29.8.2013

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

CE 248/1

---

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

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

(2013/C 248 E/01)

Werrej

E-004178/12 by Paolo De Castro, Herbert Dorfmann, Iratxe García Pérez, Michel Dantin, Salvatore Caronna, Giancarlo Scottà, Debora Serracchiani, Vittorio Prodi, Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris, Antonio Cancian and Elisabetta Gardini to the Commission

Subject: The market in wine: safeguarding and protecting protected designations of origin outside of the EU

Versión española

Deutsche Fassung

Version française

Versione italiana

English version

E-004179/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Opium production in Afghanistan on the rise

Versione italiana

English version

E-004180/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Iranian nuclear negotiations

Versione italiana

English version

E-004181/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Infiltration by Hizb ut-Tahrir in Pakistan's military

Versione italiana

English version

E-004182/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Infanticide in Ethiopia

Versione italiana

English version

P-004183/12 by Frank Vanhecke to the Commission

Subject: European development aid to Vietnam

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004184/12 by Britta Reimers to the Commission

Subject: Delays in approvals for genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004185/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Funds from the Seventh Framework Programme for the Zwentendorf nuclear power plant

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004186/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Financial support in the area of nuclear research

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004187/12 by Frank Vanhecke to the Commission

Subject: European funding for ENAR

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004188/12 by Frank Vanhecke to the Commission

Subject: Negotiations of free trade agreement with Vietnam

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004189/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: (Im)migrant (follow-up question)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004190/12 by Struan Stevenson to the Commission

Subject: VAT rates on e-books

English version

E-004191/12 by Sergio Berlato to the Commission

Subject: The shocking phenomenon of child soldier recruitment

Versione italiana

English version

E-004192/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Web blackout in China

Versione italiana

English version

E-004193/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Rights to replant vines

Versione italiana

English version

P-004194/12 by Julie Girling to the Commission

Subject: Biofuel-to-electricity project funding: follow-up

English version

E-004195/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Report of the Commission against biofuels

Versión española

English version

E-004196/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Management of migration flows

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004197/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Bilateral agreements on taxation of savings in Switzerland

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004205/12 by Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: Gibraltar and Directive 91/477/EEC

English version

E-004206/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: Non-recognition of the profession of landscape architect

Version française

English version

E-004207/12 by Potito Salatto and Crescenzio Rivellini to the Commission

Subject: Article 43 of the EC Treaty and the application of national legislation on local public transport

Versione italiana

English version

E-004214/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Cyprus issue

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004215/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Recognition of the occupied part of Cyprus

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004218/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Definitive partition of Cyprus

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004256/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Council

Subject: Council staff

English version

E-004266/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Mountain farming

Versione italiana

English version

E-004271/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: European Globalisation Adjustment Fund

Versione italiana

English version

E-004273/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Extracting stem cells from breast milk

Versione italiana

English version

E-004277/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: The ‘supergrain’

Versione italiana

English version

E-004280/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Partial plan for reclassifying Mas de Luna

Versión española

English version

E-004284/12 by Hubert Pirker to the Commission

Subject: Harmonisation of rules regarding equipment to be carried in private cars

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004285/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: The BRIC countries and the multilateral system

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004294/12 by Mariya Nedelcheva to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Security and humanitarian crisis in Mali

българска версия

English version

E-004295/12 by Mariya Nedelcheva to the Commission

Subject: Public consultation on ‘Gender imbalance in corporate boards in the EU’

българска версия

English version

E-004297/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Green and white jobs for youth

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004298/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: DPRK violation of SCR 1837

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004357/12 by Filip Kaczmarek to the Commission

Subject: North Korea's missile tests

Wersja polska

English version

E-004300/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Alert system for posted workers

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004302/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Youth unemployment

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004311/12 by Franz Obermayr to the Commission

Subject: Recording implants in passports

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004335/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Sexual abuse of children

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004347/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Organised crime

Versione italiana

English version

E-004361/12 by Ana Miranda to the Commission

Subject: Fisheries agreement between the European Union and Mauritania

Versión española

English version

E-004384/12 by Sirpa Pietikäinen and Satu Hassi to the Commission

Subject: Discharges from the Talvivaara mine and the lack of intervention by Finnish authorities

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-004386/12 by Judith A. Merkies to the Commission

Subject: Renewable energy and definition of residues

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004387/12 by Kartika Tamara Liotard to the Commission

Subject: New case of mad cow disease in the United States

Nederlandse versie

English version

P-004394/12 by José Bové to the Commission

Subject: CAP reform, greening: crop rotation v ‘diversification’ — economic impacts

Version française

English version

E-004405/12 by Zoltán Bagó to the Commission

Subject: Supporting small and medium-sized enterprises operating in the cultural and creative sectors

Magyar változat

English version

E-004410/12 by Edit Bauer to the Commission

Subject: Restricting the right to private property

Magyar változat

English version

E-004413/12 by Zoltán Bagó to the Commission

Subject: Student loan guarantee facility

Magyar változat

English version

E-004428/12 by Liam Aylward, Pat the Cope Gallagher and Brian Crowley to the Commission

Subject: EFSA and the nutrition and health claims regulation and its impact on SMEs

English version

P-004431/12 by Patrice Tirolien to the Commission

Subject: Creation of an instrument to adapt EU fishing measures to the realities of the outermost regions

Version française

English version

E-004438/12 by Georgios Papanikolaou to the Commission

Subject: Actions aimed at protecting the children of adult prisoners

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004459/12 by Adam Bielan and Michał Tomasz Kamiński to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Cases of human rights abuse in Vietnam

Wersja polska

English version

E-004475/12 by Georgios Papanikolaou to the Commission

Subject: Commission position on imputed income from owner-occupied housing

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004478/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: Cancer of the digestive system

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-004906/12 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Royal Dutch Shell and Turkish production of oil and gas on and near Cyprus

Dansk udgave

English version

E-004485/12 by Maria Eleni Koppa to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Turkish drilling in Famagusta and challenging of sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004509/12 by Pino Arlacchi, Liisa Jaakonsaari, Ivo Vajgl, Claudio Morganti, Willy Meyer, John Attard-Montalto, Lara Comi, Antonio Cancian, Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris, Zoltán Bagó, Salvatore Tatarella, Luís Paulo Alves and Roberto Gualtieri to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Illegal maritime shipments

Versión española

Versione italiana

Magyar változat

Versão portuguesa

Slovenska različica

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

E-004510/12 by Anna Hedh to the Commission

Subject: Alcohol policy

Svensk version

English version

E-004516/12 by Derek Vaughan to the Commission

Subject: Paints Directive (2004/42/EC)

English version

E-004518/12 by Janusz Wojciechowski to the Commission

Subject: Measures envisaged to adapt slaughterhouses (Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 Annex II)

Wersja polska

English version

E-004519/12 by Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz to the Commission

Subject: EU strategy aimed at developing financial culture

Magyar változat

English version

E-004521/12 by Amelia Andersdotter to the Commission

Subject: Separation of the Commission's activities against contraband and counterfeiting

Svensk version

English version

E-004537/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: OTEC facilities

Versione italiana

English version

E-004542/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Stem cells replace sperm

Versione italiana

English version

E-004543/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Direct funding programmes and the city of Pescara

Versione italiana

English version

E-004544/12 by Aldo Patriciello to the Commission

Subject: Professions and professional associations in the EU

Versione italiana

English version

E-004545/12 by João Ferreira to the Commission

Subject: Emergency plan for the Douro Region

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004546/12 by João Ferreira to the Commission

Subject: REALIMENTAR, the Portuguese network for food and nutritional sovereignty and security

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004547/12 by João Ferreira to the Commission

Subject: Reversal of the decision to abolish vine planting rights

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004548/12 by Ana Miranda to the Commission

Subject: Pesticide spraying in Galicia

Versión española

English version

P-004549/12 by Eleni Theocharous to the Commission

Subject: Prospecting for hydrocarbons by Turkey

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004550/12 by Jim Higgins to the Commission

Subject: State-subsidised routes in Galway City

English version

E-004551/12 by Christine De Veyrac to the Council

Subject: Combating ‘solitary terrorists’

Version française

English version

E-004552/12 by Alfredo Antoniozzi to the Commission

Subject: EU‐China urbanisation partnership

Versione italiana

English version

E-004553/12 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou to the Commission

Subject: Growing regional inequalities — Need for innovative new tools in the framework of the European Social Fund

Ελληνική έκδοση

English version

E-004554/12 by Andrea Češková to the Commission

Subject: Evaluation of projects with regard to the drawing EU financial resources within the framework of monitoring by the European Court of Auditors

České znění

English version

E-004555/12 by Andrea Češková to the Commission

Subject: Control of the drawing of financial resources from EU funds in the Czech Republic

České znění

English version

E-004556/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Aspartame: possible removal from the market and transparency for European consumers

Versione italiana

English version

E-004557/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: Resolution fund

Versione italiana

English version

E-004558/12 by Cristiana Muscardini to the Commission

Subject: The hell of Dadaab

Versione italiana

English version

E-004559/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: The Trentino NGN Case

Versione italiana

English version

E-004560/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Nationalisation of Red Eléctrica Española in Bolivia

Versión española

English version

E-004561/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Inclusion of disabled persons in the Energy Taxation Directive

Versión española

English version

E-004562/12 by Ana Miranda to the Commission

Subject: Inclusion of landscape architecture in the regulated professions list of the European Union

Versión española

English version

P-004563/12 by Margrete Auken to the Commission

Subject: Compliance with the European Court of Justice ruling on open-cast mining in León, Spain

Dansk udgave

English version

E-004565/12 by Nessa Childers to the Commission

Subject: Grants for senior citizens' groups

English version

E-004566/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Type 2 diabetes

Versione italiana

English version

E-004567/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: Relocation of the Cargill plant

Versione italiana

English version

E-004568/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Small businesses in Europe

Dansk udgave

English version

E-004569/12 by Liam Aylward to the Commission

Subject: Hacking into electronic infomation systems

Leagan Gaeilge

English version

E-004570/12 by Liam Aylward to the Commission

Subject: The Posting of Workers Directive — administrative matters for small and medium-sized businesses

Leagan Gaeilge

English version

E-004572/12 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Training of seafarers

English version

E-004573/12 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Accession of Croatia to the EU

English version

E-004574/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Explosion in Buenos Aires

Versione italiana

English version

E-004575/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: United States: pension fund will run out sooner than expected

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004576/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Reduction in support for the outermost regions

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004577/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Reduction in aid for the outermost regions

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004578/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Special support for beekeepers affected by the drought

Versão portuguesa

English version

E-004580/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: The euro crisis could destroy the EU, says George Soros

Versão portuguesa

English version

P-004581/12 by Gilles Pargneaux to the Commission

Subject: Delayed publication of the annual report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights on discrimination against the Roma

Version française

English version

E-004582/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Israeli colonisation in the West Bank: legalisation of the illegal settlements of Bruchín, Rechelim and Sansana

Versión española

English version

E-004583/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Revision of the directive on the recognition of professional qualifications

Dansk udgave

English version

E-004586/12 by Monica Luisa Macovei to the Commission

Subject: Enhancing cooperation between Member States in the area of confiscation and asset recovery: Measures to strengthen Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) in Member States

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-004590/12 by Martin Kastler to the Commission

Subject: Differentiation between voluntary work and working time in EU legislation

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004597/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Phendimetrazine, illegal drug

Versione italiana

English version

E-004607/12 by Anneli Jäätteenmäki to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Kashgar and the Uyghur regions

Suomenkielinen versio

English version

P-004618/12 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: The Commission's ‘action teams’ — measures to boost jobs and tackle youth unemployment: the situation in Italy

Versione italiana

English version

E-004632/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: Use of acrylamide in food products

Versiunea în limba română

English version

E-004644/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Investment of EU funds in Turkey

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004646/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Statements by the Turkish Minister for European Affairs

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004650/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: European honey buzzard

Versione italiana

English version

E-004652/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Best practices of the Youth in Action programme —'Youth in the world': Cooperation with countries other than the neighbouring countries of the European Union

Versione italiana

English version

E-004656/12 by Struan Stevenson to the Commission

Subject: Cross-border adoption of stray dogs

English version

P-004659/12 by Ivo Belet to the Commission

Subject: Oil exploration in Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004709/12 by Bart Staes to the Commission

Subject: Oil extraction in Virunga National Park (Democratic Republic of Congo)

Nederlandse versie

English version

E-004662/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Testing of drinking water and failure to apply Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information

Versione italiana

English version

P-004665/12 by Alexander Mirsky to the Commission

Subject: Non-citizen's passport in Latvia with humiliating wording

Latviešu valodas versija

English version

E-004674/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Halving of the plant habitat in the Alps

Deutsche Fassung

English version

E-004678/12 by Francisco Sosa Wagner to the Commission

Subject: Apple iTunes Store

Versión española

English version

E-004679/12 by Edward Scicluna to the Commission

Subject: New jobs

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004680/12 by Edward Scicluna to the Commission

Subject: Lost jobs

Verżjoni Maltija

English version

E-004686/12 by Niccolò Rinaldi to the Commission

Subject: Registering Halloumi cheese as a Protected Designation of Origin product

Versione italiana

English version

P-004690/12 by Jan Březina to the Commission

Subject: Marketing campaign for Caribbean rum in the EU

České znění

English version

P-004704/12 by Tamás Deutsch to the Commission

Subject: Ombudsman election in Luxembourg

Magyar változat

English version

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004178/12

a la Comisión

Paolo De Castro (S&D), Herbert Dorfmann (PPE), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Michel Dantin (PPE), Salvatore Caronna (S&D), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Vittorio Prodi (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE) y Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)

(23 de abril de 2012)

Asunto: Mercado vitivinícola: protección fuera de la UE de las denominaciones de origen protegidas

En vista de que:

la Denominación de Origen Protegida (DOP) de los vinos «Prosecco», reconocida en Italia mediante el Decreto ministerial de 17 de julio de 2009, está inscrita en el registro europeo de indicaciones geográficas de vinos E-Bacchus;

el Reglamento (CE) n° 479/2008 del Consejo de 29 de abril de 2008 establece normas sobre el funcionamiento del sistema de denominaciones de origen e indicaciones geográficas del mercado vitivinícola, que incluyen (Título III, Capítulo IV) disposiciones de protección contra los fenómenos de imitación, evocación y usurpación;

en algunos mercados comerciales importantes fuera de la UE (en particular, Brasil, Australia y Nueva Zelanda), cada vez se observan más marcas y etiquetas de productos vitivinícolas con la mención «prosecco», así como iniciativas comerciales y promocionales en las que se menciona esta célebre variedad de cepa italiana;

otros casos de evocación en mercados de países terceros de productos vitivinícolas certificados de la UE, entre ellos el vino español DOP «Rioja» en América Latina o las frecuentes imitaciones de la DOP «Champagne» francesa, dan testimonio de un fenómeno cada vez más extendido y no limitado;

dichas prácticas comerciales pueden inducir a error a los consumidores finales, que podrían adquirir en el mercado productos que no tienen nada que ver con las marcas europeas de DOP, así como tener consecuencias negativas de carácter económico y social para los operadores de los sectores productivos de DOP;

¿Podría la Comisión indicar si es consciente de este problema y qué iniciativas pretende adoptar para contrarrestar, incluso en el marco de la OMC y de las relaciones bilaterales con estos países terceros, la difusión de estos fenómenos y poner en marcha, definitivamente, medidas eficaces de protección de los productos con denominación de origen en los mercados que no pertenecen a la UE?

Respuesta del Sr. Cioloş en nombre de la Comisión

(15 de junio de 2012)

La Comisión Europea tiene conocimiento de casos similares al que exponen Sus Señorías. En el contexto de su política comercial, la UE intenta proteger nuestras indicaciones geográficas en los mercados de terceros países.

Los servicios de la Comisión Europea van a examinar detenidamente la situación en Brasil y Nueva Zelanda y plantear, en su caso, la cuestión a las autoridades competentes, con el fin de tratar la situación de las denominaciones de origen protegidas y las indicaciones geográficas protegidas. En el caso de Australia, en el marco del Acuerdo de 2010 entre la UE y Australia sobre el comercio de vinos, los servicios de la Comisión Europea están intentando conseguir la inclusión de la DOP «Prosecco» y de las DOP «Conegliano-Valdobbiadene-Prosecco» y «Colli Asolani-Prosecco» en la lista de las denominaciones de la UE protegidas en Australia a través del Acuerdo.

La protección de las indicaciones geográficas europeas constituye uno de los temas de interés más importantes del sector agrícola en toda negociación comercial con terceros países, en el que la UE está buscando un instrumento jurídico que podría esgrimir a fin de resolver el tipo de problema al que ustedes aluden. La Comisión está a su disposición para explicar más a fondo en otra ocasión a Sus Señorías su enfoque y sus objetivos al respecto.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004178/12

an die Kommission

Paolo De Castro (S&D), Herbert Dorfmann (PPE), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Michel Dantin (PPE), Salvatore Caronna (S&D), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Vittorio Prodi (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE) und Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)

(23. April 2012)

Betrifft: Weinmarkt: Wahrung und Schutz der geschützten Ursprungsbezeichnung in Drittstaaten

In der Erwägung,

dass die kontrollierte Ursprungsbezeichnung für „Prosecco“-Weine, die in Italien durch den Ministerialerlass vom 17. Juli 2009 anerkannt wird, in der europäischen Datenbank „E-Bacchus“ für die geografischen Angaben von Weinen eingetragen ist;

dass die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 479/2008 des Rates vom 29. April 2008 Regeln für die Funktion des Systems der Ursprungsbezeichnungen und geografischen Angaben auf dem Weinmarkt vorgibt, einschließlich (Titel III, Kapitel IV) Bestimmungen zum Schutz vor Nachahmung, Anspielung und widerrechtlicher Aneignung;

dass auf einigen wichtigen Handelsmärkten außerhalb der EU (insbesondere in Brasilien, Australien und Neuseeland) Marken und Etiketten von Weinprodukten mit dem Aufdruck „Prosecco“ sowie Handels‐ und Werbemaßnahmen, die auf die berühmte italienische Rebsorte anspielen, immer stärker verbreitet und immer häufiger anzutreffen sind;

dass andere Fälle von Anspielungen auf zertifizierte Weinprodukte der EU auf Märkten außerhalb der EU, darunter der spanische Wein „Rioja“ DOC in Lateinamerika oder die häufigen Nachahmungen des französischen „Champagner“ AOC von einem immer häufiger und keinesfalls nur begrenzt auftretenden Phänomen zeugen;

dass diese Handelspraktiken die Endverbraucher in die Irre führen könnten, die auf dem Markt Produkte erwerben könnten, welche mit den europäischen Marken mit geschützter Ursprungsbezeichnung nichts gemeinsam haben, und dass sie zudem negative wirtschaftliche und soziale Auswirkungen auf die Anbieter der Herstellungsketten von Produkten mit geschützter Ursprungsbezeichnung haben;

kann die Kommission mitteilen, ob sie über diese Problematik informiert ist und welche Maßnahmen sie zu ergreifen gedenkt, um auch im Rahmen der WTO und der bilateralen Beziehungen mit den betreffenden Drittländern gegen die Verbreitung dieser Phänomene vorzugehen und endgültig wirkungsvolle Schutzmaßnahmen für Produkte mit Ursprungsbezeichnungen auf den Märkten außerhalb der EU einzuleiten?

Antwort von Herrn Cioloş im Namen der Kommission

(15. Juni 2012)

Der Europäischen Kommission sind ähnliche Fälle bekannt, die dem von den Damen und Herren Abgeordneten angeführten Fall durchaus vergleichbar sind. Im Rahmen ihrer Handelspolitik ist die EU darum bemüht, ihre geografischen Angaben auf Drittlandmärkten zu schützen.

Die Dienststellen der Europäischen Kommission werden die Lage in Brasilien und Neuseeland eingehend prüfen und die dort zuständigen Behörden gegebenenfalls auffordern, die Situation in Bezug auf die geschützten Ursprungsbezeichnungen (g.U.) und die geschützten geografischen Angaben (g.g.A.) zu klären. Im Falle Australiens sind die Kommissionsdienststellen im Rahmen des Abkommens EU-Australien von 2010 über den Weinhandel konkret darum bemüht, die g.U. „Prosecco“ und die g.U. „Conegliano-Valdobbiadene-Prosecco“ und „Colli Asolani-Prosecco“ in die Liste der EU-Bezeichnungen aufzunehmen, die infolge des Abkommens in Australien geschützt sind.

Der Schutz der geografischen Angaben der EU gehört stets zu den wichtigsten Agrarinteressen bei Handelsverhandlungen mit Drittländern, bei denen die EU ein Rechtsinstrument anstrebt, das im Falle von Problemen wie den von Ihnen angeführten eingesetzt werden könnte. Die Kommission ist bereit, den Damen und Herren Abgeordneten ihren Ansatz und ihre Zielsetzungen zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt eingehender zu erläutern.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-004178/12

à la Commission

Paolo De Castro (S&D), Herbert Dorfmann (PPE), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Michel Dantin (PPE), Salvatore Caronna (S&D), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Vittorio Prodi (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE) et Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)

(23 avril 2012)

Objet: Marché vitivinicole: sauvegarde et protection des appellations d'origine contrôlée en dehors de l'UE

Considérant que:

l'appellation d'origine contrôlée des vins «Prosecco», reconnue en Italie par le décret ministériel du 17 juillet 2009, est inscrite dans le registre européen des indications géographiques des vins E-Bacchus;

le règlement (CE) n° 479/2008 du Conseil du 29 avril 2008 contient des normes sur le fonctionnement du système des appellations d'origine et des indications géographiques du marché vitivinicole, y compris (titre III, chapitre IV) des dispositions de sauvegarde et de protection des phénomènes d'imitation, d'évocations et d'usurpation;

sur certains marchés commerciaux importants en dehors de l'UE (en particulier, au Brésil, en Australie et en Nouvelle-Zélande), les marques et étiquettes de produits vitivinicoles portant l'inscription «Prosecco» sont de plus en plus répandues et faciles à trouver, tout comme les initiatives commerciales et promotionnelles évoquant le célèbre cépage italien;

d'autres cas d'évocation, sur les marchés situés en dehors de l'UE, de produits vitivinicoles de l'UE certifiés, comme le vin espagnol «Rioja» AOC en Amérique latine ou les imitations récurrentes du «Champagne» AOC français, témoignent d'un phénomène de plus en plus répandu et qui n'est pas circonscrit;

de telles pratiques commerciales risquent d'induire en erreur les consommateurs finals qui pourraient acheter sur le marché des produits qui n'ont rien à voir avec les marques européennes AOP, et d'avoir des retombées négatives de caractère économique et social pour les ouvriers des filières de production AOP;

la Commission pourrait-elle indiquer si elle est au courant de cette problématique et quelles initiatives elle entend adopter pour lutter, y compris au sein de l'OMC et dans le cadre des relations bilatérales avec les pays non européens concernés, contre la diffusion de ces phénomènes et protéger définitivement de manière efficace les produits dotés d'une appellation d'origine sur les marchés non européens.

Réponse donnée par M. Cioloș au nom de la Commission

(15 juin 2012)

La Commission européenne est consciente de l'existence de cas similaires à celui exposé par Mesdames et Messieurs les membres du Parlement européen. Dans le cadre de sa politique commerciale, l'UE tente de protéger ses indications géographiques sur les marchés des pays tiers.

Les services de la Commission européenne étudieront attentivement la situation au Brésil et en Nouvelle-Zélande et, le cas échéant, aborderont la question avec les autorités compétentes afin d'améliorer la situation concernant les appellations d'origine protégées et les indications géographiques protégées. Dans le cas de l'Australie, et dans le cadre de l'accord Union européenne-Australie 2010 relatif au commerce du vin, les services de la Commission européenne travaillent activement à l'insertion de l'AOP «Prosecco», ainsi que des AOP «Conegliano-Valdobbiadene-Prosecco» et «Colli Asolani-Prosecco» dans la liste des appellations de l'UE protégées en Australie en vertu de l'accord.

La protection des indications géographiques européennes est l'un des intérêts agricoles les plus importants dans toute négociation commerciale avec des pays tiers, pour lequel l'UE s'efforce de trouver un instrument juridique qui pourrait être invoqué afin de remédier aux problèmes que vous avez soulevés. La Commission est disposée à fournir aux Honorables Parlementaires, à une prochaine occasion, des explications détaillées concernant son approche et ses objectifs dans ce domaine.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004178/12

alla Commissione

Paolo De Castro (S&D), Herbert Dorfmann (PPE), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Michel Dantin (PPE), Salvatore Caronna (S&D), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Vittorio Prodi (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE) e Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Mercato vitivinicolo: tutela e protezione extra-UE delle denominazioni di origine controllata

Premesso che:

la Denominazione di Origine Controllata dei vini «Prosecco», riconosciuta in Italia con il decreto ministeriale del 17 luglio 2009, è inserita nel registro europeo delle indicazioni geografiche dei vini E-Bacchus;

il regolamento (CE) n. 479/2008 del Consiglio del 29 aprile 2008 reca norme sul funzionamento del sistema delle denominazioni di origine e indicazioni geografiche del mercato vitivinicolo, comprese (Titolo III, Capo IV) disposizioni di tutela e protezione da fenomeni di imitazioni, evocazioni ed usurpazioni;

in alcuni importanti mercati commerciali extra-UE (in particolare Brasile, Australia e Nuova Zelanda), sono sempre più diffusi e reperibili marchi ed etichette di prodotti vitivinicoli con la dicitura «prosecco», nonché iniziative commerciali e promozionali evocative del celebre vitigno italiano;

che altri casi di evocazione sui mercati extra-UE di prodotti vitivinicoli dell’UE certificati, tra cui il vino spagnolo «Rioja» DOC in America latina o le ricorrenti imitazioni dello «Champagne» AOC francese, sono la testimonianza di un fenomeno sempre più diffuso e non circoscritto;

che tali pratiche commerciali rischiano di indurre in errore i consumatori finali, che potrebbero acquistare sul mercato prodotti che niente hanno a che fare con i marchi europei DOP, oltre a determinare ricadute negative di carattere economico e sociale per gli operatori delle filiere produttive DOP;

può la Commissione far sapere se è a conoscenza della problematica e quali iniziative intende adottare per contrastare, anche in sede OMC e di relazioni bilaterali con i Paesi extracomunitari coinvolti, il diffondersi di tali fenomeni e per avviare, definitivamente, un percorso efficace di protezione dei prodotti a denominazioni di origine sui mercati extra-UE.

Risposta di Dacian Cioloș a nome della Commissione

(15 giugno 2012)

La Commissione europea è a conoscenza di casi analoghi a quello esposto dagli onorevoli parlamentari. Nell'ambito della sua politica commerciale, l'UE si adopera per tutelare le indicazioni geografiche europee sui mercati terzi.

I servizi della Commissione condurranno un esame approfondito della situazione in Brasile e in Nuova Zelanda e, se del caso, solleveranno la questione presso le autorità competenti per affrontare la situazione delle denominazioni di origine protette e delle indicazioni geografiche protette. Nel caso dell'Australia, e nel quadro dell’accordo del 2010 tra l’UE e l’Australia sul commercio del vino, i servizi della Commissione europea lavorano attivamente al fine di inserire la DOP «Prosecco», nonché le DOP «Conegliano-Valdobbiadene-Prosecco» e «Colli Asolani-Prosecco», nell'elenco delle denominazioni dell’UE protette in Australia dall'accordo.

La protezione delle indicazioni geografiche europee è uno dei principali interessi agricoli nei negoziati commerciali con paesi terzi, nel corso dei quali l’UE si adopera per trovare uno strumento giuridico che potrebbe essere addotto per la risoluzione di problemi quali quelli esposti dagli onorevoli parlamentari. La Commissione sarebbe lieta, in una prossima occasione, di spiegare più approfonditamente agli onorevoli parlamentari l’impostazione adottata e gli obiettivi perseguiti in quest’ambito.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004178/12

to the Commission

Paolo De Castro (S&D), Herbert Dorfmann (PPE), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Michel Dantin (PPE), Salvatore Caronna (S&D), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Vittorio Prodi (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE) and Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: The market in wine: safeguarding and protecting protected designations of origin outside of the EU

The Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) of ‘Prosecco’ wines, recognised in Italy by the Ministerial Decree of 17 July 2009, is recorded in the EU’s E‐Bacchus register of geographical indication of wines.

Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 of 29 April 2008 sets out rules on how the system of designations of origin and geographical indications of the market in wine functions, including (in Title III, Chapter IV) measures for safeguarding and protecting these from imitation, evocation and misuse.

The use of the word ‘Prosecco’ in brands and labels for wine products is becoming ever more common in several important trade markets outside of the EU (notably Brazil, Australia and New Zealand), as are commercial and promotional ventures that are evocative of the famous Italian grape variety.

There are other cases of the imitation of EU‐certified wine products in non‐EU markets, including the Spanish PDO wine ‘Rioja’ in Latin America or the recurrent imitations of the French PDO ‘Champagne’, evidencing a phenomenon that is becoming ever more widespread and uncontained.

Such commercial practices risk misguiding the end consumers, who might buy products on the market that have no connection at all to the European PDO names. This is in addition to the adverse economic and social repercussions for operators in the PDO wine production chain.

Is the Commission aware of this problem and what initiatives does it intend to adopt — including through the World Trade Organisation and bilateral relations with the relevant non‐EU countries — to counter the spread of such cases and once and for all start firmly protecting PDO products on non‐EU markets?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

The European Commission is aware of cases similar to the one exposed by the Honourable Members of the European Parliament. As part of its trade policy, the EU seeks the protection of our geographical indications in third markets.

The European Commission services will closely study the situation in Brazil and New Zealand and, if appropriate, raise the issue with the relevant authorities to address the situation of Protected Denominations of Origin and Protected Geographical Indications. In the case of Australia, and in the framework of the 2010 EU‐Australia Agreement on trade in wine, the European Commission services are actively pursuing the goal to insert the PDO ‘Prosecco’, as well as the PDOs ‘Conegliano-Valdobbiadene‐ Prosecco’ and, ‘Colli Asolani-Prosecco’ in the list of EU names protected in Australia through the Agreement.

The protection of European geographical indications is one of the most important agricultural interests in any trade negotiation with third countries, where the EU seeks a legal instrument that could be invoked in order to redress the kind of problems you have raised. The Commission would be happy on a future occasion to explain to Honourable Members our approach and objectives in more depth.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004179/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Aumento della produzione di oppio in Afghanistan

A metà aprile le Nazioni Unite hanno riferito che la produzione di oppio in Afghanistan dovrebbe aumentare nel corso del 2012. Ciò è dovuto all'insicurezza, alla corruzione e alle preoccupazioni economiche, da cui ne consegue che la produzione di oppio dovrebbe diffondersi verso un maggior numero di aree rispetto agli ultimi quattro o cinque anni. La coltivazione di oppio genera centinaia di migliaia di dollari ogni anno e sostiene l'insurrezione talebana e l'élite politica in Afghanistan. Secondo l'agenzia di stampa Reuters, nel 2011 il valore della produzione di oppio è più che raddoppiato rispetto all'anno precedente, fino a raggiungere 1,4 miliardi di dollari e al momento rappresenta il 15 % dell'economia.

La relazione dell'ONU dimostra che i livelli di sicurezza sono vincolati all'aumento dei livelli di produzione di oppio e altre relazioni dell'ONU hanno rivelato un aumento delle vittime e dei feriti tra i civili nel corso del 2011, il quale ha raggiunto il livello più alto mai registrato. L'instabilità impedisce ai funzionari del governo di monitorare e sradicare le coltivazioni.

Quest'anno meno della metà delle province afghane sarà probabilmente liberata dall'oppio. Un rappresentante nazionale dell'Ufficio delle Nazioni Unite contro la droga e la criminalità in Afghanistan ha dichiarato al quotidiano britannico The Guardian:«Per molto tempo, quando esistevano 20 province libere dall'oppio, sembrava che fossimo in grado di confinarlo alle province più instabili nel sud del paese. Oggi la situazione è cambiata e la questione della governance rappresenta la chiave di tutto ciò.» Il rappresentante sostiene che la maggior parte del denaro sparisce nelle mani dei «grandi padroni» dell'Afghanistan.

Vi sono pochi segnali che il Governo afghano sia pronto a risolvere il problema. Inoltre, la Banca mondiale prevede che il deficit di bilancio dell'Afghanistan, in seguito al ritiro delle truppe straniere nel 2014, possa raggiungere i 7 miliardi di dollari all'anno. Pertanto, molti agricoltori afghani considerano la produzione di oppio uno strumento per compensare tale differenza.

Il 90 % dell'eroina presente nell'Europa occidentale proviene dall'Afghanistan e l'Unione europea prende parte ai programmi antinarcotici sin dall'inizio del processo di ricostruzione. Secondo il sito web del Servizio europeo per l'azione esterna (SEAE), «la lotta al narcotraffico è al centro di tutti i programmi dell'UE in Afghanistan».

1.	Può l'Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente confermare se i funzionari dell'UE in Afghanistan stanno monitorando la crescita della produzione di oppio?

2.	Quali sono stati alcuni dei risultati tangibili che ha raggiunto negli ultimi anni la partecipazione dell'Unione europea allo sradicamento della coltivazione di oppio?

3.	Ha compiuto l'Unione europea degli sforzi per incoraggiare gli agricoltori afghani a diversificare la produzione con altri prodotti ad alto potenziale di guadagno?

4.	Qual è la valutazione dell'Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente circa l'impegno del governo afghano a favore del processo di eradicazione dell'oppio?

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

(18 giugno 2012)

L’UE è a conoscenza del fatto che la produzione di oppio in Afghanistan è aumentata, come risulta dall’indagine annuale dell’UNODC (l’Ufficio delle Nazioni Unite per il controllo della droga e la prevenzione del crimine) che collega tale aumento, tra l’altro, a problemi di sicurezza in varie province.

L’UE, uno dei principali donatori, fornisce aiuti pubblici allo sviluppo (APS) e assistenza umanitaria all’Afghanistan concentrandosi su tre settori prioritari: sviluppo rurale, governance e sanità, ma anche contribuendo a progetti a sostegno della protezione sociale e della cooperazione regionale. La dipendenza dall’economia della droga in Afghanistan può essere ridotta soltanto attraverso un’impostazione globale e una serie coerente di strumenti, compresi mezzi di sostentamento alternativi, operazioni di polizia, gestione delle frontiere e programmi sociali.

Nelle province situate nelle regioni settentrionale e nordorientale del paese, fortemente interessate in passato dalla produzione di oppio, la coltivazione del papavero da oppio ha registrato un netto calo grazie a una migliore governance e all’accesso a mezzi di sostentamento alternativi unitamente a un ampio sviluppo sociale ed economico.

La diversificazione della crescita economica in Afghanistan, accompagnata dalla fornitura di fonti legali di reddito, dipenderà da una combinazione di fattori, in particolare dal miglioramento delle condizioni di sicurezza. È importante altresì agevolare lo sviluppo del settore privato favorendo un clima propizio alle imprese. Il sostegno dell’UE allo Stato di diritto e alla riforma delle istituzioni giudiziarie afghane contribuisce a creare un contesto più favorevole allo sviluppo economico e agli investimenti del settore privato.

Al tempo stesso, l’UE solleva tali questioni con il governo afghano, direttamente e nell’ambito di meccanismi di coordinamento internazionale. L’Unione ha ripetutamente esortato il governo afghano ad avviare riforme essenziali per combattere in modo efficace la produzione di oppio.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004179/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Opium production in Afghanistan on the rise

In mid‐April, the United Nations reported that opium production is set to rise across Afghanistan in 2012. This is due to insecurity, corruption and economic concerns, with opium production expected to spread to more areas than it has in the past four or five years. The crop generates hundreds of millions of dollars each year, and supports the Taliban’s insurgency and the political elite in Afghanistan. According to Reuters, in 2011 the value of opium production more than doubled from the previous year to USD 1.4 bn and now accounts for 15% of the economy.

The UN report shows that security levels are tied to increased opium production levels, and other UN reports have revealed that civilian deaths and injuries rose in 2011 to the highest level on record. Instability makes it harder for government officials to monitor and eradicate crops.

Under half of Afghanistan’s provinces are likely to be free of opium this year. A country representative of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime in Afghanistan told the UK’s Guardian newspaper: ‘For a long while, when we had 20 opium-free provinces, it seemed that we were able to push the opium back into the most insecure southern provinces. Today that is not any longer the case, and the governance issue is key to that.’ The representative says most of the money disappears into the hands of the ‘big patrons’ of Afghanistan.

There are few signs that the Afghan Government is prepared to clamp down on the problem. Also, the World Bank forecasts that Afghanistan’s budget deficit after the 2014 deadline for foreign troops to withdraw could be as much as USD 7 billion a year. Therefore many Afghan farmers regard opium production as a way to make up the shortfall.

90% of heroin in western Europe originates in Afghanistan, and the EU has been involved in anti-narcotic efforts since the start of the reconstruction process. According to the EEAS website, ‘counter-narcotics is central to all EU programmes in Afghanistan’.

1.	Can the High Representative/Vice-President confirm whether EU officials in Afghanistan are monitoring the rise in opium production?

2.	What have been some of the tangible results achieved over the past years by EU involvement in poppy eradication?

3.	Has the EU made attempts to encourage Afghan farmers to diversify production to other high-earning products?

4.	What is the assessment of the High Representative/Vice-President regarding the Afghan Government’s commitment to the poppy eradication process?

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

(18 June 2012)

The EU is aware of the rise in opium production in Afghanistan as described in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC's) annual survey, which links this increase, inter alia, to the lack of security in a number of provinces.

The EU is one of the major donors providing Official Development Assistance (ODA) and humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan concentrating on three focal areas: rural development, governance and health but also to projects in support of social protection and regional cooperation. Dependence on the drugs economy in Afghanistan can only be reduced through a comprehensive approach and through a coherent range of instruments, including alternative livelihoods, policing, border management and social programmes.

Provinces in north and northeast Afghanistan, formerly strongly affected by opium production, have seen substantial reductions in the cultivation of opium poppy due to improved governance and access to alternative livelihoods in combination with broad based social and economic development.

Diversified economic growth in Afghanistan and with it the provision of licit sources of income will depend on a combination of factors, in particular improved security. It is also important to facilitate private sector development by enabling business environment. EU support for the rule of law and reform of the Afghan justice institutions helps to create a more conducive context for economic development and private sector investments.

At the same time, the EU raises these issues with the Afghan Government directly and in the context of international coordination mechanisms. It has repeatedly warned the Afghan Government that it needs to engage in key reforms, if it is to combat opium effectively.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004180/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Negoziati nucleari dell'Iran

A metà aprile 2012 sono intercorsi colloqui tra i paesi P5+1 (1) e l'Iran, finalizzati alla discussione del programma nucleare iraniano. In seguito a 10 ore di colloqui, secondo il ministro degli Esteri iraniano, Ali Akbar Salehi, si è giunti alla conclusione che le controversie tra le due parti avrebbero potuto essere «velocemente e facilmente» risolte dopo una seconda tornata di colloqui il mese successivo. La prossima tornata avrà luogo il 23 maggio 2012 a Baghdad. In risposta a ciò, il Primo ministro israeliano Benjamin Netanyahu ha replicato che la pausa di cinque settimane tra l'incontro di Istanbul e la prossima tornata è stata «un regalo» all'Iran, che in questo modo dispone di un ulteriore lasso di tempo per continuare ad arricchire uranio. Il Wall Street Journal ha riferito che il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante avrebbe dichiarato che si intende «proseguire verso un processo sostenuto di dialogo serio» e che «ci si attende che gli incontri futuri sfocino in iniziative concrete verso una soluzione globale e negoziata». Secondo la Reuters, Salehi avrebbe dichiarato che la Repubblica islamica potrebbe fare alcune concessioni rispetto all'uranio altamente arricchito in cambio di un alleggerimento delle sanzioni internazionali. Il Wall Street Journal, tuttavia, sostiene che il capo negoziatore iraniano per il nucleare, Saeed Jalili, ha fornito scarse indicazioni rispetto alla disponibilità dell'Iran a conformarsi alle richieste della comunità internazionale, affermando che Teheran avrebbe continuato ad arricchire uranio a livelli prossimi a una purezza del 20 %, vale a dire, a un livello prossimo all'arricchimento per uso militare.

