisneuvottelut perustuvat neuvoston lokakuussa 2005 hyväksymään neuvottelukehykseen. Viisumivapautta koskevan vuoropuhelun aloittaminen Turkin kanssa noudattaa neuvoston kesäkuussa 2012 esittämiä päätelmiä yhteistyön kehittämisestä Turkin kanssa oikeus‐ ja sisäasioiden alalla.

Komissio on pannut merkille kunnallisvaalien lopulliset tulokset, jotka vaalien toimittamisesta vastaava Turkin lainkäyttöelin, ylin vaalilautakunta, julkisti 6. toukokuuta.

Komissio katsoo, että vuorovaikutus Turkin kanssa on paras tapa varmistaa, että EU ja sen normit ovat edelleen kiintopiste Turkin toimille oikeusvaltion alalla. Komissio on kuitenkin samalla ilmaissut avoimesti huolensa viime kuukausien tapahtumista Turkissa ja kehottanut Turkkia toteuttamaan kaikki tarvittavat toimenpiteet sen varmistamiseksi, että väitteitä korruptiosta ja väärinkäytöksistä tarkastellaan avoimesti ja puolueettomasti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005204/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — EU reaction to recent problems in the field of democracy and the rule of law in Turkey

In 2012 and at the beginning of 2013 some of the most reluctant Member States indicated that they would be prepared to open at least one new negotiating chapter (Chapter 22, on regional policy and coordination of structural instruments) as part of the negotiations on Turkey’s accession to the EU. Talks were due to commence in June 2013.

Enthusiasm on the part of the EU quickly waned in May and June 2013 as wide‐spread anti‐government protests were met with disproportionate force by the police. Nevertheless, on 5 November 2013 the EU announced that it had agreed to open Chapter 22 (although postponing the resumption of accession negotiations until late autumn 2013). Furthermore, a readmission agreement and the Roadmap Towards a Visa-Free Regime with Turkey were launched on 16 December 2013. At the same time, the Government of Turkey was faced with massive corruption allegations, which led to further protests throughout the country.

1.	Why did the EU — despite the huge corruption allegations — decide to go ahead with accession negotiations and arrangements for visa liberalisation?

2.	What is the Vice-President/High Representative’s evaluation of the municipal elections of March 2013? Were they free and fair?

3.	What future action has been planned in terms of Turkish integration into the EU and have these plans changed as a result of the issues which the current government has in terms of basic compliance with democratic norms and the rule of law?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2014)

Accession negotiations with Turkey are conducted on the basis of the negotiating framework adopted by the Council in October 2005. The launch of the visa liberalisation dialogue with Turkey is in line with the Council conclusions of June 2012 on developing cooperation with Turkey in the areas of Justice and Home Affairs.

The Commission has taken note of the final results of the municipal elections announced on 6 May by the Supreme Board of Elections, a judicial body responsible for the conduct of elections.

The Commission considers that engagement with Turkey is the best way for the EU and its standards to remain the benchmark for Turkey in the rule of law area. At the same time, the Commission has expressed openly its concerns about the developments in Turkey over the past months and called on Turkey to take all the necessary measures to ensure that allegations of corruption and wrongdoing are addressed in a transparent and impartial manner.

(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)

Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-005209/14

Komisijai

Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D)

(2014 m. balandžio 17 d.)

Tema: Stiklo taros standartizavimas ES

Kai kuriose valstybėse narės, pvz. Lietuvoje, susiduriama su stiklo taros supirkimo problema. Rinkoje parduodama daug produktų skirtingoje stiklo taroje, iš kurios superkama tik nedidelė dalis. Stiklo taros standartizavimas ES mastu leistų ženkliai padidinti jos supirkimą, sumažinti aplinkos taršą bei atneštų ekonominės naudos.

Norėjau sužinoti, ar Komisija planuoja imtis veiksmų stiklo taros standartizavimo srityje? Kaip šiuo metu yra reglamentuojamas šis klausimas ES mastu?

J. Potočniko atsakymas Komisijos vardu

(2014 m. liepos 4 d.)

Pakuotė gali būti teikiama rinkai, jei ji atitinka visus esminius Pakuočių ir pakuočių atliekų direktyvoje (19) numatytus sudėties ir tinkamumo naudoti, pakartotinai naudoti ir (arba) perdirbti reikalavimus. Manoma, kad šių reikalavimų laikomasi tada, kai pakuotė atitinka Europos Sąjungos oficialiajame leidinyje paskelbtus atitinkamus darniuosius standartus arba, jei tokių darniųjų standartų nėra, atitinkamus nacionalinius standartus.

Šiuo metu nėra stiklo tarai skirtų darniųjų standartų, ir Komisija kol kas nenumato jos standartizuoti. Stiklo taros įvairovę lemia rinkodaros ir komercinės priežastys, o standartizavimo priemonės gali daryti didelį ekonominį poveikį, ypač maisto ir gėrimų gamintojams.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005209/14

to the Commission

Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D)

(17 April 2014)

Subject: Standardisation of glass containers in the EU

Some Member States, for example, Lithuania, face the issue of container deposit. The market offers a lot of products in different glass containers, but only a small part of them could be purchased later. Standardisation of glass containers at EU-level would significantly increase their purchasing, reduce pollution and bring economic benefits.

Can the Commission say whether it intends to take any action in the field of standardisation of glass containers? How is this issue currently regulated at EU-level?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2014)

Packaging may be placed on the market if it complies with all the essential requirements of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (20) as regards its composition and reusable, recoverable, and/or recyclable nature. Compliance with these requirements is presumed where packaging complies with the relevant harmonised standards published in the Official Journal of the European Union or, where such harmonised standards do not exist, with the relevant national standards.

No harmonised standard currently exists for glass containers and the Commission does not currently envisage the standardisation of glass containers. Diversification of glass containers is driven by marketing and commercial reasons, and measures aimed at standardisation may have a significant economic impact, particularly on food and beverage producers.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-005217/14

προς την Επιτροπή

Theodoros Skylakakis (ALDE)

(23 Απριλίου 2014)

Θέμα: Όροι του διαγωνισμού ΤΑΙΠΕΔ για το Ελληνικό

Για το διαγωνισμό του Ελληνικού Ταμείου Αξιοποίησης Δημόσιας Περιουσίας (ΤΑΙΠΕΔ), για το οικόπεδο του τέως αεροδρομίου του Ελληνικού, η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή έχει προνομιακή πληροφόρηση, λόγω παρουσίας παρατηρητών τους οποίους έχει ορίσει στο ΔΣ του ΤΑΙΠΕΔ. Όπως ανέφερα σε προηγούμενη ερώτησή μου, οι όροι του διαγωνισμού άλλαξαν ουσιωδώς μετά την αποχώρηση ενός εκ των υποψηφίων. Συγκεκριμένα το μερίδιο 30% επί των συνολικών κερδών και ωφελημάτων του επενδυτή, έγινε 30% για το υπερβάλλον ποσό μετά την επίτευξη απόδοσης επένδυσης ύψους 15%. Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Αν υπάγεται με οποιοδήποτε τρόπο ο σχετικός διαγωνισμός στο ευρωπαϊκό δίκαιο — έστω και από πλευράς γενικών αρχών — είναι συμβατό με το ευρωπαϊκό δίκαιο να αλλάζουν οι όροι των διαγωνισμών με ουσιώδη τρόπο στη διάρκεια της διενέργειάς τους;

Πότε ενημερώθηκε από τους παρατηρητές για την αλλαγή αυτή των όρων η Επιτροπή;

Θα υπήρχε μια μόνο προσφορά αν ήταν εκ των προτέρων γνωστοί οι τελικοί όροι στους επενδυτές;

Ζήτησαν μετά την αλλαγή των όρων οι εναπομείναντες επενδυτές παράταση και, αν ναι, γιατί δεν τους δόθηκε;

Απάντηση του κ. Katainen εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(6 Αυγούστου 2014)

Βάσει των διαθέσιμων πληροφοριών, η Επιτροπή δεν έχει υπόψη της τυχόν ανησυχίες σχετικά με την εφαρμογή της νομοθεσίας της ΕΕ για την ιδιωτικοποίηση του οικοπέδου του Ελληνικού. Η εφαρμογή της διαδικασίας ιδιωτικοποιήσεων αποτελεί αποκλειστική αρμοδιότητα των εθνικών αρχών. Εναπόκειται δε στις εθνικές αρχές να διασφαλίσουν την τήρηση της σχετικής νομοθεσίας της ΕΕ και της εθνικής νομοθεσίας.

Δεν μπορούμε να προβούμε σε εικασίες σχετικά με τα πιθανά εναλλακτικά αποτελέσματα του διαγωνισμού, εάν οι συνθήκες θα ήταν διαφορετικές σε σύγκριση με τις τρέχουσες.

Το έργο του Ελληνικού άρχισε τον Δεκέμβριο του 2011 με τη δημοσίευση της εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος, ενώ οι διαπραγματεύσεις με τους τέσσερις επενδυτές και η οριστικοποίηση της συμφωνίας αγοράς μετοχών διήρκεσαν μέχρι τον Ιανουάριο του 2014. Το αποτέλεσμα είναι ότι, επιπλέον της επιλεγείσας προσφοράς των 915 εκατ. ευρώ, ο επιλεγείς υποψήφιος θα επενδύσει 1,3 δισ. ευρώ στο πάρκο και τις υποδομές. Το σχέδιο αναμένεται να δημιουργήσει 59 000 θέσεις εργασίας, να δώσει ώθηση στην οικονομία και να βελτιώσει το περιβάλλον (21).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005217/14

to the Commission

Theodoros Skylakakis (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Terms relating to the HRADF call for tenders for the Hellinikon site

The Commission is very well informed about the call for tenders held by the Hellenic Republic Asset Development Fund (HRADF) for the site of the former Hellinikon airport, owing to the presence of the observers it has appointed to the Board of HRADF. As I mentioned in a previous question (…..), the terms of the tender procedure changed substantially after the withdrawal of one of the bidders. More specifically, the 30% share of total profits and benefits for the investor changed to 30% on the excess amount after achieving a return on investments of 15%.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

If this call for tenders in any way falls within the scope of European law — even in terms of general principles — is it compatible with European law to alter the terms of tendering procedures substantively while they are under way?

When was the Commission informed by its observers about this change in the terms?

Would there have only been one bid if prospective investors had known the final terms from the outset?

After the terms were changed, did the other investors call for an extension and, if so, why was it not granted?

Answer given by Mr Katainen on behalf of the Commission

(6 August 2014)

Based on the available information, the Commission is not aware of any concerns relating to the application of EU rule of law to the privatisation of Hellinikon site. The implementation of the privatisation process is the exclusive responsibility of the national authorities. And it is the responsibility of the national authorities to ensure the compliance with the relevant EU and National Law.

We cannot speculate on the alternative possible outcomes of the tender if the conditions would have been different compared to the current ones.

The Hellinikon project started in December 2011 with the publication of the expression of interest while the negotiations with the four investors and the finalisation of the Share Purchase Agreement lasted until January 2014. The result is that in addition to EUR 915 million bid winning tender, the retained bidder will invest EUR 1.3 billion in the park and infrastructure. The project is expected to create 59 000 jobs, give impetus to the economy and improve the environment. (22)

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005241/14

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Charles Tannock (ECR)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: VP/HR — Persecution of Christians in Iran

The persecution of Christians in Iran is well-documented, and shows no sign of abating under President Rouhani’s regime. Five detainees have recently been sentenced to between three and a half and eight years’ imprisonment, on charges ranging from acting against national security through membership of a Christian organisation, to spreading propaganda against the Islamic Republic by helping disperse Christianity in the country. In reality, it appears that their sole crime is the peaceful exercise of Christian belief.

The accused are: Mr Farshid Fathi Malayer, Mr Alireza Sayyedian, Mr Saeed Abedinigalangashi, Mrs Maryam Naghash Zargaran and Mr Behnam Irani. A sixth detainee, Mr Amin Khaki, was detained on 5 March 2014, but has currently not been charged.

It appears that several of the detainees have suffered health problems since their arrest, with at least one being held in solitary confinement and another alleging physical mistreatment and the refusal of medical attention.

1.	Is the VP/HR aware of the cases of these six detainees?

2.	Does she agree that the continued detention of these individuals for their Christian belief, and their alleged mistreatment, is a violation of international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Iran is a State Party?

3.	Will she use her leverage with the Iranian authorities to call personally for their release, and to draw attention to the many other Christians in Iran who are currently imprisoned?

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

(25 August 2014)

The European Union is well aware of the situation regarding religious minorities in Iran. The situation of human rights in Iran remains of serious concern to the EU, notably with regard to the rights of people belonging to ethnic and religious minorities such as the Christians, including the six persons mentioned by the Honourable Member.

In this regard, the EU has, on several occasions, called on Iran to live up to international legal obligations on human rights, which Iran has itself signed up to, such as the International Covenant on Civil and political rights, also with particular regard to the rights of peoples belonging to religious minorities..

The EU will continue to emphasise, in its contacts with Iranian authorities and decision-makers, the need for Iran to respect religious freedom and will make full use of the EU Guidelines on Freedom of Religion or Belief, adopted by the Council last year.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-005258/14

à la Commission

Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: SNCM

Le 20 février 2012, la Commission a présenté sa «Stratégie visant à promouvoir le tourisme côtier et maritime européen» dans laquelle elle souligne son «fort potentiel en matière d'emploi et de croissance» et déplore la «fragmentation du secteur avec une forte proportion de PME».

Or, en 2012, la Société nationale maritime Corse-Méditerranée (SNCM) représentait 26 % des parts de marché pour le transport de voyageurs dans la région et 33 % pour le fret. Cependant, la Commission réclame actuellement 440 millions d'euros à la SNCM, dont le chiffre d'affaires est de 190 millions, soit près de 250 % de celui-ci.

La Commission agit à la suite d'une plainte déposée par l'entreprise Corsica Ferries, qui souhaite voir disparaître un concurrent jugé gênant. Or, cette société est la filiale d'une holding italo-suisse uniquement propriétaire de la marque commerciale. Les bateaux sont, eux, détenus par de nombreuses filiales situées dans des paradis fiscaux. Cette entreprise a d'ailleurs utilisé jusqu'en 1999 un pavillon de complaisance panaméen pour contourner les contraintes fiscales et sociales. Par ailleurs, cette société a déjà agi de la sorte en Sardaigne où elle est parvenue à faire disparaître l'opérateur public. Dix jours après la disparition de ce dernier, les tarifs augmentaient en moyenne de 140 % pour les passagers. La fréquentation touristique a chuté par la suite de 23 % en un an et l'effondrement du trafic maritime n'a été que partiellement compensé par une hausse du trafic aérien, plus polluant et privilégié par une clientèle plus aisée.

1.	La Commission ne voit-elle pas un paradoxe à vouloir voir émerger des entreprises puissantes dans le secteur du tourisme côtier et maritime tout en exigeant aux entreprises déjà existantes le remboursement de sommes représentant 250 % de leur chiffre d'affaires?

La Commission a-t-elle conscience qu'elle est garante des traités, qui promeuvent «la justice et la protection sociales» (article 3 du traité UE), assignent «pour but essentiel à leurs efforts l'amélioration constante des conditions de vie et d'emploi de leurs peuples» (préambule du traité FUE) et font référence à la Charte communautaire des droits sociaux fondamentaux des travailleurs, et qu'elle a donc un devoir de lutte contre le dumping social et fiscal?

Réponse donnée par M. Almunia au nom de la Commission

(13 juin 2014)

La Commission considère que la croissance d'entreprises dans le secteur du tourisme côtier et maritime ne peut être pérenne que si ces entreprises peuvent être assurées que le marché sera régi par des règles de concurrence équitables, justes et prévisibles. Le respect de cette exigence est d'autant plus important dans le secteur concerné puisque les investissements nécessaires à l'opération de lignes maritimes sont élevés et s'inscrivent dans des périodes d'exploitation relativement longues. Le respect des règles d'aides d'État demeure ainsi essentiel lorsque certaines entreprises sont bénéficiaires de soutiens financiers publics excédant largement leur chiffre d'affaires annuel, comme par exemple dans le cadre de délégation de service public pluriannuelle octroyée à la SNCM. Il est donc primordial de remédier à des distorsions de concurrence qui résultent de l'octroi d'aides indues. Cependant le contrôle des aides d'État ne saurait être réduit à la seule récupération, dans la mesure où le soutien à des besoins de services publics bien identifiés et organisés font l'objet de décisions positives. Ainsi, dans sa décision du 2 mai 2013, la Commission a validé plus de 60 % des aides octroyées à la SNCM, qui correspondent au service de base fourni dans le cadre de la DSP.

La Commission ne dispose d'aucune information démontrant le non-respect par Corsica Ferries des normes européennes en matière de droit du travail ou de conditions sociales. Dès lors qu'une plainte ou des informations concernant une possible infraction lui parviendrait, la Commission procéderait à l'analyse de ces informations et en cas de non-conformité, elle prendrait les mesures appropriées en vue d'en assurer la conformité avec la législation européenne applicable.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-005258/14

to the Commission

Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: The SNCM

On 20 February 2012, the Commission presented its Strategy to support coastal and marine tourism in Europe in which it emphasised the strategy's ‘great potential for jobs and growth’ and regretted the ‘fragmentation of the sector with a high proportion of SMEs’.

In 2012, the Société Nationale Maritime Corse-Méditerranée (SNCM) accounted for 26% of the region's passenger transport market and 33% of the freight transport market. Currently, however, the Commission is demanding EUR 440 million from the SNCM, a sum that is nearly 250% of its turnover of EUR 190 million.

The Commission has taken this action following a complaint lodged by the company Corsica Ferries, which wants to see an annoying competitor eliminated. Corsica Ferries is a subsidiary of an Italo-Swiss holding company which just owns the trade name. The vessels are owned by a number of subsidiary companies situated in tax havens. Moreover, up to 1999 Corsica Ferries operated under a Panamanian flag of convenience in order to evade tax and social constraints. Furthermore, this company has already taken similar action in Sardinia where it succeeded in closing down the public operator. Ten days after the latter closed down, passenger fares rose by 140% on average. Tourist numbers fell subsequently by 23% in one year and the collapse in maritime traffic was only partially offset by a rise in air traffic, which is a less environmentally-friendly means of transport with a wealthier customer base.

1.	Does the Commission not see a paradox here, in wanting to see strong companies emerge in the coastal and maritime tourism sector while demanding that already existing companies repay sums equivalent to 250% of their total turnover?

Is the Commission aware that it is the guardian of the Treaties, which promote ‘social justice and protection’ (Article 3 TEU), affirm ‘the essential objective of their efforts’ to be ‘the constant improvements of the living and working conditions of their peoples’ (preamble to the TFEU) and make reference to the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers, and that it has therefore a duty to combat social and fiscal dumping?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M. Almunia au nom de la Commission

(13 juin 2014)

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005260/14

a la Comisión

Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)

(23 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Restricciones a la libre residencia de los ciudadanos europeos

El derecho de las personas a circular y residir libremente dentro de la Unión Europea constituye la piedra angular de la ciudadanía de la Unión. Hoy en día, la libre circulación de personas se regula principalmente mediante la Directiva 2004/38/CE relativa al derecho de los ciudadanos de la Unión y de los miembros de sus familias a circular y residir libremente en el territorio de los Estados miembros.

La Directiva otorga derechos y obligaciones a los ciudadanos dependiendo del tiempo de estancia. Para períodos superiores a tres meses, el derecho de residencia está sujeto a determinadas condiciones: el ciudadano de la UE y los miembros de su familia deben disponer de recursos suficientes y de un seguro de enfermedad de manera que no representen una carga para los servicios sociales del Estado miembro de acogida durante su estancia.

Sin embargo, el margen de maniobra que el texto otorga a cada Estado miembro produce situaciones como la de Bélgica, donde, según la Oficina de Extranjería del Ejecutivo belga, 4 812 ciudadanos de la UE fueron expulsados del país en 2013. Las razones que el Gobierno esgrime son que estos ciudadanos suponen una «carga excesiva» para el sistema social.

1.	¿Ha iniciado la Comisión un estudio o avance para evitar una interpretación restrictiva de los términos de la Directiva que suscitan problemas? Esto es, ¿cuándo hay una carga para la asistencia social?

2.	¿No cree la Comisión que es de capital importancia salvaguardar, en especial en estos momentos de crisis, el derecho de las personas a circular y residir libremente dentro de la Unión Europea?

Respuesta del Sr. Hahn en nombre de la Comisión

(7 de julio de 2014)

En lo que respecta a las condiciones y limitaciones al ejercicio de la libre circulación, la Comisión remite a Su Señoría a sus respuestas a las preguntas escritas E-183/2014, E-335/2014, E-356/2014, P-3848/2014, E-4165/2014 y E-4700/2014.

La Comisión concede gran importancia al derecho a circular y residir libremente en la EU. El pasado mes de noviembre, adoptó una Comunicación titulada «Libre circulación de los ciudadanos de la UE y de sus familias: cinco medidas clave» (23), que incluye explicaciones claras sobre las normas en materia de libre circulación, en particular las modalidades de acceso a la asistencia social y la seguridad social y sus limitaciones.

En enero de 2014, una de las acciones anunciadas en la Comunicación ha constituido la finalización, en colaboración con los Estados miembros, de una guía práctica sobre la «prueba de residencia habitual» (24). Esto ayudará a los Estados miembros a aplicar las normas de la UE sobre la coordinación de la seguridad social para los ciudadanos de la UE que se hayan mudado a otro Estado miembro.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005260/14

to the Commission

Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Restrictions on European citizens' right to reside freely within the Union

The right of EU citizens to move and reside freely within the European Union is the cornerstone of European citizenship. Today, the free movement of persons is chiefly governed by Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of EU citizens and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.

The directive confers rights and responsibilities on EU citizens which vary depending on the period of residence. For periods longer than three months, the right of residence is subject to certain conditions: EU citizens and their family members must have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay.

However, the directive also gives the Member States some room for manoeuvre. This leads to situations such as in Belgium, which, according to figures from the Government Immigration Office, expelled 4 812 EU citizens from the country in 2013. The Belgian Government claimed that the people in question placed an ‘excessive burden’ on the country's social services.

1.	Has the Commission launched a study or taken steps with a view to preventing restrictive interpretations of the provisions of the directive that are causing problems? Specifically, under what circumstances is someone a burden on the social services?

2.	Does it not agree that it is vital to safeguard people's right to move and reside freely within the European Union, particularly in view of the current crisis?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2014)

As regards the conditions and limitations to the exercise of free movement, the Commission refers the Honourable Member of Parliament to its answers to written questions E-183/2014, E-335/2014, E-356/2014, P-3848/2014, E-4165/2014 and E-4700/2014.

The Commission attaches great importance to the right to move and reside freely in the EU. It adopted last November a communication on" Free movement of EU citizens and their families: Five actions to make a difference" (25) which sets clear explanations about free movement rules, in particular modalities for access to social assistance and social security and its limitations.

In January 2014, one of the actions announced in the communication has been the finalisation, together with Member States, of a practical guide on ‘habitual residence test’ (26). This will help Member States apply EU rules on the coordination of social security for EU citizens that have moved to another Member State.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005303/14

à la Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Situation de MyFerryLink

MyFerryLink exploite les liaisons transmanche par ferry de la ligne Calais‐Douvres. Cette nouvelle compagnie maritime française est une SCOP constituée majoritairement d'anciens salariés de SeaFrance.

Suite à la liquidation de SeaFrance en janvier 2012, le tribunal de commerce de Paris décide de confier à Eurotunnel les actifs de la compagnie. Il s'agit notamment des trois navires Rodin, Berlioz et Nord‐Pas‐de‐Calais. Deux semaines plus tard, Eurotunnel signe avec la SCOP SeaFrance un contrat d'affrètement. Elle exploite ainsi les trois navires entre Calais et Douvres, sous la marque MyFerryLink. La première traversée commerciale a lieu le 20 août 2012.

Le 7 novembre 2012, l'autorité française de la concurrence valide ce montage juridique, à condition qu'Eurotunnel et MyFerryLink dissocient totalement leurs services commerciaux.

En juin 2013, l'autorité britannique de la concurrence (Competition and Markets Authority) rend, elle, des conclusions totalement inverses, prônant notamment l'interdiction de l'accès au port de Douvres aux navires appartenant à Eurotunnel. La «Competition and Markets Authority» estime qu'il existe une distorsion de concurrence entraînée par la position dominante d'Eurotunnel sur la ligne Calais‐Douvres. Elle considère qu'Eurotunnel pouvait utiliser sa position dominante pour augmenter les coûts alors que l'existence d'un nouvel opérateur comme MyFerryLink ne peut nuire à la concurrence, dans la mesure où Calais est le deuxième port de voyageurs au monde et qu'il s'agit du second détroit le plus fréquenté au monde.

Eurotunnel et la SCOP SeaFrance ont fait appel de cette décision devant la Cour d'appel de la commission de concurrence et ont obtenu satisfaction dans une décision en date du 4 décembre 2013.

Alors que la «Competition and Markets Authority» doit rendre sa décision finale courant mai, quelle est la position de la Commission sur ce dossier?

Réponse donnée par M. Almunia au nom de la Commission

(24 juin 2014)

La Commission est informée du déroulement des faits relatifs à la création de MyFerryLink («MFL») à savoir l'autorisation sous condition par l'autorité de la concurrence française (27) tandis que la commission de la concurrence britannique a en substance adopté une décision inverse (28). Suite à la décision de la Cour d'Appel de la commission de concurrence britannique, l'autorité britannique de la concurrence et des marchés («CMA») va devoir adopter une nouvelle décision. Selon les informations disponibles sur son site internet, la CMA devrait rendre sa décision d'ici la mi-juin 2014.

Au sein des 28 Etats-membres, chacune des autorités de concurrence possède son cadre d'analyse propre. Si les autorités nationales de concurrence sont invitées à coopérer entres elles lorsqu'elles examinent une même transaction, cette coopération ne conduit pas nécessairement à ce que des conclusions similaires soient tirées (29).

La Commission note que les autorités britannique et française ont été en relation dans l'examen de ce cas.

Le règlement (CE) no 139/2004 du Conseil (30) ne conférait à la Commission aucune juridiction dans ce dossier car la concentration n'avait pas une dimension européenne. Toutefois, la Direction Générale de la Concurrence de la Commission a suivi le dossier et a notamment reçu des représentants d'Eurotunnel et de MFL en avril 2013 après la publication du rapport préliminaire de la commission de la concurrence britannique.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005303/14

to the Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: MyFerryLink

MyFerryLink operates cross-Channel ferry services on the Calais-Dover route. This new French shipping company is a workers' production cooperative (SCOP) made up mostly of former SeaFrance employees.

Following the liquidation of SeaFrance in January 2012, the Commercial Court of Paris decided to entrust Eurotunnel with the company’s assets, which included the three ships Rodin, Berlioz and Nord-Pas-de-Calais. Two weeks later, Eurotunnel signed a charter agreement with the SeaFrance SCOP, which thus operates the three ferries between Calais and Dover under the MyFerryLink brand. The first commercial crossing took place on 20 August 2012.

On 7 November 2012, the French Competition Authority validated this legal arrangement, with the proviso that Eurotunnel and MyFerryLink should keep their commercial services completely separate.

In June 2013, the UK Competition and Markets Authority came to completely opposite conclusions and advocated, amongst other things, that a ban be imposed on access to the port of Dover by the vessels belonging to Eurotunnel. The Competition and Markets Authority takes the view that there is a distortion of competition caused by the dominant position of Eurotunnel on the Dover Calais route. It believes that Eurotunnel could use its dominant position to increase prices, when, in fact, the existence of a new operator such as MyFerryLink cannot harm competition, insofar as Calais is the second passenger port in the world in the second busiest strait in the world.

Eurotunnel and the SeaFrance workers' production cooperative (SCOP) appealed against this decision at the Court of Appeal of the Competition Commission and won their case in a ruling of 4 December 2013.

Pending the Competition and Markets Authority’s final decision, due in May, what is the Commission's position on this issue?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M. Almunia au nom de la Commission

(24 juin 2014)

La Commission est informée du déroulement des faits relatifs à la création de MyFerryLink («MFL») à savoir l'autorisation sous condition par l'autorité de la concurrence française (31) tandis que la commission de la concurrence britannique a en substance adopté une décision inverse (32). Suite à la décision de la Cour d'Appel de la commission de concurrence britannique, l'autorité britannique de la concurrence et des marchés («CMA») va devoir adopter une nouvelle décision. Selon les informations disponibles sur son site internet, la CMA devrait rendre sa décision d'ici la mi-juin 2014.

La Commission note que les autorités britannique et française ont été en relation dans l'examen de ce cas.

Le règlement (CE) no 139/2004 du Conseil (34) ne conférait à la Commission aucune juridiction dans ce dossier car la concentration n'avait pas une dimension européenne. Toutefois, la Direction Générale de la Concurrence de la Commission a suivi le dossier et a notamment reçu des représentants d'Eurotunnel et de MFL en avril 2013 après la publication du rapport préliminaire de la commission de la concurrence britannique.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005306/14

à la Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Stratégie de déploiement des réseaux électriques intelligents en Europe

Les réseaux intelligents offrent d'importantes possibilités pour adapter la production, le stockage ainsi que la consommation aux évolutions des marchés.

Alors que l'Union européenne se fixe des objectifs ambitieux pour le déploiement de ces réseaux, la Commission européenne ne finance pas directement leur développement dans les États membres malgré le fait qu'ils offrent d'importantes possibilités pour adapter la production, le stockage ainsi que la consommation aux évolutions des marchés.

Au regard de leur importance stratégique, quelles politiques d'investissement et quels financements la Commission entend-elle déployer pour favoriser le déploiement des réseaux intelligents à l'horizon 2020?

Réponse donnée par M Oettinger au nom de la Commission

(11 juin 2014)

Le rôle important accordé par la Commission aux réseaux intelligents est entériné dans le Troisième Paquet Energie (35) et dans la Communication (2011)202 (36). La Commission reconnaît la complexité du sujet, son besoin d'intégration multidisciplinaire et de coopération accrue entre acteurs concernés. À cet égard, un certain nombre d'initiatives ont été développées selon trois axes principaux: (i.) réglementation; (ii.) infrastructure; et (iii.) technologies et innovation:

(i.) La «Smart Grids Task Force» créée par la Commission développe le cadre et les standards permettant d'accélérer les investissements au niveau réglementaire;

(ii). Les investissements dans les réseaux intelligents constituent une priorité dans l'octroi des fonds structurels et régionaux dans le cadre des «Operating Programmes». Les projets de réseaux intelligents sont également éligibles sous le fonds «Connecting Europe Facility». Deux projets ont été sélectionnés dans la première liste de priorité;

(iii) Les réseaux électriques intelligents sont soutenus à travers le programme cadre de recherche depuis 2014. Le premier appel d'offres s'est clôturé en Mai 2014. 108 millions d'euros sont prévus de façon directe. De plus, l'activité «Smart Cities» (90 millions pour 2014) soutiendra indirectement ce domaine en intégrant, entre autres, les réseaux électriques intelligents avec des réseaux thermiques, le stockage d'électricité et thermique.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005306/14

to the Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Building smart power grids in Europe

Making greater use of smart grids would be an excellent way of tailoring energy production, storage and consumption to market developments.

Although the EU has set itself ambitious targets for the introduction of these grids, the Commission does not offer Member States specific funding to build them, despite the benefits referred to above.

Given the strategic importance of smart grids, what investment policies and other forms of funding does the Commission intend to employ in order to foster their development between now and 2020?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M Oettinger au nom de la Commission

(11 juin 2014)

Le rôle important accordé par la Commission aux réseaux intelligents est entériné dans le Troisième Paquet Energie (37) et dans la Communication (2011)202 (38). La Commission reconnaît la complexité du sujet, son besoin d'intégration multidisciplinaire et de coopération accrue entre acteurs concernés. À cet égard, un certain nombre d'initiatives ont été développées selon trois axes principaux: (i.) réglementation; (ii.) infrastructure; et (iii.) technologies et innovation:

(i.) La «Smart Grids Task Force» créée par la Commission développe le cadre et les standards permettant d'accélérer les investissements au niveau réglementaire;

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-005342/14

aan de Commissie

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 april 2014)

Betreft: Vooruitgang bij de uitvoering van de EU-biodiversiteitsstrategie

In haar mededeling „Onze levensverzekering, ons natuurlijk kapitaal: een EU-biodiversiteitsstrategie voor 2020” van 3 mei 2011 (COM(2011)0244) stelt de Commissie dat zij, samen met de lidstaten, voor 2012 een proces in gang zal zetten om het delen van ervaringen, goede praktijken en grensoverschrijdende samenwerking inzake het beheer van Natura 2000 te bevorderen, binnen de in de habitatrichtlijn uiteengezette biogeografische kaders.

Welk proces is in gang gezet en wat heeft het tot nu toe bevorderd? Indien er geen proces in gang is gezet, waarom niet? Zal dit de verwezenlijking van doelstelling 1 van de strategie in gevaar brengen?