1.	Qual è la posizione dell'AR/VP rispetto alle critiche relative al fatto che i colloqui in materia di nucleare tra l'Iran e il P5+1 hanno consentito al regime iraniano di guadagnare tempo per continuare ad arricchire uranio?

2.	Può l'AR/VP fornire maggiori informazioni circa le

«iniziative concrete» auspicate in seguito a ulteriori incontri e, in particolare, circa i colloqui che si terranno a Baghdad il mese prossimo?

3.	Qual è la posizione dell'AR/VP rispetto alla dichiarazione di Saeed Jalili sull'intenzione dell'Iran di mantenere i livelli di arricchimento a un grado di purezza prossimo al 20 %?

4.	È l'AR/VP pronto a fornire informazioni circa possibili scadenze da imporre nel caso in cui, nonostante il proseguire dei colloqui, l'Iran dovesse mantenere immutato il proprio rifiuto di conformarsi alle richieste internazionali rispetto al suo programma nucleare?

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

(31 luglio 2012)

Nel corso dei negoziati con l'Iran sul suo programma nucleare per conto del gruppo E 3+3, l'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente si è impegnata per riavviare un dialogo serio, che finora ha portato a tre riunioni tra il gruppo e l'Iran nel 2012 (14 aprile a Istanbul, 23-24 maggio a Baghdad e 18-19 giugno a Mosca). L'AR/VP e l'E 3+3 concordano che è necessario che l'Iran adotti misure concrete miranti a rafforzare la fiducia. Nell'ambito delle iniziative in corso dell'E 3+3 per convincere l'Iran a fornire rassicurazioni sulla natura esclusivamente pacifica del suo programma nucleare, gli Stati membri dell'UE hanno deciso severe sanzioni che inviano un forte segnale al paese. Fra di esse vi è il divieto d'importare dall'Iran greggio e prodotti petroliferi e di fornire finanziamenti collegati.

L'incontro di Baghdad era volto ad avviare negoziati sulla sostanza della questione nucleare iraniana. L'E 3+3 aveva avanzato proposte valide e credibili, che riprendevano anche precedenti idee iraniane sulla cooperazione nucleare, in base ai principi di approccio graduale e reciprocità. I colloqui di Baghdad e successivamente di Mosca hanno messo in luce che può esistere un terreno comune, nonostante le notevoli divergenze restanti.

L'AR/VP e l'E 3+3 concordano sul fatto che per far nascere la fiducia occorre anzitutto occuparsi in modo urgente e globale delle operazioni di arricchimento a una purezza del 20 % da parte dell'Iran, comprese quelle dell'impianto di Fordow, difeso da bunker possenti, nell'ambito degli attuali sforzi per trovare una rapida soluzione diplomatica alla contesa sul programma nucleare iraniano.

I recenti sviluppi delle attività nucleari iraniane hanno aumentato le preoccupazioni della comunità internazionale e reso più urgente trovare una soluzione politica. L'AR/VP, per conto dell'E 3+3, resta determinata a risolvere il problema in tempi brevi mediante negoziati.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004180/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Iranian nuclear negotiations

In mid‐April 2012, talks were held between the P5+1 countries (2) and Iran to discuss the latter’s nuclear programme. The conclusion reached after 10 hours of talks, according to Iran’s foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, was that the disputes between the two sides could ‘quickly and easily’ be resolved following a second round of talks next month. The next round is due to take place in Baghdad on 23 May 2012. In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the five-week break between the Istanbul meeting and the next session had given Iran a ‘freebie’, in the sense of extra time to continue to enrich uranium. The Wall Street Journal reported the HR/VP as saying ‘we want now to move to a sustained process of serious dialogue’ and ‘we expect that subsequent meetings will lead to concrete steps towards a comprehensive negotiated solution’. According to Reuters, Salehi has said that the Islamic Republic could make concessions on its higher-grade uranium enrichment in exchange for an easing of international sanctions. According to the Wall Street Journal, however, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, has offered few indications that Iran is ready to comply with the international community’s demands, stating that Tehran would continue to enrich uranium at levels close to 20% purity, that is, near weapons-grade enrichment.

1.	What is the position of the HR/VP with regard to the criticism that the nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 have allowed the Iranian regime to buy time to continue to enrich uranium?

2.	Can the HR/VP offer some information on the

‘concrete steps’ that are expected to be taken following further meetings and, in particular, on the talks to be held in Baghdad next month?

3.	What is the HR/VP’s position with regard to Saeed Jalili’s statement that Iran intends to maintain enrichment levels at close to 20% purity?

4.	Is the HR/VP prepared to offer information on possible deadlines to be imposed if, despite the ongoing negotiations, Iran maintains its refusal to comply with international demands regarding its nuclear programme?

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

(31 July 2012)

The HR/VP, acting on behalf of the E3+3 group in negotiating with Iran over its nuclear programme, has been engaged in efforts to revive a serious dialogue with Iran that, so far, has resulted in three meetings between the group and Iran (14 AprilIstanbul, 23/24 May 2012 Baghdad and 18/19 June 2012 Moscow). The HR/VP and the E3+3 have been united on the need for Iran to take concrete confidence-building steps. As part of the ongoing efforts of the E3+3 to convince Iran to address its concerns about the exclusively peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear programme the EU member states have agreed on severe sanctions sending a strong signal to Iran, including the prohibition on the import of crude oil and petroleum products from Iran and prohibition on the provisions of related financing.

The meeting in Baghdad was aimed at starting negotiations on the substance of the Iranian nuclear issue. The E3+3 had prepared a solid and credible package, also responsive to earlier Iranian ideas on nuclear cooperation, based on the principles of a step-by-step approach and reciprocity. The talks in Baghdad and subsequently in Moscow made it clear that there may be some common ground, despite significant differences that remain.

The HR/VP and the E3+3 are united that as a first step towards confidence building Iran's 20% enrichment activities including the deeply bunkered enrichment facility at Fordow must be addressed urgently and comprehensively as part of the ongoing efforts to seek a swift diplomatic resolution of the conflict over Iran's nuclear programme.

Recent developments in Iran's nuclear activities have increased the concerns of the international community and the urgent need to find a political solution. The HR/VP, acting on behalf of the E3+3, remains determined to resolve this problem in the near term through negotiations.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004181/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Infiltrazione di Hizb ut-Tahrir nell'esercito pakistano

Nel mese di giugno 2011, il quotidiano britannico The Independent ha riferito che un comandante dell'esercito pakistano, il Brigadiere Ali Khan, alto ufficiale presso il quartiere generale dell'esercito a Rawalpindi, è stato arrestato il 5 maggio 2011 con l'accusa di essere affiliato al gruppo islamico Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) e interrogato. Si sospetta che il gruppo si sia infiltrato nell'esercito pakistano nel corso degli ultimi 15 anni per organizzare un colpo di stato. Secondo un ex membro dell'HT, Maajid Nawaz, che da allora ha istituito una fondazione per combattere l'estremismo islamico, chiamata Quilliam, il gruppo ha cercato di infiltrasi nell'esercito pakistano attraverso due approcci. «Il primo è quello di scoprire i legami familiari» e il «secondo è quello di reclutarli nel corso di viaggi all'estero».

L'obiettivo principale dell'HT è quello di stabilire un califfato nel mondo musulmano. Ciò comporterebbe l'istituzione della legge islamica della Sharia; se da un lato l'organizzazione sostiene di essere pacifica, dall'altro è anche nota per il suo l'incitamento all'odio e alla violenza. Negli ultimi anni, almeno due ufficiali dell'esercito sono stati giudicati dalla corte marziale per affiliazioni a Hizb ut-Tahrir. Nel 2004, secondo la BBC, numerosi ufficiali di basso rango sono stati condannati per attentati alla vita dell'ex presidente Pervez Musharraf. Di conseguenza, si nutrono maggiori preoccupazioni circa l'estremismo religioso all'interno dei ranghi delle forze armate pakistane.

1.	Qual è la posizione dell'Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente sulle relazioni di Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) e di altri gruppi estremisti che si sono infiltrati nei ranghi dell'esercito pakistano?

2.	Ha discusso l'Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente la questione con i funzionari pakistani competenti? In caso affermativo, può specificare quali sono stati gli esiti?

3.	Ha affrontato l'Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente le preoccupazioni circa l'operato degli estremisti islamici all'interno dell'esercito pakistano con altri attori regionali?

4.	Secondo i funzionari dell'UE in Pakistan, quanto è seria la minaccia degli elementi estremisti che operano all'interno dell'esercito pakistano?

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

(25 luglio 2012)

L’AR/VP osserva che Hizb ut-Tahrir è un’organizzazione vietata in Pakistan e che l’esercito pakistano assicura che il brigadiere Ali Khan è stato arrestato.

L'UE è consapevole del fatto che fra i membri dei servizi statali e delle forze armate vi sono estremisti o simpatizzanti di gruppi islamici.

Le autorità pakistane non ritengono opportuno affrontare tali questioni nel dialogo con i paesi terzi: pertanto questo argomento non è stato oggetto di discussione. In seguito all'adozione di un nuovo quadro politico, il piano d’impegno UE-Pakistan, e all’avvio da parte dell’AR/VP del dialogo strategico il 5 giugno a Islamabad, avranno inizio nuovi dialoghi settoriali sulla sicurezza. Ciò consentirà all'UE di sollevare una serie di questioni in materia di sicurezza, fra cui la lotta al terrorismo e la non proliferazione.

L'UE non ha discusso della presenza di islamisti nelle milizie pakistane con altri interlocutori regionali, né altri attori hanno sollevato la questione. Tuttavia l'Unione europea e la sua delegazione a Islamabad continueranno a seguire da vicino le questioni e gli sviluppi in materia di sicurezza in Pakistan, in stretta cooperazione con gli Stati membri.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004181/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Infiltration by Hizb ut-Tahrir in Pakistan's military

In June 2011, the UK’s Independent newspaper reported that a Pakistani army commander, Brigadier Ali Khan, a senior officer at the army’s general headquarters in Rawalpindi, had been detained on 5 May 2011 and interrogated on charges of being linked to the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT). The group has been suspected of infiltrating the Pakistani military over the past 15 years, in order to orchestrate a coup. According to a former member of HT, Maajid Nawaz, who has since set up a foundation to tackle Islamic extremism called Quilliam, the group attempts to infiltrate the Pakistan army through two approaches. ‘The first is to explore family connections’, and the ‘second is to recruit them when they make foreign trips’.

The chief aim of HT is to establish a caliphate in the Muslim world. This would entail the establishment of Islamic sharia law, and while it claims to be a peaceful organisation, it is also known to incite hatred and violence. At least two army officers in recent years have been court-martialled for links with Hizb ut-Tahrir. In 2004, according to the BBC, a number of low-ranking officers were convicted in connection with attempts on the life of former President Pervez Musharraf. As a result, there has been an increase in concerns about religious extremism within among the ranks of Pakistan’s armed forces.

1.	What is the position of the High Representative/Vice-President on reports of Hizb ut‐Tahrir (HT) and other extremist groups infiltrating the ranks of the Pakistani military?

2.	Has the High Representative/Vice-President discussed this topic with the relevant Pakistani officials? If so, can she specify some of the outcomes?

3.	Has the High Representative/Vice-President addressed concerns over Islamists operating within the Pakistani military with other regional actors?

4.	According to EU officials in Pakistan, how serious is the threat posed by extremist elements operating inside the Pakistani military?

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

(25 July 2012)

The HR/VP notes that Hizb ut-Tahrir is a banned organisation in Pakistan, and that the Pakistani army ensure that Brigadier Ali Khan was detained.

The EU is aware that extremists or sympathizers include members of state services and the armed forces.

The Pakistani authorities consider that such questions should not be addressed in dialogue with third countries. This topic has not therefore been discussed with them. Following adoption of a new political framework, the EU‐Pakistan Engagement Plan, and the launch by the HR/VP of the strategic dialogue in Islamabad on 5 June, new sector dialogues on security will start. This will enable the EU to raise issues on a range of security concerns including counter-terrorism and non-proliferation, among others.

The EU has not addressed the issue of Islamists in the Pakistani military with other regional actors, nor has the issue been raised by other actors. However the EU and its Delegation in Islamabad will continue to follow security concerns and developments in Pakistan closely, in close cooperation with the Member States.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004182/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Infanticidio in Etiopia

Secondo una relazione pubblicata dal quotidiano britannico The Telegraph il 14 aprile, nella remota valle del corso finale del fiume Omo, nell'Etiopia sud-occidentale, una tribù nota come i Kara conduce regolarmente pratiche di infanticidio su bambini nati fuori dal matrimonio. Le coppie sposate dovrebbero innanzitutto richiedere l'autorizzazione al matrimonio, ma senza l'uso di contraccettivi, è comune incorrere in gravidanze accidentali. Si ritiene che questi bambini siano maledetti e sporchi e che portino sfortuna alla famiglia. Sono considerati come il male o ciò che loro definiscono mingi. Da molte generazioni, la tribù dei Kara e altre tribù quali i Banna e gli Hamer hanno abbandonato questi bambini in mezzo ai cespugli affinché morissero di fame o fossero mangiati da animali selvatici. Non esistono cifre ufficiali ma si stima che il numero dei bambini uccisi ogni anno ammonti a 300. Sono stati registrati casi di infanticidio in Africa, in paesi quali il Camerun, la Liberia, il Madagascar, il Senegal, la Nigeria e il Benin.

In Etiopia, un membro della tribù dei Kara è attualmente impegnato per porre fine all'infanticidio attraverso un'organizzazione chiamata Omo Child, la quale protegge i bambini abbandonati. Attualmente essa collabora con il Governo etiope attraverso un partenariato e ospita trenta bambini.

1.	È l'AR/VP a conoscenza dei casi di infanticidio tra le tribù nell'Etiopia sud-occidentale?

2.	Nell'ambito del documento di strategia nazionale dell'Etiopia e del programma indicativo nazionale per il periodo 2008-2013, quali disposizioni sono state elaborate per i bambini etiopi che vivono in aree remote del paese e che corrono il rischio di subire pratiche tribali di infanticidio?

3.	È l'AR/VP pronto a offrire sostegno a organizzazioni come

Omo Child

?

4.	Quali passi si stanno compiendo per migliorare le opportunità di istruzione per gli individui che vivono in aree dell'Etiopia sud-occidentale?

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

(8 giugno 2012)

1.	L’UE è al corrente dei casi di infanticidio che si sono verificati in tre tribù etiopi nella regione a Sud del fiume Omo. Benché il governo etiope abbia proibito tali uccisioni rituali, sembra che l’infanticidio continui ad essere praticato.

2.

L’azione più efficace a lungo termine contro le pratiche tribali come l’infanticidio è l’istruzione. Il programma per la tutela dei servizi di base, promosso nell’ambito della strategia nazionale 2008-2013 dell’UE per l’Etiopia, ha beneficiato di un finanziamento dell’UE. Si tratta di un programma attuato dal governo etiope e finanziato da diversi donatori in cui la UE e altri donatori contribuiscono all’intento governativo di realizzare alcuni obiettivi di sviluppo per il millennio. Il programma sovvenziona, tra l’altro, le spese ricorrenti nel settore dell’istruzione e ha permesso, secondo i dati ufficiali del governo, di ottenere un tasso di iscrizione agli istituti di istruzione primaria nel 2010/2011 del 96,4 %.

3.	L’UE offre alle ONG come Omo Child la possibilità di partecipare all’invito dell’UE a presentare proposte a livello locale e globale rivolto alle organizzazioni della società civile tra cui quelle che si occupano specificamente di categorie vulnerabili come i bambini.

4.

Il governo etiope dispone di un programma di sviluppo del settore dell’istruzione che prevede l’istruzione elementare per tutti entro il 2015. Insieme con l’UE e gli altri partner per lo sviluppo, ha stanziato considerevoli risorse per raggiungere questo obiettivo. È opportuno ricordare i suoi recenti investimenti nella costruzione di 2000 nuove scuole e l’assunzione di 100 000 nuovi insegnanti. Il governo sta inoltre attuando un programma per migliorare la qualità degli insegnanti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004182/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Fiorello Provera (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Infanticide in Ethiopia

According to a report published in the UK’s Telegraph on 14 April, in the remote valley of the lower Omo River in south-west Ethiopia, a tribe known as the Kara regularly conducts a practice of infanticide on children who are born out of wedlock. Married couples are expected to seek permission to get married first, but without contraception it is common to have accidental pregnancies. The babies are believed to be cursed and unclean, and bring bad luck to a family. They are considered evil or, what they call mingi. For many generations, the Kara and some other tribes such as the Banna and Hamer have been placing them out in the bush to starve or be eaten by wild animals. There are no official figures, but the numbers of children killed each year is estimated to be 300. Cases of infanticide have been recorded across Africa in countries such as Cameroon, Liberia, Madagascar, Senegal, Nigeria and Benin.

In Ethiopia, a member of the Kara tribe is now working to end infanticide through an organisation called Omo Child. The organisation protects children who have been abandoned. The organisation is now working with the Ethiopian Government through a partnership, and at present Omo Child shelters thirty children.

1.	Is the HR/VP aware of cases of infanticide among tribes in south-west Ethiopia?

2.	Under Ethiopia’s Country Strategy Paper and National Indicative Programme for 2008-2013, what provisions are made for Ethiopian children who live in remote parts of the country, who are vulnerable to tribal practices of infanticide?

3.	Is the HR/VP prepared to offer support to organisations such as Omo Child?

4.	What steps are being taken to improve educational opportunities for individuals living in parts of Ethiopia’s south-west region?

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

(8 June 2012)

1.	The EU is aware of cases of infanticide occurring in three Ethiopian tribes in the region of South Omo. The government of Ethiopia has outlawed these ritualistic killings. It appears however, that despite the efforts of the government, the practice of infanticide continues.

2.

In the long term, the most promising action against tribal practices such as infanticide is education. Under the EU Country Strategy 2008-2013 for Ethiopia, the Protection of Basic Services (PBS) programme has benefited from EU‐financing. PBS is a multi-donor programme led by the Government of Ethiopia in which the EU and other donors contribute to the government's efforts to achieve several Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). PBS supports — amongst others — the recurrent expenditures in the education sector — which has allowed gross enrolment rates for primary education to attain 96.4% in 2010/2011, according to official government data.

3.	The EU offers NGOs like Omo Child to participate in the EU's global and local call for proposals for Civil Society Organisations, some of which are specifically target at vulnerable groups such as children.

4.

The Ethiopian government has an Education Sector Development Programme that plans universal primary education by 2015. Together with the EU and other Development Partners, it has invested considerable resources to attain this objective. Of note is its recent investment in the construction of 2 000 new schools, and the recruitment of 100 000 new teachers. The government is also implementing a program to increase the quality of teachers.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P-004183/12

aan de Commissie

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 april 2012)

Betreft: Europese ontwikkelingshulp naar Vietnam

Volgens de mensenrechtenorganisatie Human Rights Watch gaat het op het vlak van mensenrechten en democratie van kwaad naar erger in de communistische dictatuur van Vietnam (Human Rights Watch, Systematic crackdown on human rights, 23 januari 2012). Gedurende 2011 voerde het regime een steeds hardere repressie tegen dissidenten.

— Kan de Commissie mij meedelen hoeveel ontwikkelingshulp zij reeds heeft gepompt in projecten en programma's op het vlak van democratie en mensenrechten in Vietnam en mij een overzicht geven van deze projecten en programma's?

— Denkt de Commissie er niet aan om deze hulp  terug te schroeven in het licht van bovenstaande ontwikkelingen?

Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie

(12 juni 2012)

De Commissie spant zich sinds 2004 in om in Vietnam de mensenrechten te bevorderen en te beschermen en de democratie en de rechtsstaat te versterken. In totaal wordt voor een bedrag van 28,5 miljoen euro steun verleend via de volgende door de EU gefinancierde programma's en projecten:

—	financieringsprojecten (1,8 miljoen euro) in het kader van het Europees Instrument voor democratie en mensenrechten (EIDHR) ter bescherming van sociaaleconomische mensenrechten en rechten van vrouwen, kinderen en specifieke kwetsbare groepen (zoals personen met een handicap of hiv-/aidspatiënten);

—

het in 2009 goedgekeurde en tot 2015 lopende programma voor justitiële samenwerking (Justice Partnership Programme — 18,7 miljoen euro) ter financiering van specifieke maatregelen voor institutionele capaciteitsopbouw om de Vietnamese overheid te ondersteunen bij de hervorming van de juridische sector en het gerechtelijk apparaat;

—

het in 2009 afgeronde programma voor institutionele ondersteuning (Institutional Support Programme — 8 miljoen euro), dat erop gericht was de nationale assemblee en de drie gerechtelijke instellingen (het ministerie van Justitie, het Hooggerechtshof en het centrale openbaar ministerie) te ondersteunen  ter versterking van de democratie en de rechtsstaat.

De Europese Unie is niet van plan om haar ontwikkelingssteun op  terreinen als goed bestuur, de rechtsstaat en de mensenrechten in Vietnam  terug te schroeven. Deze steun kwam immers de bevordering van economische en sociale rechten in Vietnam en de hervorming van het rechtsstelsel en het gerechtelijk apparaat ten goede. De EU is van mening dat politieke druk en constructieve betrokkenheid de beste mogelijkheden bieden om Vietnam in de richting van een meer open samenleving op basis van de rechtsstaat te doen evolueren.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004183/12

to the Commission

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: European development aid to Vietnam

According to the human rights organisation Human Rights Watch, the situation is going from bad to worse as regards human rights and democracy in the communist dictatorship of Vietnam (Human Rights Watch, Systematic crackdown on human rights, 23 January 2012). During 2011, the regime intensified its repression of dissidents.

— Can the Commission indicate how much development assistance it has already pumped into projects and programmes in the area of democracy and human rights in Vietnam, and give an overview of these projects and programmes?

— Is the Commission not considering scaling down that assistance in view of the aforementioned developments?

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

(12 June 2012)

Since 2004, the Commission has been active in promoting and protecting human rights, strengthening democracy and reinforcing the rule of law in Vietnam through EU‐funded programmes and projects for a total value of EUR 28.5 million, as follows:

—	‘European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights’ (EIDHR) financing projects for EUR 1.8 million for the protection of socioeconomic human rights as well as the rights of women, children and specific vulnerable groups (i.e. people with disabilities or living with HIV/AIDS);

—	‘Justice Partnership Programme’ (EUR 18.7 million) approved in 2009 and running until 2015, financing institutional capacity building interventions to support the Government of Vietnam in the reform of its legal and judicial sectors;

—

‘Institutional Support Programme’ (EUR 8 million) ended in 2009 and aimed at supporting the National Assembly and the three justice sector institutions (Ministry of Justice, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuracy) with the objective of strengthening democracy and the rule of law.

The EU is not considering scaling down development assistance in the area of governance, rule of law and human rights to Vietnam, as such assistance has made a positive contribution to promoting economic and social rights in Vietnam, as well as supporting legal and judicial reform. The EU takes the view that a combination of political pressure and constructive engagement bears the greatest chance of influencing Vietnam towards a more open society based upon the rule of law.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004184/12

an die Kommission

Britta Reimers (ALDE)

(23. April 2012)

Betrifft: Verzögerungen bei Zulassungen von GVO

Der Ministerrat verabschiedete im Dezember 2008 einstimmig Schlussfolgerungen, in denen unter anderem gefordert wird, „dass Anträge weiterhin ohne unnötige Verzögerungen bearbeitet und die einschlägigen internationalen Verpflichtungen der EG erfüllt werden müssen“. Die einschlägige EU-Gesetzgebung (insbesondere Artikel 7 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1829/2003) bestimmt, dass die Kommission den Mitgliedstaaten Anträge auf Zulassung von GVO mit positiver EFSA-Sicherheitsbewertung innerhalb von höchstens drei Monaten zur Abstimmung über eine mögliche Zulassung vorlegt.

1.	Kann die Kommission bestätigen, dass zwischen 2004 und 2011 mehr als doppelt so viele Anträge eingingen wie Zulassungen erteilt wurden?

2.	Wie viele Anträge auf Zulassung von GVO mit positiver EFSA-Sicherheitsbewertung liegen der Kommission derzeit vor?

3.	Wie viele davon wurden fristgerecht dem zuständigen Ständigen Ausschuss und/oder der Folgeinstanz (Rat bzw. Berufungsausschuss) zur Abstimmung vorgelegt?

4.	Wie begründet die Kommission die Nichteinhaltung der oben genannten gesetzlich vorgesehenen Fristen?

Antwort von Herrn Dalli im Namen der Kommission

(22. Juni 2012)

1.	Von 2004 bis Ende 2011 gingen bei der EFSA

1.	Von 2004 bis Ende 2011 gingen bei der EFSA

 (3) 102 Anträge auf Zulassung von GVO gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1829/2003 ein. Acht dieser Anträge wurden wieder zurückgezogen. Die EFSA gab 38 wissenschaftliche Gutachten zu diesen Anträgen ab. Die übrigen 56 Anträge sind noch anhängig, entweder weil die Sicherheitsbewertung noch nicht abgeschlossen ist, die Antragsdossiers unvollständig sind oder keine ausreichenden Informationen zur Untermauerung des Antrags vorliegen. Ende 2011 lag für 29 der von der EFSA bereits bewerteten GVO eine Zulassung der Kommission vor.

2.	Derzeit sind bei der Kommission acht Anträge zur Zulassung anhängig, für die die EFSA bereits ein Gutachten abgegeben hat.

3.	Die meisten Anträge mit EFSA-Gutachten wurden dem Ständigen Ausschuss für die Lebensmittelkette und Tiergesundheit erst nach Ablauf der Dreimonatsfrist vorgelegt.

4.

Die vom Mitgesetzgeber festgelegte Frist von drei Monaten ist in der Praxis sehr knapp bemessen. Es sei darauf hingewiesen, dass die Kommission nach der Veröffentlichung der EFSA-Gutachten eine einmonatige öffentliche Konsultation dazu durchführt. Innerhalb eines Monats übermittelt die Kommission der EFSA dann die wissenschaftlichen Anmerkungen zur Prüfung. Auf Antrag der Mitgliedstaaten stellt die EFSA ihr wissenschaftliches Gutachten gemäß den Schlussfolgerungen des Rats

„Umwelt“ aus dem Jahr 2008 dem Ständigen Ausschuss für die Lebensmittelkette und Tiergesundheit vor, damit die Mitgliedstaaten eventuell verbleibende Zweifel klären können. Die Entscheidung wird dann durch Abstimmung bei der darauffolgenden Sitzung des Ausschusses getroffen. Dabei muss die Kommission strenge interne Verfahrensregeln beachten, bevor sie den Mitgliedstaaten mindestens 10 Tage vor der Abstimmung einen Zulassungsentwurf zukommen lässt. Außerdem werden etwaige weitere Anmerkungen der Interessenträger überprüft und falls erforderlich hält die Kommission noch einmal Rücksprache mit der EFSA, um die Unbedenklichkeit des Produkts bestätigen zu lassen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004184/12

to the Commission

Britta Reimers (ALDE)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Delays in approvals for genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

In December 2008, the Council of Ministers unanimously agreed on conclusions that point, among other things, to the ‘necessity of continuing processing applications without undue delays and respecting the relevant EC international obligations’. The relevant EU legislation (in particular Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003) states that the Commission should submit applications for the approval of GMOs that have a clean bill of health from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to the Member States within a maximum of three months to enable a decision to be made on possible approval.

1.	Can the Commission confirm that between 2004 and 2011 more than twice as many applications were received as approvals granted?

2.	How many applications for approval of GMOs that have a clean bill of health from the EFSA does the Commission currently have on its desk?

3.	How many of these have been presented to the responsible standing committee and/or the next body in line (the Council or the appeal board) for a decision within the given deadline?

4.	How does the Commission explain the failure to comply with the statutory deadlines mentioned above?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

1.	102 applications for GMO authorisation were submitted to EFSA

1.	102 applications for GMO authorisation were submitted to EFSA

 (4) under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from 2004 to end of 2011, eight of which were withdrawn. EFSA adopted 38 scientific opinions on these applications. The 56 other applications are pending due to the ongoing risk assessment, incomplete files or insufficient information to support the application. End 2011, 29 of these GMOs with an EFSA's scientific opinion were approved by the Commission.

2.	To date, eight applications with an EFSA scientific opinion are pending in the Commission for approval.

3.	Most applications with an EFSA opinion were presented to the SCFCAH

3.	Most applications with an EFSA opinion were presented to the SCFCAH

 (5) after the three-month deadline.

4.

The three-month deadline set by the co-legislator is very tight in practice. It is reminded that the Commission launches a one month public consultation on EFSA's opinions after their publication. The Commission sends the scientific comments to EFSA for analysis within one month. Upon request of the Member States, and in line with the conclusions of the 2008 Environment Council, EFSA presents its scientific opinion in the SCFCAH where Member States can clarify any remaining doubts. The decision is then put for vote at the following SCFCAH meeting, knowing that the Commission must follow strict internal procedures prior to sending a draft authorisation to the Member States 10 days before the vote. Any additional comments from stakeholders are also scrutinized and, when needed, the Commission goes back to EFSA to confirm the safety of the product.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004185/12

an die Kommission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(23. April 2012)

Betrifft: Mittel aus dem Siebten Rahmenprogramm für das Kernkraftwerk Zwentendorf

In ihrer Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-001409/2012 von Hans-Peter Martin zu Fördermitteln für die Erforschung der Endlagerung von Atommüll schreibt Kommissarin Geoghegan-Quinn, dass im Siebten Euratom-Rahmenprogramm die Forschungstätigkeiten im Nuklearbereich die vier Hauptbereiche „Entsorgung radioaktiver Endabfälle, Reaktorsysteme, Strahlenschutz, Infrastruktur und Humanressourcen“ umfassen. Im österreichischen Zwentendorf befindet sich das nie in den Netzbetrieb gegangene Kernkraftwerk Zwentendorf. Heute wird es unter anderem von Energieunternehmen für Fortbildungsseminare genutzt.

— Werden im Rahmen der Forschungstätigkeit im Siebten Rahmenprogramm Seminare, Fortbildungen oder andere Veranstaltungen am österreichischen Kernkraftwerksstandort Zwentendorf finanziell oder anderweitig unterstützt?

— Gibt es in einem der vier Hauptbereiche Fördermittel, die in Zusammenhang mit dem österreichischen Kernkraftwerksstandort Zwentendorf eingesetzt werden?

Antwort von Frau Geoghegan-Quinn im Namen der Kommission

(21. Juni 2012)

Im Zuge des Siebten Rahmenprogramms der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft für Forschungs‐ und Ausbildungsmaßnahmen im Nuklearbereich (2007-2011) wurden keine Forschungsmaßnahmen, Seminare, Schulungen oder Kurse am Standort des österreichischen Kernkraftwerks Zwentendorf gefördert.

Im Zusammenhang mit dieser österreichischen Anlage ist auch keine Förderung vorgesehen. Eine Förderung wäre im Rahmen der jährlichen Aufforderung der Kommission zur Einreichung von Vorschlägen zum Thema Kernspaltung möglich.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004185/12

to the Commission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Funds from the Seventh Framework Programme for the Zwentendorf nuclear power plant

In her reply to my written question No E‐001409/2012 on financial support for research into a final storage solution for nuclear waste, Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn writes that research activities under the Seventh Euratom Framework Programme cover four main areas: ‘management of ultimate radioactive waste, reactor systems, radiation protection, infrastructures and human resources’. Zwentendorf in Austria is the location of a nuclear power plant that has never been in productive operation. It is currently used by energy companies as a venue for training seminars, among other things.

— Do the research activities covered by the Seventh Framework Programme include financial or other support for seminars, training courses or other events held at the Zwentendorf nuclear site in Austria?

— Is funding from any of the four main areas identified used in connection with the Zwentendorf nuclear site in Austria?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

The Seventh Framework Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community for nuclear research and training activities (2007-2011) did not support research activities, seminars, training or courses at the Austrian nuclear power plant site Zwentendorf.

In conjunction with this infrastructure in Austria, no funding has been forecasted. Funding would be possible following a proposal in response to a topic identified within the Commission's yearly fission call.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004186/12

an die Kommission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(23. April 2012)

Betrifft: Fördermittel im Bereich Atomforschung

In ihrer Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-001409/2012 von Hans-Peter Martin zu Fördermitteln für die Erforschung der Endlagerung von Atommüll schreibt Kommissarin Geoghegan-Quinn, dass „für die Umsetzung der indirekten Maßnahmen innerhalb des Siebten Rahmenprogramms der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft […] 405,245 Mio. EUR einschließlich Verwaltungskosten vorgesehen“ sind.

— Welche Mittel sind innerhalb des Siebten Rahmenprogramms für direkte Maßnahmen vorgesehen?

— Welche Mittel sind im EU-Forschungsbudget insgesamt für Atomforschung vorgesehen oder haben mit dem Bereich Nuklearenergie zu tun?

— In welchen Mitgliedstaaten wurden die meisten Fördermittel aus den genannten 405,245 Mio. EUR eingesetzt?

Antwort von Frau Geoghegan-Quinn im Namen der Kommission

(22. Juni 2012)

Die Mittel, die durch das Siebte Rahmenprogramm für den Zeitraum 2007-2013 für direkte Maßnahmen (Tätigkeiten der gemeinsamen Forschungsstelle der Europäischen Kommission (JRC) im Bereich Nuklearenergie) bereitgestellt werden, belaufen sich auf insgesamt 750 Mio. EUR und decken vor allem Sicherheit, Prävention und Überwachung im Bereich Nuklearenergie ab.

Die im EU-Forschungsbudget (Vorschlag zu „Horizont 2020“) für Forschung im Bereich Nuklearenergie vorgesehenen Mittel sind: Kernspaltung (355 Mio. EUR), Kernfusion (709 Mio. EUR), (Sicherheits‐ und Präventions-) Tätigkeiten des JRC im Bereich Nuklearenergie (724 Mio. EUR) und für ITER außerhalb des mehrjährigen Finanzrahmens in einem separaten zusätzlichen Programm für den Zeitraum 2014-2018 vorgesehene Finanzhilfen (2,573 Mio. EUR).

Mit den Mitteln für Kernspaltungsforschung in Höhe von 405 Mio. EUR wurden vornehmlich Tätigkeiten in Frankreich (51 Mio. EUR), Deutschland (40 Mio. EUR), dem Vereinigten Königreich (22 Mio. EUR), Spanien (15 Mio. EUR), Italien (15 Mio. EUR), Belgien (12 Mio. EUR), Schweden (14 Mio. EUR), Finnland (13 Mio. EUR), den Niederlanden (10 Mio. EUR), der Schweiz (4,5 Mio. EUR), der Tschechischen Republik (2 Mio. EUR) und Ungarn (1,5 Mio. EUR) unterstützt.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004186/12

to the Commission

Hans-Peter Martin (NI)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Financial support in the area of nuclear research

In her reply to Written Question E‐001409/2012 from Hans-Peter Martin on financial support for research into a final storage solution for nuclear waste, Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn writes that ‘the maximum amount for implementation of the indirect actions under the Seventh Framework Programme (FP) of the European Atomic Energy Community […] is EUR 405.245 million, including administrative costs.’

— What funding is provided within the Seventh Framework Programme for direct actions?

— Within the EU research budget as a whole, what funding is provided for nuclear research or is related to nuclear energy?

— In which Member States was the most funding from the aforementioned EUR 405.245 million spent?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

Resources provided under the Seventh Framework Programme for direct actions (Commission's Joint Research Center's (JRC) nuclear activities) for the period 2007-2013 are reaching a total of EUR 750 million mainly covering nuclear safety, safeguards and security activities.

Resources foreseen in the EU research budget (Horizon 2020 proposal) for nuclear research are: fission (EUR 355 million), fusion (EUR 709 million), JRC nuclear (safety and safeguards) activities (EUR 724 million), and the funding for ITER outside the multiannual financial frameworkin a separate supplementary programme (EUR 2.573 million) for the period 2014-2018.

The EUR 405 million fission research budget was mainly supporting activities in France (EUR 51 million), Germany (EUR 40 million), the United Kingdom (EUR 22 million), Spain (EUR 15 million), Italy (EUR 15 million), Belgium (EUR 12 million), Sweden (EUR 14 million), Finland (EUR 13 million), The Netherlands (EUR 10 million), Switzerland (EUR 4.5 million), the Czech Republic (EUR 2 million) and Hungary (EUR 1.5 million).

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004187/12

aan de Commissie

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 april 2012)

Betreft: Europese financiering ENAR

Kan de Commissie mij meedelen hoeveel financiële middelen zij aan de organisatie ENAR heeft verstrekt in 2009, 2010 en 2011?

Kan de Commissie mij tevens aanduiden naar welke projecten dit geld vloeide en het concrete, aantoonbare nut van deze financiering aantonen?

Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie

(15 juni 2012)

In overeenstemming met Besluit nr. 1672/2006 tot vaststelling van het Progress-programma (2007-2013) draagt de Commissie bij in de vaste operationele kosten van Europese niet-gouvernementele organisaties (ngo's) die discriminatie bestrijden. In dit verband heeft de Commissie na een oproep tot het indienen van voorstellen in 2007 en een volgende oproep in 2010 het Europees netwerk tegen racisme (ENAR) geselecteerd als begunstigde van een partnerschapskaderovereenkomst voor de periode van 1 januari 2008 tot en met 31 december 2010 en van 1 januari 2011 tot en met 31 december 2013.

Naar aanleiding van de partnerschapskaderovereenkomst en na evaluatie van het ingediende jaarlijkse werkprogramma heeft ENAR een subsidie gekregen van 961 300,47 EUR (83,55 % van de totale kosten van de organisatie) voor de periode van 1 januari 2009 tot en met 31 december 2009, van 967 553,88 EUR (82,55 % van de totale kosten) voor de periode van 1 januari 2010 tot en met 31 december 2010, en van 983 983,02 EUR (81,55 % van de totale kosten) voor de periode van 1 januari 2011 tot en met 31 december 2011.

De subsidie wordt aan ENAR betaald in zijn hoedanigheid van overkoepelende Europese organisatie van ngo's die strijden tegen discriminatie op grond van geloofsovertuiging en etnische afkomst.

—	De activiteiten in de werkprogramma's van ENAR zijn op basis van de volgende doelstellingen ingedeeld:

—	een progressief verhaal over gelijkheid en diversiteit formuleren en onder de aandacht brengen;

—	de capaciteit van het netwerk vergroten om zijn strategie goed uit te voeren;

—	nieuwe stappen ondernemen op weg naar financiële stabiliteit en duurzame ontwikkeling.

Het geachte Parlementslid kan meer informatie over het ENAR-werkprogramma vinden op de website van ENAR (6).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004187/12

to the Commission

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: European funding for ENAR

Can the Commission tell me how much funding it gave to ENAR (European Network Against Racism) in 2009, 2010 and 2011?

Can the Commission also tell me which projects received the money, and indicate the actual, demonstrable benefit of this funding?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

In accordance with the decision No 1672/2006 establishing the Progress Programme (2007-2013) the Commission supports the running operational costs of European non-governmental organisations (NGOs) fighting against discrimination. In this context and following a call for proposals in 2007 and a further call in 2010, the Commission has selected the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) as beneficiary of a Framework Partnership Agreement for the periods 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2010 and 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2013.

Following the framework Partnership Agreement and after evaluation of the submitted annual work programme ENAR received a grant of EUR 961 300,47 (83,55 % of its total costs) for the period 1st January 2009 to 31st December 2009, a grant of EUR 967 553,88 (82,55 % of its total costs) for the period 1st January 2010 to 31st December 2010 and a grant of EUR 983 983,02 (81,55 % of its total costs) for the period 1st January 2011 to 31st December 2011.

The grant is paid to ENAR as a European umbrella organisation of NGOs fighting against discrimination on grounds of religious and ethnic origin.

The activities of ENAR's work programmes are structured on the basis of the following objectives:

—	articulating and promoting a progressive narrative on equality and diversity;

—	enhancing the capacity of the network to deliver its strategy;

—	making a step change towards financial stability and sustainability.

The Honourable Member may find more detailed information about ENAR's work programme on the ENAR website (7).