Antwoord van de heer Potočnik namens de Commissie

(10 juni 2014)

In 2011 lanceerde de Commissie het biogeografische proces van Natura 2000 om de lidstaten bij te staan bij het beheer van Natura 2000 als een coherent ecologisch netwerk. Het proces biedt praktische hulpmiddelen voor het uitwisselen van informatie, ervaringen en kennis en voor het uitwerken van gezamenlijke oplossingen en ontwikkelen van samenwerkingsacties, teneinde vooruitgang te boeken bij de verwezenlijking van de biodiversiteitsdoelstellingen van de EU voor 2020. Het proces omvat een reeks studiedagen en thematische workshops in het kader van Natura 2000, die zijn georganiseerd in de Europese biogeografische regio's en allemaal zijn gericht op een aantal geselecteerde habitattypen en ‐soorten. Bovendien is er een internetplatform opgericht om de communicatie en de uitwisseling van ervaringen en goede praktijken tussen alle deskundigen die bij het beheer van Natura 2000 (39) betrokken zijn, te vergemakkelijken.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005342/14

to the Commission

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

In its communication ‘Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020’ of 3 May 2011 (COM(2011)0244), the Commission states that, together with Member States, it will establish by 2012 a process to promote the sharing of experience, good practice and cross-border collaboration on the management of Natura 2000, within the biogeographical frameworks set out in the Habitats Directive.

Which process has been established, and what has it promoted so far? If no process has been established, why not? Will this compromise the reaching of target 1 of the strategy?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2014)

In 2011 the Commission launched the Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process to assist Member States in managing Natura 2000 as a coherent ecological network. The process provides practical means to exchange information, experience and knowledge and to identify common solutions and develop cooperative actions to ensure progress towards the EU 2020 Biodiversity targets. The process is organised around a series of Natura 2000 seminars and thematic workshops within Europe’s biogeographical regions, all focusing on a number of selected habitat types and species. An Internet-based communication platform has been established to facilitate communication and exchange of experience and good practice between all experts involved in Natura 2000 management (40).

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-005350/14

aan de Raad

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 april 2014)

Betreft: Voortgang bij de uitvoering van de EU-strategie op het gebied van biodiversiteit

In zijn conclusies van juni 2012 benadrukt de Raad dat, om de biodiversiteitsstrategie daadwerkelijk uit te voeren en als onderdeel daarvan het Natura 2000-netwerk van voorspelbare, adequate en regelmatige financiering te voorzien, er uit alle mogelijke bronnen extra middelen moeten worden aangetrokken en voor passende financiering moet worden gezorgd via onder meer het toekomstig financieel kader van de EU, nationale bronnen en, waar passend, innovatieve financiële mechanismen. Tevens wijst de Raad op het belang van verdere analyse van deze behoefte en van het onderzoeken en bevorderen van het gebruik van innovatieve financiële mechanismen ter ondersteuning van de doelstellingen van het biodiversiteitsbeleid.

Heeft de Raad extra middelen aangetrokken om voor passende financiering te zorgen? Is de Raad van mening dat de huidige financiering volstaat om de doelstellingen van de biodiversiteitsstrategie te bereiken? Heeft de Raad innovatieve financiële mechanismen ontwikkeld ter ondersteuning van de doelstellingen van het beleid ten behoeve van de biodiversiteit? Zo ja, kan de Raad hiervan een overzicht geven? Zo niet, waarom niet?

Antwoord

(28 juli 2014)

De Raad streeft ernaar het verlies van biodiversiteit een halt toe te roepen, en het meerjarig financieel kader 2014-2020 verstrekt financiering om deze doelstelling te behalen. Zoals het geachte Parlementslid misschien weet, is de biodiversiteitsstrategie van de EU geïntegreerd in een scala van beleidsdomeinen, en wordt zij uitgevoerd door middel van verschillende uniale en nationale programma's en instrumenten.

Wat de begroting van de EU betreft, heeft de Commissie een specifieke opsporingsmethode ontwikkeld voor binnenlandse financiële stromen, ter bepaling van biodiversiteitsgerelateerde kosten. Deze methode zal volledig worden uitgevoerd in het kader van de huidige EU-begroting (2014-2020).

Het geachte parlementslid wordt verzocht zich tot de Commissie te richten voor meer informatie over het gebruik van de EU-begroting voor de uitvoering van de strategie.

Met het oog op een meer algemene verbetering van de uitvoering van de EU-biodiversiteitsstrategie heeft de Raad in zijn conclusies van 12 juni 2014 (41) beklemtoond dat er behoefte is aan verdere harmonisering van het verslagleggingskader van het Biodiversiteitsverdrag (Convention on Biological Diversity — CBD) en van bestaande en nieuwe metingen, definities en statistische termen die in de mondiale en regionale procedures voor boekhouding en statistiek met name door de Verenigde Naties, de Wereldbank, de Organisatie voor Economische Samenwerking en Ontwikkeling en de EU worden gebruikt.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005350/14

to the Council

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

In its Council conclusions of June 2012 the Council stresses the need to mobilise additional resources from all possible sources and ensure adequate funding through, inter alia, the future EU financial framework, national sources and innovative financial mechanisms, as appropriate, for the effective implementation of the strategy, including predictable, adequate and regular financing for the Natura 2000 network. It also expresses the importance of further analysing this need and exploring and promoting the use of the innovative financial mechanisms in support of biodiversity policy objectives.

Has the Council mobilised additional resources to ensure adequate funding? Does the Council believe that the current funding is adequate to reach the targets of the biodiversity strategy? Has the Council developed innovative financial mechanisms in support of biodiversity policy objectives? If so, can the Council give an overview of these? If not, why not?

(28 July 2014)

The Council is committed to halting the loss of biodiversity, and the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 provides for funding to achieve this goal. As the Honourable Member may know, the EU's Biodiversity Strategy is integrated into a range of policy areas and is implemented by means of various Union and national programmes and instruments.

As far as use of the EU budget is concerned, a specific tracking method for domestic financial flows identifying biodiversity-related expenses has been developed by the Commission. It will be fully implemented in the current EU budget (2014-2020).

The Honourable Member is invited to address himself to the Commission for further information on the use of the EU budget in implementing the strategy.

As part of improving more generally the implementation of the EU's Biodiversity Strategy, the Council, in its conclusions of 12 June 2014 (42), stressed the need to increasingly harmonise the financial reporting framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity and measurements, definitions and statistical terms used by global and regional accounting and statistical processes driven in particular by the United Nations, the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the EU.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-005351/14

aan de Raad

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 april 2014)

Betreft: Voortgang bij de uitvoering van de EU-strategie op het gebied van biodiversiteit

In zijn conclusies van december 2011 onderstreept de Raad hoe belangrijk het is dat er op EU‐ en lidstaatniveau wordt voorzien in passende financiering voor het onderhouden en herstellen van ecosystemen en hun diensten.

Is de Raad van mening dat er voor passende financiering gezorgd is? Zo niet, wat is de Raad voornemens te doen om meer financiering aan te trekken?

Antwoord

(15 september 2014)

Het geachte Parlementslid wordt verwezen naar het antwoord van de Raad op schriftelijke vraag E‐005350/14.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005351/14

to the Council

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Progress in implementation of EU biodiversity strategy

In its Council conclusions of December 2011 the Council ‘stresses the importance of ensuring appropriate funding at EU and Member States level for maintenance and restoration of ecosystems and their services’.

Does the Council believe that appropriate funding has been ensured? If not, what does the Council plan to do to attract more funds?

(15 September 2014)

The Honourable Member should refer to the Council's reply to Written Question E-005350/14.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-005352/14

à Comissão

Ana Gomes (S&D)

(23 de abril de 2014)

Assunto: Violações dos direitos humanos e dos trabalhadores em resultado da pressão indevida exercida pelos grandes retalhistas da UE sobre os fabricantes de sumos brasileiros a fim de reduzir os preços

Os fornecedores de produtos alimentares de países terceiros são muitas vezes forçados a reduzir os seus custos, visto que os retalhistas europeus exigem preços cada vez mais baixos. Esta prática resulta de forma crescente em violações dos direitos humanos e dos trabalhadores.

O Brasil, por exemplo, satisfaz 60 % da procura global de sumo de laranja e mais de 80 % da procura na UE. De todos os setores agrícolas do Brasil, o do cultivo de laranjas e o da produção de sumo de laranja concentrado encontram-se na pior situação, uma vez que o número de compradores está a diminuir. Continua a existir um pequeno número de grandes retalhistas europeus, que aliam o seu poder de compra para ditar condições comerciais favoráveis e preços mais reduzidos. Esta falta de concorrência a nível da procura no mercado brasileiro de sumos de laranja leva as grandes empresas a infringirem os direitos dos trabalhadores.

A situação é insustentável tanto de uma perspetiva económica como social. Além do recurso a trabalhadores menores de idade, as práticas desleais incluem pagamentos tardios, alterações unilaterais nos contratos, cláusulas contratuais abusivas e a restrição do acesso ao mercado. Estas situações geram pressão ao longo da cadeia de valor e resultam em más condições de trabalho.

Adicionalmente, a fusão de duas empresas de produção de sumo de laranja líderes no mercado (Citrosuco e Citrovita), que a Comissão investigou e acabou por aprovar, conduziu esta nova empresa comum a uma quota de mercado de sumo de laranja concentrado de cerca de 50 %. No entanto, impendem sobre esta empresa comum, tal como sobre as empresas Cutrale e Louis Dreyfus, suspeitas de práticas inerentes a um cartel, situação que há já vários anos é objeto de investigações.

Para além de os retalhistas europeus imporem reduções dos preços aos seus fornecedores brasileiros, a ausência de concorrência a nível da oferta exacerbou o impacto desta situação nas condições de trabalho nas plantações de laranja no Brasil.

1.	Planeia a Comissão abrir investigações sobre o impacto da fusão das empresas Citrosuco e Citrovita sobre os direitos dos trabalhadores e as condições laborais nas plantações de laranja do Brasil?

2.	Tenciona a Comissão realizar investigações para avaliar o impacto das práticas desleais sobre os direitos humanos dos trabalhadores e as condições laborais nas plantações de laranja no Brasil?

Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão

(8 de julho de 2014)

A resposta às duas perguntas é «não».

Após uma investigação aprofundada, a Comissão aprovou a concentração entre Citrosuco e Citrovita a 4 de maio de 2011 (43). A Comissão analisou o impacto económico da operação de concentração proposta na concorrência efetiva no mercado geográfico relevante, que foi definido, neste caso, como o Espaço Económico Europeu.

Ao abrigo do Regulamento das concentrações da UE (44), a análise da Comissão não abrange fatores que não sejam económicos, tais como as condições de trabalho ou os direitos laborais por parte dos fornecedores junto da entidade resultante da concentração.

No que respeita a um eventual abuso de posição dominante por parte da entidade resultante da concentração, terá de ser formalmente determinado se a empresa detém uma posição dominante no mercado relevante (45). As quotas de mercado das empresas fornecem apenas uma primeira indicação útil de uma eventual posição dominante. A fim de estabelecer a existência de uma posição dominante, a Comissão tem em conta outros elementos, tais como as condições do mercado, nomeadamente a dinâmica do mercado e em que medida os produtos são diferenciados. O simples facto de uma empresa ter uma posição dominante em certos mercados não constitui automaticamente uma violação do TFUE, designadamente das suas regras de concorrência. O artigo 102.° do TFUE não proíbe a posição dominante, mas sim a sua utilização abusiva.

2.	Não existe nenhuma fundamentação jurídica para que a UE proceda a investigações, a fim de avaliar o impacto de práticas desleais nos direitos humanos dos trabalhadores e condições de trabalho no Brasil.

A UE e o Brasil estão a reforçar as suas relações no quadro do diálogo UE-Mercosul e das negociações para um acordo de associação birregional. A este respeito, a UE atribui grande importância à inclusão de um capítulo sobre comércio e desenvolvimento sustentável que confirme o cumprimento por ambas as partes das normas fundamentais de trabalho internacionalmente reconhecidas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005352/14

to the Commission

Ana Gomes (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Human and labour rights violations resulting from undue pressure by large EU retailers on Brazilian juice manufacturers to reduce prices

Suppliers of food products in third countries are often forced to reduce costs as European retailers continually demand lower prices. This practice increasingly results in human and labour rights violations.

Brazil, for example, meets 60% of global demand for orange juice and supplies more than 80% of EU demand. Of all agricultural sectors in Brazil, orange growers and producers of orange concentrate are in the worst situation because the number of buyers is shrinking. A small number of large European retailers remain, combining their purchasing power to dictate favourable terms and lower prices. This lack of demand-side competition in the Brazilian orange juice market leads to the largest companies infringing labour rights.

The situation is unsustainable from both an economic and a social perspective. In addition to the employment of underage workers, unfair practices include late payments, unilateral contract changes, unfair contractual terms and restricted access to the market. This accumulates pressure along the value chain and results in poor working conditions.

Furthermore, the merger of two leading orange juice companies (Citrosuco and Citrovita), which the Commission investigated and eventually approved, has resulted in an estimated 50% share of the market in orange concentrate for the newly created joint venture. Together with Cutrale and Louis Dreyfus, however, the joint venture is suspected of cartel behaviour, and investigations have been going on for several years.

In addition to European retailers imposing price cuts on their Brazilian suppliers, the absence of supply-side competition has exacerbated the impact on working conditions in orange groves in Brazil.

1.	Does the Commission plan to open investigations into the impact of the merger of Citrosuco and Citrovita on labour rights and working conditions in Brazilian orange groves?

2.	Does the Commission plan to carry out investigations to assess the impact of unfair practices on workers’ human rights and working conditions in orange groves in Brazil?

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

(8 July 2014)

The answer to both questions is no.

The Commission approved the merger between Citrosuco and Citrovita on 4 May 2011 (46)after an in-depth investigation. It examined the economic impact of the proposed merger on effective competition in the relevant geographical market, which has been determined in this case as the European Economic Area.

The Commission's analysis under EU merger rules (47) does not extend to non-economic factors such as labour rights or working conditions on the part of the suppliers to the approved merged entity.

As regards a potential abuse of dominant position by the merged entity, it would need to be formally established whether the company enjoys a dominant position in the relevant market (48). Market shares of undertakings provide only a useful first indication of a possible dominant position. In order to establish dominance the Commission takes into account other elements such as the market conditions, in particular the dynamics of the market and the extent to which products are differentiated. The mere fact that an undertaking has a dominant position in certain markets does not automatically constitute an infringement of the TFEU, namely its rules on competition. Art. 102 TFEU does not prohibit a dominant position, but its abuse.

2.	There is no legal basis for the EU to carry out investigations to assess the impact of unfair practices on workers’ human rights and working conditions in Brazil.

The EU and Brazil are strengthening their relationship through the EU-Mercosur dialogue and negotiations for a bi-regional Association Agreement. The EU attaches great importance to include therein a chapter on Trade and Sustainable Development confirming the adherence of both parties to internationally recognised core labour standards.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005354/14

à la Commission

Astrid Lulling (PPE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Libre circulation des biens et des personnes

Dans ma question E-013574-13, j'avais demandé des renseignements sur l'obligation pour les résidents en Belgique de circuler avec une plaque d'immatriculation belge, sous peine de lourdes sanctions, y compris la saisie du véhicule par la police.

La Commission a répondu que les autorités belges étaient en train de mettre leur loi en conformité avec le droit européen, mais seulement au sujet du prêt d'un véhicule immatriculé dans un autre État membre.

Or, il y a un nombre grandissant et considérable de contrôles (tant par la police que par les douanes) donnant lieu à des amendes lourdes et au paiement de taxes pour le simple fait que le conducteur roule avec une voiture immatriculée dans un autre État membre. Selon la Cour de justice (van Putten (C 578/10)), un État membre peut demander l'immatriculation de véhicules destinés à être utilisés essentiellement sur le territoire dudit État membre à titre permanent. Néanmoins, les autorités belges ne prennent comme critère que le simple fait d'une résidence. Par conséquent toute voiture qui est utilisée en Belgique par un résident belge devrait être immatriculée en Belgique. Or, cela mène à des situations absurdes pour des voitures qui ne sont utilisées qu'occasionnellement en Belgique pour des raisons de double résidence, notamment par des personnes qui doivent séjourner à Bruxelles pour des réunions d'institutions européennes, notamment les parlementaires européens.

1.	Est-ce que la Commission peut se renseigner sur le calendrier concernant la modification de la loi belge à mettre en conformité avec le droit européen?

2.	Est-ce que la Commission est prête à agir de manière proactive pour examiner les autres entraves à la libre circulation dans le marché intérieur?

3.	Est-ce que la Commission est disposée à proposer une législation pour assurer la mobilité à l'intérieur de l'Union pour des raisons professionnelles et privées et simplifier l'immatriculation d'une voiture dans un autre État membre?

Réponse donnée par M. Šemeta au nom de la Commission

(10 juin 2014)

La Commission prie l'Honorable Parlementaire de se référer aux réponses déjà apportées aux questions P-003064/2014, P-003828/2014 et E-003688/2014.

La Commission précise que l'arrêt de la Cour de justice (affaires jointes C-578/10 à C-580/10) mentionné par l'Honorable Parlementaire vise uniquement le cas où un véhicule est emprunté. Ainsi que déjà précisé, la Commission a demandé à la Belgique de modifier sa législation sur cet aspect et la procédure est en cours.

Enfin, la Commission rappelle qu'elle a fait le 4 avril 2012 une proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil (COM(2012)164 final) pour améliorer la situation relative au transfert des véhicules à moteur immatriculés dans un autre État membre à l'intérieur du marché unique.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005354/14

to the Commission

Astrid Lulling (PPE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Free movement of goods and persons

In my Written Question E-013574-13 I had requested information on the requirement for Belgian residents to drive with a Belgian registration plate or else face severe penalties, including having their vehicle impounded by the police.

The Commission replied that the Belgian authorities were in the process of aligning their law to EC law, but only with regard to the loan of a vehicle registered in another Member State.

However, there have been a considerable and growing number of checks (both by the police and customs) resulting in heavy fines and the payment of taxes simply because the driver is travelling in a car registered in another Member State. According to the Court of Justice (van Putten (C 578/10)), a Member State may request the registration of vehicles to be used mainly on the territory of that Member State on a permanent basis. However, the Belgian authorities are using the mere fact of residence as a criterion. Therefore, any car that is used in Belgium by a Belgian resident is supposed to be registered in Belgium. However, this leads to absurd situations for cars that are used only occasionally in Belgium for reasons of dual residence, especially by people who have to stay in Brussels for meetings at EU institutions, including Members of the European Parliament.

1.	Can the Commission enquire about the timetable for the amendment of the Belgian law to bring into line with EC law?

2.	Is the Commission prepared to act proactively and look into the other barriers to free movement in the internal market?

3.	Is the Commission willing to propose legislation to guarantee mobility within the Union for professional and personal reasons and to simplify the registration of a car in another Member State?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par M. Šemeta au nom de la Commission

(10 juin 2014)

La Commission prie l'Honorable Parlementaire de se référer aux réponses déjà apportées aux questions P-003064/2014, P-003828/2014 et E-003688/2014.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-005418/14

προς την Επιτροπή

Kriton Arsenis (S&D)

(23 Απριλίου 2014)

Θέμα: Αδιαφανείς σχέσεις της τρόικας με εταιρείες συμβούλων και δικηγορικά γραφεία στην Ελλάδα — Αίτημα να γνωστοποιηθεί η λίστα επαφών της με ιδιωτικούς φορείς

Σε προηγούμενη ερώτησή μου (P-000361/2013) είχα θέσει υπόψη της Επιτροπής το ζήτημα των αδιαφανών σχέσεων της τρόικας με εταιρείες συμβούλων και δικηγορικά γραφεία στην Ελλάδα. Συγκεκριμένα είχα παραθέσει σειρά δημοσιευμάτων στο ελληνικό τύπο, τα οποία έκαναν λόγο για συνεχή επικοινωνία, για πολλούς μήνες, ελληνικών εταιρειών συμβούλων και δικηγορικών γραφείων με την τρόικα, στην οποία συμμετέχει η Επιτροπή. Τονιζόταν επιπλέον ότι οι εταιρείες αυτές έχουν πετύχει σε αρκετές περιπτώσεις να διαμορφώσουν τις θέσεις της τρόικας, στο πλαίσιο των διαπραγματεύσεών της με την ελληνική κυβέρνηση, προς όφελος των επιχειρηματικών συμφερόντων που εκπροσωπούν.

Στο πλαίσιο της συγκεκριμένης ερώτησης είχα ζητήσει από την Επιτροπή, κατ' εφαρμογή του κανονισμού (EK) αριθ. 1049/2001, να μου γνωστοποιήσει τη λίστα επαφών της Επιτροπής ως μέλους της τρόικας με ιδιωτικούς φορείς στην Ελλάδα από τον Μάιο 2010 έως την κατάθεση της ερώτησης.

Αντί η Επιτροπή να μου γνωστοποιήσει, ως όφειλε, τη συγκεκριμένη λίστα επαφών, μου απάντησε (P-000361/2013) ότι οι εκπρόσωποί της δεν έχουν επαφή με τους τεχνικούς, οικονομικούς και νομικούς συμβούλους του ΤΑΙΠΕΔ.

Με βάση τα ανωτέρω, και κατ' εφαρμογή του κανονισμού (EK) αριθ. 1049/2001, ρωτώ για δεύτερη φορά την Επιτροπή αν μπορεί να μου γνωστοποιήσει τη λίστα επαφών της ως μέλους της τρόικας με ιδιωτικούς φορείς στην Ελλάδα από τον Μάιο του 2010.

Απάντηση του κ. Katainen εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(13 Αυγούστου 2014)

Η Επιτροπή δεν συμμερίζεται την άποψη ότι, ως μέλος της τρόικας, υιοθέτησε θέσεις προς όφελος επιχειρηματικών συμφερόντων που εκπροσωπούνται από ελληνικές εταιρείες συμβούλων και δικηγορικά γραφεία. Η Επιτροπή έχει αναλάβει ισχυρή δέσμευση να διασφαλίσει ότι οι οικονομικές πολιτικές που συζητούνται με τις ελληνικές αρχές κατά τη διάρκεια εφαρμογής του προγράμματος δεν επηρεάζονται αδικαιολόγητα από ομάδες συμφερόντων. Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί, και υπενθυμίζει με κάθε ευκαιρία στις ελληνικές αρχές, ότι η προστασία κατεστημένων συμφερόντων δεν οδηγεί σε δίκαια αποτελέσματα.

Η Επιτροπή καταβάλλει σημαντικές προσπάθειες για να έχει μια ολοκληρωμένη εικόνα των προκλήσεων και των διαθέσιμων λύσεων για την Ελλάδα. Αυτό περιλαμβάνει τακτικές διαβουλεύσεις και συζητήσεις με ευρύ φάσμα παραγόντων πέραν της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης, περιλαμβανομένων πολιτικών κομμάτων, κοινωνικών εταίρων και άλλων ενδιαφερομένων, όπως οι ακαδημαϊκοί κύκλοι, η βιομηχανία και οι ΜΚΟ. Οι απόψεις των οργανισμών αυτών θεωρούνται ως πρόσθετη συμβολή στη διαδικασία παρακολούθησης, και σε καμία περίπτωση δεν έχουν ασκήσει αδικαιολόγητη επιρροή στη θέση της Επιτροπής.

Ωστόσο, η Επιτροπή επιβεβαιώνει ότι δεν τηρεί λεπτομερή κατάλογο των επαφών αυτών και επομένως το αίτημα του κ. βουλευτή στο πλαίσιο του κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1049/2001 δεν μπορεί να ικανοποιηθεί. Πράγματι, το δικαίωμα πρόσβασης βάσει του κανονισμού 1049/2001 εφαρμόζεται μόνο στα υφιστάμενα έγγραφα που έχει στην κατοχή της η Επιτροπή, γεγονός που δεν ισχύει για τον ζητούμενο κατάλογο.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005418/14

to the Commission

Kriton Arsenis (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Lack of transparency in relations between the Troika and consultancies and law firms in Greece — Request to disclose the list of contacts with private entities

In my previous Question P-000361/2013 I had asked the Commission about the lack of transparency in relations between the Troika and consultancies and law firms in Greece. In particular, I had referred to a series of Greek press reports about regular contacts, over a period of many months, between Greek consultancies and law firms with the Troika, which includes the Commission. It had also been stressed that these firms had succeeded in a number of instances in influencing the positions adopted by the Troika in its negotiations with the Greek Government for the benefit of the corporate interests they represent.

In this question I had asked the Commission, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, to disclose its list of contacts, as a member of the Troika, with private institutions in Greece from May 2010 up to the date on which I had tabled the question.

Instead of providing me with this list of contacts, as it should have done, the Commission answered this question (P-000361/2013) by stating that its representatives had no contacts with HRADF’s technical, financial or legal advisors.

In view of the above, and pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, I repeat my question: will the Commission disclose its list of contacts, as a member of the Troika, with private institutions in Greece since May 2010?

Answer given by Mr Katainen on behalf of the Commission

(13 August 2014)

The Commission disagrees with the statement that it, as a member of the Troika, has adopted positions for the benefit of corporate interests represented by Greek consultancies and law firms. The Commission is strongly committed to ensuring that the economic policies discussed with the Greek authorities in the course of implementing the programme are not unduly influenced by interest groups. The Commission considers, and consistently points out to the Greek authorities, that the protection of vested interests does not lead to equitable outcomes.

The Commission makes significant efforts to have a comprehensive view of challenges and available solutions for Greece. This includes regular consultations and discussions with a broad set of actors beyond the Greek Government, including political parties, social partners, and other stakeholders such as academia, industry and NGOs. The views of these organisations are considered as an extra input for the monitoring process, and in no cases have exerted an undue influence on the Commission' position.

However, the Commission confirms that it does not keep a detailed list of such contacts and the Honourable Member's request under Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 can therefore not be satisfied. Indeed, the right of access under Regulation 1049/2001 only applies to existing documents in the Commission's possession, which is not the case for the list requested.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-005425/14

προς την Επιτροπή

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(23 Απριλίου 2014)

Θέμα: Διαρθρωτικές Μεταρρυθμίσεις Vs Επενδύσεις

Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, στην έκθεση του σχετικά με το Ευρωπαϊκό Εξάμηνο για τον συντονισμό των οικονομικών πολιτικών: Απασχόληση και κοινωνικές πτυχές στην ετήσια επισκόπηση της ανάπτυξης 2014 (2013/2158(INI)), επισημαίνει ότι, «παρόλο που οι διαρθρωτικές μεταρρυθμίσεις μπορεί να αποδώσουν καρπούς μεσοπρόθεσμα έως μακροπρόθεσμα, η ανάγκη να τονωθεί η εσωτερική ζήτηση στην ΕΕ απαιτεί η Επιτροπή και το Συμβούλιο να ενισχύσουν τις επενδύσεις προκειμένου να διατηρηθεί η οικονομική μεγέθυνση και οι ποιοτικές θέσεις εργασίας βραχυπρόθεσμα και να ενισχυθούν οι δυνατότητες μεσοπρόθεσμα» (Παράγραφος 6).

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ασπάζεται το σκεπτικό του Κοινοβουλίου όσον αφορά το ρόλο των επενδύσεων στις πολιτικές για την επίτευξη οικονομικής μεγέθυνσης; Αν ναι, πώς προτίθεται να αξιοποιήσει τις εισηγήσεις του Κοινοβουλίου που περιέχονται στην πιο πάνω έκθεση;

Γιατί επιμένει να δίνει προτεραιότητα στην εφαρμογή των διαρθρωτικών μεταρρυθμίσεων και των πολιτικών λιτότητας, αφού είναι πλέον ξεκάθαρο ότι για να υπάρξει οικονομική μεγέθυνση θα πρέπει να δοθεί προτεραιότητα στην ενίσχυση των επενδύσεων;

Σχεδιάζει οποιεσδήποτε αλλαγές στις πολιτικές της Ένωσης για την οικονομική μεγέθυνση, και ποιες;

Απάντηση του κ. Katainen εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(29 Ιουλίου 2014)

Όπως εξέθεσε η Επιτροπή στις εαρινές προβλέψεις της, υπάρχουν πραγματικές ενδείξεις ότι η ανάκαμψη ενισχύεται σταδιακά, παρόλο που δεν έχει ακόμη σταθεροποιηθεί, και εξαπλώνεται σε ολόκληρη την ΕΕ. Η ανάπτυξη απέκτησε θετικό πρόσημο στην πλειονότητα των κρατών μελών κατά το προηγούμενο έτος, ενώ οι προοπτικές έχουν βελτιωθεί ακόμη και στα πιο ευάλωτα από αυτά. Ωστόσο, τα υψηλά χρέη του δημόσιου και του ιδιωτικού τομέα και οι σχετικές πιέσεις απομόχλευσης, οι περιορισμένες δυνατότητες για παραγωγικές επενδύσεις στο πλαίσιο ενός χρηματοπιστωτικού συστήματος που βρίσκεται στο στάδιο της ανάκαμψης και απαράδεκτα υψηλά επίπεδα ανεργίας είναι το κληροδότημα της κρίσης. Χρειάζεται επειγόντως περαιτέρω δράση όσον αφορά όλα αυτά τα στοιχεία για τη μετάβαση από την εύθραυστη ανάκαμψη στην ισχυρή και βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη και απασχόληση.

Για την τόνωση των επενδύσεων, η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι έχουν ιδιαίτερη σημασία η μείωση της αβεβαιότητας προκειμένου να τονωθεί η εμπιστοσύνη (π.χ. με την πλήρη εφαρμογή της Τραπεζικής Ένωσης), η διαφύλαξη και βελτίωση της ποιότητας των δημοσίων επενδύσεων σε στρατηγικές εξυγίανσης, η ενίσχυση της εγχώριας ζήτησης, ιδίως σε χώρες με υψηλά πλεονάσματα στο ισοζύγιο τρεχουσών συναλλαγών, οι μεταρρυθμίσεις στις αγορές προϊόντων για την αξιοποίηση ευκαιριών επενδύσεων καθώς και για την περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη της εσωτερικής αγοράς και η βελτίωση της πρόσβασης σε μακροπρόθεσμη χρηματοδότηση για επενδύσεις σύμφωνα με την Πράσινη Βίβλο της Επιτροπής.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005425/14

to the Commission

Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Structural reforms vs. investment

In its report on the European Semester for Economic Policy Coordination: employment and social aspects in the annual growth survey 2014 (2013/2158(INI)), the European Parliament points out that, ‘while structural reforms may bear fruit in the medium to long term, the need to stimulate the EU’s internal demand requires the Commission and Council to enhance investment in order to sustain growth and quality jobs in the short term and enhance potential in the medium term’ (paragraph 6).

In view of this:

Does the Commission concur with Parliament regarding the importance of investment in policies to achieve growth? If so, what action will it take in response to Parliament’s recommendations in the above report?

Why does it insist on prioritising the implementation of structural reforms and austerity policies, since it is now crystal clear that priority must be given to stepping up investment to achieve growth?

What changes, if any, does it intend to make to EU growth policy?

Answer given by Mr Katainen on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2014)

As the Commission set out in its spring forecast, there are genuine signs that recovery, although fragile, is gradually gaining strength and spreading across the EU. Growth turned positive in a large majority of Member States over the course of last year and the outlook has improved even in the more vulnerable ones. However, high public and private debts and related deleveraging pressures, weak possibilities for productive investment under a recovering financial system and unacceptably high levels of unemployment are a legacy of the crisis. Further action on all these elements remains urgently needed to return from fragile recovery to strong and sustainable growth and jobs.

For stimulating investment the Commission considers reducing uncertainty to boost confidence (e.g. by full implementation of banking union), safeguarding and improving the quality of public investment in consolidation strategies, strengthening of domestic demand, notably in countries with high current account surpluses, product market reforms to unlock investment opportunities including further development of the internal market, and improving access to long-term finance for investment in line with the Commissions Green paper to be of particular importance.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005430/14

à la Commission

Rachida Dati (PPE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Fin des frais d'itinérance: quelles garanties pour les consommateurs?

Actuellement, les citoyens européens payent le prix fort lorsqu'ils utilisent leur téléphone dans un autre État que le leur. Ils déboursent ainsi près de 45 centimes pour 1 mégaoctet de données consommées à l'étranger. Selon une enquête de la Commission européenne, 28 % des voyageurs dans l'Union européenne éteignent ainsi leur téléphone pour éviter les frais d'itinérance quand ils se rendent dans un autre pays.

C'est pourquoi le Parlement européen a voté, le 3 avril 2014, un texte qui permettra d'ici à 2015 de supprimer les surfacturations imposées par les opérateurs téléphoniques aux citoyens lorsque ces derniers sont dans un autre État membre. Autrement dit, un appel de mobile passé d'un État membre vers un autre coûtera le même prix qu'un appel interne (au même titre qu'un message écrit ou que la navigation internet). Ce texte doit encore être approuvé par le Conseil pour entrer en vigueur.

C'est une révolution pour le secteur de la téléphonie et une avancée considérable pour la communication entre les Européens. Mais derrière cette nouvelle règle peut se profiler le risque que les opérateurs téléphoniques rééquilibrent ce manque à gagner généré par la fin des frais d'itinérance à travers d'autres pratiques comme le durcissement des dispositions tarifaires. Ce qui reviendrait à répercuter cette perte sur le portefeuille des consommateurs européens.

La Commission peut-elle ainsi informer les citoyens que je représente des garanties qu'elle pourrait mettre en place pour encadrer les pratiques commerciales des opérateurs de télécommunications?

Réponse donnée par Mme Kroes au nom de la Commission

(4 juin 2014)

Le texte voté le 3 avril 2014 par le Parlement Européen en première lecture et auquel l'Honorable Députée fait référence contient une clause autorisant l'application d'un critère d'utilisation raisonnable du mobile en situation d'itinérance à l'étranger au sein de l'Union européenne au prix d'un usage intérieur. Le texte prévoit l'adoption par la Commission d'un acte d'exécution mi-2015 mettant en place les modalités précises de ce critère prenant en compte les lignes directrices générales devant être adoptée par l'ORECE avant le 31 décembre 2014. Ceci protègera les opérateurs de téléphonie mobile contre tout arbitrage et usage abusif de la situation d'itinérance à l'étranger par leurs clients.

Par ailleurs, la régulation du marché de l'itinérance a déjà imposé une baisse considérable des prix de l'itinérance depuis 2007. Or, sur la même période, les prix des services mobiles nationaux ont également diminué en raison de la concurrence sur les marchés nationaux. C'est particulièrement le cas en France. Il devrait en être ainsi avec la future baisse des prix de l'itinérance. La pression concurrentielle sur les opérateurs nationaux ne devrait pas faiblir si ce texte devait entrer en vigueur, ne serait-ce que parce qu'il devrait faciliter la fourniture transfrontalière de services de communications électroniques en Europe.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005430/14

to the Commission

Rachida Dati (PPE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Abolition of roaming charges: guarantees for consumers?

At present, European citizens are charged heavily for using their mobile telephones outside their country of residence. They pay nearly 45 centimes per megabyte for data downloaded when they are abroad. According to a survey by the Commission, 28% of travellers in the European Union switch off their telephones to avoid roaming charges when they are abroad.

Accordingly, on 3 April 2014, the European Parliament voted in favour of provisions which will make it possible by 2015 to do away with overcharging of citizens by telecom operators when they visit other Member States. In other words, a mobile telephone call made from one Member State to another will cost the same amount as a domestic call (and the same principle will apply to text messages or data roaming). These provisions have yet to be approved by the Council before they can enter into force.

This is a revolution in telephony, and a considerable advance for communication among people in Europe. But if this new rule is introduced, there is a risk that telecom operators may offset their loss of revenue due to the abolition of roaming charges by means of other practices, such as higher charges across the board. In other words, they would make European consumers foot the bill for their losses.

Can the Commission inform the citizens whom I represent what guarantees it could introduce in order to regulate the commercial practices of telecom operators?

(Version française)

Réponse donnée par Mme Kroes au nom de la Commission

(4 juin 2014)

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005438/14

à la Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Trafic internet sur les sites de la Commission

La Commission pourrait-elle fournir des statistiques extrêmement détaillées sur le nombre de visites d'internautes (mensuelles, annuelles, temps passé sur chaque page, pages qui ont suscité le plus de trafic, nationalité du trafic…) pour les différents sites des différentes DG de la Commission ainsi que pour les sites des commissaires depuis 2009?

(English version)

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

The Commission invites the Honourable Member to consult the following web page which contains an overview of the main Europa website performance indicators of the last three years: http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/services/statistics/performance_en.htm

In particular, the following data (see annex enclosed) can be highlighted to give an indication with respect to the website traffic (visits, unique visitors) over the last 12 months.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005438/14

alla Commissione

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Traffico internet nei siti della Commissione

Può la Commissione fornire statistiche estremamente dettagliate sul numero di visite di internauti (mensili/annuali/tempo trascorso su ogni pagina/pagine che hanno suscitato maggior interesse/nazionalità del traffico…) nei vari siti delle diverse DG della Commissione nonché in quelli dei commissari a partire dal 2009?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(17 giugno 2014)

La Commissione invita l'onorevole deputata a consultare la seguente pagina web, che contiene una panoramica dei principali indicatori di performance relativi al sito web dell'Europa negli ultimi tre anni:

http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/services/statistics/performance_en.htm

In particolare, si possono mettere in evidenza i seguenti dati (cfr. allegato) per fornire un'indicazione sui contatti del sito web (visite, visitatori unici) nel corso degli ultimi 12 mesi.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005438/14

to the Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Traffic on Commission websites

Can the Commission provide detailed statistics (monthly and annual visitor numbers, the amount of time spent on each page, the most popular pages, visitor nationalities, etc.) for the websites of each of its directorates-general and of every Commissioner since 2009?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

In particular, the following data (see annex enclosed) can be highlighted to give an indication with respect to the website traffic (visits, unique visitors) over the last 12 months.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005439/14

à la Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Persistance des vérifications à la frontière franco-luxembourgeoise

Conformément à l'article 21, point a), du Code frontières Schengen, les États membres sont autorisés à exercer des compétences de police, y compris dans les zones frontalières, dans la mesure où l'exercice de ces compétences n'a pas un effet équivalent à celui des vérifications aux frontières.

Une procédure d'infraction contre la France avait été ouverte en 2011 relativement aux contrôles routiers au niveau de la frontière franco-luxembourgeoise, la France ne semblant pas respecter la règlementation Schengen. Alors que ces vérifications sur voies routières se sont réduites, de nombreux députés, fonctionnaires, assistants et agents contractuels se rendant tous les mois à Strasbourg par train pour la session plénière, subissent encore systématiquement des contrôles policiers à la frontière franco-luxembourgeoise (à Thionville). Ces contrôles répondent parfaitement aux critères qui établissent que ces contrôles de police ont un effet équivalent aux vérifications aux frontières.

La Commission entend-elle prendre contact avec les autorités françaises afin de faire cesser ces vérifications aux frontières?

(English version)

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2014)

An infringement proceeding for non-compliance by France with the obligations under the Schengen Borders Code was initiated by the Commission in 2009. However, it did not concern alleged border checks carried out by France at its internal land borders but the non-removal by France of obstacles to fluid traffic flow at road-crossing points at internal borders. This proceeding was closed in 2012.

Based on the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not in a position to conclude that France by its actions at Thionville would infringe Article 21(a) of the Schengen Borders Code. In the absence of more detailed information, in particular on the frequency and intensity of these checks (e.g. dates and on which trains) but also on the circumstances thereof (e.g. purpose of the check, national authority involved, documents required), the Commission cannot establish whether these checks have an effect equivalent to border checks as defined in the Schengen Borders Code and interpreted by the Court of Justice in its judgments in Melki (49) and Adil (50) cases.

To be able to address the French authorities on these allegations, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to send all available information, in particular on which trains the checks occurred and when (dates and time of the checks).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005439/14

alla Commissione

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Persistere delle verifiche alla frontiera franco-lussemburghese

Secondo l'articolo 21, punto a), del Codice delle frontiere di Schengen, gli Stati membri sono autorizzati a esercitare delle competenze di polizia, anche nelle zone frontaliere, nella misura in cui l'esercizio di tali competenze non abbia un effetto equivalente a quello delle verifiche alle frontiere.

Una procedura di infrazione contro la Francia era stata aperta nel 2011 per quanto riguarda i controlli stradali alla frontiera franco-lussemburghese, in quanto la Francia non sembrava rispettare la regolamentazione Schengen. Anche se tali verifiche sugli assi stradali sono andate riducendosi, risulta che numerosi deputati, funzionari, assistenti e agenti contrattuali che si recano mensilmente a Strasburgo in treno per la sessione plenaria debbono sistematicamente subire controlli di polizia alla frontiera franco-lussemburghese (Thionville). Tali controlli rispondono perfettamente ai criteri che stabiliscono che i controlli di polizia hanno un effetto equivalente alle verifiche alle frontiere.

Intende la Commissione mettersi in contatto con le autorità francesi per far cessare tali verifiche alle frontiere?

Risposta di Cecilia Malmström a nome della Commissione

(6 giugno 2014)

La Commissione ha avviato una procedura di infrazione nei confronti della Francia per inosservanza degli obblighi del Codice frontiere Schengen nel 2009. Tale procedura non riguardava però presunte verifiche svolte dalla Francia alle frontiere terrestri interne, ma la mancata eliminazione degli ostacoli allo scorrimento fluido del traffico presso i valichi stradali alle frontiere interne. La procedura è stata chiusa nel 2012.

In base alle informazioni fornite dall'Onorevole Deputato, la Commissione non può concludere che la Francia, per i controlli a Thionville, violi l'articolo 21, lettera a) del Codice frontiere Schengen. In mancanza di dati più dettagliati — in particolare sulla frequenza e l'intensità di tali controlli (ad esempio le date e su quali treni sono stati effettuati), ma anche sulle circostanze (ad es. la finalità dei controlli, le autorità nazionali che li svolgono, i documenti richiesti) — la Commissione non è in grado di stabilire se essi abbiano un effetto equivalente alle verifiche di frontiera quali definite nel Codice frontiere Schengen e secondo l'interpretazione della Corte di giustizia nelle sentenze relative alle cause Melki (51) e Adil (52).

Per poter interpellare le autorità francesi su queste presunte infrazioni, la Commissione invita l'Onorevole Deputato a inviare tutte le informazioni disponibili, in particolare su quali treni sono stati svolti i controlli in questione e quando (data e ora).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005439/14

to the Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Continuing identity checks at the border between France and Luxembourg

Under Article 21(a) of the Schengen Borders Code, Member States have the right to exercise police powers, even in border areas, provided that in so doing they do not perform the equivalent of border checks.

Infringement proceedings were initiated against France in 2011 in response to the country's apparent reluctance to submit to Schengen rules and stop carrying out identity checks on the border between France and Luxembourg. Although the number of checks on car occupants crossing the border has decreased, MEPs, officials, assistants and contract staff travelling to Strasbourg by train to attend Parliament's monthly part-sessions are still being subjected to systematic police checks at Thionville, on the Franco-Luxembourg border. These procedures are clearly the equivalent of border checks.

Does the Commission intend to contact the French authorities in an effort to put a stop to these border checks?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2014)

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005440/14

à la Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Problème de la tabelle en Belgique

En Belgique, la «tabelle» a été créée dans les années 70 dans le secteur de l'édition: le prix des livres édités en France et vendus en Belgique (et plus généralement de tous les livres importés) subissait une majoration qui permettait aux importateurs-distributeurs de régler leurs frais de douane tout en leur servant de garantie face aux risques liés aux variations du taux de change entre francs français et francs belges.

Malgré son abolition légale en 1987 et l'entrée en vigueur de l'euro, la tabelle existe toujours sous le nom de «mark-up». Ainsi, le prix de la plupart des livres francophones achetés en Belgique est majoré de 8 à 15 %.

Il est évident que le consommateur belge est incité à acheter ses livres sur des plateformes de vente en ligne. Il en résulte une crise pour le marché du livre belge.

La Commission n'estime-t-elle pas que la persistance de cette formalité administrative discriminatoire viole la législation européenne visant à mettre en place un vrai marché intérieur?

La Commission sait-elle si les éditeurs français imposent ce système discriminatoire également dans d'autres pays francophones tels que le Luxembourg?

(English version)

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2014)

The Commission has not looked into the practice of marking up the price of books imported from France to Belgium. However, the Belgian competition authority (Conseil de la concurrence) has looked into the issue following a complaint by Syndicat des Libraires francophones de Belgique about an alleged anti-competitive agreement between two distributors, Interforum and Dilibel, to maintain the mark-up system, and against the alleged abuse of a dominant position by Dilibel by imposing excessive mark-ups on books imported from France. In a decision of 22 September 2010 the Belgian competition authority upheld a decision rejecting the complaint considering that there was no evidence of an anti-competitive agreement aimed at maintaining the mark-up between Dilibel and Interforum nor of the fact that Dilibel was dominant and thereby abusing any dominant position.

The Commission has not been notified of any similar cases by other Member States.

The Commission remains fully committed to ensuring the full respect of EU competition rules in the publishing sector. This is evidenced by its decisions in the E-books case (COMP/39847), in which it made binding the commitments offered by five international publishers (Hachette Livre, Penguin, HarperCollins, Holtzbrinck and Simon & Schuster) and Apple to meet concerns about an alleged concerted practice to limit price competition for e-books in the EEA.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005440/14

alla Commissione

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Problema della «tabella» in Belgio

In Belgio, la «tabella» è stata creata nel settore librario negli anni '70: i libri pubblicati in Francia e venduti in Belgio (e in generale qualsiasi libro importato) subivano una maggiorazione di prezzo che consentiva agli importatori-distributori di pagare le spese doganali e veniva utilizzata come garanzia contro i rischi connessi alle variazioni dei tassi di cambio tra franco francese e franco belga.

Nonostante la sua abolizione nel 1987 e malgrado l'entrata in vigore dell'euro, la tabella continua ad esistere sotto il nome di «mark-up». La maggior parte dei libri francofoni acquistati in Belgio subisce una maggiorazione tra l'8 e il 15 %.

È evidente perciò che il consumatore belga è indotto ad acquistare i libri per corrispondenza su piattaforme di vendita on line, donde una crisi del mercato del libro belga.

Ritiene la Commissione che il persistere di tale formalità amministrativa discriminatoria violi la legislazione europea tendente all'instaurazione di un vero e proprio mercato interno?

Le consta che gli editori francesi impongano tale sistema discriminatorio anche a altri paesi francofoni come il Lussemburgo?

Risposta di Joaquín Almunia a nome della Commissione

(26 giugno 2014)

La Commissione non ha esaminato la questione della maggiorazione dei prezzi dei libri importati in Belgio dalla Francia. Tuttavia, l'autorità belga per la concorrenza (Conseil de la concurrence) ha svolto verifiche in seguito a una denuncia del Syndicat des Libraires francophones de Belgique in merito a una supposta intesa anticoncorrenziale fra due distributori (Interforum e Dilibel) volta a mantenere il sistema di maggiorazione, nonché contro l'abuso di posizione dominante che Dilibel avrebbe commesso imponendo maggiorazioni eccessive sui libri importati dalla Francia. Nella sua decisione del 22 settembre 2010, l'autorità belga per la concorrenza ha confermato una precedente decisione sfavorevole ai denuncianti, non ravvisando prove né dell'esistenza di un'intesa anticoncorrenziale fra Dilibel e Interforum volta a mantenere il sistema di maggiorazioni, né del sussistere di una posizione dominante di Dilibel che potesse dar luogo a un abuso.

Alla Commissione non sono pervenute notifiche di casi analoghi da parte di altri Stati membri.

La Commissione ribadisce il proprio impegno a garantire il pieno rispetto delle norme UE di concorrenza nel settore dell'editoria. Ne sono riprova le decisioni nel caso sugli E-books (COMP/39847), in cui ha reso vincolanti gli impegni assunti da cinque editori internazionali (Hachette Livre, Penguin, HarperCollins, Holtzbrinck e Simon & Schuster) e da Apple per alleviare le preoccupazioni sui sospetti di collusione volta a limitare la concorrenza sui prezzi degli e-book nello Spazio economico europeo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005440/14

to the Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Problem of the mark-up (‘la tabelle’) on foreign books in Belgium

In Belgium, the practice of marking up the price of books published in France (and, more generally, all imported books) and sold in Belgium was introduced in the publishing industry in the 1970s: this allowed importers/distributors to meet their customs fees, but also served to hedge against risks related to fluctuations in the exchange rates between French francs and Belgian francs.

Despite having been abolished by law in 1987 and despite the introduction of the euro, the practice of marking up books still exists. Thus, the price of most French-language books bought in Belgium is marked up by 8-15%.

Clearly, Belgian consumers have an incentive to buy their books online. As a result, the Belgian book market is in crisis.

Does the Commission agree that the persistence of this discriminatory administrative practice constitutes a breach of European law that seeks to establish a genuine internal market?

Does the Commission know whether French publishers also impose this discriminatory system on other francophone countries such as Luxembourg?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2014)

The Commission has not been notified of any similar cases by other Member States.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-005442/14

à la Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 avril 2014)

Objet: Voies de fait de la police belge à l'encontre de citoyens européens: absence de garanties procédurales lors des procédures

Des plaignants non-Belges, provenant de plusieurs États membres ont dû subir des contrôles, qu'ils définissent comme assez rudes, de la part de policiers belges dans le quartier européen, notamment Boulevard Clovis, Square Ambiorix, Schuman, rue Belliard ou près des crèches européennes.

Le chauffeur est obligé de sortir de son véhicule, lequel est confisqué sans aucune explication. Aucun procès-verbal, aucune assistance auprès d'un avocat n'ont été garantis à ces citoyens européens qui sont obligés, sans pouvoir s'y opposer, de se rendre au commissariat du Boulevard Clovis ou dans d'autres postes pour y subir des contrôles pouvant durer, selon certains témoins, plusieurs heures. Aucune assistance d'un interprète n'a été assurée dans le cas où le policier parle une langue (par exemple le néerlandais) que le citoyen d'un autre État membre ne comprend pas. Toutes les plaintes que ces citoyens ont envoyées au «Comité-P» (organe disciplinaire de la police belge) ou au Procureur du Roi ont été classées sans suite.

Vraisemblablement, ces agissements ont un impact sur l'exercice de la libre circulation des citoyens et leurs garanties procédurales, notamment au regard des articles 41, 47 et 48 de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne en liaison avec les principes de légalité et de proportionnalité ainsi que des articles 4 (non-discrimination fondée sur la nationalité), 15 et 30 (garanties procédurales liées à la libre circulation et droit de séjour) de la directive 2004/38/CE.

Si, le cas échéant, la matière a un impact sur le domaine pénal, les principes généraux sur les garanties procédurales du droit d'information dans le cadre de procédures concernant le droit pénal — prévues par la directive 2012/12/UE et par les articles 6 et 13 de la Convention européenne des Droits de l'homme — devraient être connus et appliqués également par les policiers belges.

1.	La Commission envisagerait-elle de prendre des mesures à l'égard du Royaume de Belgique afin que les policiers belges respectent les garanties procédurales, le droit de la défense et au contradictoire au moment du premier contact avec lesdits citoyens européens?

Quant au traitement différencié entre Belges et non-Belges en matière d'amendes et de procédures de saisies de véhicules pour les mêmes infractions, la Commission pourrait-elle expliquer quel suivi a été donné aux réponses qu'elle avait communiquées en 2001 (E-000958/2001) et en 2010 (E-004132/2010)?

(English version)

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2014)

The right of a suspect or accused person to a fair trial is a fundamental right which is laid down as a general principle under Article 6(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Articles 47 and 48(2) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. In order to ensure the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings, three procedural rights directives have been adopted to date.

With the exception of minor offences (including certain road traffic offences), Directive 2010/64/EU (55) provides that a suspected or accused person who does not speak or understand the language of the criminal proceedings is provided without delay with interpretation. Directive 2012/13/EU (56) provides that suspects or accused persons are provided promptly with information concerning their procedural rights, the accusation against them and the right of access to materials of the case. Directive 2013/48/EU (57) ensures the right of a suspected or accused person of access to a lawyer in such time and in such a manner so as to allow the effective exercise of the rights of defence.

As regards the implementation of the first two directives (58), Belgium has notified implementing measures. The European Commission will thoroughly analyse the conformity of these measures and follow-up complaints about any systematic non-application of procedural rights.

The Commission opened an infringement in 2002 against Belgium regarding the national legislation on road traffic fines which provided for a differentiated amount of fines for people not residing on the territory. The Commission closed the procedure in 2011 after a final change to the Belgian law and the cancellation of the increased fines for non-residents.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005442/14

alla Commissione

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Metodi brutali della polizia belga nei confronti di cittadini europei: assenza di garanzie procedurali negli accertamenti

Secondo le denunce, diversi cittadini non belgi, originari di diversi Stati membri, hanno subito controlli da loro definiti assai bruschi da parte di agenti di polizia belgi nel quartiere europeo, segnatamente Boulevard Clovis, Square Ambiorix, Schuman, rue Belliard o in prossimità di asili nido europei.

Il conducente è costretto a uscire dal proprio veicolo, che viene confiscato senza spiegazioni. A detti cittadini europei non sono stati forniti processi verbali né assistenza da parte di un avvocato e sono stati obbligati, senza potersi opporre, a recarsi al commissariato nel Boulevard Clovis o presso altri uffici per subire controlli che, secondo alcuni testimoni, possono durare ore. Non è stata assicurata alcuna assistenza di un interprete nel caso in cui l'agente di polizia parla una lingua (ad esempio il neerlandese) che il cittadino di un altro Stato membro non comprende. Tutte le denunce che i cittadini hanno inviato al «comitato P» (organo di disciplina della polizia belga) o al procuratore del Re sono state archiviate senza seguito.

Palesemente tali interventi si ripercuotono sull'esercizio della libera circolazione dei cittadini e sulla loro garanzie procedurali, segnatamente alla luce degli articoli 41, 47 e 48 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'Unione europea in collegamento con i principi di legalità e proporzionalità nonché degli articoli 4 (non discriminazione basata sulla cittadinanza), 15 e 30 (garanzie procedurali legate alla libera circolazione e al diritto di soggiorno) della direttiva 2004/38/CE.

La materia potrebbe prefigurare anche una fattispecie in campo penale, in quanto i principi generali delle garanzie procedurali in materia di diritto di informazione nel quadro dei procedimenti penali — previste dalla direttiva 2012/12/UE e dagli articoli 6 e 13 della Convenzione europea dei diritti umani — dovrebbero essere noti e applicati pure dagli agenti di polizia belgi.

1.	Intende la Commissione adottare misure nei confronti del Regno del Belgio affinché gli agenti di polizia rispettino le garanzie procedurali e il diritto di difesa e di contradittorio al momento del primo contatto con detti cittadini europei?

2.	In merito alla diversità di trattamento tra cittadini belgi e non belgi in materia di ammende e procedure di confisca di veicoli per le stesse infrazioni, può la Commissione illustrare il seguito dato alle risposte alle interrogazioni comunicate nel 2001 (E-000958/2001) e nel 2010 (E -004132/2010)?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(30 giugno 2014)

Il diritto dell’indagato o dell’imputato a un processo equo è un diritto fondamentale sancito in quanto principio generale all’articolo 6, paragrafo 3, del trattato sull’Unione europea e all’articolo 47 e all’articolo 48, paragrafo 2, della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea. Al fine di garantire il diritto a un processo equo nei procedimenti penali, sono state finora adottate tre direttive sui diritti procedurali.

Ad eccezione dei reati minori (tra cui alcune infrazioni al codice della strada), la direttiva 2010/64/UE (59) prevede che all’indagato o all’imputato che non parla o non comprende la lingua del procedimento penale sia fornito senza indugio un servizio d’interpretazione. La direttiva 2012/13/UE (60) prevede che l’indagato o l’imputato sia prontamente informato dei suoi diritti procedurali, dell’accusa mossa nei suoi confronti e del diritto di accedere alla documentazione relativa all’indagine. La direttiva 2013/48/UE (61) garantisce il diritto dell’indagato o dell’imputato di avvalersi di un difensore in tempi e secondo modalità tali da permettere l’esercizio effettivo dei diritti della difesa.

Il Belgio ha comunicato le misure di attuazione delle prime due direttive (62). La Commissione europea analizzerà approfonditamente la conformità di tali misure e seguirà le denunce relative alla sistematica disapplicazione dei diritti procedurali.

Nel 2002 la Commissione ha avviato una procedura di infrazione nei confronti del Belgio in relazione alla legislazione nazionale sulle multe per le infrazioni al codice della strada, che prevede un importo differenziato per le persone non residenti in Belgio. La Commissione ha chiuso la procedura nel 2011 dopo un’ultima modifica alla legge belga e la cancellazione delle multe di importo superiore per i non residenti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005442/14

to the Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(23 April 2014)

Subject: Acts of aggression against EU citizens by the Belgian police: absence of procedural safeguards during these procedures

Non‐Belgians from several Member States have complained of being subjected to checks by Belgian police officers, which they describe as quite rough, in the European district and particularly Boulevard Clovis, Ambiorix Square, Schuman and rue Belliard and near the crèches serving the EU institutions.

Drivers have been made to get out of their cars, which are then confiscated without any explanation being given. These EU citizens were not issued with statements or guaranteed they could be assisted by a lawyer, but were forced, with no possibility to object, to go to the police station on Boulevard Clovis, or other stations, to undergo checks which — according to some of those concerned — could take hours. No interpreter was provided in cases where the police officer used a language (e.g. Dutch) which these citizens from other Member States did not understand. No action has been taken in response to any of the complaints these citizens have sent to the ‘P Committee’ (the Belgian Police Force’s disciplinary body) or to the King’s Prosecutor.

It is quite likely that such conduct has effects on the exercising by citizens of their right of free movement and the procedural safeguards applicable to them, not least under Articles 41, 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, relating to the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences, and Articles 4 (no discrimination on grounds of nationality), 15 and 30 (procedural safeguards in respect of free movement and rights of residence) of Directive 2004/38/EC.

Were this matter to have effects under criminal law, the Belgian police should be familiar with and equally apply the general principles applicable to procedural safeguards on the right to information in the criminal proceedings — as set out in Directive 2012/13/EU and in Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

1.	Does the Commission plan to take action in respect of the Kingdom of Belgium to ensure that, when they approach these EU citizens, the Belgian Police respect procedural guarantees, the right of legal defence and the right to be heard?

With regard to Belgian and non‐Belgian citizens being treated differently in terms of fines and procedures for the impounding of vehicles for the same offences, could the Commission explain what follow‐up action it has taken on the basis of its replies to written questions E‐000958/2001 and E‐004132/2010?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2014)

With the exception of minor offences (including certain road traffic offences), Directive 2010/64/EU (63) provides that a suspected or accused person who does not speak or understand the language of the criminal proceedings is provided without delay with interpretation. Directive 2012/13/EU (64) provides that suspects or accused persons are provided promptly with information concerning their procedural rights, the accusation against them and the right of access to materials of the case. Directive 2013/48/EU (65) ensures the right of a suspected or accused person of access to a lawyer in such time and in such a manner so as to allow the effective exercise of the rights of defence.

As regards the implementation of the first two directives (66), Belgium has notified implementing measures. The European Commission will thoroughly analyse the conformity of these measures and follow-up complaints about any systematic non-application of procedural rights.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-005458/14

lill-Kunsill

Roberta Metsola (PPE)

(24 ta' April 2014)

Suġġett: Traffikar tal-bnedmin

It-traffikar tal-bnedmin huwa delitt serju u ksur kbir tad-drittijiet tal-bniedem. Ta' sikwit huwa marbut mal-kriminalità organizzata u jitqies bħala waħda mill-aktar attivitajiet kriminali li tiġġenera profitt fid-dinja. Il-Kummissjoni tikkalkula li l-għadd ta' persuni li jiġu traffikati lejn l-UE jew fi ħdanha jammonta għal bosta mijiet ta' eluf fis-sena. L-approċċ tal-Kummissjoni għat-traffikar jiffoka fuq il-prevenzjoni, il-prosekuzzjoni tal-persuni kriminali u l-protezzjoni tal-vittmi. Dan hu rifless fid-direttiva l-ġdida dwar it-traffikar tal-bnedmin, li ġiet adottata fil-21 ta' Marzu 2011. Din tistabbilixxi dispożizzjonijiet robusti dwar il-protezzjoni tal-vittmi u tappoġġa l-prinċipji li ma jingħatawx pieni għal reati żgħar u li tingħata assistenza mingħajr kundizzjonijiet.

Ir-Rapport intitolat “It-Traffikar tal-Persuni (TiP)” jiġi ppubblikat ta' kull sena mill-Istati Uniti tal-Amerika. Il-pajjiżi kollha huma miġbura fi gradi differenti, bl-ewwel grad jinkludi dawk il-pajjiżi li l-gvernijiet tagħhom huma kompletament konformi mal-istandards minimi fir-rigward tat-traffikar tal-bnedmin. Madankollu, xi Stati Membri tal-UE tqiegħdu fit-tieni grad: il-Bulgarija, il-Kroazja, Ċipru, l-Estonja, il-Greċja, l-Ungerija, il-Latvja, il-Litwanja, Malta, il-Portugall u r-Rumanija.

Il-Kunsill jista' jelabora dwar jekk iqisx li r-rapport TiP jagħti deskrizzjoni ġusta u preċiża tas-sitwazzjoni fil-konfront tal-Istati Membri msemmija hawn fuq, impoġġija fit-tieni grad? Il-Kunsill kellu xi taħdidiet mal-Istati Uniti jew mal-11-il Stat Membru tal-UE konċernati dwar din il-kwistjoni? Jekk dan mhuwiex il-każ, hemm xi pjan li dawn isiru fil-futur qrib?

Barra minn hekk, il-Kunsill x'azzjoni ulterjuri, jekk hu l-każ, iqis li hija meħtieġa biex il-11-il Stat Membru mpoġġija fit-tieni grad jissodisfaw ir-rakkomandazzjonijiet li saru fir-rigward tat-traffikar tal-bnedmin?

Tweġiba

(15 ta' Settembru 2014)

L-Onorevoli Membru huwa mistieden jirreferi għat-tweġiba tal-Kunsill għall-Mistoqsija E-005357/2014. Sa fejn hija kkonċernata kwalunkwe evalwazzjoni tar-rapport TiP, il-Kunsill ma adottax pożizzjoni dwar ir-rapport. Barra minn hekk, peress li l-informazzjoni tiġi pprovduta direttament lill-Istati Uniti fil-livell nazzjonali, il-kwistjonijiet imqajmin mill-Onorevoli Membru huma kwistjoni għall-Istati Membri individwali.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005458/14

to the Council

Roberta Metsola (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Trafficking in human beings

Trafficking in human beings is a serious crime and a gross violation of human rights. It is very often linked to organised crime and is considered to be one of the most profitable criminal activities worldwide. The Commission estimates that the number of people trafficked to or within the EU amounts to several hundred thousand a year. The Commission’s approach to trafficking focuses on prevention, prosecution of criminals and protection of victims. This is reflected in the new directive on trafficking in human beings, which was adopted on 21 March 2011. It establishes robust provisions on victims’ protection and supports the principles of non-punishment for petty crimes and of unconditional assistance.

The Trafficking in Persons (TiP) Report is published by the United States of America on a yearly basis. All countries are grouped into different tiers, with tier 1 comprising those countries whose governments fully comply with minimum standards as regards the trafficking of human beings. However, the following EU Member States have been placed in the second tier: Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal and Romania.

Could the Council elaborate as to whether it considers the TiP Report to give a fair and accurate description of the situation vis-à-vis the abovementioned EU Member States, which have been placed in tier 2? Has the Council held any talks with the US or the 11 EU Member States in question on this issue? If not, are any planned for the near future?

Moreover, what further action, if any, does the Council consider to be necessary in order for the 11 EU Member States which have been placed in tier 2 to fulfil the recommendations made with regard to the trafficking of human beings?

(15 September 2014)

The Honourable Member is invited to refer to the Council's reply to Question E-005357/2014. As far as any evaluation of the TiP report is concerned, the Council has not adopted a position on the report. Moreover, since the information is provided directly to the US at national level, the issues raised by the Honourable Member are a matter for individual Member States.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005496/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Naufragio traghetto in Sud Corea

Il traghetto sud coreano naufragato il 16 aprile c.a. porta con sé un pesantissimo bilancio in fatto di vittime.

Studenti delle superiori figurano fra le principali vittime (circa trecento i ragazzi a bordo) e a duecentonovanta ammonta il totale dei dispersi.

Alla luce di quanto sopra, può la Commissione:

informare in merito alla presenza di cittadini europei a bordo dell'imbarcazione e fra i dispersi;

informare in ordine alle dinamiche dell'incidente?

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

(28 luglio 2014)

In data 16 aprile 2014 il traghetto sudcoreano Sewol è naufragato lungo la costa meridionale nei pressi dell'isola Jindo con 476 passeggeri a bordo, inclusi 325 studenti della scuola superiore Danwon di Anyang diretti a Jeju per una gita scolastica. Dei 476 passeggeri 174 sono stati tratti in salvo e 269 sono stati ritrovati senza vita. A bordo dell'imbarcazione non è stata riscontrata la presenza di alcun cittadino europeo.

2.	È attualmente in corso un'indagine giudiziaria.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005496/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: South Korean ferry disaster

The sinking of the South Korean ferry on 16 April cost a huge number of people their lives.

Many of the victims were secondary school pupils (some 300 children were on board), and the total number of people missing is 290.

1.	Can the Commission indicate whether any European citizens were on board the vessel and are among the missing?

2.	Can the Commission supply any factual information about the accident?

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

(28 July 2014)

On 16 April 2014, a South Korean ferry Sewol sank off the Southern coast near Jindo Island with 476 passengers aboard, including 325 students on a school field trip to Jeju from Danwon high school in Anyang. Of the 476 passengers, 174 have been rescued and 269 found dead. No EU citizens were boarded on the ferry.

2.	A judicial investigation is underway.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005555/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Sulla sorte di animali esotici importati

Relativamente all'importazione di animali esotici nei paesi occidentali, suscitano certamente non poche perplessità le notizie in merito ad esecuzioni di esemplari giovani e sani — attrattive di parchi zoologici — giustificate sulla base di discutibili ragioni «scientifiche» di preservazione della specie.

I casi ai quali si fa riferimento sono certamente tristemente noti.

Di conseguenza, in merito a quanto sopra, si chiede alla Commissione di fornire:

informazioni in ordine agli spazi di discrezionalità contemplati dall'UE in seno alla normativa di tutela degli animali;

informazioni in merito agli strumenti di monitoraggio implementati dall'UE nei riguardi delle specie esotiche importate.