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004188/12

aan de Commissie

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 april 2012)

Betreft: Onderhandelingen vrije handelsovereenkomst met Vietnam

Volgens de mensenrechtenorganisatie Human Rights Watch gaat het op het vlak van mensenrechten en democratie van kwaad naar erger in de communistische dictatuur van Vietnam (Human Rights Watch, Systematic crackdown on human rights, 23 januari 2012). Gedurende 2011 voerde het regime een steeds hardere repressie tegen dissidenten. Talrijke mensenrechtenactivisten werden zonder enige vorm van proces gearresteerd en opgesloten.

Ondanks deze ontwikkelingen zouden de voorbereidingen voor de onderhandelingen tussen de Commissie en het Vietnamese regime over een vrije handelsovereenkomst zijn afgerond. Gespecialiseerde media wijzen er op dat de bevoegde commissaris daarbij het onderwerp „democratie en mensenrechten” nooit  ter sprake bracht (Ivan Delibasic, „European Commission potentially split over trade deal with Vietnam”, New Europe, 8-14 april 2012) ondanks een expliciete oproep van onder andere Human Rights Watch (Human Rights Watch, „European Union: press Vietnam to respect human rights”, 11 januari 2012). Zeker sinds de inwerkingtreding van het Verdrag van Lissabon is de Commissie op het vlak van buitenlandse handel ertoe verplicht om de democratie en mensenrechten in derde landen te ondersteunen.

— Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de steeds verslechterende situatie op het vlak van mensenrechten en democratie in Vietnam?

— Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie het dat onderhandelingen over een vrije handelsovereenkomst met deze communistische dictatuur worden opgestart zonder dat in de voorbereidingen ervan de situatie op het vlak van mensenrechten en democratie werd aangekaart?

— Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie het überhaupt dat met een dergelijke staat onderhandelingen worden aangeknoopt zonder dat er een verbetering is op het vlak van democratie en mensenrechten?

— Is de Commissie op dit vlak niet gebonden door het Verdrag van Lissabon?

— Vormt dit geen slecht signaal?

Antwoord van de heer De Gucht namens de Commissie

(30 mei 2012)

De Europese Unie (EU) hecht veel belang aan het bevorderen van de naleving van de mensenrechten en de grondrechten, ook in Vietnam.

De EU streeft ernaar voor Vietnam, evenals voor andere landen in Zuidoost-Azië, een coherent beleidskader voor de algemene politieke en economische betrekkingen te creëren. In de nieuwe partnerschaps‐ en samenwerkingsovereenkomst (PSO) tussen de EU en Vietnam, die in oktober 2010 geparafeerd is, zijn belangrijke mensenrechtenclausules en bepalingen over de rechtsstaat en het Internationaal Strafhof opgenomen. Deze bepalingen zullen de invloed van de EU vergroten en zullen haar in staat stellen de dialoog en de samenwerking  ter bevordering van de mensenrechten in Vietnam te versterken.

Met het oog op betere samenhang wat betreft de manier waarop de EU haar algemene doelstellingen op het gebied van buitenlands beleid overeenkomstig het Verdrag van Lissabon nastreeft, trachten de Commissie en de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter (hv/vv) een duidelijke koppeling te leggen tussen de nieuwe vrijhandelsovereenkomsten waarover momenteel wordt onderhandeld en de PSO’s, onder meer ten aanzien van bepalingen inzake mensenrechten.

Bovendien zal ook de liberalisering van de handel een positieve bijdrage leveren aan de mensenrechten. De openstelling van markten zorgt voor efficiëntie, stimuleert groei en bevordert ontwikkeling, en draagt op die manier bij tot de verwezenlijking van fundamentele mensenrechten zoals sociale en economische rechten. De vrijhandelsovereenkomsten bevatten bepalingen inzake duurzame ontwikkeling die erop gericht zijn de partijen in een samenwerkingsproces te betrekken en de naleving van internationale arbeidsnormen in de betreffende landen te bevorderen.

Tot slot kan het geachte Parlementslid ervan verzekerd zijn dat voorzitter Van Rompuy, voorzitter Barroso, de hv/vv en commissaris De Gucht de zorgen die in de EU over de mensenrechten leven, op het hoogste niveau zullen blijven aankaarten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004188/12

to the Commission

Frank Vanhecke (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Negotiations of free trade agreement with Vietnam

According to the human rights organisation Human Rights Watch, things are going from bad to worse as regards human rights and democracy in the communist dictatorship of Vietnam (Human Rights Watch, Systematic crackdown on human rights, 23 January 2012). During 2011 the regime intensified its repression of dissidents. Many human rights activists were arrested and locked up without trial.

Despite these developments, the preparations for the negotiations between the Commission and the Vietnamese regime concerning a free trade agreement are now complete. Media with a special interest in the subject point to the fact that the competent commissioner never brought up the subject of ‘democracy and human rights’ (Ivan Delibasic, ‘European Commission potentially split over trade deal with Vietnam’, New Europe, 8‐14 April 2012) despite an explicit call on the part of Human Rights Watch, among others, to do so (Human Rights Watch, ‘European Union: press Vietnam to respect human rights’, 11 January 2012). Certainly since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Commission is required in the context of foreign trade to support democracy and human rights in third countries.

— Is the Commission aware of the steadily deteriorating situation in terms of human rights and democracy in Vietnam?

— How does the Commission justify the fact that negotiations regarding a free trade agreement with this communist dictatorship have been launched without taking stock, in the preparatory phase, of the situation as regards human rights and democracy?

— How does the Commission justify the fact that it even enters into negotiations with such a state without there being any improvement in terms of democracy and human rights?

— Is the Commission not bound in this regard by the Treaty of Lisbon?

— Does this not send out the wrong signal?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(30 May 2012)

The European Union (EU) is committed to promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, in Vietnam as elsewhere.

In the case of Vietnam, as well as with other Southeast Asian countries, the aim of the EU is to establish a coherent policy framework for overall political and economic relations. The new EU‐Vietnam Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), which was initialled in October 2010, includes significant clauses on human rights, provisions on the rule of law and on the International Criminal Court. Such clauses will enhance EU leverage and will allow it to intensify dialogue and cooperation aimed at promoting human rights in Vietnam.

In order to ensure coherence in the way the EU pursues its broader foreign policy objectives in accordance with the Lisbon Treaty, the Commission and the High Representative/Vice-President (HR/VP) pursue a clear linkage between the new Free Trade Agreements (FTA) being negotiated and the PCAs, including human rights provisions.

Furthermore, trade liberalisation also has a positive contribution to make to human rights. The opening of markets creates efficiency, stimulates growth and helps spur development, thereby contributing to the implementation of fundamental human rights such as social and economic rights. FTAs include provisions on sustainable development which aim to engage the Parties in a cooperative process and support compliance of international labour standard commitments in domestic implementation.

Last but not least, the Honourable Member can be assured that EU human rights concerns will continue to be raised at the highest level by President Van Rompuy and President Barroso, as well as by the HR/VP and Commissioner De Gucht.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004189/12

aan de Commissie

Auke Zijlstra (NI)

(23 april 2012)

Betreft: (Im)migrant (vervolgvraag)

Op 19 april 2012 heeft commissaris Malmström namens de Commissie antwoord gegeven op schriftelijke vraag E-002316/2012. Daarin schrijft zij onder andere het volgende:

„Migratie is een vrije en individuele keuze. De Commissie heeft zich nooit tegen dit recht gekant. Wel wil de Commissie maatregelen bevorderen om illegale migratie tegen te gaan en legale migratiekanalen te stimuleren, en zij herinnert eraan dat de lidstaten zelf de voorwaarden voor en de omvang van de migratie uit derde landen naar hun grondgebied bepalen.”

1.

Kan de Commissie concreet aangeven welke maatregelen zij reeds heeft genomen om illegale migratie tegen te gaan en welke resultaten dat heeft opgeleverd — vooral in het kader van de massale migrantenstromen vanuit Noord-Afrika naar de EU? Hoeveel illegale migranten heeft de Commissie reeds weten tegen te houden?

2.	Kan de Commissie concretiseren waarom zij legale migratiekanalen stimuleert resp. wil stimuleren? Is de Commissie daarmee ook van mening dat migratie naar de EU moet toenemen? Zo ja, waarom?

3.	Als de Commissie stelt dat lidstaten zelf de voorwaarden voor en de omvang van de migratie uit derde landen naar hun grondgebied kunnen bepalen, is het Nederland dan toegestaan voortaan elke migrant uit een derde land die Nederland wil binnenkomen te weren?

Zo ja, hoe verhoudt zich dat tot

— de Europa-route,

— het vrij verkeer van personen,

— Het Commissievoorstel voor een richtlijn COM(2010)0379 betreffende de voorwaarden voor toegang en verblijf van onderdanen van derde landen met het oog op seizoenarbeid?

Antwoord van mevrouw Malmström namens de Commissie

(29 juni 2012)

1.

De Commissie heeft aanzienlijke steun verleend om illegale migratie uit Noord-Afrika en Turkije aan te pakken (bijvoorbeeld via het sluiten van overnameovereenkomsten, het opbouwen van capaciteit voor geïntegreerd grensbeheer en het verlenen van steun in het kader van gezamenlijke Frontex-operaties). In mei 2011 is gestart met een dialoog over migratie, mobiliteit en veiligheid met Tunesië en Marokko met het oog op het sluiten van mobiliteitspartnerschappen. De Commissie heeft actief bijgedragen aan het recente „EU-optreden inzake de migratiedruk — een strategische reactie” (8). In 2011 werden 140.980 onderdanen van derde landen aangehouden die illegaal de grens overstaken, en werden 148 853 illegale migranten naar hun land van herkomst  teruggestuurd (9).

2.	Ondanks de hoge werkloosheidcijfers in delen van Europa, hebben veel lidstaten te maken met een tekort aan arbeidskrachten en vaardigheden (10). Economische migratie blijft van essentieel belang om deze uitdagingen het hoofd te bieden, met name in de context van de vergrijzende EU-bevolking.

3.

Richtlijn 2004/38/EG verleent onderdanen van derde landen die gezinsleden van mobiele EU-burgers zijn, verblijfsrecht in het gastland. Indien aan de voorwaarden van deze richtlijn is voldaan, mogen de lidstaten deze personen de verleende rechten niet ontzeggen, hoewel zij deze rechten wel kunnen weigeren, beëindigen of intrekken in geval van misbruik of fraude.

Het voorstel voor een richtlijn betreffende seizoenarbeid (11) zal werkgevers in de EU helpen om over het noodzakelijke werknemersbestand te beschikken, door het voor onderdanen van derde landen mogelijk te maken legaal de EU binnen te komen en er te werken en hun uitbuiting te voorkomen, zonder dat zulks afbreuk doet aan de bevoegdheid van de lidstaten om te beslissen hoeveel arbeidsmigranten zij op hun grondgebied toelaten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004189/12

to the Commission

Auke Zijlstra (NI)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: (Im)migrant (follow-up question)

On 19 April 2012, Commissioner Cecilia Malmström replied on behalf of the Commission to Written Question E‐002316/2012. Among other things, she writes the following in her answer:

‘It is a freedom and an individual decision by each person whether or not to undertake a migration. The Commission does not, and never has, opposed this right. It does, however, wish to promote measures to reduce irregular migration and promote legal channels of entry into the EU, noting that it is for each Member State to decide on the conditions and volume of admissions of third‐country nationals to its territory.’

1.	Can the Commission indicate what actual measures it has taken so far to reduce irregular migration and what results they have yielded — especially in the context of the mass migration flows from north Africa to the EU? How many irregular migrants has the Commission so far succeeded in keeping out?

2.	Can the Commission elaborate on why it promotes or wishes to promote legal migration channels?

Does this mean the Commission also shares the view that migration to the EU must increase? If so, why?

3.	If the Commission states that Member States themselves determine the conditions for, and the scope of, migration from third countries, is the Netherlands therefore permitted henceforth to refuse every migrant from a third country who wishes to enter the Netherlands? If so, how does this accord with

— the Europe route,

— the free movement of persons,

— the Commission proposal for a directive COM(2010)0379 on the conditions of entry and residence of third‐country nationals for the purposes of seasonal employment?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2012)

1.	The Commission provided considerable support to tackle irregular migration from North Africa and Turkey

1.	The Commission provided considerable support to tackle irregular migration from North Africa and Turkey

(e.g. conclusion of readmission agreements, capacity building for integrated border management and support via Frontex Joint Operations). A Dialogue on migration, mobility and security with Tunisia and Morocco launched in May 2011 aims to concluding Mobility Partnerships. The Commission actively contributed to the recent ‘EU Action on migratory pressure — a strategic response’ (12). In 2011 140.980 third-country nationals were apprehended crossing the border irregularly and 148.853 irregular migrants were returned to their countries of origin (13).

2.	Despite high unemployment rates in parts of Europe, many Member States face labour and skills shortages

2.	Despite high unemployment rates in parts of Europe, many Member States face labour and skills shortages

 (14). Economic migration remains instrumental to address these challenges, notably in the context of the EU's ageing population.

3.

Directive 2004/38/EC gives third-country national family members of mobile EU citizens the right of residence in the host Member State. If the conditions set out in this directive are met, Member States may not deprive these persons of the rights conferred, though they may refuse, terminate or withdraw them in case of abuse or fraud.

The proposal for a directive on seasonal employment (15) will help EU employers to have the necessary workforce, allowing third-country nationals to legally enter and work in the EU and preventing their exploitation, without interfering with Member States' competence to decide on the numbers of labour migrants they admit to their territory.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004190/12

to the Commission

Struan Stevenson (ECR)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: VAT rates on e-books

In line with VAT Directive 2006/112/EC, e-books throughout the European Union should carry a VAT rate in each Member State of 15% or above (e-books are currently not one of the specific products and services listed in Annex A to the VAT Directive that can carry a reduced VAT rate, should Member States choose to adopt the reduced band). In the UK, e-books are taxed at 20%, and UK sellers of e-books apply this rate when selling to UK consumers.

On 1 January 2012, Luxembourg decided unilaterally to reduce the VAT rates on e-books to 3%, thus seemingly infringing VAT Directive 2006/112/EC, in accordance with which Member States are required to impose a VAT rate of at least 15%. France has also decided to reduce VAT on its e-books to 5%, which means that they too are seemingly infringing the VAT Directive, but for booksellers the Luxembourg situation is much more serious, as Luxembourg is the corporate home of Amazon.

Amazon is registered in Luxembourg and already absolutely dominates the e-book market. The Office of Fair Trading came to the view last autumn that Amazon accounts for between 70% and 80% of all sales in the online bookselling sector. Amazon itself claims to be responsible for over 90% of the e-book market. This means that anyone supplying e-books from another Member State therefore suffers a massive competitive disadvantage, as Luxembourg is able to supply e-books at 3% VAT.

The VAT Directive explicitly states that the supply of electronic services is not eligible for a reduced rate. The application of a standard rate to an extent minimises the distortion which the application of a reduced rate would cause, as well as protecting against a tax competition race to the bottom. All Member States have agreed in the VAT Committee that the supply of e-books constitutes an electronic supply of services, and so it appears that both France and Luxembourg are acting illegally.

Under already agreed changes to VAT legislation, it appears that the rules covering the place of supply for business to private consumers will change in 2015. Taxation will then take place according to the rate applicable in the Member State of the customer. This will ensure that all consumption of e-books, regardless of their provenance, will be taxed at the same rate.

Considering the dangers of unilateral action by Member States, as well as the adverse impact of the application of reduced rates, could the Commission ensure that all EU Member States uphold the VAT rates as laid down in Directive 2006/112/EC?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of this issue and administrative letters have been sent to the two Member States concerned.

The Commission will take a decision on how to proceed following an examination of the Member States' responses.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004191/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Berlato (PPE)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Drammatico fenomeno del reclutamento di bambini soldato

Secondo dati recenti, l'arruolamento di bambini impiegati come combattenti avviene in oltre tre quarti dei conflitti armati nel mondo. Tale fenomeno comprende l'arruolamento o l'utilizzo illegale, da parte di gruppi armati o delle forze governative, di bambini nelle milizie o in altri gruppi alleati con le forze armate.

Gli ultimi dati ufficiali disponibili su questo drammatico fenomeno risalgono al maggio 2008, quando è stato presentato a New York il «Rapporto globale sui bambini soldato», che contiene informazioni documentate sull'esistenza di 21 paesi in cui i bambini sono stati utilizzati in aree di conflitto tra l'aprile del 2004 e l'ottobre del 2007.

Durante i conflitti armati i bambini subiscono gravi violazioni dei loro diritti: violenze, massacri, esecuzioni sommarie, torture e violenze sessuali. Inoltre, i minori appartenenti a gruppi particolarmente vulnerabili, ovvero coloro che vengono separati dalle loro famiglie (orfani, rifugiati e sfollati non accompagnati, figli di donne sole) o che provengono da situazioni economiche e sociali svantaggiate (minoranze, ragazzi di strada) o che vivono nelle zone calde del conflitto corrono il serio rischio di essere arruolati sia da parte degli eserciti governativi sia da parte di gruppi armati di opposizione ai governi.

Premesso che il reclutamento e l'utilizzo di bambini soldato rappresentano una delle più gravi violazioni delle norme che regolano i diritti umani nel mondo e alla luce della gravissima situazione sopra descritta, si interroga la Commissione per sapere se, anche nell'ottica del rispetto della Convenzione dei diritti del fanciullo, essa non ritenga opportuno intensificare gli strumenti di controllo e le iniziative per sollecitare i paesi terzi ad adottare misure efficaci per porre fine all'impiego dei minori nelle milizie o in altri gruppi alleati con le forze armate.

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

(20 giugno 2012)

L'Unione europea condanna fermamente tutti le gravi violazioni dei diritti umani nei confronti dei minori, e quindi anche il loro arruolamento e utilizzo nei conflitti armati. Nel 2003, l'UE ha adottato un'apposita serie di orientamenti sui bambini e i conflitti armati (16), che hanno spianato la strada a un approccio più sistematico alla tutela dei minori durante i conflitti e le altre emergenze.

Nel 2008 la Commissione ha adottato la comunicazione «Riservare ai minori un posto speciale nella politica esterna dell'UE» (17) nonché il piano d'azione e il documento di lavoro riguardanti i bambini in situazioni di emergenza (18). Questi documenti hanno delineato, tra l'altro, la programmazione dell'assistenza dell'UE ai bambini coinvolti nei conflitti armati, che si avvarrà di diversi strumenti quali lo «strumento europeo per la democrazia e i diritti umani» (EIDHR) e il programma «Investire nelle persone». Ad esempio, quest'anno, l'UE lancerà un invito a presentare proposte nell'ambito dello strumento «Investire nelle persone», il cui scopo è promuovere in maniera globale la lotta a tutte le forme di violenza nei confronti dei minori e quindi anche dei bambini coinvolti nei conflitti armati (ad es. smobilitazione dei bambini soldato, azioni di sensibilizzazione e assistenza alle bambine coinvolte nei conflitti).

L'UE è inoltre molto attiva a livello multilaterale. La risoluzione dell'assemblea generale delle Nazioni Unite del 2011, sostenuta dall'UE, ha prorogato il mandato per il Rappresentante speciale delle Nazioni Unite per i bambini e i conflitti armati. Nello stesso anno, l'UE ha dato il suo sostegno alla risoluzione del Consiglio di sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite, che ha dato nuovo impulso all'inclusione nelle liste nere dell'ONU di tutte le organizzazioni coinvolte in attentati a scuole e ospedali nonché al personale che lavora al loro interno e alle persone protette.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004191/12

to the Commission

Sergio Berlato (PPE)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: The shocking phenomenon of child soldier recruitment

Recent information points to children being recruited as combatants in over three-quarters of the world’s armed conflicts. This includes armed groups or government forces illegally recruiting or using children in militias or other groups allied with armed forces.

The latest official figures on this shocking phenomenon date back to May 2008, when the ‘Child Soldiers Global Report’ presented in New York gave documented information on the existence of 21 countries where children were used in areas of conflict between April 2004 and October 2007.

During armed conflict, children suffer serious violations of their rights: violence, massacres, summary executions, torture and sexual violence. Furthermore, minors from particularly vulnerable groups, i.e. those separated from their families (orphans, unaccompanied refugees and displaced persons and children of single mothers), those from disadvantaged economic and social situations (minorities and street children), and those who live in hot conflict zones, are all at serious risk of being recruited by government armies or armed opposition groups.

The recruitment and use of child soldiers is one of the most serious breaches of human rights legislation in the world. In view of this, the extremely serious situation described above and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, does the Commission agree that supervisory instruments and initiatives to urge third countries to adopt effective measures to stop the use of minors in militias or other groups allied with armed forces should be stepped up?

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

(20 June 2012)

The European Union condemns strongly all grave violations against children in armed conflict, which includes the recruitment and the use of child soldiers. In 2003, the EU adopted a dedicated set of Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict (19) which paved the way for a more systematic approach to child protection during the conflict and other emergencies.

In 2008, the Commission adopted a communication on Special Place for Children in EU External Action (20) together with the action plan and the Staff working paper on situation of children during emergencies (21). These documents inter alia outlined the programming of EU assistance to children affected by armed conflict through different instruments such as the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) and Investing in People. For example, this year, the EU will launch a call for proposals under the Investing in People instrument which will promote activities to fight all forms of violence against children including children affected by armed conflict in a comprehensive way (e.g. child soldiers demobilisation, awareness-raising, assistance to girls associated with conflict).

The EU is also very active in the multilateral context. The 2011 United Nations (UN) General Assembly resolution, which was sponsored by the EU, renewed the mandate of the UN Special Representative for children and armed conflict. In the same year, the EU supported a resolution of the UN Security Council which added a new trigger for the UN blacklisting of entities involved in attacks on schools and hospitals as well as on related staff and protected persons.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004192/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Blackout del web in Cina

Il 12 aprile in Cina si è verificato un blackout del web, i principali siti cinesi e i maggiori siti occidentali (quelli solitamente non filtrati dai firewall di controllo cinesi) non erano raggiungibili, i primi dagli utenti all'esterno del paese e i secondi dagli utenti cinesi. Le autorità hanno dato la notizia ufficiale di un guasto ai sistemi dei due maggiori provider, China Telecom e China Unicom, i quali però negano guasti di sorta sui loro sistemi, posizione avallata anche dai rilevamenti di società americane che monitorano la sicurezza e le prestazioni delle infrastrutture web. In più si aggiunga che provider minori cinesi non hanno accusato problemi. Si apre quindi la concreta possibilità che le autorità cinesi stiano sperimentando un sistema che potenzia i loro sistemi di gestione delle informazioni sul web, col quale trasformare, in caso di necessità di contenimento di informazioni particolarmente dannose, la rete Internet in una sorta di rete Intranet chiusa entro i confini cinesi.

È la Commissione a conoscenza del fatto? Quali sono le sue conclusioni? Come intende salvaguardare gli interessi e i diritti dei propri cittadini che per motivi lavorativi o personali si trovano in Cina, nell'eventualità che tale blocco da parte del governo Cinese debba ripetersi? Reputa che gli attuali accordi che intercorrono fra UE e Cina tutelino sufficientemente i diritti dell'uomo e dei cittadini dell'Unione?

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

(13 luglio 2012)

L’UE è a conoscenza di un blackout del web in Cina che il 12 aprile 2012 ha interrotto l’accesso a numerosi siti web per un periodo limitato. Le cause di tale incidente non sono chiare. La Commissione continuerà a seguire attentamente l’evolversi della situazione.

L’UE discute periodicamente con le autorità cinesi questioni legate alla libertà di informazione ed espressione, soprattutto nell’ambito del dialogo UE-Cina sui diritti umani. L’UE ha sollevato varie questioni in questo ambito durante l’ultima sessione di tale dialogo tenutasi a Bruxelles in data 29 maggio 2012, in particolare in merito alle condanne a pene estremamente lunghe e al numero crescente di incriminazioni e di condanne per reati contro la sicurezza dello Stato pronunciate nel corso di cause sulla libertà d’espressione. La Cina ha evidenziato il fatto che, se da un lato lo sviluppo di Internet è importante ai fini delle attività commerciali, dall’altro esso può essere utilizzato in modo improprio da parte di quanti se ne servono per svolgere attività criminose, far circolare notizie non veritiere, diffondere timori tra il pubblico e vendere armi, nonché che sarebbe nell’interesse dell’intera comunità internazionale adottare misure rigorose contro le attività criminose svolte tramite Internet. La Cina ha vietato alcune tipologie di attività su Internet, definite da regolamenti amministrativi, e sono stati presi provvedimenti adeguati. L’UE continuerà ad affrontare tali questioni con la Cina.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004192/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Web blackout in China

On 12 April there was a web blackout in China; the main Chinese sites and the major Western sites (those usually not filtered by the controlling Chinese firewalls) were inaccessible to users outside China, in the former case, and to Chinese users, in the latter case. In their official version of the incident, the authorities maintained that there had been a breakdown in the systems of the two main providers, China Telecom and China Unicom. However, these providers deny that their systems suffered breakdowns of any kind, and that position is borne out by the findings of American companies which monitor web infrastructure security and services. Furthermore, smaller Chinese providers did not experience problems. This therefore raises the specific possibility that the Chinese authorities may be testing a system to strengthen their information management systems on the Web, enabling them, should they need to contain particularly damaging information, to turn the Internet into a type of Intranet network confined within Chinese borders.

Is the Commission aware of this fact? What conclusions does it draw? How does it intend to safeguard the interests and rights of its own citizens who are in China for personal or professional reasons, should the Chinese Government again impose a blockade of this sort? Does it believe that the current agreements between the EU and China sufficiently protect human rights and the rights of EU citizens?

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

(13 July 2012)

The EU is aware of a web blackout in China which interrupted access to a number of websites for a limited time on 12 April 2012. The reasons for this incident are unclear. The EU will continue to follow closely any developments on this issue.

The EU regularly discusses issues related to freedom of information and expression with the Chinese authorities, in particular in the framework of the EU‐China human rights dialogue. It has raised a number of concerns in this field at the last session of this dialogue which took place on 29 May 2012 in Brussels, in particular the extremely long sentences and the increasing number of endangering state security indictments and convictions imposed in freedom of expression cases. China noted that while the development of the Internet was important for commerce, the Internet was open to abuse by persons who used it for criminal activity, gossip, causing fear to the public, and selling weapons. The international community had a common interest in clamping down on criminal activity on the Internet. China prohibited certain types of activity on the Internet, which were specified in administrative regulations, and appropriate action was taken. The EU will continue to engage China on these issues.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004193/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Diritti di reimpianto dei vigneti

L'articolo 90 del regolamento (CE) n. 479/2008 relativo all'organizzazione comune del mercato vitivinicolo (OCM), stabilisce la liberalizzazione dei diritti d'impianto dei vigneti in Europa a partire dal 2015. Il 20 marzo 2012 l'onorevole Paolo De Castro, presidente della commissione per l'agricoltura e lo sviluppo rurale, ha sottolineato l'intenzione del Parlamento europeo di schierarsi a difesa del mantenimento dei sistemi del diritto di impianto per i vigneti oltre il 2015, anno in cui dovrebbero essere liberalizzati, secondo quanto disposto dall'OCM vino. Alla luce dei risultati degli studi sull'impatto dell'apertura del mercato dei diritti di impianto nel settore vitivinicolo dell'Unione europea, emerge oggi la necessità di rivedere questo orientamento dell'Unione in materia, laddove esso causerebbe numerose difficoltà tanto al mercato e ai viticoltori, quanto all'ambiente.

È la Commissione conscia dei danni che causerebbe a tutto il settore? Ha la Commissione intenzione di dar seguito alle richieste degli addetti al settore e di rivedere la propria posizione? Come intende procedere per tutelare un settore di riferimento per l'economia di molti Stati membri?

Risposta di Dacian Cioloș a nome della Commissione

(13 giugno 2012)

Alcuni Stati membri produttori di vino, svariati professionisti a livello nazionale ed europeo nonché numerosi deputati europei hanno espresso, fin dallo scorso anno, i propri timori circa la

prossima conclusione del regime dei diritti di impianto dei vigneti. È per questo motivo che nel 2012 è stato istituito un Gruppo di alto livello al fine di organizzare un forum di discussione sul tema.

Questo gruppo si compone di rappresentanti degli Stati membri e delle principali organizzazioni del settore a livello europeo.

Un rappresentante del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio è invitato a tutte le riunioni del gruppo in veste di osservatore.

L'obiettivo del gruppo consiste nella valutazione dei diversi aspetti del funzionamento del regime in parola negli Stati membri nonché dell’incidenza della sua abolizione sul settore e sul mercato del vino. A conclusione dei suoi lavori, il gruppo presenterà alla Commissione una relazione sui temi affrontati alla fine dell’anno 2012.

La fine di tale regime non è una misura isolata ma fa parte della riforma dell’OCM vino, adottata dal Consiglio nel 2008. Questa riforma intende ripristinare l’equilibrio del mercato vinicolo, accrescerne la competitività offrendo ai produttori gli strumenti per il suo miglioramento e rafforzare la politica di qualità del vino nell'interesse sia dei produttori che dei consumatori.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004193/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Rights to replant vines

Article 90 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine (wine OCM) establishes that restrictions on vine planting rights in Europe will cease at the end of 2015. On 20 March 2012, Paolo De Castro, MEP, chair of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, highlighted Parliament’s intention to defend the maintenance of systems of vine planting rights beyond 2015, the year in which they ought to be liberalised under the Wine OCM Regulation. In view of the results of impact studies on opening up the market in planting rights in the European Union’s wine-producing sector, the EU’s approach now needs to be reviewed where this would cause a large number of problems not only for the market and for vine growers but also for the environment.

Is the Commission aware of the damage this would cause the whole sector? Does the Commission intend to follow up the requests of experts in the sector and review its position? What action will it take to protect a sector that is key to the economies of many Member States?

(Version française)

Des États membres producteurs de vin, de nombreux professionnels au niveau national et européen ainsi que plusieurs députés européens ont exprimé depuis l'an dernier leurs préoccupations sur la fin prochaine du régime des droits de plantation de vignes. C'est pourquoi un Groupe de haut Niveau a été créé en 2012 pour organiser un forum de discussion sur le sujet.

Ce groupe est composé de représentants des États membres et des principales organisations du secteur au niveau européen.

Un représentant du Parlement européen et du Conseil est invité à toutes les réunions du groupe en tant qu'observateur.

L'objectif de ce groupe est d'évaluer différents aspects du fonctionnement de ce régime dans les États membres, ainsi que les impacts de son abolition pour le secteur et le marché du vin. À l'issue de ses travaux, le groupe présentera à la Commission un rapport sur les thèmes abordés à la fin de l'année 2012.

La fin de ce régime n'est pas une mesure isolée; elle fait partie de la réforme de l'OCM vin, adoptée par le Conseil en 2008. Cette réforme vise à rétablir l'équilibre du marché du vin à accroître la compétitivité en fournissant aux producteurs des outils pour son amélioration et à renforcer la politique de qualité du vin, tant dans l'intérêt des producteurs que des consommateurs.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004194/12

to the Commission

Julie Girling (ECR)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Biofuel-to-electricity project funding: follow-up

Following the Commission’s answer to my Question E‐001353/2012, I can now provide the following further information:

The project is based in Ioannina in north-western Greece at the ‘Spider SA’ main factory premises where the firm has a fabrication facility. My constituent’s company supplied the biodiesel processing equipment, and another UK company, JS Power, has supplied a diesel generator set (as yet not commissioned).

The precise customer name we were given was Spider Environmental Services SA with a VAT number of 998624522. They are part of a group also called Spider SA. However, it is possible that the actual formal company name is Spider, N. Petsios & Sons SA (possibly without the word Spider).

The project involved the collection of waste cooking oil, the processing of that oil into biodiesel and the use of the biodiesel in a diesel generator set to produce electricity. Consequently the funding could have been received for waste, biofuel or power generation.

— Can the Commission confirm whether the company ‘Spider SA’ of Ioannina, Greece received any EU funding during 2010?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(31 May 2012)

After a new research on the basis of the additional information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission confirms that the company Spider SA did not receive any funding in any biofuel-related project supported in the context of its 7th Framework Programme for research and technological development (FP7, 2007-2013).

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004195/12

a la Comisión

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(23 de abril de 2012)

Asunto: Informe de la Comisión en contra de los biocombustibles

La semana pasada un medio de comunicación europeo publicaba información sobre un borrador de un informe de la Comisión Europea que concluye que «ni es posible, ni pertinente dar cifras sobre la rentabilidad de los biocombustibles porque sus efectos indirectos en la deforestación y la utilización de los espacios verdes provocan que los biocarburantes sean también contaminantes».

De esta manera, este estudio encargado por la Comisión Europea muestra la ineficacia de los biocarburantes, de los que alerta que provocarán a largo plazo un aumento de las emisiones de CO2 con un coste excesivo para poder ser alternativas viables a los carburantes tradicionales, poniendo en entredicho la legitimidad de las políticas asumidas hasta la fecha por la Unión Europea.

A las consecuencias medioambientales y económicas negativas apuntadas por el informe, hay que añadir los efectos indirectos negativos que la promoción y apuesta de la UE por los biocarburantes está provocando en países empobrecidos con los que se han firmado o se van a firmar acuerdos comerciales en los que se incluyen términos arancelarios beneficiosos para la importación de materias primas necesarias para la elaboración de biocombustibles.

Así, numerosas organizaciones africanas y latinoamericanas llevan tiempo denunciando las graves consecuencias y el agravamiento de los conflictos agrarios que está produciendo lo que han denominado la «fiebre verde»: acaparamiento, usurpación y sustitución de tierras de los pequeños y medianos agricultores destinadas a la producción de alimentos por grandes monocultivos de plantaciones de caña de azúcar o palma africana destinados a la producción de materias primas para la elaboración de biocombustibles que está derivando en una preocupante escasez de alimentos y poniendo en serio riesgo la seguridad alimentaria de los países empobrecidos.

A la luz de lo citado,

— ¿Puede la Comisión facilitarme el informe citado?

— ¿Piensa la Comisión revisar las políticas relativas a biocombustibles?

— ¿Piensa la Comisión eliminar los términos arancelarios favorables a la importación de materias primas básicas para la elaboración de los agrocombustibles?

Respuesta del Sr. Oettinger en nombre de la Comisión

(20 de junio de 2012)

El informe mencionado por Su Señoría es solo un proyecto y está sujeto a cambios, pero se puede consultar en Internet (22). Hay otras estimaciones más recientes de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero debidas a cambios indirectos en el uso del suelo que la Comisión considera las mejores existentes (23).

La Comisión tiene previsto presentar en un futuro próximo una propuesta legislativa dirigida a limitar las emisiones relacionadas con el cambio indirecto del uso de la tierra.

En virtud de regímenes preferenciales autónomos (SPG, incluida la iniciativa TMA (24)) o los acuerdos comerciales bilaterales, varios países gozan de derechos preferenciales o de acceso con franquicia de derechos al mercado de la UE para las materias primas importadas utilizadas, entre otras cosas, para fabricar biocombustibles. En el caso del SPG, se pueden retirar las preferencias por motivos contemplados en la ley, lo que incluye las violaciones de los derechos humanos y las normas de trabajo fundamentales, las deficiencias en los controles aduaneros, el fraude y las prácticas comerciales desleales. La Comisión examina periódicamente el trato preferencial, lo que ha dado lugar a su retirada en tres casos hasta ahora.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004195/12

to the Commission

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Report of the Commission against biofuels

Last week, a European media source published information on a draft European Commission report that concludes it is neither possible nor useful to determine cost effectiveness figures for biofuels, because their indirect effect on deforestation and the use of green spaces means that biofuels also pollute.

The study, commissioned by the European Commission, demonstrates the inefficiency of biofuels and warns that they will in the long term cause an increase in CO2 emissions, at too high a cost to be a viable alternative to traditional fuels, thus questioning the legitimacy of policies adopted to date by the European Union.

Apart from the adverse environmental and economic impact highlighted by the report, it is important to consider the negative indirect effects of the EU’s promotion of and commitment to biofuels on poorer countries with which it has signed or intends to sign trade agreements establishing favourable import tariffs for the raw materials needed for biofuel production.

Many African and Latin American organisations have long denounced the serious consequences and escalation of agrarian conflicts provoked by what they refer to as ‘green fever’: the large-scale land-grabbing of farmland owned by small and medium‐sized farmers and the substitution of food crops with large single‐crop plantations of sugar cane or African oil palm to provide raw materials for the production of biofuels, which is leading to worrying food shortages and seriously endangering the food security of poorer countries.

In light of the above:

—	Can the Commission provide me with a copy of the abovementioned report?

—	Does the Commission intend to review its policies on biofuels?

—	Does the Commission intend to remove the favourable tariffs applied to imports of basic raw materials used in the manufacture of biofuels?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2012)

The report referred to by the Honourable Member is only a draft and subject to change but is available on the Internet (25). More recent estimates of indirect land use change emissions exist which the Commission considers to be the best available (26).

The Commission intends to bring forward a legislative proposal to tackle emissions related to indirect land use change in the near future.

Under autonomous preferential schemes (GSP including EBA (27)) or bilateral trade agreements, several countries enjoy preferential duties or duty-free access to the EU market for imported raw materials that are used — inter alia — for the production of biofuels. With regard to GSP, preferences may be withdrawn for reasons specified in the law that include violations of core human rights and labour standards, shortcomings in customs controls, fraud and unfair trading practices. Preferential treament is kept under periodic review by the Commission which has so far led to withdrawal in three cases.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004196/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(23 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Διαχείριση μεταναστευτικών ροών

Η Επιτροπή έχει κάνει λόγο σε πολλές περιστάσεις για έμπρακτη αλληλεγγύη στη διαχείριση των μεταναστευτικών ροών. Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Ποια είναι η πρόβλεψη των κονδυλίων για την Ελλάδα για το 2013 από το Ταμείο προσφύγων ΙΙΙ, το Ταμείο Εξωτερικών Συνόρων και Ταμείο Επιστροφών; Πως διαμορφώνονται σε σχέση με τα κονδύλια των προηγούμενων ετών; Θεωρεί η Επιτροπή επαρκή τα όσα προτείνονται για την αντιμετώπιση από την Ελλάδα των μεταναστευτικών ροών;

Απάντηση της κας Malmström εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(21 Ιουνίου 2012)

Βάσει του Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου Προσφύγων, του Ταμείου Εξωτερικών Συνόρων και του Ταμείου Επιστροφών, η ετήσια κατανομή των πόρων για επιλέξιμες δράσεις στα κράτη μέλη βασίζεται στα ειδικά κριτήρια τα οποία καθορίζονται στην αντίστοιχη βασική πράξη για τη σύσταση κάθε Ταμείου (28).

Σύμφωνα με την αντίστοιχη νομική βάση, η Επιτροπή υποβάλλει στα κράτη μέλη, την 1η Ιουλίου κάθε έτους, εκτίμηση των ποσών που θα τους χορηγηθούν για το επόμενο έτος. Κατά συνέπεια, η πρόβλεψη των κονδυλίων που θα χορηγηθούν στην Ελλάδα το 2013 θα είναι διαθέσιμη από την 1η Ιουλίου 2012, βάσει των ποσών που περιλαμβάνονται στο σχέδιο προϋπολογισμού του 2013 της ΕΕ. Τα τελικά κονδύλια θα επιβεβαιωθούν από τη στιγμή της έγκρισης του προϋπολογισμού ΕΕ 2013 από την αρμόδια για τον προϋπολογισμό αρχή.

Τα συνολικά ποσά που χορηγήθηκαν στην Ελλάδα βάσει των εν λόγω ταμείων για το 2012 αναφέρονται στην απάντηση της Επιτροπής προς την κοινοβουλευτική ερώτηση E-002742/2012 (29).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004196/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Management of migration flows

On many occasions, the Commission has referred to real solidarity in the management of migration flows. In view of this:

Can the Commission indicate what funding is earmarked for Greece for 2013 from the European Refugee Fund III, the External Borders Fund and the Return Fund? How does this compare to funding in previous years? Does the Commission consider adequate the funding proposed to enable Greece to deal with migration flows adequate?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

Under the European Refugee Fund, the External Borders Fund and the Return Fund, the annual distribution of resources for eligible actions in the Member States is based on the specific criteria defined in the respective basic act establishing each Fund (30).