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(10 luglio 2014)

Per quanto riguarda gli animali nei giardini zoologici, la direttiva in materia promuove la protezione e la conservazione delle specie animali selvatiche potenziando il ruolo dei giardini zoologici nella conservazione della biodiversità. Occorre adottare misure nazionali per il rilascio delle licenze e le ispezioni dei giardini zoologici, al fine di garantire che questi rispettino le misure previste per la conservazione, compresa l'appropriata sistemazione degli animali. La legislazione prevede un ruolo molto limitato per la Commissione. Tuttavia la Commissione controlla l'attuazione ed esamina ogni elemento ben documentato e circostanziato portato alla sua attenzione in ordine al mancato recepimento o alla mancata attuazione. Sebbene l'allevamento in cattività figuri tra le misure di conservazione consentite, non esistono disposizioni specifiche riguardanti i metodi di selezione o gestione delle popolazioni di animali. Gli Stati membri sono tenuti a garantire che i metodi di selezione scelti siano coerenti con la conservazione delle specie.

Il prossimo regolamento sulle specie esotiche invasive prevede disposizioni relative alle verifiche alle frontiere. Tuttavia, nell'ambito di tale quadro giuridico, le restrizioni all'importazione si applicano solo alle specie figuranti nell'elenco delle specie esotiche invasive di rilevanza unionale e non ad altre specie esotiche. Inoltre, non esiste un approccio comune dell'UE per quanto riguarda l'importazione, l'esportazione e il commercio interno di oltre 30 000 specie riprese negli allegati del regolamento n. 338/97 del Consiglio (67). Tali specie comprendono un gran numero di animali esotici che possono essere oggetto di scambi solo se gli Stati membri dell'UE rilasciano permessi o certificati che garantiscono la loro provenienza da fonti legittime e sostenibili. La Commissione collabora strettamente con gli Stati membri per rafforzare costantemente il rispetto di queste norme.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005555/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: The fate of imported exotic animals

In the context of imports of exotic animals into Western countries, some perplexity is undoubtedly caused by reports of killings of young, healthy animals — which are zoo attractions — on debatable ‘scientific’ grounds connected with preserving species.

The cases referred to here are certainly well known and deplored.

1.	Can the Commission supply information about the margin of discretion permitted by the EU in its rules on animal welfare?

2.	Can the Commission supply information about the monitoring instruments established by the EU with regard to imported exotic species?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2014)

As regards animals in zoos, the Zoos Directive promotes the protection and conservation of wild animal species by strengthening the role of zoos in the conservation of biodiversity. National measures have to be adopted for the licensing and inspection of zoos, to ensure that they respect the foreseen conservation measures, including appropriate accommodation for the animals. The legislation foresees a very limited role for the Commission. The Commission nevertheless monitors the implementation and examines any well founded and substantiated evidence of failure of transposition or implementation brought to its attention. Although captive breeding is listed among the conservation measures allowed, there are no specific provisions regarding breeding methods or management of animal populations. Member States are responsible for ensuring that the breeding methods chosen are consistent with the conservation of the species

The forthcoming Regulation on Invasive Alien Species includes provisions on border checks. However, under that legal framework, import restrictions will only apply to species listed as invasive alien species of Union concern and not to other exotic species. Furthermore, a common EU approach exists in respect to the import, export and internal trade of more than 30 000 species which are included in the annexes to Council Regulation 338/97 (68). Those species include a large number of exotic animals which can only be traded if the EU Member States issue permits or certificates guaranteeing that they come from sustainable and legal sources. The Commission works closely with the Member States to constantly strengthen the enforcement of those rules.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005556/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Spionaggio agricolo cinese

Negli Stati Uniti, negli ultimi anni, le autorità governative e di polizia hanno registrato un aumento costante dei casi di «spionaggio agricolo»: il primo caso si è verificato nell'Iowa, dove il direttore di un centro di ricerca che si occupa di semi di mais particolarmente resistenti e nutrienti ha scoperto una spia che studiava il raccolto. Denunciato, si è poi scoperto che l'uomo era al soldo di un gruppo cinese impegnato nello sviluppo di nuove tecnologie agricole, cui la spia inviava semi sviluppati da ricercatori americani.

Gli agenti cinesi arrestati negli Stati Uniti fino ad oggi sono una decina circa, ma non è escluso che ve ne siano altri ancora a piede libero, anche perché la popolazione cinese continua a crescere e le risorse alimentari interne del paese cominciano a non tenere il passo con questa espansione.

In merito a questa situazione, può la Commissione rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:

è a conoscenza della questione?

È stata informata dagli Stati membri riguardo ad eventi simili avvenuti negli Stati membri?

È a conoscenza di atti di spionaggio analoghi anche in altri settori produttivi?

Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione

(3 luglio 2014)

La Commissione è consapevole che il rischio di appropriazione illecita dei segreti commerciali detenuti da imprese e centri di ricerca europei è in aumento. Secondo una recente indagine effettuata per la Commissione, una società europea su cinque ha subito almeno un tentativo di furto di segreti commerciali negli ultimi dieci anni. La minaccia proviene sia dall’interno che dall’esterno dell’Unione europea. Nell’odierna economia della conoscenza, la capacità delle aziende di innovare e competere può essere gravemente danneggiata in caso, ad esempio, di furto o utilizzo abusivo di informazioni o materiali riservati.

Il 27 novembre 2013 la Commissione ha presentato una proposta di direttiva del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio sulla protezione del know-how riservato e delle informazioni commerciali riservate (segreti commerciali) contro l’acquisizione, l’utilizzo e la divulgazione illeciti (69). La proposta prevede mezzi mediante i quali le vittime di appropriazione illecita di segreti commerciali possono ottenere un risarcimento dei danni all’interno dell’Unione europea. Essa dovrebbe rendere più semplice per i giudici nazionali trattare i casi di appropriazione illecita di segreti commerciali e rimuovere dal mercato i prodotti che violano segreti commerciali. Dovrebbe inoltre rendere più facile per le vittime ottenere un risarcimento per azioni illegali.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005556/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Chinese agricultural espionage

The police and government authorities in the United States have observed a steady increase in cases of ‘agricultural espionage’ over the past few years. The first such incident to be recorded took place in Iowa, where the manager of a research centre working on a project to produce highly resistant and nutritious maize seeds came across a spy who was digging up the harvest. After being arrested, it then emerged that the spy was on the payroll of a Chinese firm seeking to develop new agricultural technologies, and that he was sending his paymasters seeds that had been developed by American researchers.

Around ten Chinese undercover operatives have been arrested in the United States to date, but there is no guarantee that there are not others out there who have so far avoided detection, especially given that the Chinese population is continuing to escalate and the country’s food resources are now starting to struggle to keep up with this growth.

1.	Is the Commission aware of the situation described above?

2.	Have any Member States approached it to report similar incidents taking place within their borders?

3.	Does it know if any similar acts of espionage have been perpetrated in other industrial sectors?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2014)

The Commission is aware that the risk of misappropriation of trade secrets held by European businesses and research centres is increasing. According to a recent survey carried out for the Commission, one in five European companies has suffered at least one attempt to steal its trade secrets in the last 10 years. This threat comes both from within and outside the European Union. In today’s knowledge economy, the capacity of companies to innovate and compete can be seriously harmed when, e.g. confidential information or materials are stolen or misused.

On 27 November 2013, the Commission submitted a proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (70). The proposal includes means through which victims of trade secret misappropriation can obtain redress within the European Union. It should make it easier for national courts to deal with the misappropriation of trade secrets and to remove the trade secret infringing products from the market. It should also make it easier for victims to receive damages for illegal actions.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005557/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Smart Work per il digitale

Un ciclo di seminari organizzati in Italia da alcune società di consulenza e innovazione focalizzano l'attenzione su un tema certamente familiare: gli aspetti controversi del mondo virtuale. Al di là di quanto attiene ai rischi implicati dalla rete, tale iniziativa concentra i propri sforzi sulla trasmissione di un messaggio principale: la necessità di un approccio umanistico, capace di dominare le potenzialità della rete, senza rimanerne vittima. In sostanza, si fa riferimento a una filosofia orientativa piuttosto che a una serie di accorgimenti atti ad ovviare ai problemi presentati da internet.

Con «smart work» si definisce tale sensibilità, cornice di riferimento sulla base della quale promuovere l'operatività sulla rete.

In relazione a quanto espresso, può la Commissione fornire delucidazioni in merito alla socializzazione, da parte dell'UE, di approcci guida sostanziali — non nozionistici — all'impiego di internet?

Risposta di Neelie Kroes a nome della Commissione

(28 maggio 2014)

La Commissione ringrazia l'onorevole parlamentare per la sua domanda e si compiace di fornire ulteriori chiarimenti su come la Commissione affronta in modo sostanziale l'incremento delle utenze di Internet nella società. La Commissione è consapevole della pervasività e dei profondi cambiamenti che la diffusione delle TIC comporta per la società. Come mostra l'agenda digitale per l'Europa, tutte le politiche (mercato interno, politica dei consumatori, tutela della vita privata, istruzione, occupazione, ecc.) devono prendere in considerazione e accompagnare i cambiamenti indotti dalla diffusione delle TIC.

Il programma di ricerca e innovazione Orizzonte 2020 (H2020), finanziato dall'UE, dispone che l'impatto sociale della diffusione delle TIC sia preso in considerazione in tutti i progetti. Le attività di ricerca e innovazione finanziati dall'UE devono dimostrare responsabilità, vale a dire sviluppare un approccio di accompagnamento critico, e non ingabbiare l'innovazione con imposizioni e divieti superficiali.

Con il programma Orizzonte 2020, la Commissione mira inoltre a sostenere lo sviluppo di piattaforme di sensibilizzazione collettiva e piattaforme sociali digitali per sfruttare le TIC in una prospettiva umana.

Un apposito obiettivo trasversale relativo a «un'era digitale incentrata sulle persone» è stato anche integrato nel programma di lavoro per favorire «il lavoro intelligente», vale a dire una combinazione di intelligence tecnologica e sociale.

L'onorevole parlamentare potrebbe essere anche interessato all'«iniziativa Onlife».La Commissione ha raccolto una dozzina di esperti con una competenza multidisciplinare, soprattutto nel campo delle scienze sociali e umanistiche, per esaminare le modalità con cui l'attuale transizione digitale e l'avvento di un'era iperconnessa influenzano radicalmente la condizione umana e richiedono una rielaborazione dei quadri informativi su cui costruiamo le nostre politiche. Ciò ha portato al Manifesto Onlife sul tema «Being human in a hyperconnected era».

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005557/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Smart Work for the digital sector

A cycle of seminars organised in Italy by various consultancy and innovation companies focus attention on a theme which is certainly familiar: the controversial aspects of the virtual world. Going beyond the threats implied by the web, this initiative concentrates its efforts on the transmission of a central message: the need for a humanistic approach, able to master the potential of the web without becoming a victim of it. Essentially, it relates to a philosophy of guidance rather than a series of measures to avoid the problems presented by the Internet.

Such sensitivity is known as ‘smart work’, a reference framework based on promoting the operation of the web.

In relation to the above, can the Commission provide any clarification in relation to the socialisation by the EU of substantial, rather than superficial, guidelines on the use of the Internet?

Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2014)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his question and is happy to provide further clarification on how the Commission deals with the uptake of Internet by society in a substantial way. The Commission is aware of the pervasiveness and the deep changes that ICT deployment entails for society. As the Digital Agenda for Europe shows, taking into account and accompanying the changes brought about by ICT deployment impacts all policies: internal market, consumers' policy, privacy, education, employment, etc.

In Horizon 2020 (H2020), the EU-funded research and innovation programme, the societal impact of ICT deployment is to be taken into account in all projects. EU-funded research and innovation has to be responsible, and this means developing a critical accompaniment approach, not straightjacketing innovation with superficial do's and don'ts.

Through H2020, the Commission aims also to support the development of collective awareness platforms and digital social platforms to harness ICT to a humane perspective.

A dedicated cross-cutting objective on ‘Human-centric digital age’ has also been integrated in the work programme to foster ‘smart work’, i.e. the mix between technological and societal intelligence.

The Honourable Member may also be interested in the Onlife Initiative. The Commission gathered a dozen of experts with a multidisciplinary background mainly in social sciences and humanities, to explore the ways by which the current digital transition and the rise of a hyper-connected era affect radically the human condition and call for a reengineering of the frameworks on which we build policies. This lead to the Onlife Manifesto on ‘Being human in a hyperconnected era’.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005558/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Rischi di un «effetto Crimea» nel Nagorno Karabakh

Già in passato l'interrogante ha chiesto alla Commissione informazioni in merito al rischio di un'estensione dell'«effetto Crimea» ad altre aree confinanti con la Russia, soffermandosi in particolare sui casi della Transnistria e dell'Ossezia. A questi esempi se ne aggiunge un terzo non meno rilevante, quello dell'Armenia e della regione del Nagorno Karabakh, in cui, all'indomani del referendum per l'indipendenza della Crimea, il ministero degli Esteri karabakhi ha rilasciato un comunicato che riconosce il referendum come una manifestazione del diritto all'autodeterminazione e lo considera la via democratica per la risoluzione delle dispute di questo tipo. Il 18 marzo l'Assemblea Nazionale dell'Artsakh ha rilasciato un altro comunicato, firmato da tutte e quattro le forze politiche principali, che riconosce il referendum e lo considera come una prova della superiorità del diritto all'autodeterminazione sul diritto all'integrità territoriale.

D'altro canto esistono tesi contrapposte a queste, anche provenienti da organizzazioni e attivisti mobilitati per l'autodeterminazione del Nagorno Karabakh, secondo cui il referendum in Crimea si è svolto «sotto il tiro di mitragliatrici» e non è stato organizzato in maniera democratica, ma durante un'occupazione militare.

In merito a questa situazione, ritiene la Commissione europea che lo scenario della Crimea possa avere ripercussioni concrete sul Nagorno Karabakh nel prossimo futuro?

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

(26 giugno 2014)

La situazione in Crimea e quella nel Nagorno-Karabakh sono due casi molto distinti. L'UE non riconosce il «referendum» illegale e illegittimo tenutosi in Crimea, condanna fermamente l'annessione illegale della Crimea e di Sebastopoli alla Federazione Russa e non intende riconoscerla.

Quanto al futuro del Nagorno-Karabakh, lo status quo si basa su un cessate il fuoco in vigore ormai da vent'anni e non è una situazione sostenibile. È dunque assolutamente prioritario trovare una soluzione a questo conflitto. L'UE continuerà a sostenere il processo di pace in corso con la mediazione del Gruppo di Minsk dell'OSCE e ad esortare l'Armenia e l'Azerbaigian a perseguire in buona fede negoziati costruttivi per giungere a un accordo di pace. L'UE ha ribadito la propria disponibilità a incrementare il suo sostegno a misure volte a promuovere la fiducia e la pace, in linea con l'azione del Gruppo di Minsk e in modo pienamente complementare, per facilitare la creazione di condizioni favorevoli a un accordo di pace.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005558/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Risk of a ‘Crimea effect’ in Nagorno-Karabakh

In the past, the author of this question had asked the Commission for information concerning the risk of the ‘Crimea effect’ spreading to other areas which border Russia, dwelling on the cases of Transnistria and Ossetia in particular. Yet a third, equally important example should be added to these two: that of Armenia and the Nagorno‐Karabakh region, where, the day after the Crimean independence referendum, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement recognising the referendum as a demonstration of the right to self‐determination and describing it as the democratic way to resolve such disputes. On 18 March, the National Assembly of Artsakh issued another declaration, signed by all four of the main political parties, recognising the referendum and describing it as proof of the superiority of the right to self‐determination over the right to territorial integrity.

On the other hand, there have been treatises opposed to these, also produced by organisations and activists campaigning for self‐determination in Nagorno‐Karabakh, which state that the referendum in Crimea took place ‘under machine gun fire’ and was not organised democratically, but during military occupation.

In light of this situation, does the Commission believe that the Crimean scenario could have concrete repercussions in Nagorno‐Karabakh in the near future?

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

(26 June 2014)

The Crimean scenario and Nagorno-Karabakh are two very different cases. The EU does not recognise the illegal and illegitimate ‘referendum’ in Crimea and the EU strongly condemns the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and will not recognise it.

As for the future of Nagorno-Karabakh, the ‘status quo’ based on a 20 years old cease-fire is not a sustainable option and the solution of this conflict remains a top priority. The EU will continue to support the ongoing peace process mediated by the OSCE Minsk Group and appeal to Armenia and Azerbaijan for constructive, good-faith negotiations towards a peace agreement.The EU reiterated its readiness to provide enhanced support for confidence and peace building measures, in support of and in full complementarity with the Minsk Group, with a view to facilitating the creation of conducive conditions for a peaceful settlement.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005559/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Rischi di sicurezza legati ai cittadini europei che si arruolano per la jihad siriana

È cosa risaputa che alcuni cittadini occidentali, tra cui numerosi europei, hanno voluto unirsi ad alcuni gruppi dell'opposizione siriana, inclusi alcuni tra i più estremisti. Il fatto drammatico è però che questi flussi stanno aumentando con il passare del tempo. Se gli USA hanno registrato che cinquanta cittadini americani hanno scelto questa strada, in Europa si contano tra i 2 300 e 2 400 cittadini arruolati dai jihadisti. Trattandosi di comuni cittadini europei, essi hanno la possibilità di muoversi liberamente in tutta l'Unione e rappresentano un rischio potenzialmente enorme per la sicurezza interna degli Stati membri.

Una volta reclutati, i loro passaporti vengono requisiti e consegnati ad altri jihadisti, che così «acquisiscono» la cittadinanza europea e sono liberi di muoversi nell'UE per fondare nuove cellule terroristiche.

In merito a questa situazione, può la Commissione chiarire se:

è a conoscenza della situazione?

sono allo studio misure transnazionali per affrontare questo problema, in particolare tramite gli strumenti a disposizione dell'Europol?

Risposta di Cecilia Malmström a nome della Commissione

(13 giugno 2014)

La Commissione europea è consapevole della minaccia che rappresentano i cittadini europei che, dallo scoppio del conflitto in Siria, hanno ingrossato le file dell'opposizione siriana più estremista.

La Commissione collabora intensamente con il coordinatore antiterrorismo dell'UE, le pertinenti agenzie dell'UE e gli Stati membri nell'ambito dei gruppi di lavoro del Consiglio.

La Commissione contribuisce attivamente a tutte le attività promosse in vari Stati membri che presentano una qualche componente «combattenti stranieri» o comunque di viaggio per scopi terroristici.

La Commissione riconosce l'importanza cruciale dell'approccio transfrontaliero e giudica essenziale la cooperazione internazionale in questo campo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005559/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Security risks linked to European citizens signing up for the jihad in Syria

It is well known that some Westerners, including many European citizens, have decided to join certain Syrian opposition groups, including some of the most extremist. The most dramatic thing, however, is that these numbers are growing over time. The USA has registered fifty American citizens who have chosen this path, yet between 2 300 and 2 400 European citizens have joined the jihadists. Since these persons are EU citizens, they can move freely within the entire Union and represent a potentially enormous risk for the internal security of the Member States.

Once they have been recruited, their passports are requisitioned and handed over to other jihadists, who thus ‘acquire’ European citizenship and are free to move within the EU and establish new terror cells.

In light of this, can the Commission answer the following questions:

Is it aware of this situation?

Are cross‐border measures being studied to tackle this problem, particularly through instruments available to Europol?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(13 June 2014)

The European Commission is aware of the threat coming from European citizens who have joined radical fighting groups in Syria since the beginning of the conflict there.

The Commission has worked closely with the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, the relevant EU Agencies and Member States within the Council preparatory working groups.

The Commission has contributed intensively in all the activities dealing with the ‘foreign fighters’ or ‘terrorist travellers’ dimension led by different Member States.

The Commission recognises the crucial importance of the cross-border approach and how essential international cooperation in this field is.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005560/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Per una didattica inclusiva

Il recente studio OCSE-Pisa (condotto su quarantaquattro paesi) ha messo in evidenza come studenti «deboli» possano possedere in realtà un'insospettata propensione per il problem solving. A differenza dei compagni eccellenti, i primi riuscirebbero ad affrontare con maggiore destrezza situazioni problematiche relative alla vita reale.

Tali considerazioni fanno ben sperare in ordine all'incoraggiamento di un nuovo tipo di didattica, aperta alle differenti abilità, ai talenti di ogni studente. Di conseguenza, gli stessi docenti dovrebbero essere preparati in tal senso; di modo da «non perdere» alcuna potenzialità dei propri discenti.

In merito alle considerazioni espresse, può la Commissione precisare quanto segue:

quali sono gli orientamenti dell'UE in relazione all'esigenza di contemplare un sistema educativo e scolastico capace di accogliere e coltivare le differenti abilità degli studenti?

Risposta di Androulla Vassiliou a nome della Commissione

(6 giugno 2014)

L'onorevole deputato è certamente a conoscenza del fatto che, a norma dell'articolo 165 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, la responsabilità del contenuto e dell'organizzazione dei sistemi di istruzione e formazione spetta interamente agli Stati membri. Per trovare soluzioni a sfide comuni, la Commissione sostiene la collaborazione, l'apprendimento tra pari e lo scambio di buone pratiche tra gli Stati membri.

Nel suo documento di lavoro «Supporting the Teaching Professions for Better Learning Outcomes » (Sostenere le professioni dell'insegnamento per ottenere migliori risultati di apprendimento) del novembre 2012 (71), la Commissione ha evidenziato la necessità che gli insegnanti offrano oggi un insegnamento individualizzato volto a sostenere tutti gli studenti, affinché questi possano conseguire specifici risultati di apprendimento, qualunque sia la loro particolare esigenza formativa e la loro estrazione sociale o culturale. Gli insegnanti dovrebbero essere in grado di utilizzare in classe un'ampia gamma di competenze didattiche e avere accesso a un ricco repertorio didattico per poter aiutare gli studenti a sviluppare al massimo le proprie capacità.

Affinché i sistemi di istruzione consentano agli insegnanti di svolgere questo lavoro, la loro istruzione e il loro sviluppo professionale vanno considerati un compito permanente e devono essere strutturati e aggiornati mediante provvedimenti coerenti e coordinati. Nelle conclusioni del Consiglio del 2009 sullo sviluppo professionale degli insegnanti e dei capi istituto (72) e in alcune discussioni successive del Consiglio, i ministri hanno sottolineato che tali provvedimenti dovrebbero prevedere una formazione iniziale di livello elevato per gli insegnanti, il sostegno sistematico a inizio carriera per i nuovi insegnanti e uno sviluppo professionale continuo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005560/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: In favour of inclusive teaching

The recent OECD‐Pisa study (conducted in 44 countries) highlighted how ‘weak’ students may actually possess hidden talents when it comes to problem solving. Unlike their more academic classmates, they are more skilful when it comes to tackling problems related to real life.

These observations have raised hopes of promoting a new kind of teaching, open to different abilities and to the talents of every student. Consequently, teachers should also be trained in such a way, so as ‘not to miss’ some of the potential of their students.

In light of these considerations, can the Commission answer the following questions:

What is the EU's position in relation to the need to consider an educational and school system able to accommodate and cultivate the different abilities of students?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2014)

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 content and organisation of education and training systems rests entirely with Member States. The Commission supports collaborative work, exchange of good practice, and peer learning between Member States in order to find solutions to common challenges.

The Commission noted in its Staff Working document ‘Supporting the Teaching Professions for Better Learning Outcomes’ of November 2012 (73) that teaching staff today need to offer individualised teaching so that all learners are supported to achieve specified learning outcomes, whatever their particular learning needs, cultural or social background. Teaching staff should be able to use a broad spectrum of classroom teaching skills and have access to rich teaching repertoires in order to help their pupils achieve to the best of their abilities.

In order for education systems to enable teachers to do so, their education and professional development needs to be seen as a lifelong task, and be structured and resourced through coherent and coordinated provision. Ministers underlined in their Council conclusions of 2009 on the development of teachers and school leaders, (74) and in several subsequent Council discussions, that such provision should include high-quality initial teacher education, systematic support for new teaching staff and continuing professional development.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005561/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Nuovi anticoagulanti: un possibile investimento

Ricerche mediche, le cui acquisizioni sono state presentate in un convegno tenutosi in Italia, mostrano una stretta correlazione fra fibrillazione atriale ed ictus.

L'irregolarità delle pulsazioni cardiache — non insolite a partire dai quaranta anni — favorirebbe l'insorgenza di coaguli nel sangue incrementando il rischio di trombosi e ictus. Più precisamente, occorre dire che un caso di ictus su tre è imputabile a tale disfunzione cardiaca.

Un rimedio particolarmente efficace a quest'ultima si individuerebbe nell'adozione di nuovi farmaci anticoagulanti orali. Il costo dei nuovi farmaci sarebbe l'unico aspetto limitante connesso a tale impiego; sebbene un investimento iniziale svilupperebbe effetti particolarmente positivi anche in termini finanziari, visto che si ridurrebbe sensibilmente la spesa relativa all'assistenza sanitaria per i pazienti colpiti da ictus.

In relazione a quanto illustrato, può la Commissione fornire delucidazioni in merito alla contemplazione, da parte dell'UE, di strategie sanitarie che si attestino per efficacia, ma che implichino un considerevole impegno finanziario iniziale?

Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione

(11 giugno 2014)

Conformemente al trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, la definizione delle politiche sanitarie e l'organizzazione e l'erogazione di servizi sanitari e assistenza medica — compreso il rimborso e il pagamento dell'assistenza sanitaria — rientrano nelle responsabilità degli Stati membri.

Per sostenere l'azione degli Stati membri la Commissione ha avviato diverse iniziative volte ad agevolare lo scambio di informazioni tra gli Stati membri sull'efficacia dei sistemi sanitari.

Un'iniziativa chiave in proposito è data dalla cooperazione a livello unionale sulla valutazione delle tecnologie sanitarie (VTS), uno strumento che serve a valutare la sicurezza, l'efficacia e l'efficienza di diverse tecnologie sanitarie.

La Commissione ha costituito una rete specifica di valutazione delle tecnologie sanitarie in forza della direttiva sui diritti dei pazienti relativi all'assistenza sanitaria transfrontaliera (75) per costituire il quadro in cui attivare tale cooperazione. La rete intende consentire l'uso, a livello nazionale, delle informazioni in tema di VTS prodotte congiuntamente o da organi VTS. Ciò consentirà di ridurre i duplicati e di pervenire a una visione comune degli aspetti clinici delle tecnologie sanitarie. La rete aiuterà inoltre i paesi ad accrescere la base scientifica per la presa di decisioni in merito all'adozione di nuove tecnologie sanitarie.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005561/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: New anticoagulants: a potential area for investment

Medical research, the findings of which were presented during a conference held in Italy, has shown a close link between atrial fibrillation and strokes.

An irregular heartbeat — not uncommon among persons over forty — produces blood clots and increases the risk of thrombosis and stroke. More precisely, it should be pointed out that one in three cases of stroke is caused by such heart problems.

The use of new oral anticoagulant drugs has been identified as a particularly effective remedy. The only obstacle to the use of these new drugs would be their cost, although an initial investment would have particularly positive effects in financial terms too, considering that there would be a considerable reduction in healthcare costs for stroke patients.

In relation to the above, can the Commission provide clarifications concerning whether the EU would consider healthcare strategies whose effectiveness has been proven, but which would require a considerable initial financial commitment?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2014)

According to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the definition of health policies and the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care — including the reimbursement and payment of healthcare — is the responsibility of the Member States.

To support Member States' action, the Commission has launched a number of initiatives aimed at facilitating the exchange of information between Member States on the effectiveness of healthcare systems.

A key initiative in this regard is the EU level cooperation on Health Technology Assessment (HTA), a tool to assess safety, efficacy and effectiveness of various health technologies.

The Commission has established a dedicated Network on Health Technology Assessment under the directive on patients' rights in cross-border healthcare (76) to provide a framework for such cooperation. The Network aims to enable the re-use at national level of HTA information produced jointly or by HTA bodies. This will reduce duplication of work and establish a joint understanding of the clinical aspects of health technologies. It will also help countries to increase the scientific basis for decisions on the uptake of new health technologies.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005562/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Mobilità intermodale: un progetto pilota

Riguardo alle strategie concepite per una mobilità urbana sostenibile, si fa riferimento a un progetto pilota predisposto da una società ingegneristica di servizi ambientali italiana.

Il progetto sviluppa un sistema organico di gestione della mobilità intermodale fornendo informazioni agli utenti mediante un servizio informatico veloce e accessibile. In tal modo, si incentiva sensibilmente il trasporto pubblico, con ovvie ricadute in fatto di salvaguardia ambientale.

Peraltro, lo stesso progetto trova applicazione in una capitale europea già assurta agli onori delle cronache per via dell'impulso reso all'adozione di efficaci strategie eco-compatibili.

In merito a quanto espresso, può la Commissione fornire:

informazioni in merito alla trasferibilità del progetto in ulteriori contesti europei?

Informazioni in ordine a progetti similari implementati in altri paesi europei?

Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione

(10 giugno 2014)

La Commissione non è in grado di valutare in quale misura l’approccio del progetto pilota presentato dall’onorevole deputato potrebbe essere applicato in altri contesti europei. È responsabilità primaria delle autorità locali quella di individuare e attuare soluzioni che rispondano alle circostanze ed esigenze specifiche delle zone urbane. In tal senso, esse dovrebbero trarre beneficio dalle esperienze pertinenti rese disponibili da altri centri urbani in tutta l’Unione. Al fine di facilitare lo scambio di esperienze e di buone pratiche, la Commissione sostiene lo Urban Mobility Observatory Eltis (www.eltis.org). I partner del progetto pilota cui fa riferimento l’onorevole deputato sono invitati a condividere le loro conoscenze ed esperienze mediante Eltis.

Molte città europee utilizzano con sempre maggiore frequenza le tecnologie dell’informazione e della comunicazione per attuare moderni sistemi intermodali di gestione del trasporto urbano, di informazione, pagamento e controllo. La Commissione sostiene le città e i loro partner per attuare e testare approcci innovativi in questi settori mediante iniziative come Civitas. Per ulteriori informazioni consultare il sito internet www.civitas.eu.

I sistemi intermodali di informazione e di emissione dei biglietti sono essenziali per far fronte alla congestione e ai problemi ambientali, sfide comuni nelle città di tutta l’UE. Si tratta di strumenti efficaci per migliorare la qualità dei servizi offerti ai passeggeri, e in particolare per gruppi specifici di utenti. Il miglioramento dell’accesso ai dati relativi ai trasporti in possesso degli operatori darà un forte impulso allo sviluppo di tali servizi, come dimostrano valide iniziative presenti in tutta Europa.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005562/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Intermodal mobility: a pilot project

Strategies are being drawn up to promote sustainable urban mobility, an aim which is likewise finding expression in a pilot project developed by an Italian environmental service company.

The project is designed to create a comprehensive intermodal mobility management system, allowing information to be supplied to users by a quick-access computerised service. The emphasis is placed firmly on public transport, producing a clear impact in terms of environmental protection.

The project is, moreover, being implemented in a European capital city which has become known for its advocacy of strategies that are not only environment-friendly, but also effective.

1.	Does the Commission think that the above strategy might lend itself to other European contexts?

2.	Does it know whether similar projects are being implemented in other European countries?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2014)

The Commission is not in a position to assess to which extent the approach of the presented pilot project might be applied in other European contexts. It is the primarily responsibility of local authorities to identify and implement solutions that respond to the specific circumstances and requirements of their urban areas. In doing so, they should benefit from relevant experience available from other towns and cities across the Union. To facilitate such an exchange of experience and best practices, the Commission supports the Urban Mobility Observatory Eltis (www.eltis.org). The partners of the pilot project that the Honourable Member refers to are invited to share their expertise and experience through Eltis.

Many European cities are increasingly using information and communication technologies to implement modern, intermodal urban transport management, information, payment and control systems. The Commission supports cities and their partners in implementing and testing innovative approaches in these areas through initiatives like Civitas. For more information: www.civitas.eu

Intermodal information and ticketing systems are essential to address congestion and environmental issues, challenges common to cities all over the EU. They are effective tools to improve passenger service quality, including for specific groups of users. Improved access to transport data held by operators will give a strong push to developing such services, as good initiatives across Europe demonstrate.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005563/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Esternalità ambientali: uno studio in merito

Dallo studio condotto da una società di ricerca e consulenza, si perviene alla conoscenza di dati relativi al costo finanziario delle esternalità ambientali prodotte dalle principali aree produttive e dalle famiglie della penisola italiana.

L'ammontare complessivo del danno ambientale si attesterebbe sui 50 miliardi di euro l'anno (piú del 3 % del PIL).

Il settore che presenta un maggiore tasso di danni ambientali rispetto al contributo che apporta al PIL è quello della logistica e trasporti.

Diversamente, il settore che registra un più alto tasso di esternalità prodotte è quello familiare, seguito dall'industria.

Tale studio concorre a fornire degli indicatori che rilevano — dei comparti che producono ricchezza — i costi ambientali (e quindi anche economici e sociali) altresì prodotti. La logica soggiacente a cui si richiamano gli studiosi responsabili della ricerca fa riferimento al principio «chi inquina paga».

In merito alle considerazioni espresse, può la Commissione comunicare:

quali siano gli strumenti adottati dall'UE per rilevare il danno ambientale prodotto dai diversi comparti produttivi;

dati statistici in merito alle esternalità ambientali dei paesi membri?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(4 luglio 2014)

Non sono state compilate statistiche relative al valore monetario delle esternalità, tuttavia queste sono stimate per mezzo di studi (77) ad hoc che loro volta sono usati per valutare l'impatto delle proposte giuridiche (78).

Per quanto riguarda il modo con cui l'UE può identificare il pregiudizio ambientale causato da diversi settori, il regolamento (UE) n. 691/2011 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, relativo ai conti economici ambientali europei, costituisce un quadro di riferimento per la raccolta regolare dei dati inerenti all'ambiente e all'economia. La finalità è mostrare in quale misura i diversi settori dell'economia generino specifiche pressioni sull'ambiente, oltre a sottolineare come l'ambiente contribuisca alle attività economiche. La prima raccolta di dati è conclusa ed Eurostat ne ha pubblicato i risultati (79).

Il regolamento comprende tre moduli: uno per i conti delle emissioni atmosferiche, uno per le imposte ambientali e uno per i conti dei flussi di materia, ma saranno estesi per tener conto anche dei conti dell'energia, della spesa per la protezione dell'ambiente nonché del settore dei beni e dei servizi ambientali.

Il registro europeo delle emissioni e dei trasferimenti di sostanze inquinanti (E-PRTR) (80) è un registro europeo che ogni anno fornisce dati sull'ambiente provenienti da oltre 30 000impianti industrialiappartenenti a 65 attività economiche in tutta Europa. Per ciascun impianto esistono informazioni relative alle emissioni di inquinanti in acqua, in aria e nel suolo, nonché ai trasferimenti di rifiuti dal sito e di inquinanti delle acque reflue.

Inoltre, il progetto pilota della Commissione presentato nella comunicazione «Costruire il mercato unico dei prodotti verdi» (81) consente alle parti interessate di incontrarsi per sviluppare metodologie comuni per misurare gli impatti sull'ambiente dei prodotti e delle organizzazioni.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005563/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: A study on environmental externalities

A study carried out by a research and consultancy firm has provided data showing the financial costs of environmental externalities produced by the main productive sectors and families on the Italian mainland.

The overall cost of the environmental damage is around EUR 50 billion per year (over 3% of GNP).

The sector which causes the greatest rate of environmental damage compared with what it actually contributes towards GNP is the logistics and transport sector.

Conversely, the sector with the highest rate of externalities produced is the family sector, followed by industry.

This study helps provide indicators which reveal the environmental (and therefore also economic and social) costs generated by wealth‐producing sectors. The underlying logic advocated by the researchers responsible for the study refers to the ‘polluter pays’ principle.

In light of these considerations, can the Commission answer the following questions:

Which instruments has the EU adopted to highlight the environmental damage caused by various productive sectors?

What statistics does it possess concerning environmental externalities in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2014)

There are no statistics collected on the monetary value of externalities. However, environmental externalities are estimated through ad-hoc studies (82) and such valuations are used in Impact Assessments of legal proposals (83) .

In relation to how the EU can identify the environmental damage caused by different sectors, the regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU) No 691/2011, on European environmental economic accounts, provides a legal framework for the regular collection of data linking the environment and the economy. The aim is to show how far the various economic sectors generate specific environmental pressures, as well as highlighting how the environment contributes to economic activities. The first data collection has taken place and Eurostat has published the results (84).

The regulation includes three modules on air emissions accounts, environmentally-related taxes and material flow accounts, but it will be extended to cover also energy accounts, environmental protection expenditure and environmental goods and service sector.

The European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR) (85) is a Europe-wide register that provides key environmental data annually from more than 30 000 industrial facilities covering 65 economic activities across Europe. For each facility, information is provided concerning pollutant releases to air, water and land as well as off-site transfers of waste and of pollutants in waste water.

Furthermore, the Commission pilot scheme on ‘Building the Single Market for Green Products’ (86) is bringing stakeholders together to develop commonly agreed methodologies for measuring the environmental impact of products and organisations.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005564/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Effetti del cambiamento climatico sull'Europa meridionale: quali strategie per contrastarli?

Un nuovo rapporto delle Nazioni Unite mette in guardia dagli effetti che il cambiamento climatico potrebbe avere sul Mediterraneo e accusa la lentissima reazione istituzionale volta a prevenire tali effetti. Questi trend, se non affrontati in maniera efficiente, potrebbero essere devastanti: le inondazioni colpirebbero le coste del Vecchio continente, coinvolgendo circa 5 milioni e mezzo di persone e provocando danni per 17 miliardi di euro ogni anno, mentre il 9 % dei mammiferi sarebbe a serio rischio di estinzione. La desertificazione delle regioni europee meridionali e le alluvioni lampo provocherebbero perdite agricole per milioni di euro per la devastazione di colture pregiate di olio, frutta, vino, oltre a provocare flussi migratori consistenti che rischierebbero di acuire anche le tensioni sociali. L'area mediterranea rappresenta quindi un'area particolarmente a rischio in Europa a causa dei cambiamenti climatici, per cui appare opportuno che le istituzioni europee prendano seriamente in considerazione una strategia tesa a proteggerla e a sconfiggere le cause che la espongono al rischio, collaborando con i governi centrali e le autorità locali ove necessario.

In merito a questa situazione, ha l'UE avviato studi per stimare in maniera quanto più precisa possibile i rischi e i costi del cambiamento climatico sull'Europa meridionale?

Ha iniziato a studiare, di comune accordo con gli Stati membri e sentite le loro esigenze, misure per proteggere le produzioni locali, le popolazioni e il sistema economico-sociale delle aree in questione?

Risposta di Connie Hedegaard a nome della Commissione

(16 giugno 2014)

Il Centro comune di ricerca della Commissione europea (CCR) ha pubblicato di recente i risultati del progetto PESETA II (87). Si tratta di una valutazione plurisettoriale coerente degli impatti dei cambiamenti climatici in Europa per il periodo 2071-2100. In particolare, il documento mostra che la distribuzione geografica dei danni climatici è molto asimmetrica, con un’incidenza chiaramente maggiore sulle regioni dell’Europa meridionale (Europa centro-meridionale e regioni dell’Europa del Sud), su cui graverà circa il 70 % delle perdite in termini di benessere generale in Europa.

La strategia dell’UE in materia di adattamento ai cambiamenti climatici (88) promuove l’adozione e l’attuazione di strategie di adattamento in tutto il territorio dell’UE. Il bilancio dell’UE può contribuire a finanziare lo sviluppo e l’attuazione di strategie di adattamento. Inoltre, la Commissione sta collaborando con gli Stati membri per garantire che i fondi strutturali e di investimento europei siano utilizzati per aumentare la resilienza ai cambiamenti climatici in tutto il territorio europeo.

Il 13 maggio 2014 i ministri responsabili per l’ambiente e i cambiamenti climatici nel quadro dell’Unione per il Mediterraneo hanno dichiarato il loro impegno ad affrontare i problemi legati al clima e all’ambiente che interessano quest’area in modo sempre più pressante. La regione mediterranea è particolarmente esposta agli effetti dei cambiamenti climatici, ma è anche ricca di opportunità di sviluppo a bassa intensità di carbonio. Proprio in considerazione di queste sfide e opportunità è stato istituito il gruppo di esperti di cambiamenti climatici per la cooperazione nel Mediterraneo.

Altri progetti di ricerca finanziati dall’UE o iniziative sul cambiamento climatico tra i paesi dell’Europa meridionale sono accessibili attraverso la piattaforma Climate-ADAPT, la piattaforma web europea per le informazioni sull’adattamento in Europa (89).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005564/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Which strategies can be used to tackle the effects of climate change in Southern Europe?

A new United Nations report has warned of the effects climate change could have on the Mediterranean and slammed the incredibly slow institutional response to prevent such effects. If not tackled efficiently, these trends could be devastating: floods would cover the coastlines of Europe, affecting around five and a half million people and causing EUR 17 billion's worth of damage every year, while 9% of mammals would face a serious risk of extinction. Desertification in southern European regions and flash floods would cause millions of euros in agricultural losses through the devastation of high‐value crops, such as oil, fruit and wine, in addition to triggering sustained migration flows, which would risk heightening social tensions. The Mediterranean is therefore a particularly high‐risk area in Europe as regards the effects of climate change and it therefore seems that the European institutions should seriously consider a strategy aimed at protecting this area and overcoming the causes which expose it to risk, cooperating with central governments and local authorities where necessary.

With regard to this situation, has the EU initiated studies to provide the most accurate estimate possible of the risks and costs of climate change for Southern Europe?

Has it begun to analyse, subject to mutual agreement with the Member States and having listened to their requirements, measures to protect local production and people and the socio‐economic system of the areas in question?

Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2014)

The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) recently published the results of its Peseta II project (90). It is a consistent multi-sectoral assessment of the impacts of climate change in Europe for the 2071-2100 time horizon. It notably shows that the geographical distribution of the climate damages is very asymmetric with a clear bias towards the southern European regions (composed of the Central Europe South and Southern Europe regions), expected to bear about 70% of overall welfare losses in Europe.

The EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (91) promotes the adoption and implementation of adaptation strategies across the whole EU territory. The EU budget can help finance the development and implementation of adaptation strategies. The Commission is also working with Member States to ensure that European Structural and Investment Funds are being used to increase the resilience of all European territories to climate change.

On 13 May 2014, the Ministers in charge of Environment and Climate Change under the Union for the Mediterranean declared their commitment to tackle the growing climate and environmental challenges facing the region. The Mediterranean region is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, but is also rich in opportunities for low-carbon development. In recognition of these challenges and opportunities, a regional climate change expert group for cooperation across the Mediterranean has been established.

Other EU funded research projects or cross-country initiatives on climate change in Southern Europe can be accessed via Climate-ADAPT, the European web-platform on adaptation information in Europe. (92)

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005565/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Due problematiche specifiche relative al TTIP

Diversi esperti giuristi si interrogano sull'architettura giuridica del TTIP e sui rischi ad esso legati per quanto concerne le politiche nazionali (europee da un lato e statunitensi dall'altro) in nome della difesa del libero accesso al mercato. Queste preoccupazioni scaturiscono innanzitutto dalle divergenze normative tra le due sponde atlantiche, ad esempio in materia ambientale o agricola. In effetti, l'UE e gli Stati Uniti costituiscono due blocchi caratterizzati da standard normativi elevati, ma non necessariamente combacianti, motivo per cui sarà necessario costituire un sistema di pesi e contrappesi che permetta un'interpretazione chiara e trasparente delle norme in materia. In secondo luogo, occorre ricordare la profonda svolta che l'UE ha compiuto con il trattato di Lisbona, assumendo una caratterizzazione fortemente sociale e orientata al rispetto dei principi democratici, carattere che non dovrebbe essere in alcun modo messo in discussione da eventuali dispute giudiziarie legate alla liberalizzazione dei mercati europeo e statunitense.

In merito a quanto detto, può la Commissione rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:

condivide le due problematiche messe in luce?

Tramite quali strumenti e garanzie intende proteggere l'aspetto sociale del mercato interno europeo e l'alto livello di protezione dei consumatori che esso assicura?

Risposta di Karel De Gucht a nome della Commissione

(17 giugno 2014)

La Commissione ha ripetutamente sottolineato che l'obiettivo generale dei negoziati relativi alla partnership transatlantica per il commercio e gli investimenti (TTIP) è di eliminare gli adempimenti burocratici inutili, ridurre il costo delle transazioni commerciali tra le due sponde dell'Atlantico e permettere alle imprese di rispettare le leggi, sia americane che europee, con maggiore facilità, conseguendo nel contempo i livelli di salute, sicurezza e protezione ambientale che ciascuna parte ritiene opportuni.

2.	La Commissione invita l'onorevole deputato a consultare la risposta fornita all'interrogazione E-002653/2014 (93).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005565/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Two specific concerns regarding the TTIP

Several legal experts are questioning the legal architecture of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the associated risks concerning national policies (European on one side and American on the other) as regards protecting free access to the market. These concerns derive mainly from regulatory differences between the two sides of the Atlantic, for example on the environment and agriculture. The EU and US do, in fact, both have regulatory standards that are very high, but not necessarily aligned, which is why it will be necessary to set up a system of weights and counterweights that will allow for a clear and transparent interpretation of the relevant regulations. Secondly, we need to remember the profound turn taken by the EU with the Treaty of Lisbon, whereby it took on a deeply social nature, focusing on respect of democratic principles — a quality that should not in any way be brought into question by any legal disputes associated with the liberalisation of the European and US markets.

Can the Commission answer the following questions in this regard:

Does it share the two concerns highlighted here?

What instruments and guarantees is it planning to use to protect the social aspect of the European internal market and the high level of consumer protection it ensures?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

The Commission has repeatedly stressed that the overall objective of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations is to cut unnecessary red tape, reduce the costs of doing business across the Atlantic and make it easier for companies to comply with both American and European laws, all while achieving the levels of health, safety, and environmental protection that each side deems appropriate.

2.	The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the answer provided to Question E-002653/2014 (94).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005566/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Impegno dell'UE nella lotta contro le mine anti-uomo

Ogni anno le mine anti-uomo e il materiale bellico inesploso provocano nel mondo il ferimento o la morte di circa diecimila persone, colpendo in particolare i civili, tra cui diversi bambini. Ad oggi, sessantacinque paesi sono ancora fortemente a rischio in questo senso e necessitano del massimo supporto internazionale, in particolare da parte degli Stati tecnologicamente più avanzati.

1.	È la Commissione in grado di fornire dati sull'impegno dell'UE nei processi di sminamento e di neutralizzazione del materiale bellico inesploso?

2.	Quanti e quali fondi sono stati impiegati? In quali paesi e nel contesto di quali operazioni?

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

(6 giugno 2014)

L’UE è unita nel perseguire l’obiettivo di un mondo senza mine, come risulta evidente sia dal fatto che tutti gli Stati membri dell’UE hanno aderito alla Convenzione di Ottawa per la messa al bando delle mine antipersona sia dal finanziamento da parte dell’UE, mediante il bilancio della PESC, di specifiche decisioni del Consiglio per l’attuazione della convenzione a livello di Stati, la sua universalizzazione e l’assistenza alle vittime. Più in generale, l’UE investe ingenti risorse in azioni antimine: nel periodo 2009-2012 l’UE e gli Stati membri sono stati, congiuntamente, i principali donatori a livello mondiale.

Per dare visibilità a questo impegno, diversi Stati membri hanno espresso il forte auspicio che l’UE colga l’occasione della terza conferenza di revisione della convenzione di Ottawa (Maputo, Mozambico, 23-27 giugno 2014) per inviare un segnale politico sull’importanza di continuare con tale sostegno. In questo contesto, squadre informali dell’UE lavorano su temi specifici per preparare il terreno in modo da poter presentare il proprio sostegno ad azioni antimine in modo coerente e visibile, sia nel periodo precedente la conferenza di Maputo sia nel periodo successivo.

L’UE e gli Stati membri stilano un resoconto annuale da presentare all’organizzazione Land‐Mine Monitor sulle attività concrete che sono state finanziate per sostenere le azioni antimine nell’ambito dello sminamento, dell’assistenza alle vittime o della sensibilizzazione ai rischi derivanti dalle mine. Poiché attualmente la raccolta dei dati è in ancora in atto, non siamo in grado di rispondere alle Sue domande con cifre precise, ma lo faremo non appena queste informazioni saranno disponibili.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005566/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: EU involvement in the elimination of antipersonnel mines

Every year about 10 000 people in the world are killed or maimed because of antipersonnel mines and unexploded ordnance; the victims are mostly civilians, children included. The 65 countries still exposed to a serious risk of this kind need international support in every possible form, especially from technologically more advanced countries.

1.	Can the Commission supply figures on EU involvement in the clearance and neutralisation of unexploded ordnance?

2.	How much funding has been used and from what sources was it provided? In which countries and under what circumstances have operations been carried out?

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

(6 June 2014)

The EU is united in pursuing the objective of a mine-free world. This is visible in the fact that all EU members are party to the Anti-personnel Mine Ban Convention (the Ottawa Convention), and also demonstrated with the EU financing of specific Council Decisions with CFSP budget support for the national implementation of the convention, universalisation and victims assistance. More generally the EU is spending very considerable resources on Mine Action — over the 2009-2012 period, EU and Member states have been together the leading donors in the world.

To give visibility to this engagement, a number of EU Member States have expressed their strong wish that EU takes the opportunity of the Ottawa Convention Third Review Conference (Maputo, Mozambique, 23-27 June 2014) to send a political signal of its important support. In this context, the EU is working very closely together in informal teams with burden-sharing on thematic issues, to prepare the EU to be able to present, in the run up to the Maputo Conference and beyond, in a visible and coherent way the EU support to Mine Action.

Alongside its Member States, the EU is reporting on a yearly basis to the Land-Mine Monitor on the concrete activities financed for Mine Action, being them in the field of mine clearance, victim assistance or risk education. As this data is currently in the process of being collected, we are not able to reply yet to your question on figures but we will do so as soon as the data is available.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005567/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Settore marittimo e sviluppo

Una recente vetrina settoriale (tenutasi in una storica città di mare italiana), relativa al comparto nautico in particolare e a quello marittimo più in generale, mette in evidenza le potenzialità dello stesso quale base di rilancio delle attività economiche, segnatamente a fronte delle perdite registrate negli ultimi anni, in seguito alla crisi.

Coniugandosi con attività tipiche del turismo marittimo e, ovviamente, con il comparto ittico, l'industria nautica riorganizza il ventaglio di opportunità — creative, sostenibili e innovative — per lo sviluppo locale.

Naturalmente, tale strategia si accorda con le priorità tipiche della nuova programmazione europea e con la relativa logica di integrazione fra politiche settoriali.

Alla luce di quanto illustrato, può la Commissione:

fornire dati circa le strategie predisposte in altri contesti europei per la riorganizzazione e la valorizzazione del settore marittimo;

fornire informazioni circa le tendenze del settore marittimo europeo negli ultimi cinque anni?

Risposta di Antonio Tajani a nome della Commissione

(26 giugno 2014)

Nel 2013 la Commissione ha elaborato la strategia LeaderSHIP 2020 (95), nel quadro dell'iniziativa Europa 2020 e in collaborazione con gli operatori del settore e le altre parti interessate. Questa strategia si concentra sulla necessità di rendere più ecologici i trasporti marittimi, ottimizzare l’efficienza energetica e aprirsi a nuovi mercati in campo marittimo, quali eolico offshore ed energia marina, oltre a promuovere lo sviluppo di progetti in quest'ambito per definire una partnership pubblico-privata nel contesto di Orizzonte 2020. Essa fornisce una serie di raccomandazioni per il breve e medio termine riguardanti quattro settori fondamentali (occupazione e competenze, accesso al mercato e condizioni di mercato eque, accesso ai finanziamenti, ricerca, sviluppo e innovazione) per garantire la crescita e un'occupazione altamente qualificata in campo marittimo a livello europeo.

Dopo una forte espansione, giunta al suo culmine nel 2007, i mercati europeo e mondiale della cantieristica navale sono entrati in una profonda crisi, soprattutto a causa del coesistere di sovraccapacità con una crisi economica e finanziaria di portata mondiale. Di conseguenza la produzione della cantieristica navale nell'UE è diminuita di oltre la metà, passando da 4,5 milioni di TSLC (96) nel 2007 a 2,0 milioni di TSLC nel 2012. La situazione è rimasta critica nel corso dell'anno, con un ristagno del portafoglio ordini sullo stesso livello del 2011 (circa 1,8 milioni di TSLC), mentre nel 2013 si sono osservati alcuni segnali di ripresa.

In fatto di segmenti di mercato la produzione di navi da carico standard, come le navi container, è quasi scomparsa; alcuni segmenti di mercato specializzati, come le navi ausiliarie offshore, sono in piena espansione, mentre quelli delle navi da crociera e dei megayachts mostrano una certa resilienza. Le vendite di piccole imbarcazioni da diporto sono diminuite del 60 % dall’inizio della crisi economica, ma di recente si è rilevata una modesta ripresa, soprattutto per quanto riguarda i mercati di esportazione. I mercati interni dell'UE registrano ancora volumi di vendite ridotti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005567/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Marine industry and development

A recent industry showcase (held in a historic Italian seaside town), focusing on the boating industry in particular and the marine industry in general, highlighted the industry’s potential as a springboard for reviving economic activity, particularly given the losses experienced over the past few years as a result of the economic crisis.

Together with typical marine-tourism activities and, obviously, the fishing industry, the boating industry is reorganising the range of opportunities — creative, sustainable and innovative — for local development.

Of course, this strategy accords with the typical priorities of new European programmes and with the associated logic of integrating industry policies.

In the light of this:

Can the Commission provide figures on the strategies being pursued in other European contexts to reorganise and develop the marine industry?

Can the Commission provide information on trends in the European marine industry over the past five years?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2014)

In the framework of the Europe 2020 initiative in 2013 the Commission elaborated, in cooperation with the industry and all other relevant stakeholders, the LeaderShip 2020 strategy (97). The strategy focuses on the need for the greening of shipping, energy efficiency and the diversification into new maritime markets, such as off-shore wind power and marine energy. It also promotes developing concepts in this area for a Public Private Partnership under Horizon 2020. The strategy provides a series of recommendations in four key areas (employment and skills, market access and fair market conditions, access to finance, research, development and innovation) for the short and medium term to safeguard growth and high-value employment in the European maritime industry.

After a strong boom, which reached its peak in 2007, the European and global shipbuilding markets entered into a deep crisis, primarily as a result of overcapacity combined with a global economic and financial crisis. As a result EU shipbuilding production decreased by more than half from 4.5 million cgt (98) in 2007 to 2.0 million cgt in 2012. The situation remained challenging in 2012 with the order book stagnating at the same level as in 2011 (around 1.8 million cgt) while in 2013 some signs of recovery have been seen.

In terms of market segments, the production of standard cargo vessels such as container vessels almost disappeared, some specialised market segments such as off-shore support vessels are booming while cruise vessels and mega-yachts show some resilience. Sales of small pleasure boats fell by 60% from the start of economic decline, but certain economic recovery is recently noticed, especially in export markets. The EU domestic markets are still on low sales.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005568/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Tropicalizzazione del Mare Nostrum

Nell'ambito della serie di iniziative concepite per la Giornata mondiale dell'acqua, il convegno sulla gestione sostenibile del Mediterraneo — appuntamento di rilievo organizzato dall'Accademia dei Lincei — ha fatto il punto della situazione relativamente alla tropicalizzazione delle acque marine.

Nuove specie tropicali arrivano nel nostro ecosistema marittimo a causa di attività antropiche non sostenibili — non solo relative al surriscaldamento globale — legate ad esempio al continuo flusso delle grandi imbarcazioni, che spostano tonnellate d'acqua di zavorra, insieme a nuove specie o relative a determinate pratiche di pesca che impoveriscono la biodiversità marina aprendo la strada a specie invasive, quali le meduse.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, può la Commissione:

Informare in merito a misure concepite dall'UE per intervenire riguardo a tale questione?

Fornire dati relativi al mutamento degli ecosistemi marini in Europa?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(16 giugno 2014)

In base alla direttiva quadro sulla strategia per l'ambiente marino (2008/56/CE (99)), uno dei descrittori qualitativi per la determinazione del buono stato ecologico nelle acque marine è rappresentato dalla condizione che le specie non indigene introdotte da attività umane si mantengano a livelli tali da non alterare negativamente gli ecosistemi. Entro il 2015 gli Stati membri dovranno istituire ed attuare programmi di misure volti a conseguire o a mantenere un buono stato ecologico nelle acque in questione.

Il 9 settembre 2013 (100) la Commissione ha proposto un regolamento destinato ad affrontare la questione delle specie esotiche invasive. La proposta è stata ampiamente discussa con i colegislatori e il processo legislativo è nella sua fase conclusiva. Il futuro regolamento intende affrontare la questione delle specie esotiche estranee al nostro continente che producono gravi conseguenze negative sulla biodiversità, la sanità pubblica e l'economia.

In effetti, uno dei principali vettori delle specie esotiche invasive nelle acque europee è costituito dall'acqua di zavorra delle navi. La Commissione sta quindi adottando tutte le misure opportune per incoraggiare gli Stati membri a ratificare la convenzione internazionale per il controllo e la gestione delle acque di zavorra e dei sedimenti delle navi.

I dati sui cambiamenti in atto negli ecosistemi marini europei, cioè sulla temperatura superficiale del mare e sui mutamenti nella distribuzione dei pesci demersali a motivo del surriscaldamento, sono pubblicati dall'Agenzia europea dell'ambiente (AEA). Nel novembre 2014 l'AEA dovrebbe inoltre pubblicare una relazione sullo stato dell'ambiente marino in Europa, basata sui dati trasmessi dagli Stati membri nel processo di attuazione della direttiva quadro sulla strategia per l'ambiente marino.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005568/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Tropicalisation of the Mediterranean

One of the many initiatives developed for World Water Day was the conference on Sustainable Management for the Mediterranean, an important meeting organised by the Accademia dei Lincei, which took stock of the tropicalisation of the sea.

New tropical species are arriving in our marine ecosystem as a result of unsustainable human activities, linked not only to global warming but, for example, to the constant traffic of large vessels — which bring in tonnes of ballast water together with new species — or to particular fishing practices that impoverish marine biodiversity and leave the way open to invasive species such as jellyfish.

1.	Can the Commission provide information on measures that the EU has developed to address this issue?

2.	Can it provide data on the changes occurring in marine ecosystems in Europe?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2014)

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC (101)) sets as one of the qualitative descriptors for determining good environmental status in marine waters that non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems. Member States are requested by 2015 at the latest to establish and implement programmes of measures designed to achieve or maintain good environmental status in the waters concerned.

On 9 September 2013 (102), the Commission proposed a regulation to tackle invasive alien species (IAS). The proposal has been extensively discussed with the co-legislators and the legislative process is nearing its end. The forthcoming Regulation is designed to address those species alien to the EU that have serious negative consequences on biodiversity, public health and the economy.

One of the main pathways of the introduction of invasive alien species into European waters is indeed through ballast water from ships. Therefore, the Commission is taking all appropriate steps to encourage Member States to ratify the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments.

Data on the changes occurring in marine ecosystems in Europe, i.e. on sea surface temperature and on changes in the distribution of demersal fish in response to warming, are published by the European Environment Agency (EEA). In November 2014, the EEA is also expected to publish a report on the state of the marine environment in Europe based on data submitted by Member States in the process of the MSFD implementation.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005569/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Illuminazione dei beni architettonici

Attualmente, strategie per ridurre sensibilmente i consumi energetici si presentano con una certa ricorrenza; qui si vuol far menzione dell'adozione di un sistema energetico per un importante bene architettonico europeo, illuminato secondo differenti opzioni (che creano atmosfere diverse all'interno della struttura storico-artistica), da apparecchiature Led. In tal modo, si è conseguito un risparmio dell'80 % del consumo. Si tratta di una rilevazione incoraggiante, che fa ben sperare riguardo alla replicabilità del progetto.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, può la Commissione:

fornire informazioni relative ad analoghe strategie, nel contesto europeo?

fornire informazioni in merito ai consumi energetici — in ordine all'illuminazione — delle strutture monumentali europee?

Risposta di Günther Oettinger a nome della Commissione

(26 giugno 2014)

La Commissione sostiene lo sviluppo e la diffusione di tecnologie di illuminazione efficiente, quali il diodo a emissione luminosa (LED), mediante misure attuative delle direttive sull'etichettatura energetica (103) e sulla progettazione ecocompatibile (104), nonché attraverso l'attuazione volontaria del sistema del marchio Ecolabel UE (105) per sorgenti luminose (106). La Commissione ha presentato un Libro verde (107) sulle tecnologie SSL (Solid State Lighting) per analizzare gli ostacoli alla loro adozione generalizzata.

Inoltre, la Commissione sostiene progetti di dimostrazione nell'ambito del suo Programma per la competitività e l'innovazione, quali ILLUMINATE (108) e LED4ART (109). Il progetto ILLUMINATE concerne l'utilizzazione e la valutazione dell'illuminazione LED nelle aree urbane di due città europee, nonché in sedi di esposizioni e musei in cinque città. LED4ART sostituirà l'attuale sistema di illuminazione della Cappella Sistina in Vaticano con una tecnologia intelligente di illuminazione LED. Si tratterà di un'installazione LED destinata a servire da modello per illustrare le capacità di questa tecnologia.

La Commissione non dispone di dati sulla precisa quantità di energia utilizzata per illuminare i monumenti e i siti del patrimonio storico in Europa. Il programma European GreenLight raccoglie dati sull'attuazione di tecnologie di illuminazione innovative e sul loro impiego in edifici non residenziali (fra qui quelli del patrimonio storico e culturale), nell'illuminazione stradale e nel settore pubblico in generale (110).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005569/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Lighting of heritage buildings

Ways of significantly reducing energy consumption tend to be a recurring topic these days. I should like to mention here an energy system that has been chosen for an important European heritage building, which is being lit using LED lights (with various options that create different atmospheres inside the historic building). The introduction of this system has led to an 80% saving in consumption. This is encouraging news, and it is to be hoped that the system could be replicated elsewhere.

In the light of this:

Can the Commission provide information on any similar strategies being used elsewhere in Europe?

Can the Commission provide information on the energy consumption — for lighting — of European monuments?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2014)

The Commission supports the development and uptake of efficient lighting technologies such as light emitting diode lighting (LED) through implementing measures of the Energy Labelling (111) and Ecodesign (112) Directives, and also through the voluntary implementation of the EU Ecolabel (113) scheme for light sources (114). The Commission has issued a Green Paper (115) on Solid State Lighting (SSL) to explore the barriers for the wide deployment of such technology.

In addition, the Commission is supporting demonstration projects under its Competitiveness and Innovation Programme such as the Illuminate (116) and Led4Art (117) projects. Illuminate concerns the deployment and testing of LED lighting in urban areas of two European cities, and in exhibitions and museum buildings in five cities. Led4Art will replace the existing lighting system of the Sistine Chapel at the Vatican in Rome with intelligent LED lighting technology. This LED lighting installation should become a showcase for the capabilities of LEDs.

The Commission does not have any data on the specific amount of energy consumed in lighting European monuments or historical landmarks. The European GreenLight programme is collecting data on the implementation of innovative lighting technologies and the deployment in non-residential buildings (including heritage buildings), street lighting and the public sector in general (118).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005570/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Nuove mappature neuronali

Nuove mappature neuronali — ad alta risoluzione e maggiormente complesse — permettono di identificare le reti di geni collegate a determinate connessioni neuronali e, quindi, a specifiche facoltà cerebrali.

Lo studio, condotto negli USA, permetterà di approfondire le conoscenze relative a differenti patologie, in particolar modo per l'autismo consentendone una diagnosi precoce.

Lo studio — che promette, ovviamente, ulteriori sviluppi — rappresenta un virtuoso esempio di cooperazione fra pubblico e privato.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, può la Commissione:

Fornire informazioni in merito allo stato dell'arte della ricerca europea nel campo neuronale, rintracciandone networks e sinergie?

Fornire dati in ordine all'incidenza dell'autismo negli Stati membri?

Risposta di Máire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(18 giugno 2014)

Nel corso del Settimo programma quadro (7o PQ) (119) l’UE ha erogato oltre 197 milioni di euro per sostenere la ricerca sui meccanismi attraverso i quali operano e si sviluppano le reti neuronali, consentendo di approfondire le conoscenze relative alle perturbazioni dei meccanismi dello sviluppo cognitivo che danno origine a disfunzioni. Una parte rilevante dei finanziamenti (69 milioni di euro) riguardava la ricerca sui meccanismi genetici e cellulari di formazione delle sinapsi: i progetti SYNAPSECODE (120) ed EUROSPIN (121) esaminano le funzioni cognitive nell’ambito dell’autismo e della schizofrenia. Sono stati destinati finanziamenti anche ad approcci terapeutici per disturbi delle funzioni cognitive, inclusi i disturbi autistici: l’UE ha investito circa 27 milioni di euro nei progetti EU-AIMS (122) e NEWMEDS (123) nei quali convergono università e industria.

Inoltre, il progetto Human Brain Project (HBP) (124) si concentra sull’aggregare conoscenze nuove ed esistenti nell’ambito delle neuroscienze, con l’obiettivo di fornire dei modelli di funzionamento del cervello umano — a partire dai geni fino alle attività cognitive. Il progetto riceverà fino a 54 milioni di euro a titolo del 7o PQ e si prevede un ulteriore sostegno da parte dell’UE nel contesto di Orizzonte 2020 (125).

Orizzonte 2020 offrirà anche altre opportunità per sostenere la ricerca in questo settore, nell’ambito della sfida sociale che affronta i temi della salute, del cambiamento demografico e del benessere (126). Ulteriori informazioni sono reperibili sul sito Research and Innovation Participant Portal (127).

La relazione pubblicata a seguito della conferenza finanziata dall’UE European Autism Action (128), tenutasi a Dublino nel 2010, stima che la prevalenza dell’autismo sia aumentata nel periodo tra la metà degli anni ’90 e il 2010, passando da 1 bambino su 500 a 1 bambino su 110, principalmente a causa dell’allargarsi del concetto di disturbi dello spettro autistico. La Commissione non applica un sistema sostenibile di raccolta dei dati sull’incidenza dell’autismo negli Stati membri.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005570/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: New ways of mapping neural pathways

New ways of producing high-resolution, highly complex maps of neural pathways are making it possible to identify the gene networks linked to certain neural connections and, therefore, specific brain functions.