In accordance with the respective legal basis, the Commission provides the Member States, by 1 July of each year, an estimate of the amounts to be allocated to them for the following year. Therefore, the provisional allocations for Greece for 2013 will be available by 1 July 2012, based on the amounts included in the 2013 Draft Budget of the EU. The final allocations will be confirmed once the EU 2013 Budget is adopted by the Budgetary Authority.

The total amounts allocated to Greece under these Funds for 2012 are indicated in the Commission reply to Parliamentary Question E‐002742/2012 (31).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004197/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(23 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Διμερείς συμβάσεις για φορολογία καταθέσεων στην Ελβετία

Σε δημοσίευμα του, το Agence Europe 17.4.2012 αναφέρει ότι, σε συνέντευξη του, ο Επίτροπος της ΕΕ για θέματα φορολογίας, Algirdas Semeta, δήλωσε ότι οι αναθεωρημένες διμερείς φορολογικές συμφωνίες για εισοδήματα από αποταμιεύσεις, που έχουν συνάψει η Μεγάλη Βρετανία και η Γερμανία με την Ελβετία αντίστοιχα, είναι σε πλήρη ευθυγράμμιση με την κοινοτική νομοθεσία. Με δεδομένο το παραπάνω δημοσίευμα ερωτάται η επιτροπή:

Ποια σημεία των διμερών φορολογικών συμφωνιών αναθεωρήθηκαν ώστε οι διμερείς φορολογικές συμφωνίες της Μεγάλης Βρετανίας και της Γερμανίας με την Ελβετία αντίστοιχα, να βρίσκονται σε πλήρη συμφωνία με την ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία;

Με την αναθεώρηση των διμερών φορολογικών συμβάσεων υπάρχει αμοιβαία και αυτόματη ανταλλαγή πληροφοριών, χωρίς αίτηση μεταξύ της Ελβετίας και των δυο χωρών, Γερμανίας και Μεγάλης Βρετανίας, για τα ονόματα των Γερμανών και Βρετανών πολιτών που διατηρούν τραπεζικές καταθέσεις στις Ελβετικές τράπεζες καθώς και για τα ποσά αυτών των καταθέσεων;

Απάντηση του κ. Šemeta εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(14 Ιουνίου 2012)

1.	Η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου στα κείμενα των πρωτοκόλλων τροποποίησης που υπέγραψαν η Γερμανία και το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο με την Ελβετία στις 5 Απριλίου και στις 20 Μαρτίου αντίστοιχα, τα οποία δημοσιοποιήθηκαν από τα ενδιαφερόμενα μέρη.

2.	Οι διμερείς συμφωνίες Γερμανίας/Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου-Ελβετίας δεν προβλέπουν την αυτόματη ανταλλαγή πληροφοριών σχετικά με το εισόδημα των ιδιωτών που είναι κάτοικοι Γερμανίας/Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004197/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Bilateral agreements on taxation of savings in Switzerland

In an article of 17 April 2012, Agence Europe indicates that the EU Commissioner for Taxation and Customs Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud, Algirdas Šemeta, stated in an interview that the revised bilateral taxation agreements on savings income concluded by both the United Kingdom and Germany with Switzerland comply fully with Community legislation. In view of the above article, can the Commission answer the following:

What points of the bilateral taxation agreements were revised in order for the agreements between Switzerland and the United Kingdom and Germany respectively to fully comply with EU legislation?

With the revision of these bilateral taxation agreements, has there been a mutual and automatic exchange of information, without the need for a request to be made, between Switzerland and the two countries (Germany and the United Kingdom) regarding the names of German and UK citizens who have savings in Swiss banks, as well as the amount of these savings?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2012)

1.	The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the texts of the Protocols of Amendment signed by Germany and the United Kingdom with Switzerland on 5 April and 20 March 2012 respectively which were made public by the parties concerned.

2.	The bilateral German/United Kingdom‐Swiss Agreements do not provide for automatic exchange of information on income received by individuals who are residents of Germany/United Kingdom.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004205/12

to the Commission

Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Gibraltar and Directive 91/477/EEC

Directive 91/477/EEC (as amended) puts in place minimum standards for the control of the acquisition and possession of weapons within the European Union. In addition, the directive lays down procedures for the transfer of firearms from one EU country to another.

What can the Commission propose to allow European firearms passes to be issued to my constituents in Gibraltar?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2012)

Directive 91/477/EEC of 19 June 1991 establishes the principle that any transfer of firearms falling within the scope of the directive is subject to authorisation from both the authorities of the Member State of departure and those of the Member State of arrival.

Certain derogations from this principle are provided for. For example, the directive establishes the ‘European firearms pass’ which allows its holder, under certain conditions, to move in possession of a firearm more easily between Member States for activities such as hunting or competitive shooting.

However, the directive does not apply to Gibraltar (32), which is why the European firearms pass is not issued there. This does not, of course, prevent temporary or permanent transfers of firearms with other Member States as long as the necessary authorisations are obtained.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-004206/12

à la Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(23 avril 2012)

Objet: Non-reconnaissance de la profession d'architecte paysagiste

La profession d'architecte paysagiste n'est pas reconnue en Espagne et en Grèce alors qu'elle est reconnue à divers niveaux dans les autres pays de l'Union européenne.

Il est dès lors impossible aux citoyens européens qualifiés pour exercer cette profession dans d'autres États membres de l'Union européenne de pratiquer ce métier en Espagne et en Grèce.

— Cette situation n'est-elle pas contraire à la législation communautaire, notamment par rapport à la liberté d'établissement et à la libre circulation des services?

— La Commission a-t-elle connaissance de ces différences au sein de l'Union européenne et envisage-t-elle de faire reconnaître cette profession au sein de tous les pays de l'Union?

Réponse donnée par M. Barnier au nom de la Commission

(21 juin 2012)

La Commission n'a pas le pouvoir d'imposer aux États membres de réglementer une profession donnée. Le droit de l'Union établit les conditions dans lesquelles un État membre doit garantir aux professionnels d'autres États membres l'accès aux activités professionnelles qu'ils sont autorisés à exercer dans leur pays d'origine.

La Commission a été informée du fait que certains citoyens européens rencontrent des difficultés lorsqu'il s'agit de faire reconnaître leurs qualifications d'architecte paysagiste en Espagne, s'ils ont obtenu ces qualifications dans d'autres États membres. Il semblerait qu'ils ne puissent pas exercer à titre indépendant les activités pour lesquelles ils sont qualifiés, parce qu'un architecte ou un ingénieur doit engager sa responsabilité pour les travaux effectués. La Commission contactera les autorités espagnoles afin d'obtenir des éclaircissements à ce sujet (33).

À l'heure actuelle, la Commission n'a pas reçu de plaintes relatives à la non-reconnaissance des diplômes d'architecte paysagiste en Grèce.

De manière plus générale, le Conseil européen a souligné l'importance de développer la reconnaissance mutuelle des qualifications professionnelles, de réduire le nombre de professions réglementées et de supprimer les barrières réglementaires injustifiées (34). La modernisation récemment proposée de la directive relative à la reconnaissance des qualifications professionnelles va dans ce sens. La Commission a également adressé à huit États membres (35) des recommandations spécifiques à cet égard, dont le suivi sera assuré dans le cadre du semestre européen 2013.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004206/12

to the Commission

Marc Tarabella (S&D)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Non-recognition of the profession of landscape architect

The profession of landscape architect is not recognised in Spain and Greece, whilst it is recognised to varying degrees in other EU Member States.

It is therefore impossible for European citizens qualified to carry out this profession in other Member States to practice this profession in Spain and Greece.

— Is this situation not a breach of European Union legislation, notably that on the freedom of establishment and free movement of services?

— Is the Commission aware of this difference within the European Union and does it plan to ensure this profession is recognised in all EU Member States?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

The Commission does not have the power to impose on Member States the regulation of a particular profession. EC law sets out the conditions under which a Member State must grant professionals from other Member States access to the professional activities which the professionals are authorised to practice in the home country.

The Commission has received information according to which European citizens who qualified as landscape architects in other Member States encounter difficulties with the recognition of their qualifications in Spain. It appears that they are not able to carry out independently the activities for which they are qualified, because an architect or an engineer is required to assume the responsibility for the work. The Commission will contact the Spanish authorities in order to seek clarification (36).

The Commission has not received any complaints relating to non-recognition of a qualification in landscape architecture in Greece.

More generally, the European Council has stressed the importance of enhancing the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, reducing the number of regulated professions and removing unjustified regulatory barriers (37). The recently proposed modernisation of the Professional Qualifications Directive addresses these issues. The Commission has also addressed country specific recommendations on this issue to 8 Member States (38) which will be followed up in the European Semester exercise for 2013.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004207/12

alla Commissione

Potito Salatto (PPE) e Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE)

(23 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Articolo 43 del trattato CE e applicazione delle norme nazionali sul trasporto pubblico locale

Ad eccezione della direttiva 2006/123/CE, il servizio di noleggio con conducente (servizio NCC) non trova, in sede comunitaria, una corretta e puntuale disciplina. Ad avvalorare ciò, il 22 settembre 2009 la Commissione europea, rispondendo all'interrogazione E-3829/09 dell'onorevole Angelilli, affermava che: «…non esistono norme di diritto comunitario derivato in materia. Nel rispetto dell'articolo 43 del trattato CE (libertà di stabilimento), spetta dunque agli Stati membri adottare le misure necessarie per regolare tale settore».

— Può la Commissione indicare se gli articoli 49 TFUE, 3, 4, 5 e 6 TUE, 101 e 102 TFUE nonché il regolamento (CEE) n. 2454/1992 e il regolamento (CE) n. 12/1998 ostino all'applicazione dell'articolo 3, comma 3, e dell'articolo 11 della legge n. 21 del 1992?

— Può la Commissione indicare se gli articoli 49 TFUE, 3, 4, 5 e 6 TUE, 101 e 102 TFUE nonché il regolamento (CEE) n. 2454/1992 e il regolamento (CE) n. 12/1998 ostino all'applicazione degli articoli 5 e 10 della legge regionale Lazio n. 58 del 26 ottobre 1993?

— Può la Commissione far sapere se l'applicazione degli articoli 49 TFUE, 3, 4, 5 e 6 TUE, 101 e 102 TFUE nonché del regolamento (CEE) n. 2454/1992 e del regolamento (CE) n. 12/1998 (libertà di stabilimento) nella legislazione italiana comporti l'estinzione delle competenze comunali per l'esercizio del servizio NCC e la cancellazione dell'ambito comunale quale limite di territorialità operativa del servizio NCC?

— Quali sono i motivi che hanno spinto la Commissione europea — Direzione generale dell'energia e dei trasporti — all'avviamento del procedimento EU Pilot 623/09/TREN, avente ad oggetto i «Requisiti posti dalla legislazione della Repubblica Italiana per l'esercizio dell'attività di noleggio auto con conducente»?

— Quali misure intende prendere la Commissione al fine di esplicitare la coerenza delle norme italiane sul trasporto pubblico locale non di linea con la richiamata normativa europea in premessa?

Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione

(29 giugno 2012)

Per quanto concerne le prime due domande, la Commissione è consapevole che la questione cui si riferisce l’onorevole parlamentare è stata sottoposta alla Corte di giustizia europea per una pronuncia pregiudiziale (cause riunite C-162 e 163/12 Airport Shuttle Express et al.). La Commissione, pertanto, si astiene dal prendere una posizione al riguardo in attesa della decisione della Corte.

I servizi menzionati nella terza domanda non sono regolamentati da normative specifiche dell'UE. Data la portata prettamente locale di questo tipo di servizi e in linea con il principio di sussidiarietà, spetta agli Stati membri e alle loro autorità nazionali o locali disciplinare le disposizioni relative a detti servizi. Inoltre i due regolamenti sopra citati sono stati abrogati e sostituiti dal regolamento (CE) n. 1073/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 21 ottobre 2009, che fissa norme comuni per l’accesso al mercato internazionale dei servizi di trasporto effettuati con autobus e che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 561/2006 (39).

In seguito alla presentazione di una denuncia da parte di un cittadino, la Commissione ha avviato il progetto EU Pilot 623/09/TREN cercando di ottenere informazioni riguardo alla normativa italiana su questo specifico argomento. Le autorità italiane hanno risposto che era in corso una revisione della citata normativa con il coinvolgimento attivo dei vari soggetti interessati. La Commissione ha poi informato i ricorrenti di conseguenza.

Dopo aver valutato la pronuncia pregiudiziale fornita dalla Corte di giustizia europea per i casi sopra citati, la Commissione definirà la sua posizione in merito alle eventuali misure da intraprendere nell’ambito della normativa nazionale in questione.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004207/12

to the Commission

Potito Salatto (PPE) and Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Article 43 of the EC Treaty and the application of national legislation on local public transport

Given that car hire with driver services are excluded from Directive 2006/123/EC, there are no appropriate specific rules governing such services at EU level. Replying to written question E‐3829/09 by Roberta Angelilli on 22 September 2009, the Commission confirmed this by noting that: ‘…there is no relevant secondary Community legislation. Therefore, subject to the respect of Article 43 of the EC Treaty (freedom of establishment), it is up to Member States to take appropriate measures to regulate this sector’.

— Can the Commission indicate whether Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, in conjunction with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 and Council Regulation (EC) No 12/98, preclude the application of Article 3(3) and Article 11 of Law No 21/92?

— Can the Commission indicate whether Article 49 of the TFEU, Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the TEU and Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, in conjunction with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 and Council Regulation (EC) No 12/98, preclude the application of Articles 5 and 10 of Lazio Regional Law No 58 of 26 October 1993?

— Can the Commission state whether the application of Article 49 of the TFEU, Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the TEU and Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, in conjunction with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 and Council Regulation (EC) No 12/98 (freedom of establishment), has the effect, in Italian law, of removing the operation of car hire with driver services from the municipal sphere of responsibility and doing away with the municipal scope of the territorial operating limit imposed on these services?

— What reasons led the Commission’s Directorate-General for Energy and Transport to start the EU Pilot 623/09/TREN project, concerning the requirements for the performance of car hire with driver services as defined by Italian legislation?

— What steps will the Commission take to clarify the consistency between Italian legislation on non-scheduled local public transport and the aforementioned European legislation?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2012)

With regard to the first two questions the Commission is aware that the matter referred to by the Honourable Member has been addressed to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling (joint cases C-162/12 and 163/12 Airport Shuttle Express e.a.). Therefore the Commission will refrain from taking a position on this issue, in anticipation of the decision of the Court.

The services referred to in the third question are not regulated by any specific EU legislation. Acknowledging the essentially local significance of these services and in line with the principle of subsidiarity, it is up to the Member States and the national or local authorities within the Member States to regulate the provision of these services. Moreover, the two Regulations mentioned have been repealed and replaced by Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international market for coach and bus services, and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 (40).

Following the submission of a citizen's complaint, the Commission had launched the EU Pilot 623/09/TREN project seeking information with regard to the Italian legislation on the specific topic. The Italian authorities replied that the legislation in question was under revision including the active involvement of the various stakeholders and the Commission informed the complainants accordingly.

After assessing the preliminary ruling to be given by the ECJ in the cases mentioned above, the Commission will determine its position concerning possible steps related to the national legislation in question.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004214/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(23 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Κυπριακό ζήτημα

Σύμφωνα με δημοσίευμα του τύπου, ο τουρκοκύπριος ηγέτης, Ντερβίς Έρογλου, αναφερόμενος στην επερχόμενη επίδοση της έκθεσης Ντάουνερ στον γ.γ. του ΟΗΕ, για την πρόοδο των διαπραγματεύσεων και για την επίλυση του Κυπριακού, τόνισε ότι, σε κάθε περίπτωση, δεν έχει νόημα η συνέχιση των διαπραγματεύσεων μετά την 1η Ιουλίου, όταν η Κύπρος θα αναλάβει την προεδρία της ΕΕ, και τη θέση αυτή, όπως είπε, την έχει μεταφέρει και στον ίδιο τον Μπαν Κι-μουν.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Θεωρεί σωστή και εποικοδομητική τη στάση του τουρκοκύπριου ηγέτη όσον αφορά την επίλυση του Κυπριακού προβλήματος;

λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τις δηλώσεις της Τουρκίας και τις απειλές για τη περίοδο της Κυπριακής Προεδρίας, τι μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει για τη συνέχιση των συνομιλιών που θα οδηγήσει στην επίλυση του Κυπριακού προβλήματος;

προτίθεται να επιβάλει κυρώσεις στην Τουρκία, η οποία είναι και υποψήφιο προς ένταξη κράτος, αν δεν συμμορφωθεί και αναγνωρίσει τη Κυπριακή προεδρία, η οποία θα αναληφθεί από ένα ήδη κράτος-μέλος της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης;

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004215/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(23 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Αναγνώριση κατεχομένων στην Κύπρο

Σχέδιο τριών φάσεων για διεθνή αναγνώριση των Κατεχομένων της βόρειας Κύπρου, και, αν δεν τα καταφέρει, για προσάρτηση, θα θέσει σε εφαρμογή η τουρκική πλευρά, εάν δεν υπάρξει λύση στο Κυπριακό μέχρι την 1η Ιουλίου, αναφέρει σε δημοσίευμά της η τουρκική εφημερίδα «Milliyet».

Οι φάσεις του σχεδίου είναι η ανακοίνωση της επιθυμίας της τουρκικής πλευράς για διεθνή αναγνώριση των Κατεχομένων, άνοιγμα των Βαροσίων, μετονομασία της λεγόμενης «ΤΔΒΚ» σε «Τουρκοκυπριακό Κράτος» για διεθνή αναγνώριση και, αν δεν στεφθούν με επιτυχία οι κινήσεις αυτές, προσάρτηση των κατεχομένων από την Τουρκία.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

τι μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει για τη προστασία της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας από την εξαπόλυση τέτοιου είδους απειλών, εν όψει της Κυπριακής προεδρίας στην ΕΕ που θα ξεκινήσει τη 1η Ιουλίου του 2012;

Θεωρεί σωστή τη στάση της Τουρκίας, η οποία επιθυμεί να γίνει κράτος μέλος της Ευρωπαϊκής οικογένειας και, τυπικά, κλείνει όλες τις πόρτες επίλυσης του κυπριακού;

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004218/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(24 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Οριστική διχοτόμηση της Κύπρου

Την δημιουργία στην Κύπρο, «δύο κρατών, δύο κυβερνήσεων και δύο κοινοβουλίων» υποστηρίζει ο Τούρκος υπουργός Ευρωπαϊκών Υποθέσεων, Εγκεμέν Μπαγίς -προσπαθώντας συγχρόνως να διασκεδάσει τις εντυπώσεις που προκάλεσαν οι πρόσφατες απειλές της Άγκυρας για προσάρτηση των κατεχομένων της βόρειας Κύπρου στην Τουρκία- σε δηλώσεις του σε Αυστριακούς και Δανούς δημοσιογράφους, οι οποίες αναφέρονται σε δημοσιεύματα στις αυστριακές εφημερίδες «Κουρίρ» και «Ντερ Στάνταρντ».

Ο Τούρκος υπουργός τονίζει πως η Άγκυρα δεν αναμένει τίποτε από την προεδρία που θα ασκεί η Κύπρος στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, από την 1η Ιουλίου μέχρι τέλος του χρόνου, ενώ αναφερόμενος στην απαίτηση της ΕΕ από την Τουρκία να επεκτείνει την Τελωνειακή Ένωση στην Κύπρο και να ανοίξει τουρκικά λιμάνια και αεροδρόμια για την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, σημειώνει πως αυτό η Τουρκία θα το έκανε αμέσως εάν και η ΕΕ άρχιζε το απευθείας εμπόριο με τη βόρεια Κύπρο.

Στη συνέχεια, ο Εγκεμέν Μπαγκίς αναρωτιέται γιατί μπορεί να είναι πρόβλημα για τις ενταξιακές διαπραγματεύσεις της Τουρκίας, η επανένωση του νησιού, τη στιγμή που δεν αποτέλεσε πρόβλημα για την ένταξη «δήθεν» του «ελληνικού τμήματος» στην ΕΕ. Ως γνωστόν η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία έχει ενταχθεί στην ΕΕ ως ενιαίο κράτος.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Τι μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει ώστε η Τουρκία να εφαρμόσει το πρωτόκολλο της Άγκυρας, να επεκτείνει την Τελωνειακή Ένωση στην Κύπρο και να ανοίξει τα τουρκικά λιμάνια και αεροδρόμια για την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία;

Πως προτίθεται να προστατεύσει την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία από τις συνεχόμενες απειλές του τουρκικού κράτους για αναγνώριση της βορείου Κύπρου ως προσαρτώμενο κράτος της Τουρκίας, που στην ουσία σημαίνει και οριστική διχοτόμηση της νήσου Κύπρου;

Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(5 Ιουνίου 2012)

Όπως γνωρίζει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος, ένα σαφές μήνυμα στάλθηκε το Δεκέμβριο του 2011, όταν το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο εξέφρασε την σοβαρή ανησυχία του σχετικά με τις τουρκικές δηλώσεις και απειλές, και ζήτησε απόλυτο σεβασμό του ρόλου της Προεδρίας του Συμβουλίου, ο οποίος αποτελεί θεμελιώδες θεσμικό χαρακτηριστικό της ΕΕ που προβλέπεται στη Συνθήκη. Επιπρόσθετα, το Συμβούλιο των Υπουργών έχει επανειλημμένα υπογραμμίσει τη σημασία της προόδου ως προς την εξομάλυνση των διαφορών μεταξύ της Τουρκίας και όλων των κρατών μελών της ΕΕ, στα οποία η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία.

Η Επιτροπή, στις επαφές της με την τουρκική κυβέρνηση, τονίζει ότι η επανένωση του νησιού ως μια δικοινοτική, διζωνική ομοσπονδία είναι η μόνη σοβαρή επιλογή. Όλες οι προσπάθειες θα πρέπει εστιαστούν στην εύρεση βιώσιμου διακανονισμού μ’ αυτό το στόχο. Η Επιτροπή συνεχίζει να τονίζει ότι η λύση του κυπριακού προβλήματος επείγει και ενθαρρύνει όλα τα μέρη να χειριστούν το ζήτημα εποικοδομητικά.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004214/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Cyprus issue

The press has reported that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Dervis Eroglu, speaking about the forthcoming report by Alexander Downer to the UN Secretary General on the progress of negotiations and the settlement of the Cyprus problem, stressed that, in any case, it would be pointless to continue negotiations after 1 July when Cyprus takes over the EU Presidency and that he has informed Ban Ki-Moon himself of this view.

In view of this:

Does the Commission consider that the position of the Turkish Cypriot leader on resolving the Cyprus problem is appropriate and constructive?

Considering Turkey’s statements and threats over the Cyprus Presidency, what measures does it intend to take to continue talks leading to a settlement of the Cyprus problem?

Does it intend to sanction Turkey, a candidate country for EU accession, if it fails to comply and does not recognise the Presidency of Cyprus, an existing EU Member State?

Question for written answer E-004215/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(23 April 2012)

Subject: Recognition of the occupied part of Cyprus

According to the Turkish newspaper Milliyet, Turkey intends to implement a three‐phase plan for international recognition of the occupied part of Northern Cyprus and, should this fails, to put into effect a plan for the annexation thereof if no solution is found to the Cyprus problem by 1 July.

The phases of the plan include the declaration by the Turkish side calling for the international recognition of the occupied part of Cyprus, the opening of Varosha, renaming the so‐called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) to the ‘Turkish‐Cypriot State’ for international recognition. Should these actions not be successful, the plan will focus on the annexation to Turkey.

In view of this:

What measures does the Commission intend to take to protect the Republic of Cyprus from these types of threats, in view of the Cyprus Presidency of the European Union starting on 1 July 2012?

Does it believe Turkey’s position is appropriate for a country seeking to become a member of the European family given that it is consistently obstructing the path towards resolution of the Cyprus problem?

Question for written answer E-004218/12

to the Commission

Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)

(24 April 2012)

Subject: Definitive partition of Cyprus

In statements given to Austrian and Danish journalists published in the Austrian newspapers Kurier and Der Standard, Turkey’s European Affairs Minister, Egemen Bagis, has supported the creation of ‘two states, two governments and two parliaments’ in Cyprus. At the same time, he tried to play down the impact of Ankara’s recent threats over the annexation by Turkey of the occupied territory of Northern Cyprus.

The Turkish minister stressed that Ankara does not expect anything from the Cypriot Presidency of the EU Council from 1 July until the end of the year. Referring to the EU’s request for Turkey to extend the customs union with Cyprus and to open Turkish ports and airports to the Republic of Cyprus, he also said that Turkey would only do this as soon as the EU began direct trade with Northern Cyprus.

Egemen Bagis then asked why the reunification of the island posed a problem in respect of Turkish accession negotiations when it had not been an issue regarding the ‘apparent’ EU accession of the ‘Greek part’ of the island. As is well known, the Republic of Cyprus has become a member of the EU as a single Member State.

In view of this:

What measures does the Commission intend to take in to ensure that Turkey implements the Ankara Protocol, extends the customs union with Cyprus and opens Turkish ports and airports to the Republic of Cyprus?

How does it intend to protect the Republic of Cyprus from the continuous threats by the Turkish State regarding the recognition of Northern Cyprus as a state annexed to Turkey, which essentially entails the definitive partition of the island of Cyprus?

Joint answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2012)

As the Honourable Member is aware, a clear message was transmitted in December 2011, when the European Council expressed serious concern with regard to Turkish statements and threats and called for full respect of the role of the Presidency of the Council, which is a fundamental institutional feature of the EU provided for in the Treaty. Also, the Council has continually underlined the importance of progress in the normalisation of relations between Turkey and all EU Member States, including the Republic of Cyprus.

The Commission in its contacts with the Turkish Government emphasises that the reunification of the island as a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation is the only valid option. All efforts should focus on finding a durable settlement to that aim. The Commission continues to stress that a solution to the Cyprus problem is urgent and encourages all parties to treat this issue constructively.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004256/12

to the Council

William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)

(24 April 2012)

Subject: Council staff

Can the Council provide a breakdown of staff grades in the Council?

Reply

(11 June 2012)

The breakdown of staff grades in the Council is set out in annex.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004266/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Agricoltura di montagna

Le zone di montagna sono confrontate a sfide particolari ed hanno esigenze specifiche rispetto agli altri territori rurali. L'agricoltura di montagna svolge un ruolo strategico. Tra la forte pressione esercitata dal turismo e la sempre più difficile sopravvivenza degli ambienti a vocazione rurale, la gestione dell'alpeggio è un fattore determinante per il ripristino dell'equilibrio. Essa deve essere compatibile con l'ambiente naturale, ma deve altresì favorire l'evoluzione tecnica.

Si deve interviene per contribuire alla conservazione del paesaggio rurale, sostenendo l'agricoltura montana ed in particolare le attività pastorali mediante la valorizzazione degli alpeggi, per tenere in debito conto le esigenze ambientali; la remunerazione delle prestazioni a favore della qualità dei siti; la promozione degli alpeggi; lo sviluppo della comunicazione tra i conduttori d'alpeggio delle regioni interessate.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, si interroga la Commissione per sapere:

Quali strumenti di sostegno, destinati alle zone montane, sono risultati più vantaggiosi negli ultimi anni e quali sono previsti per la nuova politica agricola comune (PAC).

Se sono previste regole per la certificazione di qualità dei prodotti di montagna.

Risposta di Dacian Cioloş a nome della Commissione

(12 giugno 2012)

1.	Per quanto riguarda l’agricoltura nelle zone di montagna, il documento di lavoro dei servizi della Commissione

1.	Per quanto riguarda l’agricoltura nelle zone di montagna, il documento di lavoro dei servizi della Commissione

«Peak Performance: New insights into mountain farming in the EU» (Prestazione di picco: nuove prospettive per l’agricoltura di montagna nell'UE) (41) giunge alla conclusione che la situazione nelle montagne è diversa nei vari Stati membri. Il Fondo europeo agricolo per lo sviluppo rurale offre una vasta gamma di misure a favore delle zone montane e collinari.

Questo sostegno consiste soprattutto in pagamenti per superficie a favore degli agricoltori che intendono mantenere in vita un sistema di agricoltura sostenibile per evitare l'abbandono delle terre. Tali pagamenti riflettono i costi aggiuntivi e la perdita di reddito provocati dal fatto che i periodi di crescita sono più brevi e i terreni ripidi. Esiste un ventaglio di altre misure, alcune delle quali di maggiore intensità d’aiuto, a favore delle zone montane.

Per il periodo di programmazione 2014-2020, la Commissione ha proposto la continuazione di questi regimi nonché la possibilità di mettere a punto sottoprogrammi tematici per le zone montane in modo che le peculiarità locali possano essere messe a fuoco con maggior precisione dai singoli Stati membri. Esiste anche una nuova possibilità di concedere pagamenti diretti più elevati a favore — tra l’altro — delle zone montane nell’ambito del terzo pilastro della PAC.

2.	Il 10 ottobre 2010 la Commissione ha adottato una proposta di regolamento sui regimi di qualità dei prodotti agricoli

2.	Il 10 ottobre 2010 la Commissione ha adottato una proposta di regolamento sui regimi di qualità dei prodotti agricoli

 (42). Nella relazione, la Commissione si è impegnata ad effettuare ulteriori studi ed analisi onde valutare i problemi cui sono confrontati i produttori dei prodotti di montagna nell’etichettatura dei medesimi prima dell’immissione sul mercato; su questa base la Commissione può proporre un adeguato follow-up.

I colegislatori stanno attualmente discutendo la richiesta di proposta che il termine «Prodotto della montagna» sia fissato come termine qualitativo opzionale nel regolamento per descrivere prodotti destinati al consumo umano, elencati nell’allegato I del trattato nel rispetto delle norme relative alle materie prime, ai prodotti alimentari e alla loro lavorazione.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004266/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Mountain farming

Mountain areas face particular challenges and have specific requirements compared with other rural areas. Mountain farming performs a strategic role. Given the mounting pressure of tourism and the fact that it is becoming increasingly difficult for rural environments to survive, the management of upland summer pasture plays a decisive role in restoring equilibrium. This has to be compatible with the natural environment and must also encourage technical development.

Action is needed to help preserve the rural landscape by supporting mountain farming, and pastoral activities in particular, enhancing mountain pastures, giving due consideration to environmental requirements, rewarding services that preserve the quality of these sites, promoting mountain pastures and developing communication between mountain farmers in the areas concerned.

1. Which forms of support for mountain areas have proved most successful in the last few years, and what provision will be made in the new common agricultural policy (CAP)?

2. Will rules be laid down for quality certification of mountain products?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(12 June 2012)

1.	As regards agriculture in mountain areas, the Commission Staff Working Paper

1.	As regards agriculture in mountain areas, the Commission Staff Working Paper

‘Peak Performance: New insights into mountain farming in the EU’ (43) concludes that the situation in mountains varies across Member States. The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development offers various measures to mountainous and foothill areas.

Above all, this support is represented by area payments to farmers which aim to maintain sustainable farming in order to avoid land abandonment. These payments reflect the additional costs and income loss caused by a shorter growing period and by steep slopes. There is a range of other measures, some of them with higher aid intensities for mountain areas.

For the programming period 2014-2020, the Commission has proposed a continuation of these schemes, as well as it has proposed a possibility to formulate thematic subprogrammes for mountain areas so that the local specificities can be better targeted by individual Member States. There is also a new possibility to grant higher direct payments to i.a. mountain areas under the CAP's first pillar.

2.	On 10 October 2010, the Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation on agricultural product quality schemes

2.	On 10 October 2010, the Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation on agricultural product quality schemes

 (44). In the explanatory memorandum, the Commission engaged to carry out further study and analysis in order to assess the problems of mountain products producers in labelling the products on the market; on this basis the Commission may propose appropriate follow-up.

The co-legislators currently discussing the proposal request that the term ‘mountain product’ is established as an optional quality term in the regulation to describe products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty respecting rules with regard to raw materials, feedstuffs and processing.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004271/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione (FEG)

Il termine globalizzazione indica la circolazione, a livello mondiale, di merci, servizi, capitali, tecnologie e persone attraverso l'apertura reciproca e l'intensificarsi dei contatti tra i vari paesi. Tale fenomeno può generare maggiore crescita per tutti, ma può anche produrre un impatto negativo e ciò spiega l'esigenza di una regolamentazione per mezzo di norme internazionali.

L'Unione europea rappresenta tutti i suoi Stati membri in campo commerciale e nell'ambito dell'Organizzazione mondiale del commercio ed è la prima potenza commerciale del mondo, rappresenta infatti il 20 % di tutte le importazioni ed esportazioni. Il libero scambio tra i paesi membri è stato uno dei principi fondatori dell'attuale Unione europea, che ha fatto suo l'impegno per la liberalizzazione del commercio mondiale, a vantaggio sia dei paesi ricchi che di quelli poveri.

Alla luce di quanto sopraesposto, può la Commissione comunicare quanto segue:

Quali sono state le sfide principali affrontate negli ultimi anni dal Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione (FEG)?

Per contrastare l'emergere di un mondo sempre più multipolare e il declino del peso individuale dei singoli Stati membri si potrebbe pensare ad una rielaborazione della governance economica dei paesi dell'eurozona e il passaggio ad una rappresentanza unica presso il FMI e la Banca mondiale?

Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione

(15 giugno 2012)

1. Tra il 2007 e il 2011 sono state sottoposte al Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione (FEG) 97 richieste di sostegno per un valore pari a più di 400 milioni di EUR. La Commissione fa presente in tale contesto che:

—	l'impennata del numero di domande presentate — e quindi del numero di lavoratori per cui si chiedeva assistenza — al Fondo tra il maggio 2009 e il dicembre 2011 quando il Fondo è stato aperto anche ai lavoratori colpiti dalla crisi finanziaria ed economica globale;

—	la crescente diversità degli Stati membri e dei settori economici alla base delle domande presentate al FEG.

La principale sfida per il FEG è consistita nel reagire nel modo più efficace ai licenziamenti massicci in un contesto economico e occupazionale sempre più difficile. L'esclusione di importanti gruppi di lavoratori (ad esempio i lavoratori temporanei e interinali, i lavoratori autonomi, gli agricoltori) dal sostegno del FEG ha costituito un elemento limitante in tale contesto. La Commissione rinvia l'onorevole deputato alla propria proposta (45) sul futuro FEG che intende affrontare tale problematica.

2.	La Commissione si adopera continuamente per approfondire e ampliare il coordinamento tra gli Stati membri dell'UE al fine di rendere più forte la voce dell'Europa negli istituti finanziari internazionali mediante una rappresentanza europea consolidata e meno frammentata.

Una soluzione di lungo periodo consisterebbe nel far parlare l'UE con una voce unica, il che le consentirebbe di inviare un messaggio effettivamente univoco. Tuttavia gli Stati membri dell'UE non sembrano inclini a delegare i loro poteri decisionali all'Unione nel breve o medio termine.

In alternativa, e quale passo intermedio sulla via del seggio unico, la Commissione è dell'idea di raggruppare le parti interessate dell'UE in circoscrizioni esclusivamente UE in modo da far sì che le delegazioni dell'UE diano voce esclusivamente a posizioni dell'UE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004271/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: European Globalisation Adjustment Fund

Globalisation means worldwide flows of goods, services, capital, technologies and people, as countries everywhere increasingly open up to contact with each other. Globalisation can create more wealth for everybody, but it can also be disruptive and needs to be regulated at an international level.

The European Union represents all its Member States on matters of trade policy, including within the World Trade Organisation, and is the world’s largest trader, accounting for 20 % of global imports and exports. Free trade among its members was one of the founding principles of the EU, and it is committed to liberalising world trade for the benefit of rich and poor countries alike.

In view of the above, can the Commission state:

What have been the main challenges facing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in the last few years?

Whether it would be possible, in order to counteract the emergence of an increasingly multi-polar world and the decline in the influence of individual Member States, to consider reviewing the economic governance of the euro area countries and to move towards single representation at the IMF and the World Bank?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

1. Between 2007 and 2011, 97 applications worth more than EUR 400 million have been submitted for support from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF). The Commission would note in this context:

—	the steep increase in the number of applications submitted to, and of the workers targeted for assistance by, the Fund between May 2009 and December 2011, when the Fund was opened also to workers affected by the global financial and economic crisis.

—	the growing variety of Member States and economic sectors covered by EGF applications.

The main challenge for the EGF has been to provide the most effective reaction to the mass redundancies in an increasingly difficult economic and employment context. The exclusion of important groups of workers (e.g. temporary and agency workers, self-employed, farmers) from EGF support has been a limiting factor in this context. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its proposal (46) on the future EGF which aims to address this issue.

2.	The Commission is continuously working to deepen and broaden the coordination between EU Member States, in order to strengthen Europe's voice in the IFIs through a consolidated and less fragmented European representation.

A long-term solution should be a single voice for the EU which would allow the EU to truly speak with one voice. However, EU Member States are unlikely to be willing to delegate their power to make decisions to the Union in the short or medium term.

Alternatively, and as an intermediate step to the single seat, the Commission is in favour of regrouping EU shareholders into EU‐only constituencies, so as to have EU EDs representing exclusively EU positions.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004273/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Estrazione delle cellule staminali dal latte materno

Latte di mamma fonte di cellule staminali: la conferma arriva da una ricerca avviata nel 2007 da un gruppo di studio di una università australiana, che aveva isolato alcune staminali contenute nel latte materno. Ora, grazie alle ulteriori ricerche condotte da un nuovo componente del gruppo, è stato dimostrato che esiste la possibilità di estrarre dal latte materno vere e proprie cellule «bambine» multipotenti.

Una nuova riserva di cellule di questo tipo nell'adulto consentirebbe agli scienziati di portare avanti la ricerca senza dover affrontare il problema etico di usare embrioni. Inoltre il latte materno è facilmente reperibile e, secondo i ricercatori, conterrebbe staminali in grande quantità. È stato possibile effettuare ulteriori passi avanti nel campo della ricerca, dimostrando ancora una volta come il latte materno non sia solo un semplice nutrimento per il bambino. Queste staminali possono diventare cellule di tessuto osseo, cartilagineo, adipose, pancreatiche, epatiche, neuroni. È proprio questo il loro valore: stimolandole opportunamente in provetta è possibile «trasformarle» in cellule specializzate di diversa e svariata natura.

Alla luce di quanto sopraesposto, può la Commissione comunicare quanto segue:

È a conoscenza della nuova ricerca sull'estrazione delle cellule staminali dal latte materno?

Ritiene che, in linea con le azioni promosse dalla Commissione nel campo della ricerca, sia possibile finanziare la nuova scoperta tramite il Settimo programma quadro (7° PQ) oppure il Programma quadro per la competitività e l'innovazione?

Risposta di Máire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(21 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è a conoscenza delle ricerche relative alla presenza di cellule staminali nel latte materno.

La ricerca su questa fonte di cellule staminali potrebbe essere finanziata dal settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico (2007-2013). Il documento orientativo redatto in relazione al programma di lavoro 2013 del tema di ricerca «Salute», indica che si sollecitano proposte in materia di controllo della differenziazione e proliferazione delle cellule staminali umane destinate all'impiego terapeutico.

Il programma quadro per la competitività e l'innovazione non sostiene alcun tipo di ricerca, in linea con la decisione ad esso relativa.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004273/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Extracting stem cells from breast milk

A confirmation that breast milk is a source of stem cells has come from studies launched in 2007 by a research team at an Australian university, which isolated a number of stem cells contained in breast milk. The latest research carried out by a new member of the team has now demonstrated that genuine multipotent ‘baby’ cells can be extracted from breast milk.

A new supply of cells of this type in adults would allow scientists to move research forward without having to deal with the ethical problem of using embryos. Furthermore, breast milk is easily obtainable and, according to researchers, contains large quantities of stem cells. Further progress in the field of research has been possible, demonstrating once again how breast milk is not just food for babies. These stem cells can become bone, cartilage, fat, pancreatic or hepatic tissue or neurons. Their value really lies in this: by being appropriately stimulated in the test tube, they can be ‘transformed’ into specialised cells of many different kinds.