The study, conducted in the USA, will make it possible to enhance our knowledge of various pathologies, particularly autism, allowing for early diagnosis.

The study, which is obviously likely to lead to further developments, is an excellent example of cooperation between public and private bodies.

In the light of this:

Can the Commission provide information on the state of the art of European research on tracking neural networks and synapses?

Can the Commission provide figures on the incidence of autism in the Member States?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2014)

Over the course of FP7 (129), over EUR 197 million have been provided by the EU to support research on the mechanisms through which neural networks work and develop. This research has made it possible to gain insight into perturbed developmental mechanisms underlying cognitive dysfunctions. A substantial share of this support (EUR 69 million) concerned research on the genetic and cellular mechanisms of synapse formation: the projects Synapsecode (130) and Eurospin (131) investigated cognitive function in autism and schizophrenia. Investments have also been made in therapeutic approaches for cognitive abilities disorders, including autism: the EU invested some EUR 27 million in the projects EU-AIMS (132) and Newmeds (133) bringing together academia and industry.

In addition, the Human Brain Project (134) (HBP) focuses on aggregating existing and new knowledge in neuroscience with the objective of delivering models for human brain functioning from genes to cognition. The project will receive up to EUR 54 million of support from FP7 and further EU support is expected from Horizon 2020 (135).

Horizon 2020 will offer further opportunities to support research in this area through the ‘Health, demographic change and wellbeing’ societal challenge (136). More information can be obtained through the Research and Innovation Participant Portal (137).

The report of the EU-funded European Autism Action Conference (138) held in Dublin in 2010 stated that the prevalence of autism had increased from one child in 500 to one child in 110 between the mid-1990s to 2010 due essentially to the widening of the concept of Autistic Spectrum Disorders. The Commission does not implement a sustainable data collection on the incidence of autism in the Member States.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005571/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Nuova «App» anti-violenza

Relativamente alla questione della violenza sulle donne, una nuova applicazione informatica contribuisce a fornire supporto: una App istituisce una linea diretta con consultori e centri anti-violenza fornendo l'ubicazione di quelli più prossimi e permettendo l'accesso al servizio di ascolto.

Tale strumento rappresenta solo un piccolo aiuto relativamente ad una questione che merita un convinto impegno da parte delle istituzioni; ad ogni modo, fornisce rapidamente un primo sostegno.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione:

fornire dati riguardanti l'accesso delle donne vittime di violenza ai pertinenti centri di ascolto;

fornire informazioni in ordine ad eventuali tipi di supporto finanziario che tali centri ottengono da soggetti pubblici, nel contesto europeo?

Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione

(19 giugno 2014)

1.	La Commissione non dispone di statistiche sull’accesso delle donne vittime di violenza ai centri di ascolto.

Il supporto finanziario è disponibile a livello UE per combattere la violenza nei confronti delle donne e sostenere le vittime di violenza (139). Uno degli obiettivi del nuovo programma Diritti, uguaglianza e cittadinanza 2014-2020 è prevenire e combattere tutte le forme di violenza nei confronti di bambini, giovani, donne e altri gruppi a rischio, e proteggere le vittime di tale violenza. Il programma di lavoro annuale per il 2014, adottato il 24 aprile 2014, prevede la pubblicazione di inviti a presentare proposte volte a sostenere progetti transnazionali riguardanti la violenza contro le donne e le vittime in generale (140). Un altro invito a presentare proposte nell’ambito del programma Giustizia 2014-2020 verterà sull’attuazione della direttiva sui diritti delle vittime (2012/29/UE) (141). Questi inviti a presentare proposte saranno pubblicati nella seconda metà del 2014 sul sito web http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/grants/index_en.htm.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005571/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: New anti-violence ‘app’

With regard to the issue of violence against women, there is a new computer application (app) which helps to provide support by establishing a direct line with advisory services and women’s shelters, providing the location of the nearest ones and giving access to a counselling service.

This tool simply provides a little help with an issue that deserves firm commitment on the part of the institutions, but at least it rapidly provides a first line of support.

Can the Commission therefore:

provide statistics concerning the access of women who are victims of violence to the relevant counselling centres;

provide information on the different kinds of financial support that such centres may obtain from public authorities across the EU.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2014)

1.	The Commission has no statistics on the access of women who are victims of violence to counselling centres.

Financial support is available at Union level to fight violence against women and to support victims of violence (142). One of the objectives of the new Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme (REC) for 2014-2020 is to prevent and combat all forms of violence against children, young people and women, as well as violence against other groups at risk, and to protect victims of such violence. Its Annual Work Programme for 2014 adopted on 24 April 2014 provides for calls for proposals supporting transnational projects targeting violence against women and victims in general (143). Another call under the Justice Programme 2014-2020 will be dedicated to the implementation of the directive on the rights of victims (2012/29/EU) (144). These calls will be published during the second half of 2014 on http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/grants/index_en.htm.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005572/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Scuola anticorruzione per funzionari pubblici

In Italia è nata la prima scuola «anticorruzione» dedicata ai dipendenti pubblici. Ha sede a Firenze e si configura come progetto di formazione permanente per dirigenti e quadri della pubblica amministrazione. La scuola può rappresentare un'opportunità per perfezionare l'applicazione della normativa vigente e per avviare una riorganizzazione interna delle istituzioni pubbliche. Essa mira a formare «dirigenti anticorruzione» che si occupino dei piani per la sicurezza sul lavoro o del trattamento dei dati personali e del rispetto di tali piani, come pure di verificare i comportamenti degli altri dipendenti, mettere a punto modelli organizzativi conformi al piano e vigilare su di essi, nonché di formare il personale. Di conseguenza, se all'interno di un ente dovessero verificarsi episodi illeciti, scatterebbero procedimenti dirigenziali disciplinari a carico del responsabile dell'ente.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione chiarire se:

è al corrente dell'esistenza della suddetta istituzione;

è al corrente dell'esistenza di istituzioni simili in altri Stati membri;

ritiene che si possa prendere spunto da tale istituzione per sviluppare modelli di istruzione per i funzionari europei.

Risposta di Cecilia Malmström a nome della Commissione

(20 giugno 2014)

La Commissione è a conoscenza delle nuove possibilità di formazione per i dipendenti pubblici citate dall'onorevole deputato e dell'esistenza di una serie di iniziative analoghe in altri Stati membri.

In relazione all'etica professionale, la Commissione organizza corsi e seminari di sensibilizzazione del personale nel corso di tutta la carriera, oltre a corsi di etica obbligatori per tutti i nuovi arrivati.

Nel 2013 sono stati organizzati circa 80 corsi per oltre 1 000 partecipanti. Si sta mettendo a punto un nuovo modulo di e-learning che comprende un test di conoscenza dei regolamenti in vigore e dei principi deontologici di base. Oratori esterni di alto livello sono regolarmente invitati a tenere corsi per tutto il personale, compresi i dirigenti, che informano su come le organizzazioni esterne si occupano di questioni connesse all'etica. Ai dirigenti sono inoltre proposti corsi specifici, e anche i corsi per il prepensionamento comprendono gli aspetti etici. Questi programmi di apprendimento e sviluppo elaborati a livello centrale integrano le azioni tenute regolarmente dai diversi servizi coinvolti in questioni relative all'etica, vale a dire il servizio etica, diritti e obblighi della direzione generale Risorse umane e sicurezza della Commissione, l'ufficio indagine e disciplina della Commissione (IDOC) e le singole direzioni generali della Commissione, che spesso organizzano ampie campagne di sensibilizzazione nel contesto delle loro attività.

La Commissione è disponibile a sviluppare la propria offerta di formazione in materia di etica prendendo spunto da altri esempi che le vengano indicati.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005572/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Anti-corruption school for civil servants

The first ‘anti-corruption’ school for civil servants has opened in Italy. Based in Florence, its purpose is to provide continuing training for senior and middle managers in the civil service. The school could provide an opportunity for improving enforcement of current legislation and launching an internal reorganisation of public bodies. Its aim is to train ‘anti-corruption managers’ who would be responsible for plans concerning workplace security and the processing of personal data, and for ensuring compliance with these plans. They would also be responsible for checking the behaviour of other employees, implementing and supervising organisational models based on the plan, and training staff. This means that, if illegal practices were to be identified within a body, then the in-house anti-corruption officer would instigate disciplinary procedures.

In the light of this, can the Commission clarify the following:

Is the Commission aware of the existence of this institution?

Is it aware of any similar institutions in other Member States?

Does it think this institution might be used as an example for the development of training models for European officials?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2014)

The Commission is aware of the new training opportunities for civil servants mentioned by the Honourable Member, and of the existence of a number of similar initiatives in other Member States.

In relation to professional ethics, the Commission organises courses and awareness raising seminars throughout its staff's career. There are obligatory ethics courses for all newcomers to the Commission.

In 2013 almost 80 courses were organised for over 1 000 participants. In addition, a new eLearning module is being developed which comprises a test of knowledge on the current regulations and the guiding ethics principles. Furthermore, high-level external speakers are regularly invited to give master classes to staff and managers discussing how external organisations deal with issues related to ethics. Specific courses are offered to managers, and ethical behaviour is also part of the pre-retirement courses. These Central Learning and Development programmes complement actions held regularly by different stakeholders in ethics, i.e. B1‐ Ethics, Rights and Obligations, IDOC‐ Administrative Enquiries and individual DGs, which often hold extensive awareness-raising campaigns in the context of their activities.

The Commission is open to developing its integrity training along the lines of other examples which are shared with us.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005573/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Linee guida in materia di ospitalità ecosostenibile

Diversi alberghi della Sardegna si distinguono ormai per le misure introdotte nelle proprie routines d'accoglienza, che vanno a promuovere atteggiamenti e attività ecosostenibili. Non si tratta «solo» dell'impiego di energie rinnovabili o dello smaltimento differenziato dei rifiuti: si cerca di coinvolgere il cliente ospite attraverso una serie di inviti, volti a seguire semplici ed elementari atteggiamenti ecocompatibili.

Riguardo a questi, ad esempio, si consiglia al cliente di spegnere le luci una volta uscito dall'appartamento o di chiudere le finestre una volta azionato il condizionatore.

Gli alberghi in questione possono fregiarsi del riconoscimento Ecolabel, mentre altre strutture ricettive locali cercano di avviarsi sullo stesso percorso.

Alla luce di quanto espresso, può la Commissione:

Fornire notizie in merito all'esistenza di vere e proprie linee guida, relative ad atteggiamenti da adottare e incoraggiare per un turismo responsabile?

Fornire notizie in merito ad altri territori europei che si distinguono per la promozione di un turismo sostenibile, specie se riconosciuti con certificazione Ecolabel?

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(23 giugno 2014)

La Commissione promuove il turismo responsabile: essa incoraggia i luoghi di destinazione turistica a utilizzare il sistema europeo di indicatori per il turismo (European Tourism Indicator System — ETIS) per un migliore controllo della loro gestione e del loro sviluppo sostenibili (145) ed ha elaborato la carta europea del turismo sostenibile e responsabile. L'obiettivo è incoraggiare le politiche in materia di turismo più responsabile e sostenibile e le relative azioni in tutta l'UE (146).

Inoltre, nell'UE sono a disposizione due principali strumenti volontari per incoraggiare la gestione ambientale nel settore turistico: il marchio UE di qualità ecologica (Ecolabel UE) (147) e il sistema di ecogestione e audit (EMAS) dell'UE (148).

L'Ecolabel UE è un sistema volontario di etichettatura ecologica volto a incoraggiare la produzione e il consumo sostenibili dei prodotti e la prestazione e l'uso sostenibili dei servizi. I criteri dell'Ecolabel UE per i servizi di ricettività turistica (149) e per i servizi di campeggio (150) promuovono misure volte a favorire l'uso di fonti di energia rinnovabili, il risparmio idrico ed energetico, la riduzione dei rifiuti e il miglioramento dell'ambiente locale (151).

Le ultime statistiche (dicembre 2013) indicano che la Francia, l'Italia e l'Austria sono gli Stati membri in cui questo programma volontario ha avuto maggiore successo.

EMAS è uno strumento di gestione per le organizzazioni messo a punto dalla Commissione che consente di valutare, comunicare e migliorare le prestazioni ambientali. Circa 300 alberghi, campeggi e riserve naturali con strutture ricettive e ricreative usano già il sistema EMAS. Il documento di riferimento settoriale EMAS per il settore del turismo elenca le migliori pratiche di gestione ambientale e i parametri di riferimento di eccellenza. Costituisce una fonte affidabile e preziosa di ispirazione non solo per le organizzazioni registrate in EMAS ma per l'intero settore del turismo.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005573/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Guidelines for eco-friendly hospitality

Several hotels in Sardinia have made themselves stand out by introducing certain measures in their hospitality routines to encourage eco-friendly behaviour and attitudes. We are not simply talking about using renewable energy and selective waste disposal: these hotels are trying to involve their customers by inviting them to adopt some simple, basic eco-friendly behaviour patterns.

This might include, for example, asking customers to turn off the lights when they leave their room, or to close the windows when they turn on the air-conditioning.

These hotels enjoy Ecolabel recognition, and other local accommodation providers are seeking to follow the same path.

In the light of this:

Can the Commission provide information on any proper guidelines on what to do to practise and promote responsible tourism?

Can the Commission provide any information on other areas in Europe that are making themselves stand out by promoting eco-friendly tourism, especially if they enjoy Ecolabel recognition?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(23 June 2014)

The Commission promotes responsible tourism by encouraging tourist destinations to use the European Tourism Indicator System (ETIS) for the better monitoring of their sustainable management and development (152) and by preparing a European Charter for a Sustainable and Responsible Tourism. This will encourage more responsible and sustainable tourism policies and actions across the EU (153).

Moreover, two main voluntary tools are available in the EU to facilitate environmental management in the tourism sector: the EU Ecolabel (154) and the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) (155).

The EU Ecolabel is a voluntary environmental labelling scheme encouraging the sustainable production and consumption of products and the sustainable provision and use of services. The EU Ecolabel criteria established for tourist accommodation (156) and campsite services (157) promote measures to use renewable energy sources, save energy and water, reduce waste and improve the local environment (158).

The latest statistics (December 2013) indicate that France, Italy and Austria are the Member States where this voluntary scheme has been more successful.

EMAS is a management instrument developed by the Commission for organisations to evaluate, report and improve their environmental performance. About 300 hotels, camping grounds and nature reserves with leisure and accommodation facilities are already using EMAS. The EMAS Sectoral Reference Document (SRD) for the Tourism sector lists the Best Environmental Management Practices and benchmarks of excellence. It serves as a valuable and reliable source of inspiration not only for EMAS registered organisations but for the entire tourism sector.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005574/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Progetto Archeomedsites

Un progetto siglato da Italia, Libano e Tunisia, l'Archeomedsites, nell'ambito dell'ENPI, si prefigge di valorizzare il patrimonio storico-archeologico, attraverso il rafforzamento delle capacità di gestione degli enti responsabili e mediante lo scambio di buone pratiche.

Il progetto, della durata di due anni, mira a favorire un incremento del 10 % dei flussi turistici.

In base a quanto detto, può la Commissione:

Fornire informazioni sui finanziamenti impegnati per tale progetto, specie in relazione al modo in cui verranno ripartiti fra le diverse attività?

Fornire informazioni in merito ai siti archeologici principali, interessati dall'azione di valorizzazione del progetto?

Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione

(27 giugno 2014)

1.	Il bilancio totale del progetto è di 1 999 118 EUR, con un contributo dell’UE pari a 1 793 806 EUR (90 %). La ripartizione tra le singole attività è la seguente:

sviluppo di una strategia comune per garantire che tutte le parti interessate siano coinvolte nelle attività: in ciascun paese vi sarà un'organizzazione di riferimento che sarà responsabile, a livello locale, del coordinamento, dell'organizzazione e della realizzazione delle attività. Dotazione: 713 580 EUR;

comunicazione: creazione di un sito web, realizzazione di materiale informativo, sensibilizzazione dei media, organizzazione di seminari e di campagne destinate, ad esempio, ai giovani e alla società civile, manifestazioni culturali all’interno dei siti archeologici e seminari di sensibilizzazione sul traffico illegale di materiale archeologico Dotazione: 299 910 EUR;

sostenibilità del progetto e divulgazione delle migliori pratiche, sulla base degli insegnamenti tratti dalle esperienze precedenti. Dotazione: 256 710 EUR;

sviluppo istituzionale: formazione sulla gestione dei siti archeologici.

Dotazione: 542 885 EUR;

e) analisi delle possibilità di sviluppo locale sulla base del patrimonio culturale da diffondere tra gli operatori culturali e turistici pubblici e privati e creazione di reti di consultazione per gli operatori pubblici e privati. Dotazione: 55 180 EUR.

2.	I principali siti archeologici sono:

—	Paestum e Velia, Campania, Italia;

—	Cagliari e Monte Sirai, Sardegna, Italia;

—	Tiro e a1-Bass, Libano;

—	Kerkouane e Cartagine, governatorati di Nabeul e Tunisi, Tunisia.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005574/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Archeomedsites project

Italy, Lebanon, and Tunisia are implementing an ENPI project, Archeomedsites, with a view to capitalising on their historic and archaeological heritage by boosting the operating capacity of managing bodies and exchanging best practice.

The aim of the project, which is to run for two years, is to increase tourist flows by 10%.

1.	What funding has been earmarked for the project and, in particular, how will it be apportioned to the individual activities?

2.	What are the main archaeological sites that the project is intended to promote?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2014)

1.	The total project budget is EUR 1 999 118 with an EU contribution of EUR 1 793 806 (90%). The allocation to the individual activities is as follows:

Development of a common strategy to guarantee that all stakeholders are involved in the activities. In each country a leading organisation will be responsible for the local coordination, organisation and implementation of the activities. Budget: EUR 713 580.

Communication: Creating a website, information material, media, carrying out awareness raising workshops and campaigns targeting e.g. youth and civil society. Cultural events inside the sites and awareness workshops about archaeological illegal trafficking. Budget: EUR 299 910.

Building on lessons learned to ensure sustainability and the dissemination of best practices. Budget: EUR 256 710.

Institution building: Training on how to manage and maintain archaeological sites. Budget: EUR 542 885.

Analysis of culture‐based local development to be spread among all cultural and tourism public and private actors, creation of networks for consultation among all public and private operators. Budget: EUR 55 180.

2.	The main archaeological sites are:

—	Paestum and Velia, Campania Region, Italy;

—	Cagliari and Monte Sirai, Sardinia Region, Italy;

—	Tyre city and Al Bass, Lebanon:

—	Kerkouane and Carthage, Governorates of Nabeul and Tunis, Tunisia

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005575/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Protocollo di Kyoto: alcuni dati

Relativamente al Protocollo di Kyoto e ai suoi parametri, l'Italia guarda al conseguimento di alcuni obiettivi (sia pure parziali): attualmente, la riduzione delle emissioni di CO2 si attesterebbe al 4,6 %, rispetto al traguardo stabilito del 6,5 % (in riferimento alle emissioni del 1990).

Di conseguenza, mancherebbe «poco» all'adempimento dell'impegno siglato.

I dati di cui sopra sono stati divulgati dall'Ispra, Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale.

Alla luce di quanto riportato, si chiede alla Commissione:

Può fornire dati relativi agli obiettivi conseguiti dagli Stati membri in relazione agli impegni presi con la ratifica del protocollo di Kyoto.

Può fornire informazioni in merito alle strategie prefigurate dai diversi Strati membri per ovviare ad eventuali gap, in riferimento agli obiettivi di riduzione delle emissioni CO2?

Risposta di Connie Hedegaard a nome della Commissione

(16 giugno 2014)

Ogni anno la Commissione pubblica una relazione sui Progressi nella realizzazione degli obiettivi di Kyoto e di Europa 2020. Il documento fornisce dati aggiornati sui progressi realizzati dagli Stati membri e dall’UE verso i rispettivi obiettivi di riduzione delle emissioni di gas a effetto serra e contiene informazioni sulle politiche dell’Unione volte a ridurre ulteriormente le emissioni di gas a effetto serra. L’ultima versione è disponibile online (159).

Informazioni aggiornate sui progressi compiuti dagli Stati membri si possono reperire anche nella Relazione sul meccanismo relativo all’ambizione del protocollo di Kyoto, presentata dall’UE e pubblicata a inizio maggio sul sito dell’UNFCCC (160).

La relazione mostra che l’Italia è tra i pochi Stati membri che devono ricorrere ai meccanismi di Kyoto per ottemperare agli obblighi di Kyoto per il primo periodo d’impegno (2008-2012).

In applicazione del regolamento sul meccanismo di monitoraggio (161), gli Stati membri comunicano alla Commissione le principali politiche e misure adottate per mitigare le emissioni di gas a effetto serra. Tali informazioni sono disponibili in una banca dati dell’Agenzia europea dell’ambiente, che ha pubblicato informazioni dettagliate nella Relazione annuale sulle tendenze e proiezioni in materia di emissioni (162).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005575/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Kyoto Protocol: some figures

Regarding the Kyoto Protocol and the benchmarks set under it, Italy is moving (somewhat) closer to the targets: at present, the reduction in CO2 emissions amounts to 4.6%, whereas the target rate is 6.5% (compared with the 1990 levels).

Italy thus still has ‘a little’ more to do in order to meet its commitment.

The figures above have been published by ISPRA, the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research.

1.	Can the Commission supply figures showing what targets Member States have reached and hence how far they have fulfilled the commitments that they entered into by ratifying the Kyoto Protocol?

2.	Can it provide information about the strategies which Member States are proposing to employ in order to close any gaps in relation to the CO2 emission reduction targets?

Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2014)

The Commission publishes a report on Progress Towards Achieving the Kyoto and EU 2020 Objectivesevery year. This document provides up-to-date data on the progress of Member States and the EU towards their greenhouse gas emission targets. It also provides information of the Union's policies aiming at further reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The latest version of the progress report is available online (163).

The Kyoto Protocol Ambition Mechanism Report submitted by the EU and published in early May 2014 on the Unfccc website also provides recent information on Member States' progress (164).

This report shows that Italy is among the few Member States which need to make use of Kyoto mechanisms to meet its Kyoto obligations under the first commitment period (2008-2012).

In application of the Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (165), Members States report to the Commission their main policies and measures aiming at mitigating their greenhouse gas emissions. This information is available on a database of the European Environment Agency. The Agency also published detailed information in its yearly Emission Trends and Projections Report. (166)

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005576/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Sistemi energetici a confronto e preservazione della risorsa idrica

Secondo recenti stime, l'Europa destinerebbe il 44 % delle risorse idriche a sua disposizione alle attività di centrali nucleari, a carbone e a gas. Di converso, l'eolico rappresenta uno di quei settori energetici salva-acqua. Peraltro, oltre a comportare un ragguardevole risparmio d'acqua, esso assume un ruolo di rilievo nella tabella di marcia sull'energia, relativa agli scenari prefigurati per il 2050.

In relazione a quanto detto, la Commissione può fornire dati dettagliati sui consumi d'acqua in Europa, specie in relazione ai diversi sistemi energetici, in particolare per quanto riguarda il rapporto tra livello di consumo idrico e livello dei benefici energetici prodotti?

Risposta di Günther Oettinger a nome della Commissione

(17 giugno 2014)

Secondo l'Agenzia europea dell'ambiente, l'acqua è impiegata soprattutto a livello urbano (famiglie e imprese collegate al sistema pubblico di gestione idrica), nell'industria, nell'agricoltura e nell'energia (raffreddamento nelle centrali elettriche). In media, il 44 % dell'estrazione idrica totale in Europa è usato per l'agricoltura, il 40 % per l'industria e la produzione energetica (raffreddamento nelle centrali elettriche), e il 15 % per l'approvvigionamento idrico pubblico.

(vedi http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/water-resources/water-use-by-sectors)

La produzione di energia elettrica nelle centrali elettriche, a combustibili fossili o nucleari richiede un approvvigionamento costante di acqua, principalmente per il raffreddamento. Esistono diversi processi di raffreddamento, a ricircolo d'acqua (una piccola percentuale, in genere meno del 3 % evapora semplicemente) o aperto (più del 99 % viene restituito nei corsi d'acqua), che sfruttano le risorse idriche sotterranee, fluviali o marine.

L'energia eolica non richiede grandi quantità di acqua per far funzionare gli impianti, quindi le decisioni sull'ubicazione sono prese indipendentemente dalla presenza idrica: è uno dei vantaggi di tale tecnologia.

L'UE si è dotata di una politica generale di protezione delle risorse idriche, la direttiva quadro in materia di acque (2000/60/CE) (167) con la normativa derivata. L'attuazione di tale direttiva tiene conto dell'integrazione della tutela dell'ambiente con altri settori, tra cui la produzione di energia. I piani di gestione dei bacini idrografici, adottati dagli Stati membri, sono uno strumento per la gestione integrata di tutte le attività a livello dei bacini stessi e dovrebbero includere la valutazione delle pressioni sui corpi idrici, tra cui l'uso dell'acqua per la produzione di energia e le misure da porre in essere per conseguire gli obiettivi della direttiva quadro.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005576/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Comparison of energy systems and conservation of water resources

According to recent estimates, Europe allocates 44% of its water resources to the activities of nuclear, coal and gas power stations. Conversely, wind energy is an energy sector which saves water. Moreover, in addition to involving substantial water savings, it also plays an important role in the energy roadmap, with regard to the outlook for 2050.

Can the Commission therefore provide detailed statistics on water consumption in Europe, especially in relation to the various energy systems, particularly with regard to the relationship between the level of water consumption and level of energy benefits produced?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

According to the European Environment Agency, the most important uses of water have been identified as urban (households and industry connected to the public water supply system), industry, agriculture and energy (cooling in power plants). On average, 44% of total water abstraction in Europe is used for agriculture, 40% for industry and energy production (cooling in power plants), and 15% for public water supply (see link http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/water-resources/water-use-by-sectors).

The generation of electricity in power plants, fossil or nuclear, does require continuous water supply for, mainly, cooling purposes. Different cooling processes exist, whether recirculating (a small fraction, typically <3% of the water is simply evaporated) or open (>99% of all the water is returned to water courses), making use of ground water, river water or sea water.

Wind energy does not require water in relevant amounts for the operations, what makes siting decision quite independent from the presence of water. This is one, among others, of the advantages of such technology.

The EU has a general policy on the protection of water resources, the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC (168) and derived legislation. The implementation of WFD takes into account the integration of environmental protection with other sectors, including energy production. The River Basin Management Plans adopted by Member States are the tool for integrated management of all activities at river basin level. They should include the assessment of pressures to water bodies, including the water use for energy production, and the necessary measures to be put in place for the achievement of the WFD objectives.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005577/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Tutela delle tartarughe Caretta caretta

Dinanzi alla piccola ecatombe che interessa le tartarughe Caretta caretta, tipiche del Mediterraneo, una sezione del Programma Life interviene a loro tutela: trattasi del Tartalife. L'alta mortalità delle tartarughe dipende in buona misura dalla cattura accidentale delle stesse, che rimangono imprigionate nelle reti a strascico — o simili — dei pescatori.

In particolare, diverse strategie e strumenti salva-tartaruga sono stati concepiti e messi a punto da una solida rete italiana, che unisce le forze e le competenze di diversi soggetti sociali (associazioni di categoria della pesca, amministrazioni, associazioni ambientaliste) sotto la direzione del CNR di scienze marine di Ancona.

Riguardo ai dispositivi concepiti, ve ne sono diversi, a cominciare dal TED: si tratta di una griglia inserita all'interno della rete a strascico, che impedisce alla tartaruga di rimanervi accidentalmente imprigionata, e che predispone un'uscita di sicurezza lungo un lembo della rete. Inoltre, l'impiego dell'amo circolare impedisce la morte per soffocamento alle tartarughe che, accidentalmente, dovessero intercettarlo (a differenza dell'amo a J, molto diffuso). Altre misure prevedono l'impiego del sistema elettroacustico STAR, deputato a mantenere lontane le tartarughe dalle aree di pesca.

Ovviamente, il progetto punta al forte coinvolgimento dei pescatori.

In relazione a quanto sopra illustrato, può la Commissione:

fornire informazioni sulla mortalità delle Caretta caretta (a seguito di incidenti occorsi nell'ambito delle attività di pesca);

fornire eventuali dati relativi ai primi risultati dell'implementazione delle strategie di cui sopra;

fornire informazioni riguardanti l'esistenza di eventuali incentivi per i pescatori coinvolti nel progetto?

Risposta di Maria Damanaki a nome della Commissione

(2 luglio 2014)

Le catture accessorie di Caretta caretta nel Mediterraneo ad opera di pescherecci con reti a strascico, palangari e reti fisse sono state stimate a un massimo di 130 000 all’anno. Le informazioni sulla loro mortalità dopo il rilascio in mare sono scarse, ma in base alle stime disponibili è probabile che il 30-40 % muoia a seguito di interazioni con gli attrezzi da pesca. I tassi di mortalità più elevati sono stati osservati nelle reti da imbrocco e nei palangari di fondo.

Per contribuire a proteggere la Caretta caretta e le tartarughe marine in generale dalle catture accidentale da parte dei pescherecci, la Commissione ha preso diverse iniziative, anche a livello internazionale, promuovendo l’adozione di misure di mitigazione da parte della Commissione generale per la pesca nel Mediterraneo (169).

Il progetto TartaLife ha preso il via nell'ottobre 2013 ed è finalizzato a ridurre la mortalità delle tartarughe marine. Tra le attività svolte di recente vi è un primo corso di formazione in materia di procedure di recupero delle tartarughe marine, questionari online per i pescatori o studi in mare per sperimentare nuovi dispositivi «salva-tartarughe». Attualmente è troppo presto per valutare i risultati iniziali dell’attuazione del progetto.

Per quanto riguarda i possibili incentivi per i pescatori coinvolti nei progetti di tutela, il Fondo europeo per gli affari marittimi e la pesca può sostenere gli investimenti nelle attrezzature, migliorando la selettività per taglia o per specie degli attrezzi da pesca al fine di ridurre l’impatto della pesca sull’ambiente marino e può sostenere una maggiore sensibilizzazione dei pescatori sui problemi ambientali, in relazione alla protezione e al ripristino della biodiversità marina (170).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005577/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Protection of Caretta caretta (loggerhead) sea turtles

In view of the catastrophe affecting Caretta caretta sea turtles, typical of the Mediterranean, the Life Programme is taking action to protect them, by implementing the Tartalife project. The high mortality rate of these turtles depends to a large extent on the fact that they are caught accidentally, remaining trapped in fishermen’s trawler (or similar) nets.

In particular, a number of turtle-saving strategies and tools have been devised and developed by a well-established Italian network bringing together the strengths and expertise of various stakeholders (e.g. fisheries trade associations, government departments, environmental groups), under the leadership of the CNR (Institute of Marine Sciences) in Ancona.

Among the various devices that have been designed are ‘TEDs’ (Turtle Excluder Devices). These are special grids inserted into trawl nets, which prevent turtles from being accidentally trapped and give them an ‘emergency exit’ along one side of the net. In addition, the use of circle hooks prevents death by suffocation for turtles that are accidentally snared by them (unlike the widespread J-hooks). Other measures include the use of the STAR (Sea Turtle Acoustic Deterrent) electro-acoustic system, which is designed to keep turtles away from fishing areas.

Obviously, the project seeks to involve fishermen to as great an extent as possible.

With regard to the above, can the Commission:

provide information on the mortality rate for Caretta caretta (further to accidental catches during fishing);

provide, if possible, data on the initial results of the implementation of the abovementioned strategies;

say whether any incentives are available for the fishermen involved in the project?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 2014)

Bycatch of Caretta caretta in the Mediterranean by bottom trawlers, longliners and fixed nets has been estimated at up to 130,000 annually. There is limited information on their post-release mortality, but based on available estimates it is likely 30-40% die as a result of interactions with fishing gears. Highest mortality rates have been observed in gillnets and bottom longlines fisheries.

To help protect Caretta caretta and sea turtles in general from accidental capture by fisheries, the Commission has been taking several initiatives, including at international level by promoting the adoption of mitigating measures by the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (171).

The TartaLife project started in October 2013 with the objective to minimise mortality of sea turtles. Activities recently carried out include a first training course for sea turtle recovering procedures, online questionnaire for fishermen or sea trials to test new turtle excluder devices. At this stage, it is too early to assess the initial results of the implementation of the project.

With regards to possible incentives to fishermen involved in protection projects, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund may support investments in equipment improving size selectivity or species selectivity of fishing gear with the aim to reduce the impact of fishing on the marine environment and may support the increasing of environmental awareness, involving fishermen, with regard to the protection and restoration of marine biodiversity (172).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005578/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Fondi europei ricevuti nel quadro dell'obiettivo Cooperazione territoriale europea

Nel quadro della programmazione finanziaria europea 2007-2013 uno dei tre obiettivi era quello della «cooperazione territoriale europea». Questo obiettivo è inteso a rafforzare la cooperazione transfrontaliera, transnazionale e interregionale tra i paesi e le regioni europee, promuovendo la ricerca di soluzioni congiunte a problemi comuni tra le autorità confinanti, come lo sviluppo urbano, rurale e costiero e la creazione di relazioni economiche e reti di piccole e medie imprese. La cooperazione è orientata su diversi settori quali ricerca, sviluppo, società dell'informazione, ambiente, prevenzione dei rischi e gestione integrata delle acque.

Nell'ambito di questo obiettivo, può la Commissione chiarire a quanto ammontano i fondi ricevuti dall'Austria, dalla Germania, dall'Italia, dalla Romania, dal Belgio, dalla Lituania, dal Regno Unito e dalla Grecia nel periodo 2007-2013?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(30 giugno 2014)

Le risorse complessive dell'obiettivo «Cooperazione territoriale europea» per il periodo 2007-2013 da destinare ai 27 Stati membri ammontavano a EUR 8 miliardi e 723 milioni (ai prezzi correnti), come pubblicato a gennaio 2007. Tale importo è stato suddiviso per Stato membro tra i programmi di cooperazione territoriale europea cui esso partecipa. Gli Stati membri citati nell'interrogazione dell'onorevole deputato hanno ricevuto i seguenti importi (ai prezzi correnti in milioni di EUR): Austria: 257; Germania: 851; Italia: 846; Romania: 455; Belgio: 194; Lituania: 109; Regno Unito 722; Grecia: 210.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005578/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: European funds received under the ‘European territorial cooperation’ objective

One of the three objectives of the European Financial Framework for 2007-2013 was ‘European territorial cooperation’. The aim of this objective is to step up cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation between European countries and regions, promoting efforts to find joint solutions to common problems between neighbouring authorities, such as urban, rural and coastal development and development of economic relations and networking of SMEs. The cooperation is directed towards various sectors, such as research, development, the information society, the environment, risk prevention and integrated water management.

In the context of this objective, can the Commission indicate how much funding was received by Austria, Germany, Italy, Romania, Belgium, Lithuania, the United Kingdom and Greece in the period 2007-2013?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2014)

For the 2007-2013 period, the overall resources for the European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) objective amounted to EUR 8 723 million (current prices) for 27 Member States as published in January 2007. This amount was broken down per Member State for allocation amongst the ETC programmes in which they participate. The Member States mentioned in the Honourable Member's question were allocated the following amounts (current prices in million EUR): Austria: 257; Germany: 851; Italy: 846; Romania: 455; Belgium: 194; Lithuania: 109; the United Kingdom: 722; Greece: 210.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005586/14

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico

Il Settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico ha rappresentato per il periodo di programmazione 2007-2013 uno strumento di finanziamento dell'UE all'attività di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico con lo scopo ultimo di consolidare lo Spazio europeo della ricerca (SER).

Il programma in parola era strutturato in quattro programmi specifici che ricalcano gli obiettivi principali del SER ed erano «Cooperazione», «Idee», «Persone» e «Capacità».

Considerando che fra i beneficiari vi erano anche enti locali e pubbliche amministrazioni, può la Commissione riferire quali fondi diretti, riferibili al Settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico, sono stati erogati a favore dei comuni di: Arzignano (VI), Bassano del Grappa (VI), Belluno, Padova, Portogruaro (VE), Rovigo, Venezia, Treviso, Verona, Vicenza?

Risposta di Máire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(10 giugno 2014)

Il Settimo programma quadro per le attività di ricerca, sviluppo tecnologico e dimostrazione (7° PQ, 2007-2013) finanzia per la maggior parte progetti di ricerca e sviluppo tecnico pluriennali con più partner, previa disamina da parte di esperti indipendenti delle proposte presentate in risposta agli inviti pubblicati nell'ambito del 7° PQ. Il principale criterio di valutazione è l'eccellenza e non è subordinato a considerazioni di carattere geografico. Dei dieci comuni italiani cui fa riferimento l'onorevole deputato, sette sono stati attivi nell'ambito del 7° PQ. Più nello specifico, dai dati di cui dispone la Commissione risulta che questi sette comuni, considerati nel loro insieme, hanno partecipato a 457 progetti nell'ambito di 399 convenzioni di sovvenzione del 7° PQ sottoscritte, corrispondenti a un contributo finanziario dell'UE pari a circa 130 milioni di EUR. In allegato alla presente risposta viene fornita una tabella dettagliata in cui sono indicati il numero di domande, le convenzioni di sovvenzione e l'importo dei finanziamenti ricevuti da enti appartenenti ai comuni in questione e alle rispettive regioni.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005586/14

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Seventh research and technological development Framework Programme

During the 2007-2013 programming period the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development was used to channel EU funding towards research and technological development activities intended ultimately to consolidate the European Research Area (ERA).

The programme was divided into four specific programmes corresponding to the priorities underlying the ERA, namely ‘Cooperation’, ‘Ideas’, ‘People’, and ‘Capacities’.

Bearing in mind that the recipients included local and other public authorities, can the Commission say what direct funding was granted under the 7th Framework Programme to the following municipalities: Arzignano (province of Vicenza), Bassano del Grappa (province of Vicenza), Belluno, Padua, Portogruaro (province of Venice), Rovigo, Venice, Treviso, Verona, and Vicenza?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2014)

The Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (FP7, 2007-2013) is funding mostly multi-partner and multi-annual RTD projects following the evaluation by independent experts of proposals submitted in response to published FP7 calls for proposals. The prominent evaluation criterion is ‘excellence’, independent of geographic considerations. Out of the ten Italian municipalities referred to by the Honourable Member, seven have been active under FP7. More specifically, the Commission’s records indicate that these seven municipalities together account for 457 participations in 399 signed FP7 grant agreements, corresponding to a EU financial contribution of about EUR 130 million. The detailed table containing the number of applications, grant agreements and amount of funding received by organisations belonging to the municipalities in question and the respective regions is attached to this reply.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005587/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Necesidad de un Fondo de Compensación Lácteo transitorio por la abolición de las cuotas lácteas. Impacto de la supresión de las cuotas lácteas en Galicia

La abolición de las cuotas lácteas el próximo marzo de 2015 va a suponer un fuerte impacto económico en el sistema agroganadero de Galicia, muy dependiente del sistema de cuotas, que ha realizado fuertes inversiones en modernización de las explotaciones agrarias en los pasados años.

La necesidad de un sistema transitorio de adaptación al período de supresión de este mecanismo de regulación de mercado, por el impacto brutal que va a tener a nivel socioeconómico en pequeñas explotaciones ganaderas altamente dependientes de la producción lechera, debería provocar una reflexión en el seno de la Comisión acerca de la conveniencia de garantizar rentas a los productores de leche.

¿Va a promover la Comisión Europea un Fondo de Compensación Lácteo de adaptación hasta 2020 para los actuales beneficiarios del sistema de cuotas lácteas? ¿Puede indicar la Comisión el impacto que va a provocar en Galicia la supresión del sistema de cuotas lácteas? ¿Ha valorado la Comisión una revisión y cambio de modelo ante el impacto que va a provocar esta supresión, que favorece a las grandes explotaciones en lugar de favorecer la cohesión social y económica que debería tener la Política Agraria Común (PAC), tal como fue concebida en sus orígenes?

Respuesta del Sr. Cioloș en nombre de la Comisión

(12 de junio de 2014)

La reforma de la PAC aprobada por el Consejo y el Parlamento en 2013 confirmó la decisión de reducir progresivamente las cuotas lácteas adoptada por el legislador en 2003. Por lo tanto, la decisión de reintroducirlas solo podría ser tomada por el Parlamento Europeo y el Consejo.

La Comisión llevó a cabo un estudio independiente en 2013, uno de cuyos temas principales abordó la cuestión de la «Producción lechera sostenible y su dimensión territorial». Los resultados de este estudio se presentaron, entre otros participantes, a los miembros del Parlamento Europeo en una conferencia que tuvo lugar el 24 de septiembre de 2013. Se invita a Su Señoría a consultar las conclusiones en el sitio web de la Conferencia.

Durante la reforma de la PAC de 2013, no se adoptó ninguna decisión a fin de compensar a los productores de leche en relación con la extinción del régimen de cuotas lácteas. Sin embargo, las medidas que pueden adoptar los Estados miembros en el marco de los programas de desarrollo rural y dentro del sistema de pagos directos permiten dar un apoyo específico a determinados sectores.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005587/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Impact in Galicia of the abolition of milk quotas: need for a transitional compensation fund during the phasing-out of the milk quota system

The abolition of the milk quota system in March 2015 will have a massive economic impact on Galician dairy farmers, who depend heavily on milk quotas and who have invested heavily in modernising their farm in recent years.

A temporary adjustment package is needed to offset the brutal socioeconomic effect that the removal of this market regulating mechanism will have on smallholders, for whom milk production is a key source of income, and this should spur the Commission into reflecting upon the advisability of ensuring milk producers’ incomes.

Will the Commission provide for a compensation fund until 2020 to help the current beneficiaries of the milk quota system to adjust? Can the Commission provide information on the effect that abolishing the milk quota system will have in Galicia? Has the Commission considered revising and changing the model in light of the negative impact that abolition will have, which will benefit larger farming operations rather than promoting social and economic cohesion, which was the original purpose of the common agricultural policy?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(12 June 2014)

The CAP reform adopted by the Council and the Parliament in 2013 confirmed the decision on the phasing-out of milk quotas taken by the legislator in 2003. Therefore, a decision to reintroduce milk quotas could only be taken by the European Parliament and the Council.

The Commission conducted an independent study in 2013 in which one of the main topics covered ‘Sustainable milk production including its territorial dimension’. The results of this study were presented to Members of the European Parliament, among other participants, in a conference that took place on 24 September 2013. The Honourable Member is kindly invited to consult the conclusions on the conference website (173).

During the 2013 reform of the CAP, no decision was taken to grant compensation to dairy farmers because of the end of the milk quota system. However, the measures available to Member States under the Rural Development Programmes and within the system of Direct Payments allow for targeted support of certain sectors.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005588/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Investigación sobre el uso de fondos comunitarios en la Diputación de Pontevedra (Galicia)

¿Puede informar la Comisión si la Oficina de Lucha contra el Fraude (OLAF) ha abierto un procedimiento de investigación contra la Diputación de Pontevedra (Galicia) por el proyecto de turismo accesible «Pousadas», cofinanciado por el FEDER, un proyecto que ha favorecido a promotores y familiares del Partido Popular, el partido en el Gobierno de la Xunta de Galicia, y que ha sido denunciado públicamente por el mal uso de fondos comunitarios?

Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión

(2 de junio de 2014)

La Oficina Europea de Lucha contra el Fraude (OLAF) está evaluando ahora la información relativa al asunto mencionado por Su Señoría, de acuerdo con sus procedimientos ordinarios. Los procedimientos ordinarios en la fase de selección incluyen la adecuada recopilación de información de las autoridades de los Estados miembros, con las que se mantienen contactos.

El objetivo del proceso de evaluación es comprobar si la información se inscribe en el mandato de la OLAF y si es suficiente para abrir una investigación o iniciar un caso de coordinación. Sobre la base de los resultados del proceso de selección, la OLAF decidirá si se debe incoar el procedimiento de investigación formal.

Debido a la confidencialidad del proceso de investigación de la OLAF, y a fin de proteger los derechos fundamentales de las personas que puedan estar implicadas, la OLAF no puede hacer ningún otro comentario sobre este asunto.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005588/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Investigation into the use of EU funds by the council in Pontevedra (Galicia)

Can the Commission say whether the European Anti‐Fraud Office has launched an investigation into the council in Pontevedra (Galicia) in respect of the ‘Pousadas’ accessible tourism project, which is co‐funded by the ERDF? Supporters and relatives of members of the Partido Popular (in government in Galicia) have unduly benefited from the project, which has been publicly condemned for having misused EU funds?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(2 June 2014)

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is currently evaluating information concerning the matter mentioned by the Honourable Member, in line with its standard procedures. The standard procedures at the selection stage include appropriate gathering of information from Member State Authorities, with whom contacts are ongoing.

The purpose of the evaluation-process is to verify whether the information falls within OLAF's mandate and is sufficient to open an investigation or coordination case. On the basis of the results of the selection process, OLAF will decide if a formal investigation needs to be opened.

Due to confidentiality of OLAF's investigative process, and in order to protect the fundamental rights of persons possibly involved, OLAF cannot make any further comments on this matter.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005589/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Uso de fondos europeos en el proyecto de rehabilitación de la fortaleza de Monterrei (Verín, Ourense, Galicia)

El Gobierno de Galicia ha promovido el proyecto denominado «Obra de rehabilitación y adecuación de la fortaleza de Monterrei» en Verín (Ourense, Galicia), un proyecto cofinanciado por el FEDER con 2 100 000 euros, cuyas obras han sido iniciadas en octubre de 2013 por la empresa adjudicataria Dragados S.A.

El proyecto va a promover un complejo hotelero al lado del Parador de Monterrei, que es propiedad del Estado y cuya capacidad hotelera raramente se ve cubierta. Por tanto, el apoyo con fondos públicos a un proyecto paralelo de hostelería con fines privados que no beneficia a la vecindad ni a la promoción económica de la zona, sino a una empresa concreta, ha provocado un fuerte rechazo en la comarca orensana de Verín y numerosas iniciativas parlamentarias del Bloque Nacionalista Galego en el Concello de Verín, la Diputación de Ourense, el Parlamento de Galicia, el Congreso de los Diputados y ahora en el Parlamento Europeo con la presente pregunta.

El mal uso de fondos comunitarios en Galicia ya ha sido investigado en varias ocasiones por la Comisión y por la OLAF. Resulta ilógico que, pese a esas advertencias, se sigan autorizando proyectos que no van orientados a la cohesión ni priorizan las verdaderas necesidades, sino el lucro concreto de promotores, y que ponen en cuestión también la propia imagen de la Comisión Europea.

¿Puede investigar la Comisión este proyecto que prima el interés privado en lugar de revertir en la promoción económica, social y medioambiental de una comarca altamente dependiente de la agricultura y del sector vitivinícola?

Respuesta del Sr. Hahn en nombre de la Comisión

(30 de junio de 2014)

El proyecto mencionado por Su Señoría, «Obra de rehabilitación y adecuación de la fortaleza de Monterrei» en Verín (Ourense, Galicia), no ha sido cofinanciado por el Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER). Inicialmente el proyecto se incluyó en el programa FEDER Galicia 2007-2013 pero finalmente se retiró.

Para más información, y en el contexto de la gestión compartida de la política de cohesión, la Comisión sugiere a Su Señoría que se ponga en contacto con la autoridad de gestión de dicho programa:

Ministerio de Economía y Hacienda

Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios

Subdirección General de Administración del FEDER

Paseo de la Castellana, 162

E-28071 Madrid

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005589/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Use of EU funding in the Monterry Castle restoration project in Verín, Ourense (Galicia)

The Galician Government has launched a project entitled ‘Restoration and adaption of Monterey Castle’ in Verín (Ourense, Galicia), which has received EUR 2 100 000 of co-funding from the European Regional Development Fund, and on which the company awarded the contract, Dragados S.A., began work in October 2013.

Under the project, a hotel complex is to be developed next to the Parador de Monterrei, a state-owned hotel which is rarely full. Public funding is thus being used to support a project for another hotel which neither benefits the local community nor aids the region’s economic development, but instead increases the profits of one private firm, and as a result has been met with strong opposition in the region of Verín, Ourense. The Galician Nationalist Bloc has also launched various parliamentary initiatives concerning the project in the Verín Council, the Ourense Council, the Galician Parliament, the Spanish Parliament, and now, with this question, the European Parliament.

The Commission and the European Anti-Fraud Office have already investigated the misuse of EU funding in Galicia on several occasions. It seems senseless that despite these warning signs the Commission is still authorising projects geared towards increasing profits for private developers rather than towards cohesion or the real needs of the region, and which also tarnish the image of the Commission itself.

Can the Commission investigate this project, which prioritises private interests over the economic, social and environmental development of a region which is still highly dependent on agriculture and the wine-producing sector?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2014)

The project mentioned by the Honourable Member, ‘“Restoration and adaption of Monterey Castle” in Verín (Ourense, Galicia) ’ has not been co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). Initially the project was included in the ERDF programme for Galicia 2007-2013 but it was eventually withdrawn.

For further information, and in the context of shared management of cohesion policy, the Commission suggests that the Honourable Member contact the managing authority of the programme involved:

Ministerio de Economìa y Hacienda — Madrid, España

Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios, Subdirección General de Administración del FEDER

Paseo de la Castellana, 162

28071 Madrid

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005590/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Discriminación en el reparto de cuotas de la flota de cerco de Galicia

El principio de estabilidad relativa en el reparto de derechos de pesca ha discriminado notablemente al Estado español desde 1986, afectando principalmente a Galicia, con unas cuotas de pesca notablemente inferiores a su capacidad pesquera. Así sucede en el caso de la flota de cerco, que, a través de la Asociación de Armadores de Cerco de Galicia (Acerga) con sede en Sada (A Coruña), le ha trasladado a la Comisaria la grave situación que sufre este colectivo pesquero al que pertenecen 125 barcos de cerco que emplean a 1 200 tripulantes y del cual dependen casi 5 000 empleos indirectos.

El injusto reparto europeo se agrava con el injusto reparto estatal de la cuota asignada por el Gobierno español, que ha usado el criterio de valoración de los datos de consumo de capturas históricas del periodo 2002 a 2011, con lo que el reparto de la cuota ha favorecido a la parte más industrializada de la flota y a un modelo privatizador contrarios a la sostenibilidad medioambiental, económica y social. De ese reparto ha resultado que a Galicia, con 153 buques de cerco, solo le corresponda el 24,86 % del total de la cuota asignada a España. La caballa es una especie migratoria y el Gobierno español ha ignorado el carácter migratorio y estacional de la especie y no ha tenido en cuenta que la flota gallega sale muy perjudicada porque Galicia está en el extremo occidental de la zona de pesca CIEM VIII y IX, con lo que la gran totalidad de la cuota se agota antes de llegar a aguas gallegas. El Gobierno español no está aplicando un reparto coherente, vulnerando con ello los objetivos de los artículos 2 y 17 del Reglamento (UE) n° 1380/2013 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 11 de diciembre de 2013, sobre la Política Pesquera Común, así como la proporcionalidad y la transparencia, y provocando una situación de discriminación de la flota gallega.

¿Tiene conocimiento la Comisión de esta grave situación que afecta a la flota de cerco gallega? ¿Va a establecer medidas discriminatorias positivas a corto y a largo plazo para evitar la discriminación que sufre esta flota en el reparto interno de la cuota por parte del Gobierno español y promover un reparto equitativo del recurso? ¿Va a recibir la Comisaria o el futuro miembro del Colegio de Comisarios encargado de temas pesqueros a una delegación de Acerga?

Respuesta de la Sra. Damanaki en nombre de la Comisión

(17 de junio de 2014)

En virtud de la política pesquera común, España dispone de derechos de pesca en aguas jurisdiccionales de otros Estados miembros y, en virtud de los acuerdos de asociación en el sector pesquero suscritos por la UE, en aguas de terceros países. En 2011, las capturas españolas fueron de 860 000 toneladas, lo que suponía el 17,6 % de las capturas totales de la UE. El principio de estabilidad relativa es un principio acordado entre los Estados miembros y mantenido en la reforma de la política pesquera común.

La Comisión desea recordar a Su Señoría el principio general de que la asignación de las posibilidades de pesca entre las flotas nacionales se considera competencia de los Estados miembros. Según lo dispuesto en el artículo 16, apartado 6, del Reglamento (UE) n° 1380/2013, son los Estados miembros quienes deciden, en relación con los buques que enarbolan su pabellón, el método de asignación de las posibilidades de pesca disponibles, para lo que, conforme al artículo 17 de ese mismo Reglamento, han de basarse en criterios transparentes y objetivos, incluidos criterios de carácter medioambiental, social y económico.

La Comisión recibirá gustosamente a representantes de Acerga.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005590/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Discrimination in the distribution of quotas to the Galician seine fishing fleet

The principle of relative stability used in the distribution of fishing rights has severely discriminated against Spain since 1986, with the main impact on Galicia, where fishing quotas are well below fishing capacity. Such is the case of the seine fishing fleet. The Galician Association of Seine-fishing Ship Owners (Asociación de Armadores de Cerco de Galicia (Acerga)), which is based in A Coruña, has informed the Commissioner for Fisheries about the difficult situation faced by this fishing collective, which comprises 125 seine-fishing vessels employing 1 200 crew members, and on which almost 5 000 indirect jobs depend.

The unfair European distribution of fishing quotas is exacerbated by the Spanish Government’s unfair national quota distribution, which it has based on the evaluation of historic catch consumption data for the 2002-2011 period. This has meant that quota distribution has favoured the most industrial portion of the fleet and a model based on privatisation, which ignore environmental, economic and social sustainability. As a result of this distribution Galicia, with 153 seine fishing vessels, only receives 24.86% of the overall quota assigned to Spain. Mackerel is a migratory species, but the Spanish Government has ignored the migratory and seasonal nature of this species and failed to take into account that the Galician fleet is severely prejudiced by its location at the western edge of the ICES VIII and IX fishing zones, which means that the bulk of the fishing quota has been exhausted before it reaches Galician waters. The Spanish Government’s failure to coherently distribute the quota does not comply with the objectives of Articles 2 and 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the common fisheries policy or with the principles of proportionality and transparency and gives rise to discrimination against the Galician fleet.

Is the Commission aware of this serious situation affecting the Galician seine fishing fleet? Will it set long and short-term positive discrimination measures in place to prevent the discrimination suffered by this fleet in the Spanish Government’s internal distribution of the quota and to promote a fair distribution of this resource? Will the Commissioner for Fisheries, or the future member of the College of Commissioners responsible for fisheries, meet with a delegation from Acerga?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

Under the common fisheries policy Spain has been enjoying fishing rights in the waters under jurisdiction of other Member States and, through Fisheries Partnership Agreements concluded by the EU, in the waters of third countries. In 2011 Spanish catches amounted to 860 000 tonnes or 17.6% of the total EU catches. Relative stability is a principle agreed between Member States and maintained during the reform of the common fisheries policy.

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the general principle that the allocation of fishing opportunities among national fleets is a matter for Member States. In accordance with Article 16 (6) of Regulation (EU) n° 1380/2013, each Member State shall decide how the available fishing opportunities, may be allocated to vessels flying its flag on the basis of transparent and objective criteria including those of an environmental, social and economic nature, in line with Article 17 of that regulation.

The Commission would be pleased to meet with Acerga representatives.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005591/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Discriminación fiscal del Gobierno español a emigrantes gallegos retornados de países europeos

La situación de 250 000 personas de Galicia, emigrantes retornados de países miembros de la Unión Europea y de Suiza y que perciben pensiones de jubilación u otras prestaciones sociales de tipo económico, es muy complicada, ya que están siendo sancionados por el Gobierno español por no cumplir con sus obligaciones tributarias. El Ministerio de Hacienda español rastrea las pensiones de emigrantes retornados superiores a 11 200 euros para que tributen desde 2008. Existen diferencias normativas entre los convenios bilaterales existentes, ausencia de información a las personas afectadas y carencia de un certificado uniforme estándar que fuera efectivo en cualquier Estado miembro, con traducción a todas las lenguas y sin que imponga la obligación al perceptor de traducirlo.

Mientras se dan casos de fraude fiscal en España y un estado de corrupción que toca a miembros del partido en el Gobierno, los emigrantes retornados, que han trabajado toda una vida en el extranjero llena de privaciones y contribuyendo a mejorar también la economía de otros países europeos, se ven en un vacío jurídico producto de la ausencia de regulación europea y de una interpretación con fin recaudatorio del Estado español, que provoca una tratamiento fiscal de las prestaciones discriminatorio, ya que en muchos casos se está aplicando la doble imposición fiscal y no se están reconociendo los beneficios que han sido reconocidos en los países de acogida, incluidas las exenciones fiscales y las prestaciones de incapacidad o invalidez y jubilación, que se ven afectados con el retorno a su país de origen o residencia en otro Estado miembro.

El acoso al que se ven sometidas estas personas merece un tratamiento a nivel europeo para que la Comisión promueva medidas que eviten la discriminación. ¿Va a adoptar la Comisión medidas contra el Gobierno español para evitar la discriminación fiscal en el ámbito de las pensiones de emigrantes retornados? ¿Va a promover soluciones a los problemas de doble imposición no resueltos en la actualidad mediante convenios fiscales bilaterales?

Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión

(24 de junio de 2014)

El TFUE (174) prevé la coordinación y no la armonización de la legislación sobre la seguridad social. El Derecho derivado de la UE (175) establece normas en materia de coordinación de la adquisición y el pago de pensiones del régimen general en situaciones transfronterizas. Sin embargo, el Derecho de la UE no garantiza que el traslado de residencia dentro de la Unión Europea de una persona asegurada sea neutral en lo que respecta a la seguridad social o los impuestos (176). Las desventajas derivadas de la aplicación de regímenes nacionales paralelos no supone, en principio, una discriminación.

El Derecho de la UE permite a los Estados miembros (177) configurar sus regímenes y procedimientos de fiscalidad directa, siempre que sus normas no sean discriminatorias o contrarias a los Tratados. Con arreglo a una jurisprudencia constante del Tribunal de Justicia de la UE (178), la doble imposición no es contraria al Derecho de la UE (179). Así pues, los Estados miembros pueden cooperar o no para eliminar la doble imposición, según crean conveniente. La Comisión está facultada para formular propuestas de legislación de la UE dirigidas a mejorar el funcionamiento del mercado interior, pero las propuestas en materia de fiscalidad solo podrán entrar en vigor si los EM de la UE las aprueban por unanimidad.

En este contexto, la Comisión, de conformidad con los compromisos contraídos en recientes comunicaciones (180), está trabajando para determinar la manera en que las administraciones tributarias de los Estados miembros podrían facilitar las cosas a los ciudadanos en situaciones transfronterizas, por ejemplo mediante la mejora de la cooperación entre las administraciones tributarias para eliminar la doble imposición, una mejor información a los ciudadanos y la existencia de impresos tributarios comunes (181). Por último, la Comisión está examinando las legislaciones fiscales de los EM para detectar indicios de medidas discriminatorias en los ámbitos concretos de la tributación de las personas móviles (182) y los trabajadores fronterizos (183), por ejemplo, en lo que respecta a sus pensiones de jubilación, y podría poner en marcha procedimientos de infracción si se detectara la existencia de discriminaciones.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005591/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Tax discrimination by the Spanish Government against Galician emigrants returning from European countries

Some 25 000 Galician emigrants who have returned home from EU Member States and Switzerland and receive retirement pensions and other economic social benefits find themselves in a complicated situation, as they are penalised by the Spanish Government for not meting their tax obligations. Since 2008, the Spanish Ministry of Finance has been tracking the pensions of returned emigrants where they exceed EUR 11 200, to force the recipients to pay tax. Existing bilateral agreements apply different rules, those affected are not sufficiently informed and there is no standard, uniform certificate applicable in all Member States and translated into all languages, rather than recipients being obliged to provide the translation themselves.

While cases of tax fraud abound in Spain and the state of corruption extends to members of the ruling party, returned migrants who have spent their whole working life abroad enduring countless hardships and also helping to build the economies of other European countries find themselves in a legal vacuum caused by the lack of regulation at European level and the Spanish state’s interpretation based primarily on tax collection. In many cases, returned emigrants find themselves subjected to dual taxation and that the benefits awarded to them in their host countries, such as tax exemptions and disability or invalidity pensions, are not recognised or reduced once they return home or move to another Member State.

The harassment to which these people are being subjected needs to be addressed at European level, so that the Commission can promote measures to prevent discrimination. Does the Commission intend to take steps vis-à-vis the Spanish Government to prevent discrimination with respect to the pensions of returned emigrants? Will it seek solutions to the problems of dual taxation which are presently unresolved by existing bilateral tax agreements?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2014)

The TFEU (184) provides for the coordination and not the harmonisation of social security legislation. Secondary EC law (185) provides rules to coordinate the acquisition and payment of statutory pensions in cross-border situations. However, EC law does not guarantee that the change of residence within the EU of an insured person is neutral as regards social security or taxes (186). Such disadvantages arising from the application of parallel national systems would in principle not amount to discrimination.

EC law allows Member States (187) to design their direct tax systems and procedures as long as their rules are not discriminatory or otherwise contrary to the Treaties. The CJEU (188) constantly ruled that double taxation is not contrary to EC law (189). Thus MS may or may not cooperate on the elimination of double taxation, as they see fit. The Commission has the power to make proposals for EU legislation to improve the functioning of the internal market but the proposals in the taxation area will only become law if MS unanimously agree to them.

Within this framework, the Commission, in line with commitments taken in recent Communications (190), is working to identify how MS’ tax administrations could make life easier for citizens in cross-border situations, including via better cooperation between tax administrations to eliminate double taxation, better information to citizens and the provision of common tax forms (191). Finally, the Commission is examining MS’ tax laws for evidence of discriminatory measures in the specific areas of the taxation of mobile persons (192) and cross-border workers (193), including in respect of their pensions, and it may launch infringement procedures if discrimination is found.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005592/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Inclusión de la flota cefalopodera de Galicia en el Acuerdo de Pesca Unión Europea-Mauritania

La Comisión Europea ha anunciado esta semana que el próximo 5 de mayo se abre en Paris la primera ronda de negociaciones del Acuerdo bilateral de Pesca Unión Europea-Mauritana.

¿Tiene previsto incluir la Comisión a la flota cefalopodera de Galicia, que no fue incluida en el momento de adopción del acuerdo? ¿Sabe la Comisión que el sector cefalopodero de Galicia, debido a esa injusta medida, ha sufrido un grave impacto, teniendo que desguazarse algunos barcos, y estando amarrados en tierra otros, cuyas tripulaciones ya no perciben ayudas de ningún tipo?

¿Va a presionar la Comisión a Mauritania para que reconozca que no se puede tener una doble moral política en las negociaciones alegando criterios de sostenibilidad mientras ha permitido que las flotas de terceros países, incluida la flota china, capturen especies cefalopoderas sin control?

Respuesta de la Sra. Damanaki en nombre de la Comisión

(27 de junio de 2014)

A principios de mayo se celebraron dos rondas de negociaciones para la renovación del Protocolo adjunto al Acuerdo de Asociación en el sector pesquero con Mauritania.

En relación con los cefalópodos, una serie de evaluaciones científicas llevadas a cabo por el Comité de Pesca para el Atlántico Centro-Oriental ha puesto de manifiesto la sobreexplotación de las poblaciones de África Occidental. En negociaciones anteriores celebradas en 2012, Mauritania dejó clara su preferencia por reservar esa pesquería a su flota nacional, incluso aunque mejorase la situación de la población, por lo cual no hay excedentes disponibles.

Durante la última reunión de la Comisión mixta, de septiembre de 2013, la UE acordó con Mauritania seguir trabajando a nivel científico y poner a prueba un nuevo modelo de gestión desarrollado por el IEO (Instituto Español de Oceanografía) en una campaña de investigación científica. Este asunto estará en el orden del día de la próxima reunión del Comité Científico conjunto que se organizará próximamente.

La Comisión tiene la intención de seguir defendiendo este enfoque científico durante las negociaciones actuales y de incluir en el futuro Protocolo, aún por negociar, disposiciones que autoricen esta pesquería científica.

La Comisión también pretende destacar en el futuro Protocolo la cuestión de la transparencia para confirmar que la UE es realmente un socio privilegiado de Mauritania y que la flota europea tiene un acceso prioritario frente a otras flotas extranjeras a las que recientemente Mauritania ha ofrecido acceso.

El Fondo Europeo de Pesca puede contribuir a la financiación de medidas de ayuda a la paralización temporal de las actividades pesqueras. A nivel nacional y local se están decidiendo las disposiciones concretas de aplicación, y corresponde al Estado miembro de que se trate decidir qué compensaciones deben ofrecerse a los pescadores por las pérdidas ocasionadas por la interrupción de su actividad.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005592/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Inclusion of Galicia's cephalopod fishing fleet in the EU-Mauritania Fisheries Agreement

The Commission announced this week that the first round of negotiations on the EU-Mauritania bilateral fisheries agreement will open on 5 May in Paris.

Galicia's cephalopod fishing fleet was excluded when the current agreement was adopted. Does the Commission now plan to include it? Does the Commission know how serious the effects of this unfair decision have been on the cephalopod sector in Galicia, where some vessels have had to be scrapped while others have been beached and their crews have still not received aid of any kind?

Will the Commission place pressure on Mauritania to recognise that it cannot apply political double standards in negotiations by citing sustainability criteria while allowing fleets from third countries, including China, to fish unchecked for cephalopods?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2014)

Two rounds of negotiations have been held early May for the renewal of the Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement with Mauritania.

On cephalopods, scientific assessments carried out by the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic indicate that the different stocks of Western Africa are overexploited. Mauritania made it clear, during previous negotiations in 2012, that it prefers to keep this fishery for its national fleet even if the status of the stock improves, so that there is no available surplus.

During the last Joint Committee in September 2013, the EU agreed with Mauritania to continue working at a scientific level and to test a new management model developed by the IEO (Spanish scientific institute) through a scientific research campaign. This issue will be at the agenda of the next Joint Scientific Committee that will be organised soon.

It is the intention of the Commission to continue with this science-based approach during the current negotiations and to include, in the future Protocol yet to be negotiated, provisions allowing such scientific fishery.

The Commission is also aiming at strenghtening the issue of transparency in the future Protocol, so as to confirm that the EU is indeed a privileged partner for Mauritania and that the European fleet has a priority access compared to other foreign fleets that have been offered access by Mauritania in the recent period.