In view of the above, can the Commission state the following:

Is it aware of the new research on extracting stem cells from breast milk?

Does it believe that, in line with the activities promoted by the Commission in the field of research, it might be possible to fund the new discovery through the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) or the framework Programme for Competition and Innovation?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of research showing that stem cells may be found in human breast milk.

Research on this source of stem cells could be supported through the seventh framework programme for Research and Technological Development (2007‐13). The Orientation Paper (47) prepared in connection with the Health 2013 research Work Programme indicates that proposals are invited on the subject of controlling differentiation and proliferation in human stem cells intended for therapeutic use.

In line with the decision on the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme, this programme does not support any kind of research.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004277/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Il «supergrano»

In Australia è stata sviluppata per la prima volta una varietà di grano duro capace di tollerare la salinità del terreno e di produrre il 25 % in più rispetto alle varietà convenzionali. Si tratta di una scoperta che potrebbe essere utile in futuro visto che, a causa dei cambiamenti climatici, il problema della salinità del suolo interessa già oltre il 20 % dei terreni agricoli mondiali, mettendo a rischio la produzione alimentare del pianeta.

Il «supergrano» australiano ottenuto non è un organismo geneticamente modificato bensì il frutto di incroci tradizionali. I ricercatori hanno infatti analizzato le caratteristiche genetiche di un'antica parentale selvatica del grano duro, scoprendo il funzionamento di un gene capace di dare alla pianta una migliore tolleranza a livelli elevati di sodio nel suolo. Lo studio apre nuovi scenari per il miglioramento delle piante e dimostra che è possibile sfruttare caratteristiche già presenti in alcune varietà vegetali per ottenere piante più resistenti ai cambiamenti climatici.

Alla luce di quanto sopraesposto, si interroga la Commissione per sapere:

se è a conoscenza di questa nuova ricerca e se ritiene che possa essere utile approfondire lo studio tramite ricercatori europei e finanziarne la ricerca.

Risposta di Maire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(21 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è a conoscenza del fatto che diversi ricercatori australiani appartenenti al centro di ricerca CSIRO e all’università di Adelaide sono riusciti a sviluppare con metodi convenzionali una varietà di grano duro capace di tollerare la salinità.

Questa nuova varietà è l’elettrizzante risultato della collaborazione ultradecennale di fisiologi, genetisti e botanici, che spazia dalla caratterizzazione delle risorse genetiche di una parentale selvatica del grano duro a studi genetici e genomici e finanche all’applicazione delle conoscenze acquisite in campo molecolare nelle attività convenzionali di selezione varietale.

Anche in Europa si stanno percorrendo analoghe vie di ricerca interdisciplinare, segnatamente mediante il Programma quadro di ricerca (PQ). Il tema 2 del Settimo Programma Quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico (7°PQ, 2007-2013) include anche la ricerca agricola ed offre importanti opportunità di miglioramento dei vegetali grazie ai progressi realizzati con metodi di selezione varietale sia convenzionali che nuovi. Le metodologie adottate nella realizzazione dei vari progetti sono molteplici e rispondono alle necessità impellenti del settore, fra cui: 1) l’esigenza di delucidare gli aspetti fondamentali della regolazione genetica e la funzione dei geni e di decifrare i meccanismi in grado di rendere le piante più resistenti agli stress biotici e abiotici 2) l’individuazione delle fonti di accresciuta variabilità genetica e la messa a punto di strumenti capaci di migliorare l’efficienza dei programmi di selezione varietale. I ricercatori australiani, fra i quali si annoverano alcuni esperti dell’università di Adelaide, prendono parte a diversi progetti del 7° PQ, scambiando reciprocamente con i propri interlocutori europei le conoscenze acquisite e l’utilizzo delle diverse infrastrutture (progetti DROPS, EUROOT, ADAPTAWHEAT, SWUP-MED (48)). Globalmente, la ricerca ed i suoi risultati devono mirare a sostenere il settore europeo della selezione varietale contribuendo a mantenerlo dinamico e competitivo e, in ultima analisi, offrendo agli agricoltori europei varietà vegetali in grado di soddisfarne le esigenze presenti e future.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004277/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: The ‘supergrain’

For the first time, a variety of durum wheat has been developed in Australia that is capable of tolerating soil salinity and produces 25 % more than conventional varieties. This discovery could be very useful in the future, since, in view of climate change, the problem of soil salinity is already affecting more than 20 % of the world’s agricultural land, which places the planet’s food production at risk.

The new Australian supergrain is not a genetically modified organism, but rather the fruit of traditional cross-pollination methods. Researchers analysed the genetic characteristics of an old wild relative of durum wheat and discovered a genetic function that is capable of giving the plant a better tolerance to high sodium levels in the soil. The study opens up new scenarios for improving plants and proves that it is possible to utilise the characteristics already present in some plant varieties to obtain plants that are more resistant to climate change.

Given the above, is the Commission aware of this new research and does it think it might be worth expanding on the study through EU‐funded research?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of the development of a conventionally bred salt tolerant variety of durum wheat by Australian scientists from the CSIRO Plant Industry and the University of Adelaide.

This new variety is the exciting result of more than 10 years collaboration between physiologists, geneticists and breeders, spanning from the characterisation of genetic resources from crop wild relatives to genetic and genomic studies and finally to the application of molecular knowledge in conventional breeding activities.

Similar routes of interdisciplinary research are also underway in Europe, notably through the Research Framework Programme (FP). Theme 2 of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7, 2007-2013) includes agricultural research and provides important opportunities for plant improvement through the advancement of conventional and new breeding methods. Approaches taken by the various projects are manifold and answer to urgent needs of the sector, such as elucidating the regulation and function of genes and mechanisms conferring increased tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses, identifying sources for increased genetic variation and developing tools to improve selection in breeding programmes. Australian scientists including scientists from the University of Adelaide are involved in several FP7 projects, exchanging know-how and infrastructure with their European counterparts (projects DROPS, Euroot, Adaptawheat, SWUP-MED (49)). Overall, research and its outputs are to support the European breeding sector in remaining dynamic and competitive and ultimately providing European farmers with varieties which meet current and future needs.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004280/12

a la Comisión

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)

(25 de abril de 2012)

Asunto: Plan Parcial de reclasificación «Mas de Luna»

Recientemente se ha aprobado el Plan Parcial de reclasificación «Mas de Luna» al municipio de Valle de Alba (Castellón) . Esta actuación afectará al futuro de la planta de tratamiento de residuos ganaderos (purines) situada en esta zona, la cual tendrá que ser desmantelada. La planta ha sido sufragada en parte con Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional FEDER con un coste de 6 645 630 €, según los propios datos oficiales.

Esta planta de purines nunca ha tenido un funcionamiento y rendimiento considerable, y casi al mismo tiempo que se destinaban los fondos europeos a la puesta en funcionamiento de esta actividad, el mismo ayuntamiento iniciaba los trámites para hacer de la zona una urbanización residencial con campo de golf incluido, donde quedaba claro que las dos actividades eran plenamente incompatibles.

¿Considera la Comisión que se han malgastado los fondos europeos en este proyecto?

¿Conocía la Comisión al aprobar la utilización de los fondos la duración del proyecto?

¿Cree que se han amortizado los costes iniciales?

¿Piensa adoptar alguna medida de sanción para asegurar que los fondos europeos no son malgastados?

Respuesta del Sr. Hahn en nombre de la Comisión

(3 de julio de 2012)

1. La Comisión no dispone de información que ponga en duda la finalidad del proyecto al que se refiere Su Señoría, cofinanciado por el FEDER en el periodo 1994-1999. En el marco de la asociación, la Comisión garantiza el seguimiento de la ejecución del programa en cuestión, así como la realización de controles y evaluaciones intermedias y ex post. Los informes finales de ejecución no han puesto de manifiesto ningún problema en lo que se refiere a la ejecución y viabilidad del proyecto.

2. El Estado miembro, en el ejercicio de sus competencias y conforme a los reglamentos, fija la duración de los proyectos. En virtud del principio de gestión compartida, las autoridades nacionales y regionales gestionan directamente los proyectos cofinanciados con cargo a los Fondos Estructurales y al Fondo de Cohesión, y garantizan la legalidad y regularidad de los gastos cofinanciados. Si desea más información, la Comisión invita a Su Señoría a ponerse en contacto directamente con las autoridades españolas competentes:

Ministerio de Hacienda:Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios

Ministerio de Hacienda y Administraciones Públicas

Tel.: +34 915835493etalens@segp.minhap.es

Generalitat Valenciana:

Conselleria de Hacienda y Administracion Publica

Tel. +34 963862092; Fax +34 963866209viesca_jua@gva.es

www.gva.es

3. Habida cuenta de que dicho proyecto ha sido cofinanciado durante el periodo 1994-1999 y que la Comisión no dispone de información que ponga en duda la finalidad del mismo, se considera que su coste inicial ha sido amortizado.

4. La Comisión está en contacto con las autoridades competentes a fin de recabar información pertinente e informará de los resultados a Su Señoría. En el supuesto de que se hubiera cometido algún tipo de irregularidad, la Comisión velará por la recuperación de la totalidad o una parte de los fondos comprometidos en el proyecto.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004280/12

to the Commission

Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Partial plan for reclassifying Mas de Luna

A partial plan for reclassifying Mas de Luna was recently approved by the municipality of Valle de Alba (Castellón). This action will affect the future of the treatment plant for livestock waste (slurry) located in this area, which will have to be dismantled. The plant was paid for in part through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) at a cost of EUR 6 645 630, according to the official data.

This slurry plant has never operated at full capacity and output, and at almost the same time that European funds were earmarked for the implementation of this activity, the same city council began the procedure to make the area into a residential development with a golf course. It became immediately clear that the two activities were completely incompatible.

Does the Commission believe that European funds have been poorly spent on this project?

Was the Commission aware of the duration of the project when it approved use of the funds?

Does it believe that the initial costs have been recovered?

Does it plan to adopt any penalty to ensure that European funds are not poorly spent?

(Version française)

1.	La Commission n'a pas eu connaissance d'éléments permettant de mettre en doute la finalité du projet mentionné par l'Honorable Parlementaire qui a été cofinancé par le FEDER au cours de la période 1994-1999.

Dans le cadre du partenariat, la Commission assure le suivi de l'exécution du programme concerné, ainsi que des contrôles effectués et des évaluations à mi-parcours et ex-post. Les rapports finaux d'exécution n'indiquaient pas de problèmes quant à la mise en œuvre et la viabilité du projet.

2.

La durée d'un projet est fixée par l'État membre dans l'exercice de ses compétences et conformément aux règlements. Les projets cofinancés au titre des fonds structurels et de cohésion sont gérés, en vertu du principe de gestion partagée, directement par les autorités nationales et régionales lesquelles assurent la légalité et la régularité des dépenses cofinancées. Pour plus d'informations, la Commission suggère à l'Honorable Parlementaire de s'adresser directement aux autorités espagnoles compétentes:

Ministerio de Hacienda:

Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios

Ministerio de Hacienda y Administraciones Públicas

Tel.: +34 915 835 493

etalens@segp.minhap.es

Generalitat Valenciana:

Conselleria de Hacienda y Administracion Publica

Tel.: +34 963 862 092: Fax: +34 963 866 209

viesca_jua@gva.es www.gva.es

3.	Compte tenu que ce projet a été cofinancé dans la période 1994-1999 et que la Commission n'a pas eu connaissance d'éléments qui mettraient en doute la finalité de ce projet, le coût initial devrait être amorti.

4.

La Commission est en contact avec les autorités compétentes afin d'obtenir les informations nécessaires. Elle ne manquera pas d'informer l'Honorable Parlementaire. Si des irrégularités ont été commises, la Commission veillera à la récupération de tout ou d'une partie des fonds engagés dans le projet.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004284/12

an die Kommission

Hubert Pirker (PPE)

(25. April 2012)

Betrifft: Harmonisierung der Mitführpflichten für PKW

Auf dem Weg zu einem einheitlichen Europäischen Verkehrsraum, in dem grenzüberschreitender Verkehr die Normalität darstellt, gelten bei den sogenannten Mitführpflichten für PKW immer noch 27 unterschiedliche nationale Regelungen.

Je nach Mitgliedstaat sind Warnweste, Autoapotheke, Beatmungsmaske, Ersatzlampenset, Feuerlöscher, Schmutzfänger für die Hinterräder, Plastikkeile gegen das Wegrollen etc. mitzuführen. Fehlt die vorgeschriebene Ausrüstung, drohen in den Mitgliedstaaten teilweise sehr hohe Strafen. Das schafft für grenzüberschreitend Reisende große Rechtsunsicherheit und stellt zudem ein Ärgernis dar.

Eine Harmonisierung der bestehenden Mitführpflicht von für die Verkehrssicherheit relevanten Gegenständen im Sinne von Mindeststandards würde daher beträchtlich zur Straßenverkehrs— und vor allem zur Rechtssicherheit für PKW-Lenker in Europa beitragen.

Daher richte ich im Namen der EVP-Fraktion nachstehende Fragen an die Kommission:

1. Welche Maßnahmen hat die Kommission bisher ergriffen, um die aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Vorschriften entstehende Rechtsunsicherheit für PKW-Fahrer im grenzüberschreitenden Verkehr zu verringern? Welche Informationskampagnen hat es bisher gegeben, bzw. welche sind in der nächsten Zukunft geplant?

2. Hat die Kommission bereits eine EU-weite Bestandsaufnahme und eine Evaluierung der derzeitigen Regelungen vorgenommen? Wenn ja, welche Konsequenzen will die Kommission daraus ziehen?

3. Ist die Kommission bereit, einen konkreten Gesetzesvorschlag zur Harmonisierung der Mitführpflicht noch im Rahmen des Arbeitsprogrammes 2012 vorzulegen?

4. Wird es vonseiten der Kommission im Falle der Harmonisierung der Mitführpflicht einen Konsultationsprozess mit den Autofahrerorganisationen geben?

Antwort von Herrn Kallas im Namen der Kommission

(10. Juli 2012)

Wie der Herr Abgeordnete in seiner Frage feststellt, gibt es keine EU-Vorschriften, die in einheitlicher Form festlegen, welche Sicherheits‐ und sonstigen Ausrüstungen in privaten PKW mitzuführen sind. Die Mitgliedstaaten haben diesbezüglich ihre eigenen nationalen Rechtsvorschriften erlassen.

Die Kommission hat 2008 eine Richtlinie über die grenzübergreifende Ahndung von Verstößen vorgeschlagen, die vom Europäischen Parlament und dem Rat am 25. Oktober 2011 (50) angenommen wurde und von den Mitgliedstaaten bis zum 7. November 2013 umgesetzt werden muss. Die Richtlinie verpflichtet die Mitgliedstaaten dazu, der Europäischen Kommission ihre jeweiligen nationalen Rechtsvorschriften zu Geschwindigkeitsübertretungen, Nichtanlegen des Sicherheitsgurtes, Überfahren eines roten Lichtzeichens, Trunkenheit im Straßenverkehr, Fahren unter Drogeneinfluss, Nichttragen eines Schutzhelms, unbefugter Benutzung eines Fahrstreifens und rechtswidriger Benutzung eines Mobiltelefons oder anderer Kommunikationsgeräte mitzuteilen. Sobald diese Informationen übermittelt wurden, wird die Kommission diese auf ihrer Webseite veröffentlichen, um die Rechtsunsicherheit für die Kraftfahrer zu verringern.

Als Orientierungshilfe veröffentlicht die Kommission auf ihrer Webseite zusätzlich Informationen zu der in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten vorgeschriebenen Sicherheitsausrüstung: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/going_abroad/index_de.htm

Mit Blick auf das Subsidiaritätsprinzip wurde die Harmonisierung der unterschiedlichen nationalen Rechtsvorschriften im Bereich der Sicherheitsausrüstung bisher für nicht notwendig erachtet. Bevor sie gesetzgeberisch tätig wird, muss die Kommission aber in jedem Fall eine eingehende Konsultation der Interessengruppen durchführen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004284/12

to the Commission

Hubert Pirker (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Harmonisation of rules regarding equipment to be carried in private cars

As we proceed towards a single European transport area where cross-border traffic is the norm, there are still 27 different national regulations applying to equipment which has to be carried in private cars.

Depending on the Member State concerned, reflective jackets, first aid kits, breathing masks, spare lights, fire extinguishers, rear wheel mud flaps, wheel chocks, etc. may have to be carried. If the abovementioned equipment is not carried, there is a threat of very severe penalties in some Member States. This creates great uncertainty for cross-border travellers as regards the law, and is also a source of annoyance.

Harmonisation of the existing rules on the relevant equipment required for safe travel, in the interests of minimum standards, would therefore contribute considerably to road safety and above all certainty with regard to the law for motorists in Europe.

In this context, I would like to ask the Commission the following questions on behalf of the PPE:

What steps has the Commission taken to date to reduce uncertainty regarding the law due to the differing regulations for motorists travelling across borders? What information campaigns have there been, and which ones are planned in the near future?

Has the Commission undertaken an EU‐wide survey of the situation and an assessment of the current regulations? Is so, what conclusions does the Commission intend to draw from these?

Is the Commission prepared to submit a legislative proposal specifically on harmonisation of the abovementioned regulations, still within the framework of the 2012 Work Programme?

Does the Commission expect there to be a consultation process with the motoring organisations if the regulations on the necessary equipment to be carried in private cars is standardised?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2012)

As the Honourable Member question points out, there is no EU legislation regulating in a uniform manner the type of safety or other equipment to be carried in private cars. Member States have adopted their specific national legislation as regards such equipment.

The Commission proposed in 2008 a directive on cross-border enforcement of infringements which was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council on 25 October 2011 (51) and will have to be transposed by Member States by 7 November 2013. This directive contains an obligation for Member States to communicate to the Commission their respective national rules as regards speeding, non‐use of the seat belt, non‐stopping at traffic lights, drink driving, driving under the influence of drugs, failing to wear a helmet, use of a forbidded lane and illegally using a mobile phone or other communication devices. Once the information has been communicated, the Commission will publish it in its Internet website in order to reduce uncertainty for motorists.

The Commission also publishes on its website, for guidance purposes, information concerning the safety equipment that is required by Member States: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/going_abroad.

With respect to the principle of subsidiarity, so far it has not been deemed appropriate to initiate the harmonisation of the various national rules regarding safety equipment. In any case, before a legislative initiative is taken, the Commission is bound to carry out an in-depth stakeholder consultation.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004285/12

à Comissão

Nuno Teixeira (PPE)

(25 de Abril de 2012)

Assunto: Os BRIC e o sistema multilateral

Tendo em conta que:

—	Os países denominados BRIC se reuniram no passado dia 29 de março para a 4.a Cimeira, sublinhando o seu empenho numa parceria global para a estabilidade, a segurança e a prosperidade, com base no sistema vigente, mas com alterações na justa representação dos países parte;

—	Os BRIC, apenas quatro países, representam 43 % da população mundial, onde os efeitos da crise tem tido repercussões reduzidas, se comparados com os países desenvolvidos;

—	O papel destes países para a recuperação económica a nível mundial é imprescindível, bem como a sua participação no sistema multilateral, nomeadamente nas organizações internacionais;

Pergunta-se à Comissão:

No quadro da participação da UE nos diversos organismos internacionais, qual tem sido o seu envolvimento no que respeita às reformas ansiadas pelos BRIC na arquitetura financeira multilateral, nomeadamente para o aumento da representação destes países na governação institucional do FMI e do Banco Mundial? Tem a Comissão uma posição definida relativamente às críticas dos BRIC quanto à escolha «não transparente» do presidente de ambas as instituições?

Quais serão as consequências para o FMI e para o Banco Mundial advenientes da criação do novo Banco de Desenvolvimento citado nas declarações finais da Cimeira, orientado para os BRIC, para outras economias emergentes e para os países em desenvolvimento? Em seu entender, considera a Comissão importante para o reforço da ordem multilateral a criação de mais instituições, ou o reforço e reformulação das já existentes, com a acomodação das reformas pedidas?

Qual a sua posição quanto à reforma do Conselho de Segurança da ONU que os BRIC pretendem?

Qual a sua posição quanto à aposta numa energia nuclear segura, tal como consta da Declaração de Deli, de março de 2012?

Resposta dada por Olli Rehn em nome da Comissão

(21 de Junho de 2012)

1. A UE tem feito tudo para levar por diante as reformas do Banco Mundial acordadas em 2010. O direito de voto dos países em desenvolvimento e das economias em transição no BIRD aumentou 3,1 %. A reforma da representação no FMI acordada em 2010, uma vez ratificada, transferirá mais de 6 % da representação para os países emergentes com um mercado dinâmico e dos sobre-representados para os sub-representados. A UE está no bom caminho para implementar a reforma das quotas e da governação do FMI, aceitando a redução de dois lugares para os países europeus avançados quando se tornar efetiva a reforma das quotas de 2010. Os europeus concordam também com a proposta no sentido da seleção do próximo diretor-geral do FMI com base no mérito e independentemente da nacionalidade, se o mesmo for feito para o presidente do Banco Mundial.

2. Neste momento, a proposta de um novo banco de desenvolvimento orientado para os BRIC não é clara. A Comissão é favorável à criação de um novo banco de desenvolvimento apenas se o mesmo oferecer um valor acrescentado claro e não duplicar o papel das instituições existentes.

3. Embora haja um apoio esmagador à reforma do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, os membros desta organização mantêm-se muito divididos quanto aos pormenores, podendo ser necessária uma fase de reforma transitória. Na UE, os Estados-Membros têm pontos de vista divergentes e a CE apenas tem estatuto de observador nas Nações Unidas. O Tratado de Lisboa não abre as portas à nomeação de um membro representante da UE.

4. A União Europeia insta os países que utilizam a energia nuclear a aplicarem as ferramentas e normas da AIEA. A União Europeia considera que o quadro internacional da segurança nuclear, nomeadamente a Convenção sobre a Segurança Nuclear, deveria ser revisto de forma a torná-lo mais eficaz e melhorar a sua governação e força executória.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004285/12

to the Commission

Nuno Teixeira (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: The BRIC countries and the multilateral system

The BRIC countries met on 29 March 2012 for their Fourth Summit, underlining their commitment to a global partnership for stability, security and prosperity, founded on the current system but with changes to ensure that these countries are fairly represented. The four BRIC countries alone represent 43 % of the world population, and the effects of the crisis have had less impact in these countries than in developed countries. The role of these countries in the global economic recovery is thus essential, as is their participation in the multilateral system, particularly in international organisations.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

In the framework of EU participation in the various international bodies, what has been its involvement with regard to the reforms sought by the BRIC countries in the multilateral financial architecture, particularly as regards increasing their representation in the institutional governance of the IMF and World Bank? Does the Commission have a defined position on the criticisms of the BRIC countries regarding the ‘non-transparent’ selection of the presidents of these two institutions?

What will be the consequences of the creation of the new Development Bank orientated towards the BRIC countries, cited in the final summit declaration, for the IMF and the World Bank, for other emerging economies and for developing countries? In the Commission’s opinion, is it better to strengthen the multilateral order by creating more institutions or by strengthening and reforming those that already exist, accommodating the desired reforms?

What is its position with regard to the reform of the UN Security Council that the BRIC countries are seeking?

What is its position with regard to investment in safe nuclear energy, as included in the Delhi Declaration of March 2012?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

1. The EU has pushed for the implementation of the World Bank reforms agreed in 2010. The voting power of developing countries and transition economies in the IBRD has increased by 3.1 %. The IMF quota reform agreed in 2010 will, once ratified, shift more than 6 % of quota to dynamic emerging market countries and from over— to underrepresented countries. The EU is fully on track to implement the 2010 IMF quota and governance reform, by consenting to two fewer seats for advanced European countries once the 2010 quota reform becomes effective. The Europeans would also agree on the next IMF Managing Director to be selected on merit and regardless of nationality if the same is done for the World Bank President.

2. At this stage the proposal for a new development bank oriented towards the BRIC countries is unclear. The Commission would be in favour of a new development bank only when it could provide clear added value and not duplicate the role of existing institutions.

3. Although there is overwhelming support for Security Council reform, the UN membership remains very divided on the details and a transitional stage of reform may be necessary. Within the EU, Member States have divergent views and the EC has only an observer status at the UN. The Treaty of Lisbon does not open the door for an EU seat.

4. The EU urges countries using nuclear energy to apply the relevant IAEA tools and standards. The EU considers that the international nuclear safety framework, particularly the Convention on Nuclear Safety, should be reviewed in order to increase its effectiveness, governance and enforceability.

(българска версия)

Въпрос с искане за писмен отговор E-004294/12

до Комисията (Зам.-председател/Върховeн представител)

Мария Неделчева (PPE)

(25 април 2012 г.)

Относно: ЗП/ВП — Криза на сигурността и хуманитарна криза в Мали

Положението в Мали е изключително опасно и с всеки изминал ден става по-лошо. Жестоките нападения на Националното движение за освобождение на Азауад (НДОА) — група въстаници туареги, свързани с елементи от „Ал Кайда“ в ислямския Магреб, като въоръжената ислямистка групировка Ансар дин, както и неспособността на местната хунта — свалила от власт президента Амаду Тумани Туре, под претекст, че не е успял да потуши въстанието на туарегите, — да се справи с въстаниците туареги, предизвикаха изостряне на насилието в цялата северна част на Мали. Към това се прибавят и разпространението на оръжия и муниции и радикализирането на групировките.

Влошаването на ситуацията със сигурността налага северната част на Мали да бъде обявена за територия извън правото, което още повече усложнява хуманитарната и продоволствената криза в Мали. Действително, цената на просото, основната храна на семействата в Мали, се е повишила с 40 %; над 170 хиляди души са били разселени във и извън страната (основно в Нигер и Мавритания), условията на крайна бедност предизвикват конфликти между различните етноси и уязвимост на най-бедните групи, т.е. бежанците, жените и децата. С други думи, целият регион на Сахел е дестабилизиран и отслабен.

Във връзка с това:

Какви действия ще предприеме Европейският съюз, за да се облекчи хуманитарната криза?

Какви инструменти за защита на уязвимите групи — бежанци, жени и деца, може да задейства Съюзът?

Каква позиция ще заеме Съюзът спрямо действащата хунта?

Отговор, даден от Върховния представител/Заместник-председателя Аштън от името на Комисията

(25 юни 2012 г.)

От февруари тази година досега Комисията е мобилизирала спешна помощ в размер на 9 милиона EUR от бюджета на ЕС, за да посрещне новите хуманитарни нужди в северната част на Мали. Налице е неотложна нужда различните въоръжени групировки да бъдат убедени да не създават пречки за хуманитарната дейност в региона, да не я застрашават и да не се възползват от нея, особено във връзка с доставките на храни и медицинска помощ. Това хуманитарно пространство е особено важно за извършването на доставки на помощи от основно значение, които да отговарят по обем на нуждите в северната част на Мали.

Новата спешна помощ се предоставя в допълнение към хуманитарната помощ — предимно под формата на храни, — която от края на 2011 г. досега е на обща стойност над 260 милиона EUR за региона на Сахел, като помощта за северната част на Мали представлява съществена част от нея. Спешната помощ се състои от храни, услуги по предоставяне на защита, достъп до здравни грижи, изхранване и безопасна вода.Тя се разпределя на бежанците, вътрешно разселените лица и уязвимите лица в северната част на страната. Помощта се отпуска чрез агенции на ООН, чрез Международния комитет на Червения кръст и международни неправителствени организации. Някои от финансираните от ЕС международни организации (Координационното бюро на ООН по хуманитарни въпроси — UNOCHA, ВКБООН, МКЧК, УНИЦЕФ) имат двойната задача да осигуряват както защита, така и помощ за най-уязвимото население.

В деня след извършването на държавния преврат Върховният представител/Заместник-председателят направи декларация, с която строго осъди преврата и призова за възстановяване на конституционния ред. С цел оказване на натиск върху хунтата и в допълнение към санкциите, наложени от Икономическата общност на Западноафриканските държави (ECOWAS), Комисията замрази програмите за развитие за Мали (с изключение на хуманитарната/спешната помощ и проектите, които подпомагат директно населението).

В Заключенията на Съвета от 23 април 2012 г. бе посочено, че ЕС е готов да подпомогне воден от гражданското общество преход в Мали в тясно сътрудничество с регионалните организации и други международни партньори. В случай на какъвто и да било опит за дестабилизиране на процеса на преход, ЕС може да вземе решение за налагане на целенасочени санкции.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004294/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Security and humanitarian crisis in Mali

The situation in Mali is extremely dangerous and is deteriorating by the day. Violent attacks by the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad — a Tuareg rebel group — together with elements of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the armed Islamist group Ansar Dine, and the fact that the current junta (which overthrew President Amadou Toumani Touré, claiming he failed to stop the Tuareg rebels) is itself failing to confront the rebellion have led to increasing violence throughout northern Mali. The situation is compounded by the proliferation of weapons and ammunition and the radicalisation of the groups involved.

The deteriorating security situation has led to lawlessness in the north of the country, exacerbating the humanitarian and food crisis that Mali already faces. In fact, the price of millet — the staple food of Malian families — has shot up by 40 %; more than 170 000 people have been displaced within Mali and beyond its borders (primarily to Niger and Mauritania); and conditions of extreme poverty have caused conflict among the various ethnic groups, making the poorest (refugees, women and children) even more vulnerable. The entire Sahel region has been destabilised and weakened as a result.

In this context:

What steps will the European Union take to alleviate the humanitarian crisis?

What tools can the Union deploy to protect the most vulnerable groups of people — refugees, women and children?

What position will the EU adopt towards the current junta?

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

(25 June 2012)

Since last February, the Commission has mobilised emergency aid of EUR 9 million from the EU budget to respond to the new humanitarian needs in northern Mali. There is an urgent need to persuade the various armed groups not to hinder, aggress or exploit humanitarian work in the area, particularly in the delivery of food and medical help. This humanitarian space is essential to allow in supplies of essential aid at the scale of the needs to northern Mali.

The new emergency aid is additional to the humanitarian aid, mainly food, which since late 2011 totals over EUR 260 million to the Sahel region, of which aid for North Mali constitutes an important part. The emergency aid consists of food, protection services, access to healthcare, nutrition and safe water. It goes to refugees, internally displaced people and vulnerable people in the North. It is channelled through UN agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross and international NGOs. Certain international organisations (UNOCHA, UNHCR, ICRC, Unicef) funded by the EU have a double mandate to ensure both protection and assistance to the most vulnerable populations.

The day following the coup d'état, the HR/VP made a declaration strongly condemning the coup and calling for the re-establishment of the constitutional order. To put pressure on the junta, and in addition to Ecowas' sanctions, the Commission froze its development programmes (except humanitarian/emergency aid and projects directly helping the population).

The Council conclusions of 23 April 2012 stated that the EU stands ready to provide support to a civilian-led transition in Mali in close cooperation with regional organisations and other international partners. In the case of any attempt to destabilise the transition process, the EU may decide targeted sanctions.

(българска версия)

Въпрос с искане за писмен отговор E-004295/12

до Комисията

Мария Неделчева (PPE)

(25 април 2012 г.)

Относно: Обществено допитване относно „Липсата на баланс между мъже и жени в управителните органи на предприятията в ЕС“

В рамките на борбата за равенство между половете и за защита на правата на жените Европейската комисия постави началото на обществено допитване като продължение на доклада „Жените в органите, вземащи икономически решения в ЕС“, представен от заместник-председателя Вивиан Рединг на 5 март 2012 г. Целта на това допитване е да се потърси мнението на определена целева група — в това число държавите членки, организациите, развиващи дейност в икономическия или промишления сектор, предприятията, организациите на гражданското общество, профсъюзите, органите, занимаващи се с въпросите на равенството, — за да се проучат най-добрите мерки, които могат да бъдат взети от Съюза с цел повишаване на участието на жените в органите, вземащи икономически решения, и по този начин да се реши какъв вид законодателно действие Комисията да предприеме.

Във връзка с това:

Как ще се проведе събирането, обработката и публикуването на отговорите?

Кои са критериите за избор на най-добрите мерки/практики?

Неевропейските предприятия, организации на гражданското общество и организации, развиващи дейност в икономическия или промишления сектор, могат ли да участват в общественото допитване?

Каква рекламна стратегия е предприета, за да се осигури участието на целевата група в допитването?

В името на представителността и достоверността на общественото допитване, ще има ли достъпен за обществеността списък с всички организации, предприятия, органи, правителствени организации и т.н., които участват в допитването, заедно с подадената от тях информация?

Отговор, даден от госпожа Рединг от името на Комисията

(18 юни 2012 г.)

Общественото допитване относно „Липсата на баланс между мъже и жени в управителните органи на предприятията в ЕС“ започна с пресконференцията на заместник-председателя на Комисията Вивиан Рединг, проведена на 5 март 2012 г. По този повод бе публикувано съобщение за медиите, с което всички заинтересовани страни се приканват да участват в допитването (52).

Документът за консултация може да бъде намерен както на интернет сайта на ГД „Правосъдие“ (53), така и на портала „Вашият глас в Европа“ (54). Отговорите трябва да се изпращат на създадения за целта адрес на електрона поща (55). При желание от тяхна страна в допитването могат да участват неевропейски заинтересовани страни.

Анализът на отговорите, получени по допитването, ще бъде извършен от службите на Комисията и ще допринесе за изготвянето на задълбочена оценка на въздействието. Няма критерии за избор на най-добрите мерки/практики. Всички мнения и препоръки ще бъдат взети предвид с цел да бъде изготвено решението на Комисията за предприемане на подходящи действия.

Комисията възнамерява да публикува онлайн всички отговори с изключение на онези, чиито автори са пожелали поверителност.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004295/12

to the Commission

Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Public consultation on ‘Gender imbalance in corporate boards in the EU’

As part of its work to achieve gender equality and defend women’s rights, the Commission is launching a public consultation based on the report ‘Women in economic decision‐making in the EU’ presented by Vice‐President Viviane Reding on 5 March 2012. The purpose of this consultation is to question a target group — Member States, business or industry organisations, individual companies, civil society organisations, trade unions, equality bodies, etc. — to explore all the measures that could best be adopted by the EU to enhance female participation in economic decision‐making bodies and thereby decide what form legislative action by the Commission will take.

In this context:

How will the responses be collected, sorted and published?

What are the criteria for selecting the best measures/practices?

Can non‐European companies, civil society organisations and business or industry organisations take part in the public consultation?

What advertising strategy has been adopted to ensure that the consultation’s target group takes part?

Will there be a publicly accessible list detailing all the organisations, companies, bodies, government institutions, etc. taking part in the consultation and their contributions, to ensure the public consultation is representative and credible?

(Version française)

La consultation publique sur le déséquilibre entre les hommes et les femmes au sein des organes décisionnels des entreprises dans l'UE a été lancée par la Vice-présidente Viviane Reding lors d'une conférence de presse le 5 mars 2012. Un communiqué de presse a été publié à cette occasion, invitant tous les acteurs intéressés de participer à la consultation (56).

Le document de consultation est accessible à la fois sur le site Internet de la DG Justice (57) ainsi que sur le portail Votre point de vue sur l'Europe  (58). Les contributions devaient être envoyées à une adresse email spécifique (59). Des acteurs en dehors de l'Union européenne pouvaient participer à la consultation s'ils le souhaitent.

L'analyse des réponses à la consultation sera faite par les services de la Commission et contribuera à une étude d'impact approfondie. Il n'existe pas de critères de sélection des meilleures mesures ou pratiques. Tous les avis et suggestions seront pris en compte afin de préparer la décision de la Commission sur le suivi approprié.

La Commission a l'intention de publier en ligne toutes les réponses, sauf celles dont les contributeurs souhaitent garder la confidentialité.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004297/12

lill-Kummissjoni

David Casa (PPE)

(25 ta' April 2012)

Suġġett: Impjiegi “ħodor” u “bojod” għaż-żgħażagħ

Is-swieq tal-impjiegi “ħodor” (l-impjiegi ekoloġiċi) u “bojod” (l-impjiegi fil-qasam tas-saħħa) aktarx li jkollhom l-akbar ħtieġa għal ħaddiema kwalifikati fid-deċennju li jmiss. L-Istrateġija tal-UE għaż-Żgħażagħ jew l-Istrateġija Ewropa 2020 kif jinkoraġġixxu liż-żgħażagħ biex ifittxu xogħol fl-oqsma ħodor u bojod, rispettivament? Il-Kummissjoni kkunsidrat li timplimenta programm biex tagħmel il-proċessi fl-iskejjel li jwasslu għal dawn l-oqsma aktar aċċessibbli għall-istudenti fl-Istati Membri kollha?

Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Andor f'isem il-Kummissjoni

(14 ta' Ġunju 2012)

F’Diċembru li għadda, il-Kummissjoni varat l-“Inizjattiva Opportunitajiet għaż-Żgħażagħ” (60) biex iżżid l-isforzi tagħha fl-appoġġ lill-Istati Membri fil-ġlieda kontra l-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ.

Fil-Pakkett dwar l-Impjiegi (61) tat-18 ta’April 2012, il-Kummissjoni tipproponi ġabra ta’ azzjonijiet prinċipali dwar l-impjiegi biex tinvolvi lill-Istati Membri ħalli jadottaw miżuri biex jutilizzaw il-potenzjali ta' impjiegi ekoloġiċi fil-Pjanijiet Nazzjonali dwar l-Impjiegi tagħhom, jantiċipaw il-ħiliet meħtieġa għal ekonomija ekoloġika kif ukoll jippromwovu ċ-ċertifikazzjoni tal-ħiliet u użu akbar ta' strumenti finanzjarji tal-UE għal investimenti ekoloġikament sensittivi u intelliġenti, jibnu sħubijiet bejn l-atturi tas-suq tax-xogħol biex jiffaċilitaw bidla lejn ekonomija ta' karbonju baxx u effiċjenti fir-riżorsi.

Il-Kummissjoni tipproponi wkoll pjan ta' azzjoni għall-ħaddiema tas-saħħa fl-UE li jistipula għadd ta’ miżuri konkreti li jrawmu l-kooperazzjoni Ewropea biex itejbu l-ippjanar tal-forza tax-xogħol fil-qasam tas-saħħa u jbassru l-ħtiġijiet tal-forza tax-xogħol, jantiċipaw aħjar il-ħtiġijiet tal-ħiliet fil-ġejjieni għall-professjonijiet tas-saħħa, u jistimulaw l-iskambju ta’ prattika tajba dwar ir-reklutaġġ u ż-żamma tal-professjonisti tas-saħħa. L-Istati Membri huma mħeġġa biex jimmassimizzaw l-użu tal-programmi ta’ finanzjament tal-UE biex jappoġġjaw l-iżvilupp u l-implimentazzjoni ta’ inizjattivi li jindirizzaw il-forza tax-xogħol fil-qasam tas-saħħa fl-UE.

Barra minn hekk, il-Panorama ta’ Ħiliet tal-UE, li se tiġi varata qabel tmiem l-2012, se tipprovdi ħarsa unika lejn is-sejbiet fil-livell settorjali, nazzjonali u Ewropew tal-prospetti għall-impjiegi u l-ħiliet fuq medda qasira u medja ta' żmien, hekk kif dawn jevolvu sal-2020.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004297/12

to the Commission

David Casa (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Green and white jobs for youth

The green and white job markets are likely to have the most need for qualified workers in the coming decade. How does the Commission’s EU Youth Strategy or the Europe 2020 strategy encourage young people to pursue jobs in the green and white fields? Has the Commission considered implementing a programme to make school subjects in these fields more accessible to students across Member States?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2012)

Last December the Commission launched the ‘Youth Opportunities Initiative’ (62) to step up its efforts to support Member States in fighting youth unemployment

In the Employment Package (63) of 18 April 2012, the Commission proposes a set of key employment actions to engage Member States to adopt measures for harnessing the potentials of green jobs in their National Job Plans, anticipate skills needs for the green economy as well as promote skills certification and greater use of EU financial instruments for smart green investments, build partnerships between labour market actors to facilitate shift to a low carbon and resource efficient economy.

The Commission also proposes an Action Plan for the EU health workforce setting out a number of concrete measures to foster European cooperation to improve health workforce planning and forecasting workforce needs, better anticipate future skills needs in the health professions, and stimulate exchange of good practice on the recruitment and retention of health professionals. Member States are encouraged to maximise use of EU funding programmes to support the development and implementation of initiatives to address the EU health workforce.

Moreover, the EU Skills Panorama, to be launched by the end 2012, will provide a single overview of European, national and sectoral findings on the short-term to medium-term prospects for jobs and skills needs as they evolve up to 2020.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004298/12

lill-Kummissjoni

David Casa (PPE)

(25 ta' April 2012)

Suġġett: Ksur tar-RDPK tar-Riżoluzzjoni 1837 tal-Kunsill tas-Sigurtà (SCR)

L-illanċjar u l-falliment sussegwenti, ta’ rokit bl-użu tat-teknoloġija tal-missili ballistiċi min-naħa tar-Repubblika Demokratika Popolari tal-Korea kiser ir-Riżoluzzjoni 1837 tal-Kunsill tas-Sigurtà tan-NU. X’azzjoni diġà ttieħdet, u l-UE qiegħda tippjana li tieħu iżjed azzjoni kontra r-Repubblika Demokratika Popolari tal-Korea fid-dawl tal-ksur tagħha tar-Riżoluzzjoni 1837 tal-Kunsill tas-Sigurtà?

Tweġiba konġunta mogħtija mir-Rappreżentanta Għolja/il-Viċi President Ashton f'isem il-Kummissjoni

(25 ta' Lulju 2012)

Fit-13 ta’ April, il-jum tal-illanċjar, ir-RGħ/VP ħarġet stqarrija formali li fiha kkundannat l-illanċjar bħala ksur ċar tal-obbligi internazzjonali tar-RDPK u esprimiet tħassib serju dwar l-effetti perikolużi u destabilizzanti tiegħu. F’din l-istess Stqarrija, ir-RGħ/VP ħeġġet lir-RDPK biex ma tieħu l-ebda azzjoni li tista’ tkompli żżid it-tensjonijiet fir-reġjun. Ir-RGħ/VP għamlitha wkoll ċara li l-UE se tibqa’ lesta li tkompli taħdem mal-imsieħba internazzjonali bil-ħsieb li jkompli jingħata kontribut għall-kisba tal-paċi u tal-istabbilità dejjiema fil-Peniżola Koreana.

Fit-2 ta’ Mejju, bħala reazzjoni għall-illanċjar, il-Kumitat tas-Sanzjonijiet tan-NU żied tliet entitajiet tar-RDPK mal-lista ta’ kumpaniji suġġetti għal miżuri restrittivi taħt ir-Riżoluzzjoni tal-Kunsill tas-Sigurtà tan-NU. Dawn it-tliet entitajiet huma koperti mill-miżuri restrittivi tal-UE kontra r-RDPK.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-004357/12

do Komisji

Filip Kaczmarek (PPE)

(26 kwietnia 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Testy rakietowe Korei Północnej

Korea Północna po raz trzeci od 1998 r. przeprowadziła testy rakietowe. Tym razem do wystrzelenia satelity użyto międzykontynentalnego pocisku balistycznego. Korea zerwała porozumienie ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi, na mocy którego miała powstrzymać się od rozwoju broni jądrowej i rakiet dalekiego zasięgu.

Ostatni incydent spowodował krytykę ze strony zebranych w Waszyngtonie szefów dyplomacji grupy G8, w tym także Rosji, dotychczas niechętnie krytykującej Phenian. Stany Zjednoczone zapowiedziały rezygnację z pomocy żywnościowej.

W związku z tym zwracam się z zapytaniem, czy Komisja rozważa możliwość przeprowadzenia działań w celu skłonienia Phenianu do zaprzestania podobnych testów?

Wspólna odpowiedź udzielona przez Wysoką Przedstawiciel/Wiceprzewodniczącą Catherine Ashton w imieniu Komisji

(25 lipca 2012 r.)

W dniu 13 kwietnia, w dniu wystrzelenia rakiety, Wysoka Przedstawiciel/Wiceprzewodnicząca wydała formalne oświadczenie potępiające powyższe działanie, określając je jako wyraźne naruszenie zobowiązań międzynarodowych KRLD i wyrażając głębokie zaniepokojenie jego niebezpiecznymi i destabilizującymi skutkami. W tym samym oświadczeniu Wysoka Przedstawiciel/Wiceprzewodnicząca wezwała KRLD do powstrzymania się od wszelkich działań, które mogłyby doprowadzić do zwiększenia napięć w regionie. Wysoka Przedstawiciel/Wiceprzewodnicząca wyjaśniła również, że UE jest gotowa do kontynuowania współpracy z międzynarodowymi partnerami w celu przyczynienia się do osiągnięcia trwałego pokoju i stabilności na Półwyspie Koreańskim.

W reakcji na wystrzelenie rakiety, w dniu 2 maja Komitet ds. Sankcji ONZ dodał trzy podmioty północnokoreańskie do wykazu przedsiębiorstw podlegających środkom ograniczającym, zgodnie z odpowiednimi rezolucjami Rady Bezpieczeństwa ONZ. Powyższe trzy podmioty są objęte środkami ograniczającymi UE skierowanymi przeciwko KRLD.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004298/12

to the Commission

David Casa (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: DPRK violation of SCR 1837

The launch, and subsequent failure, of a rocket using ballistic missile technology by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea violated UN Security Council Resolution 1837. What action has already been taken, and does the EU plan to take further action, against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in view of its violation of Security Council Resolution 1837?

Question for written answer E-004357/12

to the Commission

Filip Kaczmarek (PPE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: North Korea's missile tests

For the third time since 1998, North Korea has carried out missile tests. This time an intercontinental ballistic missile was used to launch a satellite. Korea has broken the agreement with the United States, under which it was to refrain from developing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles.

The latest incident has been criticised by the G8 Foreign Ministers gathered in Washington, including the Foreign Minister of Russia, a country which until now has been reluctant to criticise Pyongyang. The United States announced the cancellation of food aid deliveries to North Korea.

In view of the above, is the Commission considering taking action to persuade Pyongyang to abandon such tests?

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

(25 July 2012)

On 13 April, the day of the launch, the HR/VP issued a formal statement, condemning the launch as a clear breach of the DPRK’s international obligations and expressing deep concern about its dangerous and destabilising effects . In the same Statement, the HR/VP urged the DPRK to refrain from any action that could further increase regional tensions. The HR/VP also made it clear that the EU remains ready to continue working with international partners with a view to contributing to the pursuit of lasting peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

On 2 May, as a reaction to the launch, the UN Sanctions Committee added three DPRK entities to the list of companies subject to restrictive measures under the relevant UN Security Council Resolution. These three entities are covered by the EU’s restrictive measures against the DPRK.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004300/12

lill-Kummissjoni

David Casa (PPE)

(25 ta' April 2012)

Suġġett: Sistema ta' twissija għall-ħaddiema stazzjonati

Fil-21 ta’ Marzu l-Kummissjoni pproponiet miżuri sabiex tiggarantixxi d-drittijiet tax-xogħol tal-ħaddiema temporanji li jkunu ġejjin minn Stat Membru wieħed u jintbagħtu jaħdmu fi Stat Membru ieħor. F’dawn il-miżuri, il-Kummissjoni tinkludi sistema ġdida ta’ twissija għall-konflitti industrijali transkonfinali. Il-Kummissjoni tista’ tispjega s-sistema ta’ twissija fid-dettall, u tispjega kif is-sistema ta’ twissija se tipproteġi lill-ħaddiema stazzjonati minn diskriminazzjoni fil-konflitti transkonfinali?

Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Andor f'isem il-Kummissjoni

(14 ta' Ġunju 2012)

Nhar il-21 ta’ Marzu 2012, il-Kummissjoni adottat żewġ proposti għal-leġiżlazzjoni. L-ewwel proposta hija għal Regolament tal-Kunsill dwar l-eżerċizzju tad-dritt li tittieħed azzjoni kollettiva fil-kuntest tal-libertà tal-istabbiliment u l-libertà li tagħti servizz (64). Din il-proposta tabilħaqq tinvolvi mekkaniżmu ta' twissija li tingħata lill-Istati Membri kkonċernati l-oħrajn u lill-Kummissjoni b’tagħrif f’waqtu u trasparenti dwar atti jew ċirkustanzi serji li joltqu l-eżerċizzju effettiv tal-libertà tal-istabbiliment jew il-libertà li tagħti servizzi li jaf jikkawżaw tħarbit serju fit-tħaddim xieraq tas-suq intern u/jew li jafu jikkawżaw dannu serju lis-sistema tar-relazzjonijiet industrijali tiegħu jew jagħtu lok għal disturb soċjali serju. Atti u ċirkustanzi bħal dawn jaf jinkludu d-diskriminazzjoni kontra l-ħaddiema ippostjati. Il-Kummissjoni tiġbed l-attenzjoni tal-Onorevoli Membru għar-Regolament (KE) Nru 2679/98 (65), li jistabbilixxi mekkaniżmu ta' twissija simili, avolja aktar dettaljat, fil-qasam tal-moviment liberu tal-oġġetti, filwaqt li wieħed iżomm f'moħħu d-differenzi fis-sitwazzjonijiet li l-mekkaniżmi huma maħsuba li jkopru.

It-tieni proposta hija għal Direttiva tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar l-infurzar tad-Direttiva 96/71/KE fir-rigward tal-postazzjoni tal-ħaddiema fil-qafas tal-forniment ta’ servizzi (66). Din għandha l-għan li ttejjeb l-implimentazzjoni, l-applikazzjoni u l-infurzar fil-prattika ta’ dik id-Direttiva u li tħares id-drittijiet tal-ħaddiema ippostjati. Din il-proposta ma tipprevedix mekkaniżmu ta’ twissija.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004300/12

to the Commission

David Casa (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Alert system for posted workers

On 21 March the Commission proposed measures to guarantee the labour rights of temporary workers who come from one Member State and are sent to work in another Member State. In these measures, the Commission includes a new alert system for cross-border industrial conflicts. Can the Commission explain the alert system in detail, and explain how the alert system will protect posted workers from discrimination in cross-border conflicts?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2012)

The Commission adopted two proposals for legislation on 21 March 2012. The first is a proposal for a Council regulation on the exercise of the right to take collective action within the context of the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services (67). This proposal indeed entails an alert mechanism to provide the other Member States concerned and the Commission with timely and transparent information on serious acts or circumstances affecting the effective exercise of the freedom of establishment or the freedom to provide services which could cause grave disruption to the proper functioning of the internal market and/or which may cause serious damage to its industrial relations system or create serious social unrest. Such acts and circumstances may include discrimination against posted workers. The Commission draws the Honourable Member's attention to Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 (68), which establishes a similar, albeit more detailed, alert mechanism in the field of free movement of goods, bearing in mind the differences in situations the mechanism is intended to cover.

The second is a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (69). It aims to improve the implementation, application and enforcement in practice of that directive and of the protection of posted workers' rights. This proposal does not provide for an alert mechanism.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004302/12

lill-Kummissjoni

David Casa (PPE)

(25 ta' April 2012)

Suġġett: Il-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ

Il-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ għadu problema enormi fl-UE. B’mod speċifiku, Spanja qiegħda tħabbat wiċċha ma’ sitwazzjoni fejn “il fuq minn nofs iż-żgħażagħ tagħha huma diżokkupati. Ħafna Stati Membri oħra wkoll qegħdin iħabbtu wiċċhom ma” din il-problema. Il-Kummissjoni pproponiet numru ta’ soluzzjonijiet għal din il-problema, inkluża l-Istrateġija tal-UE għaż-żgħażagħ. Il-Kummissjoni tista’ tikkonferma li nkisbu xi suċċessi permezz ta’ dawn il-programmi? Iċ-ċittadini tal-UE fejn jistgħu jaraw progress minn programmi Ewropej fit-tnaqqis tar-rata tal-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ?

Tweġiba mogħtija f'isem il-Kummissjoni

(15 ta' Ġunju 2012)

L-istrateġija Ewropa 2020 hija l-qafas strateġiku ġenerali għal approċċ integrat ta' politiki li jippromwovu l-impjiegi taż-żgħażagħ. Dawn il-politiki huma spjegati b'iżjed dettall fl-istrateġiji speċifiċi, iżda marbutin ma' xulxin, tal-politiki tal-UE għall-edukazzjoni, l-impjiegi u ż-żgħażagħ. L-Istati Membri għandhom ir-responsabbiltà ewlenija għall-implimentazzjoni ta' dawn l-istrateġiji permezz ta' miżuri xierqa, li jinkludu l-aħjar utilizzazzjoni possibbli tal-fondi strutturali tal-UE u ta’ programmi speċifiċi, b'mod partikolari l-Programmi tat-Tagħlim tul il-Ħajja u l-programm Żgħażagħ fl-Azzjoni.

B'reazzjoni għar-rata persistentement għolja tal-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ, f'Diċembru 2011 il-Kummissjoni ppreżentat l-Inizjattiva Opportunitajiet għaż-Żgħażagħ (IOŻ) (70), li tinkoraġġixxi lill-Istati Membri jagħmlu użu mill-fondi u l-programmi disponibbli tal-UE iżjed immirat lejn iż-żgħażagħ. F'April 2012 il-Kummissjoni ppreżentat rapport fuq l-ewwel passi li saru fi ħdan l-IOŻ (71). Fil-qafas tas-Semestru Ewropew, fit-30 ta' Mejju l-Kummissjoni ppreżentat il-valutazzjoni tagħha tal-isforzi tal-Istati Membri biex jindirizzaw il-qgħad fost iż-żgħażagħ u, fejn ħasset il-ħtieġa, ipproponiet rakkomandazzjonijiet speċifiċi għal kull pajjiż.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004302/12

to the Commission

David Casa (PPE)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Youth unemployment

Youth unemployment remains a huge problem in the EU. Specifically, Spain is dealing with over half of its young people out of work. Many other Member States are also struggling with this problem. The Commission has proposed a number of solutions to the problem, including the EU Youth Strategy. Can the Commission confirm any successes achieved by these programmes? Where can EU citizens see progress from European programmes towards lowering the unemployment rate among young people?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

The Europe 2020 strategy constitutes the overarching strategic framework for an integrated approach for policies promoting employment of young people. These policies are spelled out more in detail in the specific, albeit interlinked EU policy strategies for education, employment and youth policies. The Member States have the main responsibility for implementing these strategies through appropriate measures, including making optimum use of EU structural funds and specific programmes, in particular the Lifelong Learning and Youth in Action Programmes.

In response to the persisting high youth unemployment, the Commission presented in December 2011 the Youth Opportunities Initiative (YOI) (72), encouraging Member States to make a more youth-targeted use of the available EU funds and programmes. In April 2012 the Commission has presented a report on the first steps taken under the YOI (73). In the framework of the European Semester, the Commission has presented on 30 May its assessment of Member States efforts for tackling youth unemployment and proposed country specific recommendations where deemed necessary.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004311/12

an die Kommission

Franz Obermayr (NI)

(25. April 2012)

Betrifft: Eintragung von Implantaten im Reisepass

In Österreich wird derzeit die Möglichkeit diskutiert, eine umfassende Informationskampagne bei den Ärzte— sowie den Zahnärztekammern und den Ämtern der Landesregierung zu starten, um bei der Bevölkerung das Bewusstsein für die Eintragung von medizinischen Implantaten in Reisepässe zu stärken. Die Eintragung von Implantaten in Österreich erfolgt oft nur im Behindertenpass — die Eintragung im Reisepass wird unterlassen, weil sie nicht bekannt ist. Doch die Zahl der Menschen mit Implantaten steigt und zugleich werden die Sicherheitsmaßnahmen auf den Flughäfen immer strenger und auch zeitraubender.

Kann die Kommission dazu folgende Fragen beantworten:

1. Wie beurteilt die Kommission die Forderung von Experten, auch eine dementsprechende europaweite Informationskampagne durchzuführen, um die Reisepass-Eintragung von medizinischen Implantaten zu fördern?

2. Wie funktioniert die Reisepass-Eintragung von Implantaten in den Mitgliedstaaten? Liegen der Kommission Zahlen bzw. Erkenntnisse vor, wie viele Menschen mit Reisepässen reisen, in denen Implantate eingetragen sind?

3. Was könnte die Kommission dazu beitragen, dass die Implantat-Eintragung in allen Mitgliedstaaten auch im Behindertenpass anerkannt wird, sollte noch keine Eintragung im Reisepass erfolgt sein?

4. Die Eintragung im Reisepass in Österreich kostet rund 28,50 EUR, sie sollte aber kostenlos sein. Welche Möglichkeiten gibt es seitens der Kommission, die kostenlose Reisepass-Eintragung in allen Mitgliedstaaten im Sinne der Mobilität einzufordern?

5. Welche Schritte könnten seitens der Kommission unternommen werden, um eine europaweite Anerkennung der Behindertenpässe möglich zu machen?

Antwort von Herrn Dalli im Namen der Kommission

(4. Juli 2012)

Die Entscheidung, ob Reisepässe Informationen über Implantate enthalten, obliegt — unter Berücksichtigung der EU-Datenschutzvorschriften — den Mitgliedstaaten. Der Kommission liegen keine umfassenden Daten darüber vor, wie die Reisepass-Eintragung von Implantaten in den Mitgliedstaaten erfolgt und wie viele Menschen mit Reisepässen reisen, in denen Implantate eingetragen sind. Aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Ansätze in den Mitgliedstaaten wäre eine Informationskampagne, wie vom Herrn Abgeordneten vorgeschlagen, auf EU-Ebene nicht geeignet.

Die Kommission ist allerdings der Ansicht, dass den Patienten zuverlässige Informationen über die von ihnen getragenen Implantate zur Verfügung stehen sollten. Sie erwägt daher im Rahmen der Überarbeitung der EU-Vorschriften für, Medizinprodukte Patienten, die ein Medizinprodukt implantiert bekommen, einen „Implantationsausweis“ anzubieten, damit das Medizinprodukt identifiziert werden kann. Ein solcher Implantationsausweis könnte Warnhinweise oder Informationen über Vorsichtsmaßnahmen enthalten, die vom Patienten oder medizinischen Fachkräften in Bezug auf wechselseitige Störungen mit realistischerweise vorhersehbaren äußeren Einflüssen oder Umweltbedingungen, z. B. Sicherheitsscannern, zu treffen sind.

In Bezug auf den EU-Behindertenausweis führt die Kommission derzeit eine Konsultation der Mitgliedstaaten und der Organisationen der Zivilgesellschaft zu den Möglichkeiten durch, einen europäischen Muster-Behindertenausweis einzuführen, der Vorteile in den Bereichen Kultur, Freizeit, Transport und Tourismus bieten könnte. Es besteht keine Absicht, diesen Ausweis mit Angaben zu Implantaten auszustatten.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004311/12

to the Commission

Franz Obermayr (NI)

(25 April 2012)

Subject: Recording implants in passports

There is currently a discussion in Austria about the possibility of initiating a comprehensive information campaign in medical and dental associations, as well as regional government departments, to increase awareness among the population of the fact that medical implants can be recorded in passports. Implants are often only recorded in disability passes in Austria — they are not recorded in passports because people are not aware of the facility. Yet the number of people with implants is increasing, and at the same time the security measures at airports are becoming more and more stringent and time-consuming.

1. What is the Commission’s view of the experts’ demand for a Europe-wide campaign to be carried out to promote the recording of implants in passports?

2. How does the recording of implants in passports operate in Member States? Does the Commission have access to numbers or information on how many people travel on passports in which implants are recorded?

3. What could the Commission do to make the recording of implants in disability passes standard in all Member States if they were to remain unrecorded in passports?

4. Recording in a passport costs about EUR 28.50 in Austria, but it should be free of charge. What possibility does the Commission see of calling for free recording of implants in passports in all Member States in the interests of mobility?

5. What steps could the Commission take to have disability passes recognised throughout Europe?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2012)

It is the competence of Member States to decide whether passports may contain information on implants provided that they respect the EU acquis on data protection. The Commission does not possess comprehensive data on how the recording of implants in passports is done in Member States and how many people travel on passports in which implants are recorded. Considering the different practice in Member States, an information campaign as suggested by the Honourable Member would also not be appropriate at EU level.

However, the Commission fully agrees that it is essential to ensure that patients have reliable information about the implants at their disposal. It is therefore considering, in the context of the revision of the EU regulatory framework for medical devices, to empower patients who are implanted with a medical device to receive an ‘implant card’ allowing the identification of the medical device. Such implant card could contain warnings or information about precautions to be taken by the patient or a healthcare professional with regard to reciprocal interference with reasonably foreseeable external influences or environmental conditions, as for example security scanners.

As regards an EU Disability Pass, the Commission is currently consulting Member States and civil society organisations about possibilities for introducing a European-model Disability Card that could provide benefits in the areas of culture, leisure, transport and tourism. There is no intention to equip such a card with implant identification features.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004335/12

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(26. April 2012)

Betrifft: Sexueller Missbrauch von Kindern

Schätzungen zufolge werden zwischen 10 und 20 % der europäischen Kinder in ihrer Kindheit auf unterschiedlichste Art Opfer von sexueller Gewalt.

1. Mit welchen Maßnahmen, Aktionen oder Programmen reagiert die Kommission auf diese Situation?

2. Welche Maßnahmen ergreift die Kommission, um den sexuellen Missbrauch von Kindern zu verhindern?

3. Welche Maßnahmen ergreift die Kommission, um die Mitgliedstaaten zu unterstützen und sie zu motivieren, energischer gegen strafbaren Kindesmissbrauch vorzugehen?

Antwort von Frau Malmström im Namen der Kommission

(20. Juni 2012)

Die Kommission engagiert sich stark für die Bekämpfung des sexuellen Missbrauchs und der sexuellen Ausbeutung von Kindern.

Nach einem Vorschlag der Kommission wird die unlängst verabschiedete Richtlinie 2011/93/EU (74) die Bekämpfung des sexuellen Missbrauchs von Kindern intensivieren. Die Richtlinie führt Mindestnormen im Hinblick auf die Definition von 20 Straftaten ein, legt Mindestniveaus für strafrechtliche Sanktionen fest und fördert die Meldung, Ermittlung und Strafverfolgung. Sie erweitert den Anwendungsbereich nationaler Gerichtsbarkeit um den Missbrauch durch EU-Bürger im Ausland, erleichtert minderjährigen Missbrauchsopfern den Zugang zu Rechtsmitteln und sieht Maßnahmen vor, die einer zusätzlichen Traumatisierung durch die Teilnahme an Gerichtsverfahren vorbeugen sollen. Straftäter müssen sich einer Risikoabschätzung unterziehen und haben Zugang zu speziellen Interventionsprogrammen. Der Informationsaustausch über Verurteilungen und Rechtsverluste zwischen Strafregistern wird einfacher und Hintergrundüberprüfungen werden zuverlässiger. Die Richtlinie untersagt Werbung für Gelegenheiten zum Missbrauch und Kindersextourismus und sieht Aufklärungs- und Sensibilisierungskampagnen sowie die Schulung von Beamten vor. Internetseiten, die Kinderpornografie enthalten, sollen entfernt werden, und gegebenenfalls ist der Zugang zu solchen Seiten für Internetnutzer im Hoheitsgebiet der EU zu sperren.

Die Kommission stellt durch Programme wie „Kriminalprävention und Kriminalitätsbekämpfung“, „Daphne“ und „Mehr Sicherheit im Internet“ („Safer Internet“) Mittel für Projekte zur Bekämpfung des sexuellen Missbrauchs von Kindern und der Gewalt gegen Kinder sowie zum Schutz vor Online-Missbrauch bereit. Dies umfasst auch die Entwicklung von IT-Tools zur Förderung der Ermittlungstätigkeit und das INHOPE-Netz von Hotlines zur Meldung von Material über Kindesmissbrauch.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004335/12

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Sexual abuse of children

It is estimated that between 10 and 20 % of European children are sexually assaulted during their childhood in the many forms this criminal act may take.

1. By what means, actions or programmes is the Commission responding to this situation?

2. What action is the Commission taking to prevent the sexual abuse of children?

3. What action is the Commission taking to provide support to Member States and encourage them to deal more forcefully with criminal child abuse?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2012)

The Commission is strongly committed to the fight against child sexual abuse and sexual exploitation.

Following a proposal by the Commission, the newly adopted Directive 2011/93/EU (75) will step up the fight against child sexual abuse. It establishes minimum rules regarding the definitions of 20 offences, sets minimum levels for criminal penalties, and facilitates reporting, investigation and prosecution. It extends national jurisdiction to cover abuse by EU nationals abroad, gives child victims easier access to legal remedies and includes measures to prevent additional trauma from participating in criminal proceedings. Offenders will be subject to risk assessments, and have access to special intervention programmes. Information on convictions and disqualifications will circulate more easily among criminal records and background checks will be more reliable. The directive prohibits advertising the possibility of abuse, or organising child sex tourism, and provides for education, awareness raising and training of officials. Action shall be taken to remove websites containing child pornography and access to them from the EU may be blocked.

The Commission provides funding for projects to fight child sexual abuse, combat violence against children and protect them from abuse online through programmes like ‘Prevention of and Fight against Crime’, ‘DAPHNE’, and ‘Safer Internet’, including the development of IT tools to facilitate investigations, and the INHOPE network of hotlines to report child abuse material.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004347/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(26 aprile 2012)

Oggetto: Criminalità organizzata

Se il crimine organizzato mondiale fosse una nazione, sarebbe membro del G20 come una delle maggiori economie mondiali, generando un prodotto interno lordo pari a circa due trilioni di dollari l'anno. Lo afferma un rapporto presentato da un alto funzionario dell'ONU, capo dell'Office on Drugs and Crime delle Nazioni Unite. Le cifre si riferiscono al 2009, il primo anno in cui gli esperti del Palazzo di vetro, con l'aiuto della Banca Mondiale, hanno provato a calcolare il giro d'affari globale della criminalità organizzata, e da allora la situazione potrebbe essersi ulteriormente aggravata.

Il rapporto descrive vari modi in cui il crimine si arricchisce, genera profitti e truffa lo stato. Secondo l'ONU, 40 miliardi di dollari l'anno vanno perduti attraverso la corruzione soltanto nei paesi in via di sviluppo. Fondi illeciti prodotti con il traffico di persone, con lo sfruttamento della prostituzione e varie forme di schiavismo, producono 32 miliardi di dollari l’anno. Ricettazione, scommesse clandestine, riciclaggio di denaro sporco, traffico di narcotici sono alcuni degli altri campi in cui opera la criminalità.

Alcuni gruppi terroristici usano il crimine per finanziare le loro attività e vi sono casi in cui i gruppi terroristici «diventano essi stessi veri e proprie organizzazioni criminali». Le mafie hanno dimostrato, conclude il dossier, un'impressionante capacità di «adattarsi» alle azioni delle forze dell'ordine e di trovare nuove opportunità di profitti. In particolare nel Terzo Mondo, l'ONU definisce il crimine come «un grave ostacolo» alla realizzazione degli obiettivi di sviluppo del millennio, fissati dalla comunità internazionale nel 2000 per ridurre la povertà entro il 2015 nei paesi in via di sviluppo.

Alla luce di quanto sovraesposto, può dire la Commissione se esistono dati inerenti al giro d'affari prodotto in Europa dalla criminalità organizzata? Può dire, altresì, quali sono stati i risultati della rete europea di prevenzione della criminalità (REPC), a dieci anni dalla decisione 2001/427/GAI?

Risposta di Cecilia Malmström a nome della Commissione

(7 giugno 2012)

La Commissione europea ritiene anch’essa che la criminalità organizzata e le sue attività costituiscano una minaccia per le nostre società e i nostri valori e abbiano ripercussioni gravi sull’economia mondiale. L’Europa non è immune da tale flagello. Esistono diversi studi che forniscono stime sul giro d’affari o sul valore economico della criminalità organizzata in alcuni Stati membri  (76) in paesi dell’OCSE, (77) ma vi sono pochi dati affidabili e comparabili per quanto riguarda la portata economica della criminalità organizzata nell’UE nel suo complesso.

Ciò non ha impedito alla Commissione di agire conformemente alle priorità stabilite nella comunicazione sulla strategia di sicurezza interna.

Dal momento che le attività criminose mirano fondamentalmente al conseguimento di profitti, il recupero dei beni può rappresentare uno strumento efficace per evitare che il patrimonio appartenente alla criminalità organizzata venga reinvestito nell’economia generale. Nel marzo 2012 la Commissione ha adottato una proposta di direttiva sulla confisca dei proventi di reato, finalizzata a creare un quadro giuridico dell’UE più completo e coerente per la confisca dei proventi di reato della criminalità organizzata, che semplificherà le regole esistenti e colmerà le lacune la cui esistenza ha favorito i criminali.

Attualmente la Commissione sta preparando una relazione di valutazione della Rete europea di prevenzione della criminalità che sarà pubblicata alla fine del 2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004347/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Organised crime

If global organised crime were a country, it would be a member of the G20 as one of the major world economies, generating a gross domestic product of around two trillion dollars per year. This has been confirmed in a report presented by a senior UN official, the head of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The figures refer to 2009, the first year in which UN experts, with the help of the World Bank, attempted to calculate the global turnover of organised crime and the situation may have worsened further since then.

The report describes the various ways in which criminals grow rich, generate profits and cheat the state. According to the UN, USD 40 billion a year is lost through corruption in developing countries alone. Illegal funds generated through human trafficking, the exploitation of prostitution and various forms of slavery make USD 32 billion a year. Handling stolen goods, illegal gambling, money laundering and drug trafficking are just some of the other areas in which organised crime operates.

Some terrorist groups use crime to finance their activities and there are instances in which terrorist groups are evolving into organised crime organisations in their own right. Mafia organisations have shown, concludes the dossier, an impressive capacity to ‘adapt’ to the actions of the law enforcement authorities and to find new profit opportunities. The UN defines crime in the third world in particular as ‘a serious obstacle’ to achieving the Millennium Development Goals, set by the international community in 2000 to reduce poverty in developing countries by 2015.

In view of the above, can the Commission confirm whether data exist on the turnover generated by organised crime in Europe? What results has the European Crime Prevention Network shown, 10 years on from Decision 2001/427/JHA?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2012)

The European Commission agrees that organised crime and its activities are a threat to our societies and values and have a serious impact on the global economy. Europe is not immune to this phenomenon. There are various studies that provide estimates of the turn-over or value of organised crime in specific EU MS (78) or, for example, in OECD countries (79), but there is little reliable and comparable data on the financial scale of organised criminal in the EU as a whole.

This has not prevented the Commission acting in line with the priorities set out in the communication on the Internal Security Strategy.

As criminal activities are essentially profit-driven, asset recovery can be an effective tool in preventing increasing penetration of criminal wealth into the mainstream economy. The Commission adopted in March 2012 a proposal for a directive on asset confiscation. It aims to set up a more comprehensive and coherent EU legal framework for the confiscation of profit (assets) from serious and organised criminality. It will simplify existing rules and fill gaps which have benefitted criminals.

The Commission is currently working on the evaluation report of EUCPN which will be published at the end of 2012.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004361/12

a la Comisión

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(26 de abril de 2012)

Asunto: Acuerdo de pesca entre la Unión Europea y Mauritania

Uno de los acuerdos más importantes al amparo de la dimensión exterior de la Política Pesquera Común (PPC) es el celebrado entre la Unión Europea y Mauritania, que expira el próximo 31 de julio de 2012. Hasta el momento, no se ha llegado a un punto de encuentro satisfactorio para ambas partes que haya permitido establecer un nuevo acuerdo y, por tanto, el sector pesquero afectado está pendiente de una solución para esta cuestión.

Actualmente, faenan en aguas territoriales de Mauritania barcos de 12 Estados miembros al amparo del Reglamento (CE) n° 1801/2006 del Consejo, de 30 de noviembre de 2006, relativo a la celebración del Acuerdo de Asociación en el sector pesquero entre la Comunidad Europea y la República Islámica de Mauritania. Dicho acuerdo prevé que, en los 4 años de duración del acuerdo de asociación, Mauritania reciba una contrapartida financiera de 305 millones de euros. De esa cuantía, Mauritania se comprometía a asignar 65 millones de euros durante esos cuatro años para el establecimiento de una política pesquera nacional. Galicia dispone de un total de 24 barcos cefalopoderos en la región que dan empleo directo a más de 400 personas.

— ¿Puede informar la Comisión del estado de las negociaciones para la adopción de un acuerdo comercial con Mauritania?

— ¿Cuando prevé la Comisión que se cierre el nuevo acuerdo entre la Unión Europea y Mauritania?

— ¿Supondrá el nuevo acuerdo una mejora en las expectativas de capturas por parte de la flota de la UE o, al menos, mantendrá el volumen de capturas actual? ¿Se mantendrá el número de 24 barcos que, actualmente, componen la flota cefalopodera en la zona?

— ¿Valora la Comisión la posibilidad de prorrogar el acuerdo existente para garantizar la permanencia de los barcos de la Unión Europea en Mauritania?

— ¿Dispone la Comisión de datos científicos sobre el estado de las diferentes pesquerías?

— ¿Garantizará la Comisión que el nuevo acuerdo sea justo para Mauritania, compensando la explotación de sus recursos con dotación presupuestaria para la consolidación de un sector pesquero mauritano propio y sostenible?

Respuesta de la Sra. Damanaki en nombre de la Comisión

(6 de julio de 2012)

La Comisión seguirá haciendo todo lo posible por encontrar una solución aceptable para las partes y por concluir las negociaciones a tiempo antes de la expiración del Protocolo vigente. El principal tema de negociación pendiente es el importe de la contribución financiera abonada por el presupuesto de la UE. La Comisión señala que, de conformidad con el mandato de negociación, cualquier nuevo acuerdo solo podrá aceptarse si tiene en cuenta tanto una buena relación coste-beneficio como la gestión sostenible de las poblaciones de peces. También hay que alcanzar un equilibrio justo entre el presupuesto de la UE y la participación del sector.

El nivel de las posibilidades de pesca debe fijarse con arreglo a los dictámenes científicos y reflejar el índice de utilización actual. Los cefalópodos se sobreexplotan actualmente y las posibilidades de pesca de esta población en este momento deben reducirse a cero en el nuevo Protocolo. Teniendo en cuenta la posible mejora del estado de esta población y para no descartar futuras actividades de pesca, la Comisión propone la inclusión de una cláusula de revisión en el Protocolo. La Comisión basa su trabajo en los mejores dictámenes científicos disponibles, que ofrecen un informe detallado de la situación de las distintas poblaciones de peces en Mauritania.

Aparte de su dimensión comercial, el futuro Protocolo seguirá prestando apoyo sectorial con vistas al mejor desarrollo del sector pesquero de Mauritania.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004361/12

to the Commission

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Fisheries agreement between the European Union and Mauritania

The agreement between the European Union and Mauritania, which expires on 31 July 2012, is one of the most important agreements in the external dimension of the common fisheries policy (CFP). So far, the two parties have not succeeded in establishing the common ground satisfactory to both sides that would enable a new agreement to be reached. The fishing industry concerned is still awaiting a solution therefore.

Currently, Mauritanian territorial waters are fished by boats from 12 Member States under Council Regulation (EC) No 1801/2006 of 30 November 2006 on the conclusion of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. Under this partnership agreement Mauritania received a financial contribution of EUR 305 million over the four years of its duration. Mauritania committed itself to allocating EUR 65 million to establishing a national fisheries policy during these four years. Galicia has 24 cephalopod boats in total in the region, providing direct employment for more than 400 people.

— Can the Commission report on progress in negotiations on adopting a trade agreement with Mauritania?

— When does the Commission expect the new agreement between the EU and Mauritania to be concluded?

— Will the new agreement involve improved catch allowances for the EU fleet, or will it, at least, maintain current catch levels? Will the number of ships in the cephalopod fleet in the area remain at the current figure of 24?

— Does the Commission view positively the possibility of extending the existing agreement in order to ensure that European Union vessels stay in Mauritania?

— Does the Commission have scientific data on the condition of the various fishing grounds?

— Will the Commission guarantee that the new agreement will be fair to Mauritania, compensating the exploitation of its resources with a budgetary contribution to strengthen its own sustainable fishing industry?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(6 July 2012)

The Commission will continue to do its utmost to find a mutually acceptable solution and to conclude negotiations in time before the expiry of the current Protocol. The main remaining issue in the negotiation is the level of financial contribution paid by the EU budget. The Commission underlines that, in line with the negotiating mandate, any new agreement can only be accepted when it takes into consideration both a good value for money and sustainable management of the stocks. There is also a need to achieve a fair balance between EU budget and industry's participation.

The level of fishing opportunities will need to be set according to the scientific advice and to reflect the current utilisation rate. Cephalopods are currently being overexploited and fishing opportunities for this stock should at this stage be reduced to zero in the new Protocol. In view of possible improvement of the state of this stock and so as not to exclude future fishing activities, the Commission is proposing to include a review clause in the Protocol. The Commission bases its work on the best available scientific advice which gives a detailed state of play of different stocks in Mauritania.

The future Protocol will continue, beyond its commercial dimension, to provide sectoral support for a better development of the Mauritanian fisheries sector.

(Suomenkielinen versio)

Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-004384/12

komissiolle

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE) ja Satu Hassi (Verts/ALE)

(26. huhtikuuta 2012)

Aihe: Talvivaaran kaivoksen päästöt ja Suomen viranomaisten puutteellinen toiminta

Kainuussa toimivalle kaivosyhtiö Talvivaaralle myönnettiin 2007 ympäristölupa sen harjoittamalle monimetallikaivostoiminnalle. Ympäristölupahakemuksessaan Talvivaara arvioi sulfaattipäästöikseen alle 200 mg/litra. Mangaanin osalta ympäristöluvassa todetaan sen olevan ”potentiaalinen sivutuote” kaivostoiminnassa.

Yhtiön kaivostoiminnassa on kuitenkin todellisuudessa ylitetty monikymmenkertaisesti ympäristölupahakemuksessa arvioidut ja luvan perusteella sallitut päästömäärät. Sulfaattipäästöjen on arvioitu pahimmillaan olleen jopa 160-kertaiset siihen verrattuna, mitä kaivosyhtiö ympäristölupahakemuksessaan arvioi, ja tällä hetkellä pysyttelevän tasolla 5 000‐7 000 mg/l. Kaivos on pilannut ainakin neljän järven vedet. Vesi on pilaantunut pahiten kaivoksen lähijärvissä: Salmisessa, Kalliojärvessä, Ylä-Lumijärvessä ja Kivijärvessä, joiden vettä ei voi ottaa minkäänlaiseen käyttöön (”edes saunavedeksi”).

Suomen ympäristöviranomaiset eivät ole tehokkaasti puuttuneet ympäristöluvan ehtojen rikkomiseen. Viranomaiset eivät ole käyttäneet lain mahdollistamia hallintopakkokeinoja eivätkä edellyttäneet tehokkaasti luvan noudattamista.

Viranomaisten antamat huomautukset ovat oikeudellisesti riittämätön keino ilmenneiden ympäristöongelmien käsittelyyn myös Suomea sitovan EU:n ympäristölainsäädännön perusteella. Vaikuttaa siltä, että Suomen ympäristöviranomaisten menettely Talvivaaran tapauksessa on rikkonut Suomen EU-velvoitteita.

— Kun Suomen ympäristöviranomaiset eivät ole tehokkaasti ja kaikilla lain mahdollistamilla keinoilla puuttuneet Talvivaaran jatkuvaan ympäristöluvan ehtojen rikkomiseen, onko Suomen valtio rikkonut velvoitettaan panna tehokkaasti täytäntöön EU:n antama ympäristölainsäädäntö, erityisesti IPPC-direktiivin 13 artikla?

— Mitä komissio aikoo tehdä asian johdosta?

Janez Potočnikin komission puolesta antama vastaus

(12. heinäkuuta 2012)

Komissio on tietoinen, että Talvivaaran kaivos hyväksyttiin ja toimii mahdollisesti eräiden EU:n lainsäädännön säännösten vastaisesti. Tästä kaivostoiminnasta saattaa aiheutua huomattavia riskejä pintavesille, Salminen, Kalliojärvi, Ylä-Lumijärvi ja Kivijärvi mukaan luettuina. Se saattaa myös aiheuttaa ilman ja maaperän pilaantumista.