The European Fisheries Fund may contribute to the financing of aid measures for the temporary cessation of fishing activities. Detailed implementation modalities are decided at national and local level and it belongs to the Member State concerned to decide on any compensation offered to the fishermen for losses due to the interruption of their activity.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005593/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Construcción de la autovía A-76 por la Ribeira Sacra (Galicia) incluida en la Red Natura

El Ministerio de Fomento español publicó en el Boletín Oficial del Estado de 14 de agosto de 2013 la construcción de la Autovía A-76 Ponferrada-Ourense. En febrero de 2014 se aprobó la declaración de impacto ambiental de dicho proyecto.

En el Concello de Nogueira de Ramuín (Ourense, Galicia) se ha creado la Plataforma contra la autovía A-76 por la Ribeira Sacra. La Ribeira Sacra es una zona natural de especial fragilidad paisajística para la cual está en trámite de preparación la candidatura a la nominación como Patrimonio de la Humanidad de la Unesco. Una candidatura que está en contradicción con este estruendoso e innecesario proyecto que solo evidencia intereses lucrativos y no el interés general, ya que existen vías de transporte alternativas.

La desprotección, el desamparo, la falta total de información que ha sufrido la vecindad del Concello de Nogueira de Ramuín, y la indefensión ante la administración local, provincial, gallega y española han sido completas, y esta Plataforma cuenta ya con el respaldo de muchas organizaciones en toda Galicia, incluido el Bloque Nacionalista Galego (BNG), que ha tramitado esta denuncia en los Parlamentos donde tiene representación y a quien represento en esta pregunta parlamentaria.

El proyecto va a afectar al LIC ES1120014 «Cañon do Sil», que es además Zona de Especial Protección de Valores Naturales (ZEPVN), así como a varios núcleos de población, e incluye la construcción de un túnel que atraviesa un núcleo de viviendas y que pone en peligro la fragilidad medioambiental de este espacio de la Red Natura que es singular en Europa. La vecindad no ha sido informada del proyecto.

¿Puede indicar la Comisión si va a recibir este proyecto fondos FEDER? ¿Puede indicar la Comisión si va a abrir un procedimiento de infracción contra el Estado español por atentar con este proyecto contra un espacio con doble protección medioambiental amparado por la propia Unión Europea a través de la Red Natura?

Respuesta del Sr. Hahn en nombre de la Comisión

(4 de julio de 2014)

1.El proyecto «Autovía A-76 Ponferrada-Ourense» no recibe ayuda del Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional.

2.Este proyecto fue objeto de un procedimiento de evaluación de impacto ambiental y se emitió en julio de 2013 una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental (DIA) (194). Según la información disponible en la DIA se llevó a cabo, de conformidad con el artículo 6, apartado 3 de la Directiva sobre hábitats (195), una evaluación adecuada de las repercusiones del proyecto para los espacios Natura 2000 afectados. A la luz de la información disponible, la Comisión no dispone de elementos que le permitan considerar que ha habido infracción de la legislación medioambiental de la UE y, por lo tanto, no tiene intención de iniciar un procedimiento de infracción contra España en relación con este asunto.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005593/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Construction of the A-76 motorway through Ribeira Sacra (Galicia), a Natura 2000 site

On 14 August 2013, the Spanish Ministry of Public Works published in Spain’s Official Gazette the project to construct the A-76 motorway between Ponferrada and Ourense. The environmental impact assessment for the project was approved in February 2014.

The Platform against the A-76 motorway’s passage through Ribeira Sacra has been created in the municipality of Nogueira de Ramuín (Ourense, Galicia). Ribeira Sacra is a natural area which forms part of a particularly fragile landscape. Its candidacy for recognition as a Unesco World Heritage Site is currently being prepared. This unnecessary, high-impact project flies in the face of this protection initiative and seems to be only motivated by self-serving financial interests rather than public ones, as alternative transport routes already exist.

The people of the municipality of Nogueira de Ramuín are faced with a total lack of protection, support and information and are at the complete mercy of the local, provincial, Galician and Spanish authorities. The Platform has already received support from many organisations throughout Galicia, including the Bloque Nacionalista Galego (BNG), which has forwarded the complaint to those parliaments in which it is represented and which I represent in this Parliament.

The project will affect the Canon do Sil site of Community interest (SCI) ES1120014, which is also a Specially Protected Area of Natural Value, and several populated areas. It involves the construction of a tunnel cutting through a village and threatens the fragile environmental balance of this Natura 200 site, which is unique in Europe. The neighbourhood has not been informed about the project.

Could the Commission say whether this project is to receive ERDF funding? Could the Commission say whether it will open an infringement procedure against Spain for seeking to damage an area with dual environmental protection which is covered by the EU itself through the Natura 2000 network?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2014)

1.	The project ‘A-76 motorway between Ponferrada and Ourense’ is not receiving support from the European Regional Development Fund.

This project was subject to an environmental impact assessment and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (196) was issued in July 2013. According to the information available in the EIS, an appropriate assessment of the implications of the project for the Natura 2000 sites concerned was carried out, in accordance with Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (197). In light of the information available, the Commission does not possess any evidence to consider that there has been a breach of EU environmental legislation. Therefore, the Commission does not intend to open an infringement procedure for Spain concerning this case.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-005594/14

a la Comisión

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 de abril de 2014)

Asunto: Estación depuradora de Gandarío (A Coruña, Galicia)

El Gobierno gallego ha aprobado la construcción de una estación depuradora de aguas residuales (EDAR) en la playa de Gandarío en Bergondo (A Coruña); esta construcción implica la destrucción de una zona húmeda de hábitat de interés comunitario. La ubicación de la depuradora está incluida como ZEC (Zona Especial de Conservación) según el Plan director de la red Natura 2000, aprobado por el Decreto 37/2014, de 27 de marzo, por el que se declaran zonas especiales de conservación los lugares de importancia comunitaria de Galicia y se aprueba el Plan director de la Red Natura 2000 de Galicia.

El lugar donde estaría ubicado incumpliría además la Ley 9/2002, de 30 de diciembre, de ordenación urbanística y protección del medio rural de Galicia, por tratarse de un suelo rústico y tratarse de una construcción de más de ocho metros de alto, además de otras normativas como el Plan de Protección del Litoral.

Además, el Concello de Bergondo al que pertenece la playa de Gandarío se niega reiteradamente a cumplir la Directiva europea relativa al acceso del público a la información medioambiental del año 2003 y no permite consultar el proyecto constructivo ni facilita copia del mismo.

En la respuesta a una pregunta anterior sobre el mismo tema, la Comisión informaba de que pediría información a las autoridades competentes. ¿Puede informar la Comisión de la respuesta de los Gobiernos español y gallego, así como de la del Concello de Bergondo?

Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión

(14 de julio de 2014)

En marzo de 2014, la Comisión pidió a las autoridades españolas información sobre las cuestiones señaladas por Su Señoría. Se espera que las autoridades españolas contesten antes del verano.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005594/14

to the Commission

Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Wastewater treatment plant in Gandarío (A Coruña, Spain)

The Galician regional government has given its approval for the construction of a wastewater treatment plant at Gandarío beach in Bergondo (A Coruña). This will entail the destruction of a wetland habitat of Community interest. The location for the treatment plant has been designated as a special area of conservation (SAC) under the Natura 2000 master plan. Galicia's sites of Community interest were declared special areas of conservation in Decree 37/2014 of 27 March 2014 which also endorsed the master plan for Galicia's Natura 2000 network.

Locating the treatment plant at this site will in addition breach Law 9/2002 of 30 December 2002 on town planning and protection of the rural environment in Galicia, on account of this site being classified as rural land and the fact that the plant will be over eight metres high. It will also breach the coastal protection plan and other regulations.

Furthermore, Bergondo Town Council, which owns Gandarío beach, repeatedly refuses to comply with the 2003 EU Directive on public access to environmental information and will not permit any consultation of the building plans, nor will it supply a copy of same.

In its answer to a previous question on the same subject, the Commission said that it would ask the competent authorities for information. Could the Commission provide details of the answers received from the Spanish Government and Galicia's regional government, as well as from Bergondo Town Council?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2014)

The Commission asked the Spanish authorities for information regarding the points raised in March 2014. The reply from the Spanish authorities is expected before summer.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005595/14

alla Commissione

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Affrontare la crisi della famiglia nel nome dei figli

La tutela dei bambini è un'esigenza particolarmente sentita nell'Unione europea, anche con particolare riguardo ai conflitti familiari, in cui i minori risultano essere i soggetti più esposti. Peraltro è stato mostrato nel convegno «Affrontare la crisi della famiglia nel nome dei figli», tenutosi al Parlamento europeo lo scorso 23 ottobre, che esistono differenze significative nelle modalità di gestione dei divorzi per quanto riguarda l'affidamento dei minori. A volte basta superare un confine perché i minori siano trattati ingiustificatamente in modo del tutto diverso.

Il pediatra italiano Vittorio Vezzetti ha altresì evidenziato come la perdita di un genitore o le difficoltà dovute alla separazione della coppia genitoriale siano in grado di produrre effetti immediati e a lungo termine sullo stato di salute dei minori. Sono ormai noti, nella grande letteratura scientifica internazionale, alterazioni dell'assetto bioumorale, ormonale, psiconeurologico e persino cromosomico (con azione dello stress sulla porzione telomerica). Risulta chiaro, quindi, che tale tematica, ben lungi dall'essere considerata un localistico problema di diritto di famiglia come potrebbero esserlo invece il mantenimento o l'assegnazione della casa, debba essere invece affrontata con un più universale linguaggio scientifico che ogni sistema giudiziario potrà poi recepire in piena autonomia secondo le proprie modalità.

Poiché, evidentemente, non può dirsi davvero unita e solidale un'Europa che non assicura le stesse cure a tutti i «suoi» figli, ed essendo ormai disponibile in letteratura scientifica un'ampia mole di materiale;

può la Commissione precisare se intenda, in un'ottica di eguale diritto alla salute, eseguire o valutare ricerche volte a definire delle best practices che possano essere di guida agli Stati membri nell'ottica di una maggiore armonizzazione delle procedure?

Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione

(4 luglio 2014)

La crescente mobilità dei cittadini nell'Unione europea ha moltiplicato il numero di famiglie con una dimensione internazionale. La separazione delle famiglie è spesso un processo difficile e doloroso, ma quando avviene in un contesto transfrontaliero provoca stress e difficoltà ancora maggiori.

La Commissione è consapevole delle differenze tra i vari sistemi nazionali e delle pratiche divergenti in materia di concessione ed esercizio dei diritti di affidamento e delle obbligazioni alimentari, nonché del possibile impatto di tali divergenze sui minori. Essa ritiene che in tutti gli atti relativi ai minori debba essere considerato preminente l'interesse superiore del singolo minore: tale valutazione può essere eseguita, ovviamente, soltanto caso per caso.

Per quanto concerne la responsabilità genitoriale, la legislazione europea disciplina soltanto le questioni procedurali relative alla competenza dei giudici e al riconoscimento e all'esecuzione delle decisioni (regolamento Bruxelles II bis). La Commissione sta attualmente valutando il funzionamento del regolamento Bruxelles II bis. Nella relazione di valutazione adottata dalla Commissione il 15 aprile 2014 si esamina la possibilità di introdurre procedure più armonizzate su materie specifiche, ad esempio l'audizione del minore nei casi di affidamento transfrontalieri. La Commissione ha inoltre avviato una consultazione pubblica online (198) sui sistemi integrati di tutela dei minori, destinata fra l'altro a raccogliere esempi di buone prassi.

Le questioni sollevate dall'onorevole parlamentare saranno valutate nell'ambito dell'esame generale del regolamento Bruxelles II bis e, più globalmente, della politica dell'UE in materia di promozione della tutela dei diritti dei minori.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005595/14

to the Commission

Sonia Alfano (ALDE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Tackling family crisis for the sake of children

The need to protect children is a responsibility that is keenly felt in the European Union, including with particular regard to family conflict, in which children tend to be the worst affected. However, the conference on ‘Tackling family crisis for the sake of children’, which was held at the European Parliament on 23 October 2013, highlighted the fact that there are significant differences in the ways in which divorce is managed in terms of the custody of children. It is sometimes simply a case of crossing a border for children to be unjustifiably treated in a totally different way.

The Italian paediatrician, Vittorio Vezzetti, has also shown that the loss of a parent or difficulties caused by parental separation can have both immediate and long-term effects on children’s health. The wealth of international scientific literature has provided ample evidence of changes affecting the body’s biochemical, hormonal, psychoneurological and even chromosomal balance (with stress affecting the telomeric region). It is therefore clear that this subject — far from being seen as an issue specific to family law, as in the case of maintenance and the allocation of the family home — has to be tackled using a more universal scientific language that each legal system will then be able to transpose independently in accordance with its own methods.

Since Europe can clearly not claim to be truly united and solidarity-based when it is not guaranteeing the same treatment for all of its children, and since a wealth of material is available in the scientific literature, I ask:

Can the Commission say whether, in order to ensure equal rights to health, it is intending to conduct or assess research to identify the best practices that might serve as a guide for Member States with a view to greater harmonisation of procedures?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2014)

The growing mobility of citizens within the European Union has resulted in an increasing number of families with an international dimension. Family separation is often a difficult and painful affair, but when it takes place across borders, difficulties and stress are frequently compounded.

The Commission is aware of differences in the national systems and diverging practices when it comes to granting and exercising custody rights and maintenance and their possible impacts on children. It is of the opinion that in all actions concerning children the primary consideration must be the best interests of the individual child; such an assessment can obviously be done only on a case by case basis.

European legislation covers, insofar as parental responsibility is concerned, only the procedural matters relating to the jurisdiction of the courts and the recognition and enforcement of judgments (Brussels IIa regulation). The Commission is currently assessing the functioning of the Brussels II a regulation. The question of more harmonised procedures on specific matters is raised in the evaluation report adopted by the Commission on 15 April 2014, for instance with respect to the hearing of the child in cross-border custody cases. Furthermore, the Commission has launched an online public consultation (199) on integrated child protection systems, one of the aims of which is to gather good practice examples.

The matters raised by the Honourable Member will be assessed in the overall review of the Brussels IIa regulation and, more broadly, of the EU policy in respect of the promotion of the protection of the rights of the child.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-005596/14

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 aprile 2014)

Oggetto: Correlazione tra allergie ed eccesso di parti cesarei

Secondo le stime elaborate da specifiche associazioni di categoria, l'Italia registra un eccesso di parti cesarei rispetto alla media europea. Si tratta di un fattore che favorisce l'insorgenza di allergie e l'impoverimento delle difese del sistema batterico — insito, in particolar modo, nell'apparato intestinale. Nella fattispecie, il patrimonio batterico e immunitario viene in certa misura trasmesso dalla madre al bambino durante il parto naturale. All'aumento dei parti cesarei sono collegati l'incremento delle patologie allergiche e la maggiore vulnerabilità a malattie quali diabete, malattia di Crohn e colite ulcerosa.

Alla luce delle summenzionate considerazioni si chiede alla Commissione:

di indicare eventuali studi e analisi relativi alla frequenza del parto cesareo negli altri Stati membri (con particolare riferimento alle ragioni alla base delle differenti frequenze registrate fra i paesi europei);

di indicare eventuali studi riguardanti le conseguenze scaturenti dai due diversi tipi di parto.

Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione

(17 giugno 2014)

Nel maggio 2013 il progetto EURO-PERISTAT (200), cofinanziato dall'UE, ha pubblicato la seconda relazione sulla salute perinatale in Europa dal titolo «Health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2010» (201).

La relazione indica l'alta frequenza di rischi di ordine sanitario, ad esempio distacco intempestivo della placenta e morti perinatali, dovuti all'aumento del numero dei parti cesarei.

La relazione menziona alcune possibili spiegazioni dell'aumento dei tagli cesarei, quali il timore di azioni legali, incentivi finanziari legati alle metodologie di pagamento, la richiesta di parti cesarei da parte delle donne e l'impressione che il taglio cesareo sia un intervento a basso rischio.

La relazione fornisce informazioni sui parti cesarei nel 2010: nell'Unione europea, il tasso più basso si riscontra in Finlandia (16,8 %) e il più alto a Cipro (52,2 %). La relazione riporta altresì l'incidenza dei parti cesarei sul totale delle nascite e indica l'evoluzione nel tempo (confrontando il 2004 con il 2010) delle nascite con parto cesareo in Europa, differenziando inoltre tra tagli cesarei decisi prima del parto (programmati) e durante il parto (d'emergenza).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-005596/14

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)

(24 April 2014)

Subject: Correlation between allergies and too many caesarean births

Certain medical associations have estimated that Italy has more caesarean births than the European average. This factor can lead to an increase in allergies and a reduction in the body’s bacterial defence system, which is located particularly in the intestinal tract. In fact, an individual’s bacterial and immune reserves are to some extent transmitted from mother to baby during a natural birth. The increase in caesarean deliveries is associated with a rise in allergic diseases and greater vulnerability to conditions such as diabetes, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.

1.	Can the Commission indicate any studies and analyses about the frequency of caesarean deliveries in other Member States (with particular reference to the reasons underlying the different frequencies recorded among European countries)?

2.	Can it indicate any studies concerning the consequences arising from the two different kinds of delivery?

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2014)

In May 2013, the EU-funded Euro-Peristat (202) project has released a second European Perinatal Health Report entitled ‘Health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2010’ (203).

The report points out to elevated health risks for example of placental abruption and stillbirth as a consequence of the rise in caesarean rates.

The report quotes some possible explanations for the increase in caesarean sections such as fear of litigation, financial incentives related to methods of payment, women’s requests for caesarean births, and the perception that a caesarean section is a safe procedure.

The report provides data on caesarean rates in 2010: in the European Union, the lowest rate is 16.8% in Finland and the highest 52.2% in Cyprus. In addition, the report provides the percentage of caesarean section in comparison with all births and the change over time (2004 vs. 2010) of births by caesarean section in Europe. The report also presents data on the type of caesarean section before labour (elective) or during labour (emergency).

(1) Disponible à l'adresse suivante : http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2013-006643%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN

(2) Disponibile su:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2013-006643 %2b0 %2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0 %2f%2fEN&language=EN.

(3) Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2013-006643%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN

(4) COM(2012) 11 final.

(5) Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2011/93/EU af 13. december 2011 om bekæmpelse af seksuelt misbrug og seksuel udnyttelse af børn og børnepornografi.

(6) COM(2012) 11 final.

(7) Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.

(8) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(9) 2013 m. gruodžio 17 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentas (ES) Nr. 1304/2013 dėl Europos socialinio fondo, kuriuo panaikinamas Tarybos reglamentas (EB) Nr. 1081/2006 (OL L 347, 2013 12 20, p. 470).

(10) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(11) Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17.12.2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006, OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470.

(12) SP(2014)62.

(13) http://www.eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140418_01_en.pdf

http://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/westbank/documents/news/2014/20140505_localstatementonevictionordersdemolitions_en.pdf

http://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/westbank/documents/news/2013/20140204_local_eu_statement_on_demolitions_tubas_en.pdf

(14) http://www.eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140111_02_en.pdf

(15) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/130248.pdf

(16) http://www.eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140418_01_en.pdf - http://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/westbank/documents/news/2014/20140505_localstatementonevictionordersdemolitions_en.pdf - http://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/westbank/documents/news/2013/20140204_local_eu_statement_on_demolitions_tubas_en.pdf

(17) http://www.eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140111_02_en.pdf

(18) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/130248.pdf

(19) Direktyvos 94/62/EB 9 straipsnis, OL L 365, 1994 12 31.

(20) Article 9 of Directive 94/62/EC, OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.

(21) Για περισσότερες πληροφορίες: www.hraf.gr/en/portfolio/hellinikon

(22) More information at: www.hraf.gr/en/portfolio/hellinikon

(23) COM(2013) 837 final.

(24) http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=2021&furtherNews=yes

(25) COM(2013) 817 final.

(26) http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=2021&furtherNews=yes

(27) Décision 12-dcc-154 du 7 novembre 2012.

(28) Groupe Eurotunnel S.A. et SeaFrance S.A. enquête sur les concentrations, rapport sur l'acquisition par le Groupe Eurotunnel S.A. de certains actifs de l'ancienne SeaFrance S.A., 6 juin 2013.

(29) Voir «Guide de bonnes pratiques de coopération entre les autorités nationales de concurrence de l'Union Européenne en matière de contrôle des concentrations».

(30) JO L 24 du 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(31) Décision 12-dcc-154 du 7 novembre 2012.

(32) Groupe Eurotunnel S.A. et SeaFrance S.A. enquête sur les concentrations, rapport sur l'acquisition par le Groupe Eurotunnel S.A. de certains actifs de l'ancienne SeaFrance S.A., 6 juin 2013.

(33) Voir «Guide de bonnes pratiques de coopération entre les autorités nationales de concurrence de l'Union Européenne en matière de contrôle des concentrations».

(34) JO L 24 du 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(35) Directive 2009/72/EC of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and Directive 2009/73/EC of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas.

(36) COM,(2011) 202 final.

(37) Directive 2009/72/EC of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and Directive 2009/73/EC of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas.

(38) COM,(2011) 202 final.

(39) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/platform/index_en.htm

(40) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/platform/index_en.htm

(41) 11075/14.

(42) 11075/14.

(43) Proc.° n.° COMP/M.5907 — Votorantim /Fischer/JV.

(44) Regulamento (CE) n.° 139/2004 do Conselho, de 20 de janeiro de 2004, relativo ao controlo das concentrações de empresas («Regulamento das concentrações comunitárias»)), JO L 24 de 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(45) Ou seja, uma posição de poder económico que permite a uma empresa comportar-se de forma independente dos seus concorrentes, clientes e consumidores.

(46) Case No COMP/M.5907 — VOTORANTIM /FISCHER/JV.

(47) Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20.1.2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation), OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(48) i.e. a position of economic strength, which enables the undertaking to behave independently of its competitors, customers and of its consumers.

(49) Joined cases C-188/10 and C-189/10.

(50) C-278/12.

(51) Cause riunite C-188/10 e C-189/10.

(52) C-278/12.

(53) Joined cases C-188/10 and C-189/10.

(54) C-278/12.

(55) Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20.10.2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, OJ L 280/1 of 26.10.2010.

(56) Directive 2012/13/EU of 22.5.2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings, OJ. L 142 of 1.6.2012, p. 1‐10.

(57) Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22.10.2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty, OJ L 294/1 of 6.11.2013.

(58) Directive 2013/48/EU needs to be transposed by 27.11.2016.

(59) Direttiva 2010/64/UE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 20 ottobre 2010, sul diritto all’interpretazione e alla traduzione nei procedimenti penali (GU L 280 del 1.26.2010, pag. 1).

(60) Direttiva 2012/13/UE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 22 maggio 2012, sul diritto all’informazione nei procedimenti penali (GU L 142 dell’1.6.2012, pag. 1).

(61) Direttiva 2013/48/UE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 22 ottobre 2013, relativa al diritto di avvalersi di un difensore nel procedimento penale e nel procedimento di esecuzione del mandato d’arresto europeo, al diritto di informare un terzo al momento della privazione della libertà personale e al diritto delle persone private della libertà personale di comunicare con terzi e con le autorità consolari (GU L 294 del 6.11.2013, pag. 1).

(62) La direttiva 2013/48/UE deve essere recepita entro il 27 novembre 2016.

(63) Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20.10.2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, OJ L 280/1 of 26.10.2010.

(64) Directive 2012/13/EU of 22.5.2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings, OJ. L 142 of 1.6.2012, p. 1‐10.

(65) Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22.10.2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty, OJ L 294/1 of 6.11.2013.

(66) Directive 2013/48/EU needs to be transposed by 27.11.2016.

(67) GU L 61 del 3.3.1997.

(68) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.

(69) COM(2013) 813, 2013/0402 (COD).

(70) COM(2013) 813, 2013/0402 (COD).

(71) http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/school/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf

(72) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=IT&f=ST%2015098 %202009 %20INIT

(73) http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/school/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf

(74) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2015098%202009%20INIT

(75) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:088:0045:0065:it:PDF

(76) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:088:0045:0065:en:PDF

(77) Alcuni di questi studi possono essere consultati all'indirizzo:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/studies.htm

(78) Come per esempio: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/review_air_policy.htm

(79) (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/environmental_accounts/introduction)

(80) http://prtr.ec.europa.eu/

(81) COM(2013) 196 e raccomandazione della Commissione 2013/179/UE.

(82) Some such studies can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/studies.htm

(83) For instance: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/review_air_policy.htm

(84) (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/environmental_accounts/introduction).

(85) http://prtr.ec.europa.eu/

(86) COM(2013) 196 and Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU.

(87) http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

(88) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/documentation_en.htm

(89) http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/transnational-regions/mediterranean

(90) http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

(91) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/documentation_en.htm

(92) See for instance http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/transnational-regions/mediterranean

(93) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(94) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(95) La relazione LeaderSHIP 2020 è disponibile all’indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/maritime/files/shipbuilding/leadership2020-final-report_it.pdf

(96) Tonnellate di stazza lorda compensata.

(97) The LeaderShip 2020 report is available on: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/maritime/files/shipbuilding/leadership2020-final-report_en.pdf

(98) Compensated gross tons.

(99) GU L 164 del 25.6.2008.

(100) COM(2013) 620 def.

(101) OJ L 164, 25.6.2008.

(102) COM(2013) 620 final.

(103) Direttiva 2010/30/UE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio del 19 maggio 2010 concernente l’indicazione del consumo di energia e di altre risorse dei prodotti connessi all’energia, mediante l’etichettatura ed informazioni uniformi relative ai prodotti.

(104) Direttiva 2009/125/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 21 ottobre 2009, relativa all’istituzione di un quadro per l’elaborazione di specifiche per la progettazione ecocompatibile dei prodotti connessi all’energia.

(105) Regolamento (CE) n. 66/2010 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 25 novembre 2009, relativo al marchio di qualità ecologica dell'Unione europea (Ecolabel UE).

(106) Decisione 2011/331/UE della Commissione, del 6 giugno 2011, che stabilisce i criteri ecologici per l’assegnazione del marchio di qualità ecologica dell’Unione europea (Ecolabel UE) alle sorgenti luminose.

(107) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0889:FIN:IT:PDF

(108) www.illuminateproject.eu

(109) www.led4art.eu

(110) http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/energyefficiency/greenlight

(111) Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19.5.2010 on the indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products.

(112) Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21.10.2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products.

(113) Regulation (EC) No 66/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25.11.2009 on the EU Ecolabel.

(114) Commission decision of 6.6.2011 on establishing the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel for light sources.

(115) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0889:FIN:EN:PDF

(116) www.illuminateproject.eu

(117) www.led4art.eu

(118) http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/energyefficiency/greenlight

(119) Settimo programma quadro per le attività di ricerca, sviluppo tecnologico e dimostrazione (7° PQ, 2007-2013).

(120) http://erc.europa.eu/erc-funded-projects

(121) http://www.eurospin.mpg.de/

(122) http://www.eu-aims.eu/

(123) http://www.newmeds-europe.com/

(124) https://www.humanbrainproject.eu/

(125) Orizzonte 2020 è il programma quadro per la ricerca e l’innovazione (2014-2020), cfr. GU L 347 del 20/12/2013.

(126) http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.html

(127) http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.html

(128) http://ec.europa.eu/eahc/projects/database.html?prjno=20094302

(129) The Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (FP7, 2007-2013).

(130) http://erc.europa.eu/erc-funded-projects

(131) http://www.eurospin.mpg.de/

(132) http://www.eu-aims.eu/

(133) http://www.newmeds-europe.com/

(134) https://www.humanbrainproject.eu/

(135) Horizon 2020, the framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020), OJ L 347, 20.12.2013.

(136) http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.html

(137) http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/index.html

(138) http://ec.europa.eu/eahc/projects/database.html?prjno=20094302

(139) La Commissione non è in grado di fornire informazioni sui diversi tipi di supporto finanziario disponibili a livello nazionale, regionale o locale negli Stati membri.

(140) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/rec/index_en.htm

(141) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/justice/index_en.htm

(142) The Commission cannot provide information about different kinds of financial support available at national , regional or local level in the Member States.

(143) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/rec/index_en.htm

(144) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/justice/index_en.htm

(145) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/sustainable-tourism/indicators/index_en.htm

(146) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/sustainable-tourism/charter/index_en.htm

(147) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/index_en.htm

(148) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/index_en.htm

(149) Decisione 2009/578/CE della Commissione.

(150) Decisione 2009/564/CE della Commissione.

(151) I criteri sono validi fino al 30 novembre 2015. Maggiori informazioni sui criteri sono disponibili all'indirizzo internet:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/products-groups-and-criteria.html, alla voce «Tourist accomodation services».

(152) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/sustainable-tourism/indicators/index_en.htm

(153) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/sustainable-tourism/charter/index_en.htm

(154) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/index_en.htm

(155) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/index_en.htm.

(156) Commission Decision 2009/578/EC.

(157) Commission Decision 2009/564/EC.

(158) Those two set of criteria are valid until 30.11.2015. More information on these criteria can be found under ‘Tourist accommodation services’ at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/products-groups-and-criteria.html

(159) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g-gas/docs/com_2013_698_en.pdf

(160) http://unfccc.int/documentation/submissions_from_parties/items/7967.php

(161) Regolamento (UE) n. 525/2013 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 21 maggio 2013, relativo a un meccanismo di monitoraggio e comunicazione delle emissioni di gas a effetto serra e di comunicazione di altre informazioni in materia di cambiamenti climatici a livello nazionale e dell’Unione europea. Testo rilevante ai fini del SEE (GU L 165 del 18.6.2013).

(162) http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/trends-and-projections-2013

(163) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g-gas/docs/com_2013_698_en.pdf

(164) http://unfccc.int/documentation/submissions_from_parties/items/7967.php

(165) Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21.5.2013 on a mechanism for monitoring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions and for reporting other information at national and Union level relevant to climate change Text with EEA relevance (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013) .

(166) Available at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/trends-and-projections-2013

(167) Direttiva 2000/60/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 23 ottobre 2000, che istituisce un quadro per l'azione comunitaria in materia di acque (GU L 327 del 22.12.2000).

(168) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23.10.2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy — OJ L 327, 22.12.2000.

(169) Raccomandazione CGPM/35/2011/4 relativa alle catture accidentali di tartarughe marine nella pesca nella zona coperta dall’accordo CGPM.

(170) Articolo 38, paragrafo 1, lettera a), e articolo 40, paragrafo 1, lettera g), del regolamento (UE) n. 40/1 relativo al Fondo europeo per gli affari marittimi e la pesca e che abroga i regolamenti (CE) n. 2328/2003, (CE) n. 861/2006, (CE) n. 1198/2006 e (CE) n. 791/2007 del Consiglio e il regolamento (UE) n. 1255/2011 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio.

(171) Recommendation GFCM/35/2011/4 on the incidental by-catch of sea turtles in fisheries in the GFCM Agreement Area.

(172) Articles 38(1)(a) and 40(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2328/2003, (EC) No 861/2006, (EC) No 1198/2006 and (EC) No 791/2007 and Regulation (EU) No 1255/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

(173) http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/events/dairy-conference-2013_en.htm

(174) Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea.

(175) Reglamento (CE) n° 883/2004 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 29 de abril de 2004, sobre la coordinación de los sistemas de seguridad social (DO L 166 de 30.4.2004, p. 1).

(176) Véase, por ejemplo, el asunto C-240/10 Schulz-Delzers and Schulz, apartado 42, y la jurisprudencia allí citada.

(177) En lo sucesivo «EM».

(178) Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea.

(179) Véase, por ejemplo, el asunto C-128/08, Damseaux.

(180) COM(2010) 769 — Eliminar las barreras fiscales transfronterizas en beneficio de los ciudadanos de la UE y COM(2011) 712 final sobre la doble imposición en el mercado único.

(181) La DG TAXUD ha creado un grupo de expertos y abrió una consulta pública el 10 de abril de 2014. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-416_en.htm

(182) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-31_es.htm

(183) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-340_es.htm

(184) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

(185) Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29.4.2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p.1).

(186) see, for example, Case C‐240/10 Schulz-Delzers and Schulz, para. 42 and the case-law cited therein.

(187) Hereafter ‘MS’.

(188) Court of Justice of the European Union.

(189) See for example Case C-128/08, Damseaux.

(190) COM(2010) 769 — Removing cross-border tax obstacles for EU citizens and COM(2011) 712 final on Double Taxation in the Single Market.

(191) DG TAXUD has launched an expert group and a public consultation on 10.4.2014. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-416_en.htm

(192) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-31_en.htm?locale=en

(193) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-340_en.htm

(194) http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/08/14/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-8982.pdf

(195) Directiva 92/43/CEE del Consejo, de 21 de mayo de 1992, relativa a la conservación de los hábitats naturales y de la fauna y flora silvestres (DO L 206 de 22.7.1992).

(196) http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/08/14/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-8982.pdf

(197) Council Directive 92/43/EEC, of 21.5.1992, on the protection of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206 of 22.7.1992).

(198) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/fundamental-rights/opinion/140402_en.htm

(199) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/fundamental-rights/opinion/140402_en.htm

(200) http://ec.europa.eu/eahc/projects/database.html?prjno=20101301

(201) http://www.europeristat.com/images/European%20Perinatal%20Health%20Report_2010.pdf

(202) http://ec.europa.eu/eahc/projects/database.html?prjno=20101301

(203) http://www.europeristat.com/images/European%20Perinatal%20Health%20Report_2010.pdf

Top