EU:n lainsäädännön noudattaminen tuli esiin Suomea vastaan aloitetun rikkomismenettelyn 2012/2104 yhteydessä. Menettely koski sitä, että Suomi ei ollut sisällyttänyt asianmukaisesti ja kaikilta osin kaivannaisjätedirektiiviä 2006/21/EY (80) kansalliseen lainsäädäntöönsä. Komissio pyytää Suomelle 25. kesäkuuta 2012 osoittamassaan virallisessa ilmoituksessa erityisesti selvitystä siitä, millä tavoin eräät kyseisen direktiivin säännökset on pantu täytäntöön. Siinä yhteydessä Talvivaara mainitaan havainnollistavana esimerkkinä kaivannaisjätedirektiivin mahdollisesta epäasianmukaisesta soveltamisesta, joka johtuu täytäntöönpanon laiminlyönnistä.

Komissio on myös panemassa vireille tutkimuksen, jonka yhteydessä se pyytää Suomen viranomaisilta tietoja Talvivaaran kaivoksesta. Tämä antaa komissiolle tilaisuuden todeta, kuuluuko kyseinen toiminta EU:n direktiivien, kuten ympäristön pilaantumisen ehkäisemisen ja vähentämisen yhtenäistämiseksi annetun direktiivin 2008/1/EY (81) (IPPC-direktiivi), tiettyjen julkisten ja yksityisten hankkeiden ympäristövaikutusten arvioinnista annetun direktiivin 2011/92/EU (82) ja yhteisön vesipolitiikan puitteista annetun direktiivin 2000/60/EY (83), soveltamisalaan. Samalla komissio voi todeta, onko kyseinen toiminta edellä mainittujen direktiivien säännösten mukaista.

Mikäli Suomen toimittamat tiedot osoittavat, että Talvivaaran kaivos on hyväksytty ja/tai sen toiminta on EU:n ympäristölainsäädännön vastaista, komissio harkitsee oikeudellisen menettelyn aloittamista.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004384/12

to the Commission

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE) and Satu Hassi (Verts/ALE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Discharges from the Talvivaara mine and the lack of intervention by Finnish authorities

In 2007, an environmental permit was granted to Talvivaara, a mining company based in Kainuu in Finland, allowing it to mine various types of metal. In its application for the environmental permit, Talvivaara estimated that its sulphate discharges would be less than 200 mg/l. The environmental permit stated that manganese was a ‘potential by‐product’ of the mining.

In practice, however, the company has exceeded discharge limits — both those estimated in its environmental permit application and those authorised by the permit — by a factor of dozens. In the worst cases, sulphate discharges are estimated to have been 160 times higher than the company estimated in its environmental permit application, and they are currently in the region of 5 000‐7 000 mg/l. The mine has polluted the waters of at least four lakes. The waters of the lakes closest to the mine are the most polluted: in Salminen, Kalliojärvi, Ylä-Lumijärvi and Kivijärvi the water is no longer fit to be used for any purpose, ‘not even in a sauna’.

The Finnish environmental authorities have not intervened effectively enough to stop the terms of the environmental permit from being breached. The authorities have not made use of the legal solutions available, nor have they demanded sufficiently strictly that the terms of the permit be adhered to.

The comments made by the authorities are legally inadequate for dealing with these environmental problems according to the EU’s environmental legislation, which is also binding on Finland. It appears that the actions of the Finnish environmental authorities in the Talvivaara case have breached Finland’s EU obligations.

— As the Finnish environmental authorities have neither intervened effectively nor made use of the full range of legal solutions available to them to prevent Talvivaara from continually breaching the terms of its environmental permit, is the Finnish State in breach of its obligation to properly implement the EU’s environmental legislation, particularly Article 13 of Council Directive 96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (the ‘IPPC Directive’)?

— What does the Commission intend to do with regard to this matter?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2012)

The Commission is aware that the Talvivaara mine in Finland may have been authorised and may be operating in breach of several provisions of EC law. This mining activity might pose significant risks to surface water bodies, including the lakes Salminen, Kalliojärvi, Ylä-Lumijärvi and Kivijärvi. It may also lead to air and soil pollution.

Compliance with EC law has been raised in the framework of infringement 2012/2104 launched against Finland for failure to transpose correctly and completely the 2006/21/EC (84) Mining Waste Directive. In particular, in the letter of formal notice addressed to Finland on 25 June 2012, the Commission asks to clarify how several provisions of that directive have been transposed. In this respect, the Talvivaara mine is mentioned as an illustrative example of possible bad implementation of the Mining Waste Directive resulting from a transposition deficiency.

The Commission is also opening an investigation requesting the Finnish authorities to inform on the Talvivaara mine. This will allow the Commission services to verify whether this activity should fall under EU directives including Directive 2008/1/EC (85) concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC), Directive 2011/92/EU (86) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and Directive 2000/60/EC (87) establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. It will also allow Commission services to verify whether this activity complies with the above-named directives.

Should the information provided by Finland show that the Talvivaara mine would have been authorised and/or operated in violation of EU environmental law, the Commission would then consider launching a legal action.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004386/12

aan de Commissie

Judith A. Merkies (S&D)

(26 april 2012)

Betreft: Hernieuwbare energie en definitie van residuen

Ingevolge Richtlijn 2009/28/EG inzake hernieuwbare energiebronnen (88) tellen biobrandstoffen die afkomstig zijn van productieresiduen dubbel richting het streefcijfer voor hernieuwbare energiebronnen in het vervoer. Ze hoeven ook maar aan één van de vijf duurzaamheidscriteria te voldoen om voor staatssteun in aanmerking te komen.

De definitie van „residu” is van cruciaal belang geworden bij het bepalen van de wijze waarop deze richtlijn in de lidstaten ten uitvoer wordt gelegd. Het ontbreken van een duidelijke, geharmoniseerde definitie van dit begrip heeft bepaalde lidstaten ertoe gebracht een zeer ruime definitie toe te passen. Dit heeft gevolgen voor de markten voor grondstoffen, doordat hierdoor meer grondstoffen voor dubbeltelling en staatssteun in aanmerking komen. Het ontbreken van een duidelijke, geharmoniseerde definitie van het begrip „productieresidu” brengt het risico mee dat grondstoffen die reeds in de bio-industrie worden gebruikt, op intensieve wijze voor de opwekking van energie worden afgeleid.

De bevordering van het gebruik voor energieopwekking van kostbare, voor diverse duurzame industriële toepassingen noodzakelijke grondstoffen heeft ertoe geleid dat deze natuurlijke hulpbronnen steeds schaarser worden en vervangen moeten worden door fossiele of op gewassen gebaseerde stoffen met een grotere koolstofvoetafdruk.

1.	Hoe wil de Commissie bereiken dat de doelstellingen inzake hulpbronnenefficiëntie van het stappenplan van de Commissie voor efficiënt gebruik van hulpbronnen (COM(2011)0571) ten behoeve van de opwekking van hernieuwbare energie volledig worden geïntegreerd in het energiebeleid van de EU?

2.	Op welke manier denkt de Commissie te zorgen voor rechtvaardige en gelijke toegang voor industriële gebruikers tot deze tot de kennisgebaseerde bio-economie behorende grondstoffen, zonder de biomassamarkt te laten verstoren door steunregelingen voor hernieuwbare energie?

3.	Is de Commissie van plan om, in de trant van de in het kader van de kaderrichtlijn afvalstoffen toepasselijke definities, concrete definities van

„afval”, „residu” of „bijproduct” voor de richtlijn hernieuwbare energiebronnen voor te stellen teneinde een grotere convergentie tussen nationale steunregelingen voor hernieuwbare energie mogelijk te maken?

Antwoord van de heer Oettinger namens de Commissie

(14 juni 2012)

De Commissie bevordert het gebruik van de biobrandstoffen en vloeibare biomassa die het beste presteren en baseert zich daarbij op de duurzaamheidscriteria die in Richtlijn 2009/28/EG inzake hernieuwbare energie (89) zijn vastgelegd. De Commissie zal zich verder zo snel mogelijk wijden aan de indirecte gevolgen van veranderingen in landgebruik als gevolg van biobrandstoffen. De Commissie bekijkt bovendien of de EU aanvullende maatregelen moet nemen om de duurzaamheid van in de EU verbruikte vaste en gasvormige biomassa te bevorderen. Dit zou bijvoorbeeld de vaststelling van EU-brede bindende criteria kunnen zijn.

De Commissie streeft ernaar duurzame biomassaprojecten in de EU aan te moedigen in het kader van haar voorstel voor de hervorming van het beleid voor plattelandsontwikkeling. Ook de bosbouwstrategie van de EU, die binnenkort wordt gepresenteerd, kan aanvullende maatregelen bevatten. De Commissie zal bovendien in het kader van haar strategie voor de bio-economie (90) zorgen voor meer inzicht in de huidige, potentiële en toekomstige beschikbaarheid van en vraag naar biomassa (met inbegrip van residuen en afval uit de land‐ en bosbouw) in alle betrokken sectoren.

In haar stappenplan voor efficiënt hulpbronnengebruik in Europa zegt de Commissie toe om „de kennis over biotisch materiaal, gevolgen van en tendensen in landgebruik” verder te ontwikkelen. Dit zal in 2014 leiden tot een mededeling over landgebruik.

Richtlijn 2009/28/EG inzake hernieuwbare energie bevat geen definitie van afval, residuen of bijproducten. De definitie van afval die voor EU-wetgeving geldt, is vastgelegd in Richtlijn 2008/98/EG (de EU-kaderrichtlijn afval (91)). De Commissie heeft in deel 5.2 van de mededeling over de praktische tenuitvoerlegging van de duurzaamheidsregeling van de EU voor biobrandstoffen en vloeibare biomassa richtsnoeren voor deze kwestie gegeven (92). De Commissie steunt een gezamenlijke aanpak voor de uitvoering van de richtlijn.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004386/12

to the Commission

Judith A. Merkies (S&D)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Renewable energy and definition of residues

Under the Renewable Energy Source (RES) Directive 2009/28/EC (93), biofuels derived from production residues are being double-counted towards the target for renewable energy sources in transport. They also have to fulfil only one of the five sustainability criteria in order to be eligible for state aid.

The definition of ‘residue’ has become a key issue in determining the way in which this directive is implemented in the Member States. The lack of a clearly expressed harmonised definition of this concept has led certain Member States to apply a very wide definition. This affects the markets for raw materials by making more raw materials eligible for double counting and for state aid. The absence of a clearly expressed harmonised definition of production residue entails the risk of raw materials that are already used in the bio-industry being heavily diverted to energy production.

The promotion of the use for energy generation of valuable raw materials needed for various sustainable industrial applications has led to these natural resources becoming increasingly scarce and having to be replaced by fossil or crop-based materials with a larger carbon footprint.

1.	How will the Commission ensure that the EU’s energy policy embraces the resource efficiency objectives outlined in the Commission’s Resource Efficiency Roadmap (COM(2011) 0571) for renewable energy production?

2.	What does the Commission intend to do to ensure fair and equal access for industrial users to these raw materials, which are part of the knowledge-based bio-economy, without renewable energy support schemes distorting the biomass market?

3.	Will the Commission propose concrete definitions of

‘waste’, ‘residue’ or ‘by-product’ for the RES Directive, similar to the definitions applicable under the Waste Framework Directive, in order to allow for greater convergence between national support schemes for renewable energy?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2012)

In order to promote the best performing biofuels and bioliquids, the Commission is implementing the sustainability criteria laid down in Directive 2009/28/EC on renewable energy (94) and it expects to address the issue of indirect land use change impacts of biofuels as soon as possible. The Commission is also currently assessing the need for additional EU action to promote the sustainability of solid and gaseous biomass consumed in the EU, including through EU‐wide binding criteria.

The Commission seeks to encourage sustainable biomass mobilisation across the EU as part of its proposal for the reform of the Rural Development Policy. The forthcoming EU Forestry Strategy may also contain complementary measures. Furthermore, in the context of its bioeconomy strategy (95) the Commission also plans to conduct work aimed at improving the understanding of current, potential and future availability and demand of biomass (including agricultural and forestry residues and waste) across sectors.

In the Road Map for a Resource-efficient Europe, the Commission commits to ‘further develop the scientific knowledge on biotic material, land-use effects and trends’ in a communication on land use in 2014.

Directive 2009/28/EC concerning renewable energy does not contain a definition of waste, residues or by-products. The definition of waste for EU legislation is set down in Directive 2008/98/EC (the EU Waste Framework Directive) (96). The Commission has provided, in Section 5.2 of the communication on the practical implementation of the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability scheme, guidance on this issue (97). The Commission supports a common approach for the implementation of the directive.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004387/12

aan de Commissie

Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)

(26 april 2012)

Betreft: Nieuw BSE-geval in de VS

1. Is de Commissie bekend met het feit dat er in Californië onlangs een nieuw geval van gekkekoeienziekte (BSE) is geconstateerd?

2. In hoeverre wordt er in de EU gecontroleerd op BSE-infectie bij de import van vlees, dieren, of dierlijke producten? In hoeverre bij de EU-productie van vlees en dierlijke producten?

3. Wanneer is er uit controles voor het laatst BSE geconstateerd in de EU in vlees of bij levende dieren?

4. Is de Commissie bekend met het feit dat in Zuid Korea verschillende grote levensmiddelenconcerns zijn gestopt met de verkoop van rundvlees uit de VS? Hoe beoordeelt de Commissie deze beslissing?

5. Heeft de Commissie een plan van aanpak klaar staan indien ook binnen de EU BSE-gevallen ontdekt worden? Zo ja, hoe ziet dit eruit? Zal de Commissie niet schromen om rundvlees en runderen uit de VS in de ban te doen indien dit de voedselveiligheid in de EU kan bevorderen?

Antwoord van de heer Dalli namens de Commissie

(21 juni 2012)

1.	De bevoegde autoriteiten van de VS hebben de Commissie op 24 april 2012 in kennis gesteld van het nieuwe BSE-geval in Californië.

2.	Bij Verordening (EG) nr. 999/2001

2.	Bij Verordening (EG) nr. 999/2001

 (98) zijn voorschriften vastgesteld voor de preventie, bestrijding en uitroeiing van overdraagbare spongiforme encefalopathieën (TSE's) en is meer in het bijzonder bepaald dat alle voor slachting aangeboden dieren een veterinaire keuring moeten ondergaan om te voorkomen dat verdachte gevallen in de voedsel‐ of voederketen  terechtkomen. Wat de invoer van producten uit derde landen betreft, hanteert de EU een systeem van sanitaire invoercontroles die moeten garanderen dat deze producten aan de EU-eisen voldoen. Die controles worden uitgevoerd door de inspectiedienst van de Commissie (99).

3.	In 2011 waren er 28 bevestigde gevallen van BSE, een daling ten opzichte van 2010 en 2009, toen het aantal bevestigde gevallen nog op 45 respectievelijk 67 lag.

4.	De Zuid-Koreaanse autoriteiten hebben de Commissie ervan in kennis gesteld dat zij geen sanitaire maatregelen zullen nemen ten aanzien van rundvlees uit de VS. De Commissie is er echter van op de hoogte dat twee particuliere ondernemingen op eigen initiatief geen rundvlees meer uit de VS invoeren.

5.

Verordening (EG) nr. 999/2001 voorziet in maatregelen voor het geval in de EU gevallen van BSE worden ontdekt. Op het ogenblik ziet de Commissie geen noodzaak maatregelen te nemen ten aanzien van de invoer van rundvlees en runderen uit de VS. Aangezien BSE nog altijd een endemische ziekte in de EU is, bestaat er als zodanig geen noodplan. Verordening (EG) nr. 999/2001 voorziet evenwel in maatregelen die door de bevoegde autoriteiten van de betrokken lidstaat moeten worden genomen wanneer een geval van BSE wordt bevestigd. Deze maatregelen zijn onder meer een epidemiologisch onderzoek en vernietiging van het kadaver en van alle dieren die besmet zouden kunnen zijn. Het spreekt vanzelf dat de Commissie aanvullende maatregelen ten aanzien van de invoer van rundvlees uit de VS zal overwegen, indien die nodig zijn om de volksgezondheid in de EU te beschermen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004387/12

to the Commission

Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: New case of mad cow disease in the United States

1. Is the Commission aware that a new case of mad cow disease (BSE) has been recently identified in California?

2. To what extent are checks carried out in the EU for the BSE infection in imports of meat, animals or animal products? To what extent is this the case in the production of meat and animal products in the EU?

3. When was the last time that checks identified BSE in meat or in live animals in the EU?

4. Is the Commission aware that in South Korea various large food retail chains have halted the sale of US beef? What is the Commission’s view of this decision?

5. Does the Commission have a contingency plan if BSE cases are also discovered in the EU? If so, what does it entail? Will the Commission not hesitate to ban US beef and cattle if this action can promote food safety in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

1.	The US Competent Authorities informed the Commission on 24 April 2012 of the new BSE case detected in California.

2.	Regulation (EC) No 999/2001

2.	Regulation (EC) No 999/2001

 (100) provides rules for prevention, control and eradication of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) and more specifically that all animals presented for slaughter must undergo a veterinary inspection to ensure that suspected cases do not enter the food and feed chain. The sanitary import controls system of the EU requests that products imported from third countries should also meet the EU requirements. The compliance is verified by the Commission inspection service (101).

3.	Twenty eight BSE cases were confirmed in the EU in 2011, down from 45 in 2010 and 67 in 2009.

4.	The South Korean authorities have informed the Commission that no sanitary measures will be taken on US beef. However, the Commission is aware that two private companies have suspended the import of beef from the US on their own initiative.

5.

Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 provides for measures to be taken when BSE cases are detected in the EU. The Commission does not consider appropriate, at this stage, to take any measure as regards the import of beef and cattle from the US. As BSE is still an endemic disease in the EU, there is no contingency plan as such. However, Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 provides for measures to be taken by the MS competent authorities when a BSE case is confirmed. These measures include an epidemiological investigation and the destruction of the carcass and of all animals which may have been also contaminated. Of course additional measures regarding the import of US beef will be considered by the Commission if it appears that they are needed to protect public health in the EU.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-004394/12

à la Commission

José Bové (Verts/ALE)

(26 avril 2012)

Objet: Réforme «verte» de la PAC: rotation des cultures c. «diversification»: retombées économiques

Selon les propositions législatives pour la réforme de la PAC, la «diversification des cultures» permettrait d'occuper jusqu'à 70 % des parcelles arables d'une exploitation avec la même culture d'année en année:

Comment cette mesure permettra-t-elle concrètement d'éviter les dégâts causés par les monocultures, par opposition à une véritable rotation des cultures avec un légume, à savoir:

réduire l'apparition des nuisibles (comme l'épidémie récente de Diabotrica dans les monocultures de maïs) dans la végétation et les sols;

réduire la dépendance vis-à-vis des pesticides néfastes à l'environnement comme à l'économie;

augmenter la quantité de carbone dans l'humus;

améliorer la résistance au drainage et aux inondations grâce à une meilleure faune et flore des sols;

améliorer la rétention des nutriments en augmentant la couche d'humus, réduire les fuites de nutriments et diminuer ainsi les coûts de l'eutrophication et des accidents de pêche;

réduire les applications de fertilisants artificiels grâce à la fixation d'azote dans les légumes utilisés pour la rotation;

équilibrer la balance commerciale de l'UE en réduisant la dépendance vis-à-vis des importations de soja;

produire des avantages économiques globaux en atténuant le changement climatique grâce:

à l'utilisation réduite des combustibles fossiles dans la production de pesticides et de fertilisants artificiels,

à l'enrayement de la destruction des forêts tempérées humides, des steppes herbacées et de la savane humide pour permettre l'expansion de la culture du soja,

au renforcement de la résistance des systèmes agricoles aux inondations et aux sécheresses?

Pourquoi l'analyse d'impact n'a-t-elle pas pris en considération tous les avantages économiques potentiels (pour les agriculteurs comme pour la société) décrits ci-dessus dérivant de la réduction des pesticides et des mesures d'urgence phytosanitaires, du renforcement de la sécurité alimentaire à long terme, de la protection des ressources et de la diminution de la pollution?

Réponse donnée par M. Cioloș au nom de la Commission

(4 juin 2012)

Si la Commission reconnaît que la rotation des cultures est très bénéfique sur le plan environnemental, il a été souligné au cours de la procédure d'analyse d'impact de la PAC après 2013 que la gestion et le contrôle dans le cadre d'un paiement lié à une obligation pluriannuelle relevant du premier pilier entraînerait une charge administrative importante pour les autorités nationales. C'est pourquoi la préférence est allée à l'obligation de diversification des cultures pour bénéficier de la composante écologique des paiements directs, obligation sur la base de laquelle les agriculteurs peuvent contracter des engagements plus exigeants de rotation des cultures dans le cadre des mesures agroenvironnementales et des mesures relatives au climat relevant du deuxième pilier.

L'introduction obligatoire de légumineuses pour répondre à l'obligation de diversification des cultures a également été évaluée au cours de la procédure d'analyse d'impact. Elle n'a pas été retenue parce qu'elle aurait risqué de compromettre la compatibilité de la composante écologique des paiements directs avec les règles de l'OMC.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004394/12

to the Commission

José Bové (Verts/ALE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: CAP reform, greening: crop rotation v ‘diversification’ — economic impacts

In the legislative proposals for CAP reform, ‘crop diversification’ would allow up to 70 % of a farm’s arable parcels to contain the same crop year on year.

1.	How will this measure, as opposed to real crop rotation with a leguminous component, actually succeed in breaking up damaging monocultures, thereby, for example:

reducing pest build-up (such as the recent diabotrica outbreak in maize monocultures) in vegetation and soil;

reducing the need for environmentally and economically costly pesticide use;

increasing carbon in soil humus;

improving drainage and flood resilience via increased soil biota;

improving nutrient retention via increased humus, reducing leaching of nutrients and thus reducing the costs of eutrophication and fishery crashes;

reducing the need to apply artificial fertilisers due to N2 fixation in leguminous components of the rotation;

benefiting the EU trade balance through less reliance on soya imports;

h.	making general economic gains due to mitigating climate change via:

—	less use of fossil fuels for producing pesticides and artificial fertilisers,

—	less temperate rainforest, herbaceous steppe, and wet savannah destruction to make space for expansion of soya cultivation,

—	increased resilience of farm systems to floods and droughts?

2.

Why have the full potential economic gains (both to the farmer and to society) outlined above — from reduced pesticide use, reduced phytosanitary emergency measures, increased long-term food security, resource protection and reduced pollution — not been comprehensively considered in the impact assessment?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2012)

While the Commission acknowledges the high environmental benefits of crop rotation, it has been emphasised during the impact assessment process of the CAP post 2013 that the administration and control within a first pillar payment of a multiannual obligation would lead to heavy administrative burden for national authorities. That is why the crop diversification was preferred as an obligation to get the green component of direct payments, obligation on which farmers may build for more demanding crop rotation commitment within second pillar agro-environmental-climate measures.

The introduction of compulsory leguminous as part the crop diversification obligation was also assessed during the impact assessment process. It was not retained, as it would have put a risk on the WTO compliance of the green component of direct payments.

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-004405/12

a Bizottság számára

Bagó Zoltán (PPE)

(2012. április 26.)

Tárgy: Kulturális és kreatív ágazatokban működő kis— és középvállalkozások támogatása

A Kreatív Európa program létrehozásával kapcsolatos javaslatban a Bizottság „javasolta, hogy hozzanak létre egy »Kreatív Európa« elnevezésű keretprogramot, amely összefogja a jelenlegi Kultúra, MEDIA és MEDIA Mundus programokat, és egy új pénzügyi eszközt foglal magában, amely javítja a kulturális és kreatív ágazatokban működő kis— és középvállalkozások (kkv-k) és szervezetek finanszírozáshoz való hozzáférését”. A 2. mellékletben megállapításra kerül, hogy a program végrehajtásában a kulturális és kreatív ágazatok pénzügyi eszköze tekintetében az Európai Befektetési Alap vesz részt.

Hogyan zajlik majd a gyakorlatban a kulturális és kreatív ágazatokban működő kis— és középvállalkozások támogatását szolgáló új alprogram irányítása és végrehajtása, azaz az Európai Befektetési Alap bevonásával történő hitelnyújtás?

Andrula Vasziliunak válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. július 5.)

A 2014‐2020-ra vonatkozó Kreatív Európa programról szóló bizottsági javaslat egy olyan hitelgarancia-eszköz létrehozását irányozza elő, amely a hagyományosabb, támogatásalapú intézkedésekkel párhuzamosan lesz alkalmazható a kulturális és médiaágazatok támogatására. Az említett ágazatok működéséhez továbbra is főként támogatásalapú intézkedések formájában történik majd segítségnyújtás. Az Európai Bizottság — szándékai szerint — a gyakorlatban a fent említett eszköz irányítását és végrehajtását delegálni fogja, mégpedig valószínűleg az Európai Beruházási Alapra (EBA). Az EBA a saját részéről pénzügyi közvetítőket jelöl ki, amelyek változatos hitelportfóliót állítanak fel a kulturális és kreatív ágazatokban működő és a támogathatóság feltételeinek eleget tevő kis— és középvállalatok és szervezetek számára. Az EBA garanciát nyújt a hitelportfólióra, és megosztja a hitelkockázatokat a pénzügyi közvetítőkkel.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004405/12

to the Commission

Zoltán Bagó (PPE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Supporting small and medium-sized enterprises operating in the cultural and creative sectors

In the proposal regarding establishing a Creative Europe programme, the Commission proposed ‘a single “Creative Europe” Framework Programme bringing together the current Culture, MEDIA and MEDIA Mundus programmes, and including a new financial facility to improve access to finance for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and organisations in the cultural and creative sectors’. In Annex II, it is established that the programme will be implemented with the involvement of the European Investment Fund in respect of the Cultural and Creative Sectors Facility.

How will the management and implementation of the new sub-programme aimed at supporting small and medium-sized enterprises operating in the cultural and creative sectors take place in practice, i.e. how will loans be made available with the involvement of the European Investment Fund?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2012)

The Commission's proposal for the Creative Europe Programme 2014-2020 envisages the setting up of a loan guarantee facility operating alongside the more traditional grant-based actions in favour of the culture and media sectors and which will continue to provide the main supports to the sectors. In practice the European Commission intends to delegate responsibility for the management and implementation of this facility, probably to the European Investment Fund (EIF). The EIF would in turn select financial intermediaries who would build diversified portfolio of loans to small and medium‐sized enterprises and organisations in the cultural and creative sectors which meet the eligibility criteria. The EIF would provide a guarantee on the portfolio of loans and share the credit risks with the financial intermediaries.

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-004410/12

a Bizottság számára

Bauer Edit (PPE)

(2012. április 26.)

Tárgy: A magántulajdonhoz való jog korlátozása

A közelmúltban egy választópolgár keresett meg kérésével. A levélben leírt probléma által sérül az egyén magántulajdonhoz való joga, és ez ellentétes az európai joggyakorlattal.

A sértett fél egy beltelek tulajdonosa Szlovákiában, melyen tudtán kívül évekkel ezelőtt a Nyugat-szlovákiai Energetika (a továbbiakban: „villamos művek”) négy darab beton villanyoszlopot és villanyvezetéket helyezett el, mely a telek 10 m-es sávján húzódik végig, mintegy 600 m2-es részt érintve és elértéktelenítve ezáltal. A községtől hivatalos építkezési engedélye volt a cégnek. A villamos műveknek — mint a vezeték tulajdonosának — a hatályos szlovákiai törvények értelmében joga van a telken elhelyezni a vezetéket, és semmiféle kártérítési kötelezettsége nincs a telek tulajdonosával szemben. A hatályos törvény azt is kimondja, hogy amennyiben a vezeték nagymértékben korlátozza az ingatlan tulajdonosát és befolyásolja az ingatlan értékét, úgy az építmény (villanyvezeték) használatba helyezésétől számított három hónapon belül egyszeri kártérítést követelhet a villamos művektől, ellenkező esetben ez a lehetőség elévül. Jelen esetben a parcella tulajdonosa nem kapott értesítést az építkezési engedély kiadásáról, tehát nem tudott élni törvény adta jogával a kártérítés igénylésére. A villamos művektől való válaszlevélben fölvetődik a vezetékek áthelyezésének lehetősége, de ennek költségeit a villamos művek teljes mértékben a telek tulajdonosára hárítaná, ami ugyancsak megfelel a hatályos törvényeknek. Időközben a telek iránt érdeklődő személy mélyen a piaci áron alul lett volna csak hajlandó megvenni a telek ezen részét, éppen a vezetékekre való tekintettel.

— Megfelel-e a Szlovák Köztársaság hatályos energetikai törvényében lefektetett joggyakorlat az európai uniós joggyakorlatnak, ami a villamos vezetékek elhelyezését, annak módját és feltételeit illeti?

— Az európai joggyakorlat szerint elfogadható-e, hogy az energetikai cégek jogai előnyt élveznek a magántulajdonhoz való joggal szemben?

— Miért nem kötelesek az energetikai cégek megvásárolni az általuk blokkolt és önkényesen birtokolt telkeket az adott régióban kialakult piaci árért, esetleg bérleti díjat fizetni az elfoglalt területért?

— Milyen lépéseket tehet az Európai Bizottság, hogy a tulajdonhoz való jog ne sérüljön más, harmadik személy gazdálkodásából, vállalkozásából kifolyólag?

Viviane Reding válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. június 27.)

Főszabályként a Bizottságnak a tagállamok intézkedéseivel és mulasztásaival kapcsolatos hatásköre az uniós jog alkalmazásának felügyeletére korlátozódik, az Európai Unió Bíróságának ellenőrzése mellett (vö. EUSZ 17. cikk (1) bekezdés). A tisztelt képviselő által benyújtott információk alapján nem valószínűsíthető, hogy az említett ügyben az érintett tagállam az uniós jog végrehajtása során járt el, mivel az uniós jog nem szabályozza az elektromos vezetékek felszerelésének módját és feltételeit.

Ami közelebbről a tisztelt képviselő által felvetett alapjogi kérdéseket illeti, a Bizottság emlékeztetni kíván arra, hogy az Alapjogi Charta 51. cikkének (1) bekezdésével összhangban a Charta rendelkezései csak abban az esetben vonatkoznak a tagállamokra, ha azok uniós jogszabályokat hajtanak végre. Ezenfelül az EUMSZ 345. cikke értelmében az ingatlan-tulajdonlás rendjének szabályozása továbbra is tagállami hatáskörbe tartozik.

Az ilyen esetekben a tagállamoknak a nemzeti jogszabályokból és nemzetközi megállapodásokból eredő alapjogi kötelezettségeikkel összhangban kell eljárniuk.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004410/12

to the Commission

Edit Bauer (PPE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Restricting the right to private property

A constituent contacted me recently with a request. The problem described in the letter violates the right to private property, which is contrary to European legal practices.

The injured party is the owner of a property within the limits of a Slovakian settlement, on which Západoslovenská energetika a.s. (hereinafter referred to as: ‘electric company’) placed, without this person’s knowledge, four concrete electricity poles and electric cables running along a 10-m band of the full length of the property, thus affecting a total area of about 600 m2 and rendering it worthless. The company had an official building permit from the local government. According to the Slovakian legislation in force, the electric company — as the owner of the cables — has the right to place the cables on the property and has no obligation to provide compensation to the property owner. The legislation in force also states that if the cables restrict the property owner to a great extent and affect the property’s value, the owner may demand that the electric company provide one-off compensation within three months of the construction (electric cables) being put into operation; otherwise, this opportunity is lost. In the present case, the property owner was not informed of the building permit being issued and so could not exercise the legal right to claim compensation. In the response received from the electric company, the possibility of relocating the cables is actually raised, but the electric company would charge all the costs of this to the property owner, which is also in line with the legislation in force. Meanwhile, a person interested in purchasing the property would only have been willing to purchase this part of the property well under the market value because of the cables.

— Does the legal approach adopted in the Slovak Republic’s current law on energy conform with European Union law regarding the method and conditions for installing electrical cables?

— According to European law, is it acceptable that the rights of energy companies enjoy an advantage over the right to private property?

— Why are energy companies not obliged to purchase the properties they block and arbitrarily appropriate for the market value which applies in the given region or, perhaps, to pay a rental fee for the area occupied?

— What steps can the European Commission take to prevent infringement of the right to private property as a result of the business or entrepreneurial activities of third parties?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

As a matter of principle, the Commission's powers regarding acts and omissions by Member States are limited to overseeing the application of Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice (cf. Article 17 (1) TEU). On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, it does not appear that in the matter referred to the Member State concerned did act in the course of implementation of Union law, which does not cover the method and conditions for installing electrical cables.

Regarding more particularly the fundamental rights issues raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission would recall that, according to Article 51 (1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the provisions of the Charter are addressed to Member States only when they are implementing Union law. Moreover, according to Article 345 TFEU, Member States retain competence to regulate their systems of property ownership.

In such cases, Member States should act with respect of their obligations regarding fundamental rights, as resulting from their national legislation and international agreements to which they are parties.

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-004413/12

a Bizottság számára

Bagó Zoltán (PPE)

(2012. április 26.)

Tárgy: Diákhitelgarancia-eszköz

Az Erasmus Mindenkinek Program létrehozásáról szóló bizottsági javaslatban a diákhitelgarancia-eszközzel kapcsolatban az szerepel, hogy „a mesterfokozatú oklevél megszerzése érdekében megvalósuló mobilitást a (…) diákhitelgarancia-eszköz segítségével támogatják”, illetve hogy „a Bizottság azon hallgatók esetében nyújt hitelgarancia keretében finanszírozást, akik a 18. cikk (1) bekezdésében meghatározott részt vevő országok egyikében laknak, és mesterképzésüket egy másik részt vevő országban végzik; a finanszírozást olyan vagyonkezelő megbízása révén biztosítja, amely a pénzügyi eszköz végrehajtásának részletes szabályai és előírásai, valamint a felek egyedi kötelezettségeit tartalmazó vagyonkezelői szerződés alapján kezeli a támogatást. A pénzügyi eszköz megfelel a költségvetési rendeletben, valamint a végrehajtási szabályok helyébe lépő felhatalmazáson alapuló jogi aktusban foglalt, a pénzügyi eszközökre vonatkozó rendelkezéseknek.”.

1.	A Bizottság szerint az európai szintű diákhitel-garancia hogyan kerülne összehangolásra a már kidolgozott és működő nemzeti diákhitel programokkal?

2.	Hogyan összeegyeztethető a diákhitel biztosítása a fiatalkori eladósodottság elleni küzdelemmel? Milyen mértékben hagyhatjuk a gazdasági válságban eladósodni a tanulmányaikat végzőket?

3.	Hogyan veszi számításba a diákhitel-garancia, hogy a tagállamok eltérő gazdasági helyzete miatt a fizetési fegyelem igen nagy kockázatot hordozhat magában?

Andrula Vasziliu válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. június 27.)

1.	A diákhitel valamilyen formája számos tagállamban létezik, de nem mindegyikben, és több olyan konstrukció van, amely korlátozza a hordozhatóságot.

A mesterképzésben részt vevő azon hallgatók számára, akik külföldön végzik a teljes mesterképzést, különösen nehéz bankkölcsönhöz jutni, mivel a bankok még nagyobb kockázatot látnak abban, ha egy diák külföldön folytatja tanulmányait. A határokon átnyúló, tanulási célú mobilitást elősegítő uniós diákhitelgarancia-keret valódi hozzáadott értéket képviselne, a piac e szegmensében hiányt töltene be, és nem tenné feleslegessé, vagy váltaná ki a nemzeti szinten hozzáférhető finanszírozást, sokkal inkább kiegészítené a nemzeti eszközöket ott, ahol ezek jelen vannak.

2.	A felsőfokú végzettség megszerzése és a tanulmányi mobilitás javítja a fiatalok karrierkilátásait és jövedelemszerzési potenciáljukat, és csökkenti annak veszélyét, hogy nem találnak munkát.

A nemzetközi mesterképzésben résztvevők nagyobb valószínűséggel találnak majd minőségi munkahelyeket, és könnyebben vissza tudják majd fizetni a diákhitelt.

Az egyéni hitelfelvevő diák és a hitelező közötti megállapodás kérdése, hogy milyen szintű eladósodást vállalhat a diák. A programba nehézségek elleni biztosítékok lesznek beépítve, mint például egy türelmi időszak, amíg a végzettek először állást találnak, és csak azután kell elkezdeni visszafizetni a hitelt, valamint ún. fizetési szünetek, amikor szükség esetén a törlesztést szüneteltetni lehet.

3.	Az egyedi hitelező által vállalható kockázat szintje függ majd a jelenlegi konkrét gazdasági helyzettől, és annak függvényében kerül kiszámításra.

Nemteljesítés esetén a költségeket (megosztva) a hitelező és az európai diákhitel-garancia vállalja. A javasolt kockázatmegosztás mértékét más uniós területekről vett tapasztalat, valamint bankok és diákhitel szervezetek által végzett piaci tesztelés alapján határozták meg. Olyan eszköz létrehozása a cél, amely kellően vonzó ahhoz, hogy a bankok kedvező feltételek mellett nyújtsanak hitelt a külföldön mesterképzésben részt vevő hallgatóknak, ugyanakkor az uniós forrásoknak a legjobb megtérülést biztosítják, egyértelműen meghatározva az uniós költségvetés felelősségének felső határát.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004413/12

to the Commission

Zoltán Bagó (PPE)

(26 April 2012)

Subject: Student loan guarantee facility

With regard to the student loan guarantee facility, the European Commission’s Proposal on the establishment of the Erasmus for All programme states that ‘Degree mobility at Masters level shall be supported through the student loan guarantee facility’ and that ‘the Commission shall provide the funding for guarantees for loans to students resident in a participating country as defined in Article 18(1), undertaking a full Masters degree in another participating country, to be delivered through a trustee with a mandate to implement it on the basis of fiduciary agreements setting out the detailed rules and requirements governing the implementation of the financial instrument as well as the respective obligations of the parties. The financial instrument shall comply with the provisions regarding financial instruments in the Financial Regulation and in the Delegated Act replacing the Implementing Rules.’

1. In the Commission’s view, how would the Europe-wide student loan guarantee be harmonised with the existing and currently operating national student loan programmes?

2. How can guaranteeing student loans be reconciled with the fight against youth indebtedness? To what extent can we allow those completing their studies to go into debt in the economic crisis?

3. How does the student loan guarantee take into account the fact that due to differing economic conditions among Member States, repayment discipline may involve very considerable risk?

Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

1. Student loans exist in several Member States but not in all and many schemes restrict portability. For Masters students taking a full degree programme abroad, bank loans are particularly difficult to obtain — banks are doubly risk averse to studies undertaken abroad. An EU student loan guarantee facility for cross-border learning mobility would have clear added value to address this market gap, and would not duplicate or displace financing available at national level but would complement national instruments, where they exist.

2.	Higher education and learning mobility improve career prospects and earning potential and reduce the risk of unemployment. International Masters graduates in particular are more likely to secure quality jobs and be in a position to repay loans.

The level of managable debt is a matter for agreement between the individual student borrower and the lender. Safeguards against hardship will be built into the scheme, such as a grace period where graduates have an opportunity to secure a job before starting repayment and ‘payment holidays’ where repayment can be frozen if necessary.

3. The level of risk to be borne by individual lenders will take account of the prevailing economic situation and will be priced accordingly. The cost of any defaults would be shared between the lender and the European Student Loan Guarantee. The level of proposed risk sharing has been infomed by EU experience of other fields and by market testing with banks and student loan bodies. The aim is to create an instrument which is sufficiently attractive to encourage banks to lend to mobile masters students on favourable terms, whilst securing best value for EU resources, with clearly defined and capped liability for the EU budget.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004428/12

to the Commission

Liam Aylward (ALDE), Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE) and Brian Crowley (ALDE)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: EFSA and the nutrition and health claims regulation and its impact on SMEs

In response to Written Question E‐002088/2012, the Commission indicated that only a ‘very small part’ of the European food industry was unhappy with the implementation of Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. The European food supplement industry constitutes the majority of this ‘very small part’ of the European food industry referred to by the Commission. The majority of the companies operating in the European food supplement sector are SMEs. The pharmaceutical level of supporting evidence required for the approval of Article 13(1) health claims is difficult and sometimes impossible for SMEs to comply with. For example, the rigidity of the approach taken to claims assessment resulted in the evidence supporting many claims not even being considered by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) due to substance characterisation requirements that were never made clear to applicants in advance.

The ALDE group has recently launched a campaign in support of SMEs. SMEs are regularly cited by the Commission as the drivers of Europe’s economic recovery. While it is clear that a successful SME sector is crucial to Europe’s economic recovery, it is equally clear that the health claims regulation is going to have a seriously negative impact on SMEs.

— Does the Commission think that it is feasible to expect SMEs to comply with the requirements for the approval of health claims set by EFSA?

— If SMEs cannot provide the level of evidence (randomised controlled trials) required by EFSA, does the Commission accept that this will threaten the livelihood of these SMEs as products will have to be removed from the market?

— Can the Commission clarify whether the ‘think small first’ approach was followed in the implementation of Article 13(1)?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

When Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 (102) was adopted, all institutions involved agreed that its main objective should be to protect consumers from misleading claims and that scientific substantiation should be the main aspect to be taken into account. Other objectives, such as to guarantee conditions of fair competition and free circulation of foods in the EU, are also considered in the regulation, which seeks to strike a fair balance between all of them.

With reference to the questions raised:

—	EFSA applies an objective standard when verifying the substantiation of health claims by generally accepted scientific evidence and all businesses wishing to use such claims should be able to meet this standard.

—

The Commission clarifies that no product will have to be removed from the market as a result of the implementation of the regulation, but only misleading claims will have to disappear. Some adaptation may be necessary of any businesses that uses voluntary health claims to market their products. However this reflects once again the original objectives of the regulation.

—

When implementing the regulation, the Commission takes the interests of SMEs into consideration provided that these do not run against the regulation's objectives. For example, the Commission always tries to avoid setting unnecessarily restrictive conditions of use for permitted claims, so that these are available to as many operators as possible. On the contrary, the Commission cannot support business practices, such as those based on the use of unsubstantiated claims, which not only mislead consumers, but also create conditions of unfair competition. This would be a disadvantage for the majority of businesses, including SMEs, which try to compete on the basis of health claims that are substantiated by science.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-004431/12

à la Commission

Patrice Tirolien (S&D)

(27 avril 2012)

Objet: Création d'un instrument d'adaptation des dispositifs communautaires en matière de pêche aux réalités des régions ultrapériphériques

Le projet de réforme proposé par la Commission européenne sur la politique commune de la pêche (PCP) met en place un ensemble de dispositions ayant pour but de renforcer la protection des ressources halieutiques. L'objectif visant à rétablir un équilibre entre l'activité de pêche et le renouvellement des ressources est louable et partagé par l'ensemble des professionnels du milieu. La concrétisation réelle de cet objectif est liée à l'adaptabilité des mesures mises en œuvre aux différentes pratiques de pêche et aux différents bassins maritimes. Les représentants de la pêche dans les outremers s'accordent à dire qu'une mise en œuvre uniforme de la PCP serait contre-productive, voire inapplicable.

L'exemple le plus criant pourrait être l'équipement des navires imposé par la règlementation européenne, qui — sur le type de bateau utilisé dans les outremers (pirogues, canots saintois…) — revient à un coût de modification supérieur à celui de l'achat d'un nouveau navire conforme aux normes.

Les réalités halieutiques des outremers divergent fortement des réalités halieutiques du continent européen.

En découle un certain nombre d'incompatibilités par rapport aux dispositions de la nouvelle PCP et par rapport aux nouvelles règles encadrant l'attribution des fonds européens pour la pêche et la politique maritime. Pour illustration, le retrait d'unités anciennes associé au renouvellement des flottes aurait concrètement pour conséquence d'empêcher l'accès aux ressources disponibles au large et donc de concentrer l'effort de pêche au niveau du littoral, où les stocks sont menacés.

La spécificité des régions ultrapériphériques est reconnue par l'Union européenne et consacrée dans l'article 349 du traité FUE. Ainsi, il semble naturel que la politique commune de la pêche s'inscrive dans la même logique et prévoie un aménagement des dispositions en faveur de ces territoires.

Au regard de la spécificité des régions ultrapériphériques, la Commission peut-elle proposer un texte dérogatoire consolidé, de type POSEI, consacré à l'application de la politique commune de la pêche dans les régions ultrapériphériques?

Réponse donnée par Mme Damanaki au nom de la Commission

(12 juillet 2012)

La Commission reconnaît la nécessité pour certains navires des régions ultrapériphériques de gagner en efficacité et de concentrer leurs efforts de pêche sur des zones plus productives. Au cours de la réforme de la politique commune de la pêche (PCP) intervenue en 2002, certaines dérogations ont été accordées afin de permettre aux régions ultrapériphériques d'augmenter leur capacité de pêche grâce à une aide publique. Ces dérogations ont été prorogées en 2007 afin de permettre à un certain nombre de «programmes de développement» de participer à l'adaptation des flottes dans ces régions.

La Commission estime que ces considérations spécifiques s'appliquent toujours et a donc incorporé des dispositions propres aux régions ultrapériphériques dans le cadre de la réforme. À cet égard, il convient de noter en particulier que, dans sa proposition relative au Fonds européen pour les affaires maritimes et la pêche (FEAMP), la Commission envisage, en raison des handicaps spécifiques à ces régions, de maintenir le régime de compensation de leurs produits de la pêche.

En outre, la proposition comporte des mesures d'aide à la modernisation des navires, telles que des investissements visant à renforcer l'hygiène et la sécurité à bord, ou encore à tirer le meilleur parti des captures accidentelles. Compte tenu des objectifs généraux de la PCP et de la réforme, la Commission ne propose pas de financements qui pourraient être consacrés à des investissements visant à augmenter la capacité de pêche du navire, et ainsi aboutir à un risque accru de surpêche.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004431/12

to the Commission

Patrice Tirolien (S&D)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: Creation of an instrument to adapt EU fishing measures to the realities of the outermost regions

The draft reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP) proposed by the European Commission establishes a set of provisions intending to step up protection of fishery resources. The objective of restoring a balance between fishing activity and renewal of stocks is laudable and shared by all professionals in the field. Whether or not this objective is actually achieved depends on how well the measures implemented can be adapted to suit the different fishing practices and to the different sea basins. Representatives of fisheries overseas agree that a uniform implementation of the CFP would be counter-productive, and even unenforceable.

The most glaring example is the equipping of vessels as imposed by European regulations, which — compared with the type of boat used overseas (dugouts, Santoise fishing boats, etc.) — would cost far more to modify than it would to purchase a new vessel that complies with standards.

The realities of overseas fisheries are very different to the realities of fisheries on the European continent.

This means that there are a number of inconsistencies in relation to the provisions of the new CFP and in relation to the new rules governing the allocation of EU funds for fisheries and maritime policy. For example, the withdrawal of old vessels for the purposes of fleet renewal would actually result in preventing access to offshore resources and therefore concentrate fishing along the coast, where stocks are under threat.

The specific characteristics of the outermost regions are recognised by the European Union and enshrined in Article 349 of the TFEU. It therefore seems only natural that the CFP would follow the same logic and provide for adjustments to the provisions for these territories.

Given the specific characteristics of the outermost regions, can the Commission propose consolidated legislation providing for derogations, like the POSEI arrangements, on the application of the common fisheries policy in the outermost regions?

Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2012)

The Commission understands the need for certain vessels of outermost regions to become more efficient and focus fishing efforts on more productive areas. During the 2002 reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP), certain derogations were given in order to allow outermost regions to increase their fishing capacity with public aid. This derogation was extended in 2007 to allow for a number of ‘development programmes’ to help adapt the fleets in these areas.

The Commission considers that the specific considerations are still relevant and has therefore included specific provisions for outermost regions within the context of the reform. In this regard it is in particular relevant to note that in its proposal for the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) the Commission proposes to maintain the compensation regime of their fish products, resulting from the handicaps specific to these regions.

In addition, the proposal includes measures to support vessel modernisation, such as investments aimed at improving health and safety on board, or investments aimed at making the best use of unwanted catches. In view of the overarching objectives of the CFP and the reform, the Commission is not proposing funding that could be directed towards investments which increase the capacity of the fishing vessel, thereby increasing the risk of overfishing.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004438/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)

(27 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Δράσεις που στοχεύουν στην προστασία των παιδιών φυλακισμένων ενηλίκων

Στην ανακοίνωση της Επιτροπής «Το θεματολόγιο της ΕΕ για τα δικαιώματα του παιδιού» προβλέπεται σειρά δράσεων που αποβλέπουν στη ρύθμιση της κατάστασης των παιδιών ενώπιον των συστημάτων απονομής δικαιοσύνης. Οι δράσεις αυτές αποσκοπούν στην ενίσχυση των δικαιωμάτων παιδιών που είναι θύματα, ύποπτοι και κατηγορούμενοι με την ανάπτυξη τεκμηριωμένων πολιτικών καθώς και νομοθετικών και μη νομοθετικών μέτρων. Ωστόσο, το θεματολόγιο της ΕΕ δεν προβλέπει καμία δράση για τα παιδιά φυλακισμένων ενηλίκων.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Για ποιο λόγο εξαιρέθηκε η συγκεκριμένη κοινωνική ομάδα από τις ομάδες-στόχους της σχετικής ανακοίνωσης;

Με ποιον τρόπο σκέφτεται η Επιτροπή να διασφαλίσει τα δικαιώματα των συγκεκριμένων παιδιών, τα οποία συχνά πέφτουν θύματα ρατσισμού, βίας, σχολικής ή κοινωνικής περιθωριοποίησης;

Απάντηση της κας Reding εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(19 Ιουνίου 2012)

Στο θεματολόγιο της ΕΕ για τα δικαιώματα του παιδιού διατυπώνονται οι γενικές αρχές με τις οποίες θα πρέπει να διασφαλισθεί η υποδειγματικότητα της δράσης της ΕΕ για τη διασφάλιση της τήρησης των διατάξεων του Χάρτη και της UNCRC όσον αφορά τα δικαιώματα του παιδιού. Εξάλλου, το θεματολόγιο εστιάζεται σε μια σειρά συγκεκριμένων δράσεων σε τομείς στους οποίους η ΕΕ είναι ικανή να προσδώσει ουσιαστική προστιθέμενη αξία, με παράδειγμα τη φιλική προς τα παιδιά δικαιοσύνη, την προστασία των παιδιών που βρίσκονται σε ευπαθείς καταστάσεις και την καταπολέμηση της βίας κατά παιδιών, τόσο εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης όσο και εκτός αυτής.

Το ζήτημα των παιδιών που βρίσκονται γενικά σε ευπαθείς καταστάσεις εξετάζεται στο θεματολόγιο με βάση τον περιορισμένο αριθμό παραδειγμάτων που έχουν στόχο να λειτουργήσουν ως σημεία αναφοράς χωρίς να αποτελούν εξαντλητικό ή αποκλειστικό κατάλογο.

Συγκεκριμένα, μέσω της ανοικτής μεθόδου συντονισμού, η Επιτροπή παρέχει ένα πλαίσιο για την ανάπτυξη εθνικών στρατηγικών, καθώς και για τον συντονισμό των πολιτικών μεταξύ των κρατών της ΕΕ για θέματα σχετικά με τη φτώχεια και δράσεις κοινωνικού αποκλεισμού με στόχο τον κοινωνικό αποκλεισμό και τη φτώχεια. Επιπλέον, το πρόγραμμα ΔΑΦΝΗ συνεχίζει να παρέχει χρηματοδότηση για δράσεις που έχουν ως στόχο την προστασία των παιδιών από τη βία, και έχει χρηματοδοτήσει συγκεκριμένες δράσεις με στόχο τα παιδιά φυλακισμένων γονιών (103).

Το ευρωπαϊκό δίκτυο για τα παιδιά φυλακισμένων γονέων (EUROCHIPS (104)) έχει επίσης λάβει χρηματοδότηση από την ΕΕ.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004438/12

to the Commission

Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: Actions aimed at protecting the children of adult prisoners

The Commission communication entitled ‘EU Agenda for the Rights of the Child’ lays down a series of actions aimed at regulating the situation of children involved with justice systems within the EU. These actions are aimed at strengthening the rights of children who are victims of and/or who are suspected of or charged with crimes, through the development of well-documented policies as well as legislative and non-legislative measures. However, the EU Agenda does not make any provision for the children of adult prisoners.

Will the Commission answer the following:

Why has this specific social group been excluded from the target groups of the relevant communication?

In what way does the Commission intend to safeguard the rights of the children in question, who frequently fall victim to racism, violence and marginalisation at school and in society?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2012)

The EU Agenda for the Rights of the Child presents general principles that should ensure that EU action is exemplary in ensuring the respect of the provisions of the Charter and of the UNCRC with regard to the rights of children. In addition, it focuses on a number of concrete actions in areas where the EU can bring real added value, such as child-friendly justice, protecting children in vulnerable situations and fighting violence against children both inside the European Union and externally.

Children in vulnerable situations in general are addressed by the Agenda with the limited number of examples provided serving as concrete examples while neither constituting an exhaustive nor exclusive list.

In particular through the Open Method of Coordination, the Commission provides a framework for national strategy development, as well as for coordinating policies between EU countries on issues relating to poverty and social exclusion actions targeting social exclusion and poverty.

Furthermore, the Daphne Programme continues to provide funding for projects aimed at protecting children from violence, and we have funded specific projects targeting children of imprisoned parents (105).

The European Network for Children of Imprisoned Parents (Eurochips (106)) has also received EU funding.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-004459/12

do Komisji (Wiceprzewodniczącej/Wysokiej Przedstawiciel)

Adam Bielan (ECR) oraz Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR)

(27 kwietnia 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Wiceprzewodnicząca/Wysoka Przedstawiciel – przypadki naruszania praw człowieka w Wietnamie

Według organizacji Human Rights Watch w pierwszym kwartale 2012 r. Wietnam skazał na karę więzienia z przyczyn politycznych co najmniej 12 osób. Do więzienia trafiło również co najmniej 33 działaczy na rzecz praw człowieka i blogerów internetowych skazanych w 2011 r.

Ponadto wielu więźniów politycznych cierpi na poważne problemy zdrowotne i odmawia się im należytego leczenia. W lipcu i wrześniu 2011 r. co najmniej dwóch więźniów politycznych – Nguyen Van Trai i Truong Van Suong – zmarło w więzieniu.

Stan zdrowia wielu obecnych więźniów również budzi obawy. Przykładowo poeta i działacz na rzecz walki z korupcją Nguyen Huu Cau, który ma obecnie 66 lat i spędził w więzieniu 34 lata od 1975 r., prawie całkiem stracił wzrok i słuch. Buddyjski działacz Mai Thi Dung, który ma obecnie 44 lata i jest więziony od 11 lat jako zwolennik buddyzmu Hoa Hao, poważnie choruje, ma sparaliżowane obie stopy i chore serce oraz cierpi na kamicę żółciową. Do więźniów politycznych z poważnymi problemami zdrowotnymi należą również katolicki działacz Nguyen Van Ly, buddyjski działacz Nguyen Van Lia i pisarz wspierający ideę demokracji – Nguyen Xuan Nghia.

Czy Wysoka Przedstawiciel wie o poważnym naruszaniu praw człowieka w Wietnamie, w szczególności o opisanej powyżej sytuacji więźniów politycznych? Czy zamierza podjąć działania w tej sprawie?

Odpowiedź udzielona przez Wysoką Przedstawiciel/Wiceprzewodniczącą Catherine Ashton w imieniu Komisji

(27 czerwca 2012 r.)

UE podziela wyrażony przez Szanownego Pana Posła niepokój przejawami bardziej restrykcyjnego podejścia władz wietnamskich do kwestii wolności słowa i mediów. W ubiegłych miesiącach UE złożyła publiczne oświadczenia i podejmowała zabiegi dyplomatyczne, aby wyrazić swoje zaniepokojenie w związku z aresztowaniem i skazaniem pewnej liczby dziennikarzy, blogerów, działaczy prodemokratycznych i obrońców praw człowieka.

W myśl postanowień przyszłej umowy o partnerstwie i współpracy między UE a Wietnamem, obie strony uzgodniły ostatnio konieczność poprawy regularnego dialogu na temat praw człowieka. Pierwsze runda odbywających się w stolicach spotkań w ramach dialogu odbyła się w styczniu 2012 r. w Hanoi. Stała się ona dla UE okazją do poruszenia kilku kluczowych kwestii dotyczących między innymi wolności słowa oraz wolności religii i wyznania. W czasie tego spotkania przedstawiciele UE zwrócili się o natychmiastowe uwolnienie pewnej liczby wietnamskich obywateli. Należą do nich: Nguyen Van Trai, Truong Van Suong, Nguyen Huu Cau, Mai Thi Dung, Nguyen Van Ly, Nguyen Van Lia i Nguyen Xuan Nghia, których imiona znajdują się w unijnym wykazie osób stanowiących przedmiot zainteresowania.

UE będzie nadal wyjaśniać z władzami wietnamskimi – w tym także z władzami na najwyższym szczeblu – niepokojące ją kwestie. EU jest zdania, że połączenie presji politycznej i konstruktywnego zaangażowania stwarza największe szanse, aby wypłynąć na transformację Wietnamu w kierunku bardziej otwartego społeczeństwa opartego na zasadach państwa prawa.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004459/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Adam Bielan (ECR) and Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Cases of human rights abuse in Vietnam

According to Human Rights Watch, during the first quarter of 2012, Vietnam sent at least 12 people to prison for political reasons. This follows the imprisonment of at least 33 human rights activists and Internet bloggers who were convicted in 2011.

In addition, many political prisoners face serious health problems and are refused proper medical treatment. In July and September 2011, at least two political prisoners — Nguyen Van Trai and Truong Van Suong — died in jail.

The health of a number of current prisoners is also a matter of concern. For example, the poet and anti-corruption campaigner Nguyen Huu Cau, 66, who has served a total of 34 years in prison since 1975, has lost most of his vision and is almost completely deaf. The Buddhist activist Mai Thi Dung, 43, who is serving an 11-year prison term for advocating Hoa Hao Buddhism, is gravely ill, with both feet paralysed, and is suffering from heart disease and gallstones. Other political prisoners with difficult health problems include the Catholic activist Nguyen Van Ly, the Buddhist campaigner Nguyen Van Lia and the pro-democracy writer Nguyen Xuan Nghia.

Is the High Representative aware of the poor human rights situation in Vietnam, in particular the situation of the political prisoners mentioned above? Does she intend to intervene in this matter?

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

(27 June 2012)

The EU shares the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member about signs of a more restrictive approach, by the Government of Vietnam, to freedom of expression and the media. The EU has in the past months made public statements and diplomatic démarches to express concern about the arrest and sentencing of a number of journalists, bloggers, pro-Democracy activists and human rights defenders.

In line with the provisions of the future EU-Vietnam Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), the EU and Vietnam recently agreed to enhance their regular Dialogue on Human Rights. The first round of this new capitals-based Dialogue took place in January 2012 in Hanoi. It provided an opportunity for the EU to raise all key issues of concern, including freedom of expression and freedom of religion and belief. This meeting also provided an occasion for the EU to call for the immediate release, or end to the harassment of several Vietnamese citizens, including Nguyen Van Trai, Truong Van Suong, Nguyen Huu Cau, Mai Thi Dung, Nguyen Van Ly, Nguyen Van Lia and Nguyen Xuan Nghia, whose names are included on the EU list of persons of concern.

The EU will continue to raise its concerns with Vietnamese authorities, including at the highest level. It takes the view that a combination of political pressure and constructive engagement bears the greatest chance of influencing Vietnam towards a more open society based upon the rule of law.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004475/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)

(27 Απριλίου 2012)

Θέμα: Θέση της Επιτροπής για το τεκμαρτό εισόδημα ιδιοκατοίκησης

Στην τριμηνιαία έκθεση της Κομισιόν για την Ελλάδα γίνεται σαφέστατη αναφορά στη φορολογία εισοδήματος φυσικών προσώπων και κατάργηση φοροαπαλλαγών, ενώ αφήνεται να εννοηθεί ότι θα προκύψουν μελλοντικά και νέες επιβαρύνσεις στους ιδιοκτήτες ακινήτων μέσω του τεκμαρτού εισοδήματος ιδιοκατοίκησης. Η πρόταση αυτή ισοδυναμεί με κατάργηση του προστατευτικού νομοθετικού πλαισίου που ισχύει σήμερα για την πρώτη κατοικία δημιουργώντας πολλά ερωτηματικά σχετικά με τις κοινωνικές επιπτώσεις στην περίπτωση εφαρμογής ενός τέτοιου μέτρου.

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Έχει προτείνει στην ελληνική κυβέρνηση τον υπολογισμό της ιδιοκατοίκησης πρώτης κατοικίας ως τεκμαρτό εισόδημα; Συνοδεύτηκε η πρόταση αυτή από αντισταθμιστικά μέτρα για την προστασία των ευάλωτων κοινωνικών ομάδων και των πολιτών με χαμηλά εισοδήματα; Υπήρξε αντιπρόταση από την ελληνική πλευρά;

Θεωρεί η Επιτροπή ότι υπάρχουν περιθώρια περαιτέρω φορολόγησης της ιδιωτικής ακίνητης περιουσίας (υπενθυμίζεται ότι σήμερα υπάρχουν συνολικά περισσότεροι από 20 έμμεσοι ή άμεσοι φόροι σε αυτήν) χωρίς να υπάρχουν προβλέψεις προστασίας της πρώτης κατοικίας;

Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(12 Ιουλίου 2012)

1. Οι υπηρεσίες τις Επιτροπής δεν έχουν συζητήσει ειδικά με την Ελληνική Κυβέρνηση εάν θα πρέπει να περιληφθεί ή όχι στο φορολογητέο εισόδημα το τεκμαρτό εισόδημα ιδιοκατοίκησης.

2. Η Ελλάδα έχει αντιμετωπίσει δυσκολίες σχετικά με την είσπραξη των φόρων ακίνητης περιουσίας και από το τέλος του 2011 αναγκάσθηκε να χρησιμοποιήσει ασυνήθεις τρόπους είσπραξης, συμπεριλαμβάνοντας π.χ. τον φόρο ακίνητης περιουσίας στους λογαριασμούς ηλεκτρικού ρεύματος. Κατ' αυτόν τον τρόπο εναρμονίσθηκε ο φόρος ακίνητης περιουσίας με τον αντίστοιχο φόρο των περισσότερων κρατών μελών. Η Επιτροπή πιστεύει ότι, κατά γενικό κανόνα, ο φόρος ακίνητης περιουσίας και οι έμμεσοι φόροι είναι πιο αποτελεσματικοί από οικονομική άποψη και κοινωνικά δικαιότεροι όταν έχουν πλατιά βάση και χαμηλούς συντελεστές.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004475/12

to the Commission

Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: Commission position on imputed income from owner-occupied housing

In the Commission’s quarterly report on Greece, an explicit reference is made to personal income tax and the abolishment of tax exemptions. However, it implies that in the future extra charges will be payable by property owners resulting from the imputed income from owner-occupied housing. This proposal is tantamount to abolishing the protective legislative framework currently in force regarding primary housing, raising several questions about the social consequences of implementing such a measure.

In view of this:

Has the Commission made any recommendations to the Greek Government on the calculation of the imputed income from owner-occupied primary housing? Was this proposal accompanied by countervailing measures to protect vulnerable groups and citizens with low incomes? Has Greece made a counter-proposal?

Does the Commission believe there is any scope for the further taxation of privately-owned property (bearing in mind that there are currently more than 20 indirect and direct taxes in total) in the absence of any protection for primary housing?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2012)

1. The Commission services have not specifically discussed exclusion or inclusion in taxable income of the imputed income from owner-occupied primary housing with the Greek Government.

2. Greece has encountered difficulties in collecting property taxes and since the end of 2011 has to resort to non-standard collection techniques, like including the property tax in the electricity bills. This has contributed to bringing property taxation in Greece in line with most of the other Member States. The Commission believes that, in general, taxation of property and indirect taxes are economically more efficient and socially fairer when they have a wide base and low rates.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-004478/12

adresată Comisiei

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(27 aprilie 2012)

Subiect: Cancerul sistemului digestiv

30% dintre cazurile de deces cauzate de cancer în rândul populației UE se datorează unor forme de cancer ale sistemului digestiv, printre care cancerul colorectal, pancreatic, la ficat, la vezica biliară, rectal, anal, esofagian, al intestinului subțire și la stomac. Astfel, aceasta este forma de cancer care cauzează cele mai multe decese în UE, cu mult mai multe decât cancerul la sân sau la plămâni.

Este extrem de îngrijorător faptul că procentul persoanelor care își pierd viața ca urmare a cancerului sistemului digestiv crește cu rapiditate, datorându-se parțial îmbătrânirii populației Europei. Numărul cazurilor de cancer esofagian este în creștere, iar cauzele acestuia sunt încă relativ necunoscute. Cancerul pancreatic reprezintă cea mai letală formă de cancer care afectează sistemul digestiv, rata de supraviețuire de cinci ani în urma acestuia fiind în medie de doar 4%. Numărul cazurilor de cancer la ficat este în creștere în majoritatea țărilor europene ca urmare a legăturii dintre acesta și hepatita virală și a faptului că modurile de viață nesănătoase sunt extrem de răspândite.

Prin recomandarea sa din 2003 privind depistarea cancerului (2003/878/CE) (107), Consiliul a adus o contribuție importantă, recunoscând importanța testelor pentru depistarea cancerului, inclusiv a cancerului colorectal. Testele pentru depistarea cancerului la sân și a cancerului de col uterin sunt aplicate la scară largă în UE, însă mai puțin de jumătate din statele membre au introdus programe de testare a populației pentru depistarea cancerului colorectal.

Sunt necesare îndeosebi noi măsuri pentru a reduce în mod semnificativ numărul cazurilor de cancer. Persoanele trebuie informate cu privire la importanța unui mod de viață sănătos pentru a preveni, în primul rând, apariția cancerului sistemului digestiv. În plus, nu sunt alocate suficiente fonduri pentru cercetarea acestor forme de cancer. Astfel, dezvoltarea unor metode de testare prealabilă rentabile și ușor de utilizat stagnează, același lucru întâmplându-se și în cazul identificării altor factori de risc și al inovării în materie de metode de tratament pentru pacienți. Orizont 2020 reprezintă o oportunitate pentru Consiliu și Parlament să se asigure că aceste forme letale de cancer al sistemului digestiv nu sunt neglijate și se află în centrul discuțiilor despre prioritățile în domeniul sănătății.

În acest context:

Este Comisia pregătită să ia măsuri suplimentare în vederea reducerii impactului important al acestor forme de cancer asupra societății UE în ceea ce privește morbiditatea, mortalitatea și sarcina impusă sistemelor naționale de sănătate? Dacă da, la ce măsuri concrete ne putem aștepta și ce măsuri concrete sunt avute în vedere pentru a sensibiliza populația UE cu privire la cancerul sistemului digestiv?

Cum intenționează Comisia să susțină abordarea problemei cancerului sistemului digestiv în cadrul viitoarelor negocieri privind prioritățile în materie de sănătate ale programului Orizont 2020?

Cum explică Comisia punerea în aplicare lentă în ultimii zece ani a programelor de testare pentru depistarea cancerului colorectal, spre deosebire de cele ce vizează cancerul la sân și cancerul de col uterin?

Răspuns dat de dl Dalli în numele Comisiei

(22 iunie 2012)

Cancerul sistemului digestiv include un grup de forme de cancer cu frecvență ridicată, cum ar fi cancerul la colon și cancerul rectal. Prevalența și incidența cancerului la alte organe ale tractului digestiv, precum pancreasul, ficatul sau vezica biliară, sunt reduse.

Cancerul colorectal este abordat în Recomandarea Consiliului privind depistarea cancerului (2003) (108) și în orientările europene pentru asigurarea calității în depistarea și diagnosticarea cancerului colorectal (2011) (109). Codul european împotriva cancerului (2003) (110) prevede, de asemenea, pentru cetățeni o serie de orientări bazate pe dovezi privind modul de prevenire a cancerului, inclusiv a cancerului tractului digestiv. În plus, formele rare de cancer intră sub incidența cadrului de politică în domeniul bolilor rare (111)  (112) și beneficiază de posibilitățile de cercetare privind formele rare de cancer rare în cadrul programului-cadru pentru activități de cercetare PC7.

În acest context, Comisia nu intenționează să ia măsuri suplimentare pentru a reduce impactul cancerului sistemului digestiv.

Propunerea Comisiei referitoare la programul pentru cercetare și dezvoltare Orizont 2020 pentru perioada 2014-2020 (113) identifică o provocare societală specifică privind „sănătatea, schimbările demografice și bunăstarea” (114), care ar trebui să ofere noi oportunități pentru sprijinirea cercetării în domeniul cancerului. Proiectul de buget general de 90,4 miliarde EUR alocat programului Orizont 2020 ar reprezenta, dacă este adoptat, o creștere în comparație cu Al șaptelea program-cadru.

În ceea ce privește programele de depistare a cancerului colorectal, este responsabilitatea statelor membre să decidă cu privire la punerea în aplicare a Recomandării Consiliului privind depistarea cancerului, având în vedere că acest aspect face parte din organizarea și furnizarea asistenței medicale.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004478/12

to the Commission

Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)

(27 April 2012)

Subject: Cancer of the digestive system

Cancer of the digestive system, which includes colorectal, pancreatic, liver, gallbladder, rectal, anal, oesophageal, small intestinal and stomach cancer, is responsible for 30 % of cancer deaths among the EU population. This makes it the most deadly form of cancer in the EU, far more lethal than breast cancer and lung cancer.

Most worrying is that the percentage of people dying from cancer of the digestive system is increasing rapidly, partly on account of Europe’s ageing population. Oesophageal cancer, in particular, is on the rise, and much is still unknown about its causes. Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal of all the cancers that affect the digestive system, with an average five-year survival rate of only 4 %. Liver cancer is on the increase in most European countries as a result of its relationship with both viral hepatitis and the near-epidemic shift towards unhealthy lifestyles.

The Council made an important contribution in 2003 with its recommendation on cancer screening (2003/878/EC) (115), in which it acknowledged the importance of such screening, including screening for colorectal cancer. Whilst breast and cervical cancer screening have been widely implemented across the EU, less than half of the 27 Member States have so far implemented a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer.

Most importantly, further measures are needed to reduce significantly the incidence of cancer. People need to be made aware of the importance of a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent cancer of the digestive system from occurring in the first place. Furthermore, there is a lack of research funding allocated to these forms of cancer. This results in stagnation in the development of cost-efficient and consumer-friendly screening methods and in the identification of (additional) risk factors and innovative treatment methods for patients. Horizon 2020 is an opportunity for the Council and Parliament to make sure that these lethal cancers of the digestive system are not neglected and are central to discussions on health priorities.

In this context:

Is the Commission prepared to consider additional measures to reduce the severe impact that these forms of cancer have on EU society in terms of morbidity, mortality and the burden on national healthcare systems? If so, what practical steps can be expected, or are planned, with a view to raising awareness within the EU of cancer of the digestive system?

How is the Commission planning to advocate tackling cancer of the digestive system during the forthcoming negotiations on the health priorities in Horizon 2020?

How does the Commission explain the slow implementation of screening programmes for colorectal cancer in comparison with those targeting cervical and breast cancer over the past decade?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

Digestive system cancers encompass a group of cancers with a high incidence of colon and rectum cancers. There is a rare prevalence and low incidence in other organs of the digestive tract such as the pancreas, liver or gall bladder.

Colorectal cancer is addressed in the Council recommendation for cancer screening (2003) (116) and the European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis (2011) (117). The European Code against cancer (2003) (118) further provides evidence-based guidance to citizens on how to prevent cancer, including cancer of the digestive tract. In addition, rare cancers are covered by the rare disease policy framework (119)  (120) and benefit from the research opportunities for rare cancers under the framework programme for research FP7.

In this context, the Commission is not planning additional measures to reduce the impact of digestive system cancers.

The Commission's proposal for the Horizon 2020 2014-2020 research and development programme (121) identifies a specific societal challenge on ‘health, demographic change and well-being’ (122) that should provide further opportunities to support research on cancer. The overall draft budget of EUR 90.4 billion for Horizon 2020 would, if adopted, represent an increase compared to the seventh Framework Programme.

As regards screening programmes for colorectal cancer, it is the responsibility of Member States to decide on their implementation of the Council recommendation on cancer screening, as this is part of the organisation and delivery of healthcare.

(Dansk udgave)

Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-004906/12

til Kommissionen

Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)

(14. maj 2012)

Om: Royal Dutch Shell og tyrkisk udvinding af olie og gas på og nær Cypern

Tyrkiets nationale olieselskab TPAO har påbegyndt sin søgen efter olie og gas i den tyrkisk besatte del af Republikken Cypern. TPAO indgik sidste år en aftale med Royal Dutch Shell Plc om udvinding af olie og gas i Middelhavet.

— Har Kommissionen sikret sig, at Royal Dutch Shell ikke hermed bistår Tyrkiet i at krænke Republikken Cyperns territorium til lands og til havs?

— Har Kommissionen sikret sig, at Royal Dutch Shell ikke hermed bryder FN's resolutioner om boykot af det ulovligt etablerede TRNC på Cyperns nordlige og tyrkisk besatte del?

Samlet svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Štefan Füle

(26. juni 2012)

Kommissionen henviser det ærede medlem til det svar, der blev givet på den foregående skriftlige forespørgsel E‐004549/2012 (123).

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004485/12

προς την Επιτροπή (Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος)

Maria Eleni Koppa (S&D)

(2 Μαΐου 2012)

Θέμα: VP/HR — Tουρκικές γεωτρήσεις στην Αμμόχωστο και αμφισβήτηση των κυριαρχικών δικαιωμάτων της Ελλάδας και της Κύπρου

Στις 26 Απριλίου 2012, η Τουρκία ανακοίνωσε την έναρξη γεωτρήσεων στην κατεχόμενη Αμμόχωστο και την επόμενη μέρα δημοσίευσε στην επίσημη εφημερίδα της κυβέρνησης σειρά αποφάσεων του τουρκικού Υπουργικού Συμβουλίου για τη χορήγηση αδειών εκτέλεσης πετρελαϊκών εργασιών σε περιοχές της ελληνικής υφαλοκρηπίδας, στην ευρύτερη περιοχή της Ρόδου, του Καστελορίζου και εντός της κυπριακής Αποκλειστικής Οικονομικής Ζώνης (ΑΟΖ).

Η έναρξη γεωτρήσεων στην περιοχή της Αμμοχώστου αποτελεί κατάφωρη παραβίαση των ψηφισμάτων του ΟΗΕ που επιβεβαιώνουν την κυριαρχία και ζητούν το σεβασμό της εδαφικής ακεραιότητας της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, ενώ η αμφισβήτηση του δικαιώματος των ελληνικών νησιών σε υφαλοκρηπίδα, καθώς και η συμπερίληψη τεμαχίων της κυπριακής ΑΟΖ στους τουρκικούς χάρτες αντιβαίνει στους κανόνες του Δικαίου της Θάλασσας. Επιπλέον, ξεκάθαρα, η αμφισβήτηση κυριαρχικών δικαιωμάτων κρατών-μελών της ΕΕ δε συνάδει με την υποχρέωση της υποψήφιας χώρας σχετικά με την τήρηση σχέσεων καλής γειτονίας.

Ερωτάται, κατά συνέπεια, η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος:

προτίθεται να προβεί στις δέουσες ενέργειες και σε διαβήματα προς τις τουρκικές αρχές;

σκοπεύει, πιο συγκεκριμένα, να υπενθυμίσει τις υποχρεώσεις που απορρέουν από το διαπραγματευτικό πλαίσιο ΕΕ-Τουρκίας σχετικά με την τήρηση σχέσεων καλής γειτονίας και τη δημιουργία θετικού κλίματος για την επίλυση του Κυπριακού προβλήματος;

θα ασκήσει τις δέουσες πιέσεις προκειμένου η Τουρκία να υπογράψει και να σεβαστεί τις προβλέψεις της Διεθνούς Συμβάσεως των Ηνωμένων Εθνών για το Δίκαιο της Θάλασσας;

Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(26 Ιουνίου 2012)

Η Επιτροπή καλεί τα Αξιότιμα Μέλη του Κοινοβουλίου να ανατρέξουν στην απάντηση που δόθηκε στη γραπτή ερώτησή E-004549/2012 (124).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004485/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Maria Eleni Koppa (S&D)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Turkish drilling in Famagusta and challenging of sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus

On 26 April 2012, Turkey announced the commencement of drilling operations in occupied Famagusta and the following day it published in the official Government Gazette a series of decisions by the Turkish Council of Ministers to issue licences for the conduct of oil-drilling operations in parts of Greece’s continental shelf, in the wider area of Rhodes and Kastelorizo and inside Cyprus’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

The commencement of oil-drilling in the Famagusta area is in blatant violation of UN resolutions confirming the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and demanding respect for its territorial integrity. Furthermore, the challenging of the right of Greek islands to their own continental shelf and the incorporation of sections of the Cypriot EEZ into maps of Turkey is an infringement of the Law of the Sea. Moreover, challenging the sovereign rights of EU Member States is unequivocally inconsistent with the obligation of a candidate country for EU membership to maintain good neighbourly relations.

In view of this:

Does the High Representative intend to take the necessary measures to make representations to the Turkish authorities?

Does she intend, more specifically, to remind them of their obligations within the EU‐Turkey negotiating framework regarding the maintenance of good neighbourly relations and the creation of a positive climate for resolution of the Cyprus problem?

Will she bring the appropriate pressure to bear to ensure that Turkey signs and respects the provisions of the United Nations International Convention on the Law of the Sea?

Question for written answer E-004906/12

to the Commission

Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)

(14 May 2012)

Subject: Royal Dutch Shell and Turkish production of oil and gas on and near Cyprus

Turkey’s national oil company TPAO has begun exploring for oil and gas in the Turkish-occupied region of the Republic of Cyprus. Last year, TPAO entered into an agreement with Royal Dutch Shell Plc for the production of oil and gas in the Mediterranean Sea.

— Is the Commission satisfied that, in doing so, Royal Dutch Shell is not helping Turkey to compromise the territory of the Republic of Cyprus on land and at sea?

— Is the Commission satisfied that, in doing so, Royal Dutch Shell is not in breach of UN resolutions on boycotting the illegally established Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in Cyprus’ northern and Turkish-occupied region?

Joint answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

The Commission invites the Honourable Members to refer to the answer to previous Written Question E‐004549/2012 (125).

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004509/12

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) y Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Transportes marítimos ilícitos

Los flujos de transporte marítimo constituyen la forma principal de traslado de una gama de mercancías capaces de prolongar y avivar conflictos, desbaratar procesos de democratización e incluso fomentar la proliferación de armas de destrucción masiva. Según un estudio publicado recientemente por el Instituto Internacional de Estocolmo para la Investigación de la Paz (SIPRI), más del 60 % de los barcos involucrados en casos de incumplimiento de sanciones o tráfico ilícito de drogas, armas u otros equipos militares, son propiedad de empresas procedentes de países pertenecientes a la UE, la OTAN o la OCDE. El transporte marítimo es el medio preferido para este comercio clandestino, sobre todo porque la alta mar es una zona de nuestro planeta que resulta muy difícil controlar o regular. A pesar de los avances de las tecnologías de seguimiento de buques y de las tecnologías por satélite, no existe autoridad capaz de controlar eficazmente tan vasto territorio.

Además, la jurisdicción de los buques mercantes en aguas internacionales es competencia del Estado de pabellón del buque y, en consecuencia, los buques sospechosos de transportar mercancías ilegales no pueden ser abordados —ni la mercancía incautada— sin el consentimiento previo del Estado de pabellón. De hecho, la mayoría de los buques involucrados en el citado transporte ilegal de equipos militares, productos de doble uso y estupefacientes, navegan bajo las denominadas banderas de conveniencia y están registrados en Estados de pabellón con una reglamentación y control limitados de sus flotas mercantes. Las inspecciones de control del Estado rector del puerto (PSC en sus siglas en inglés) son, en la mayoría de casos, las únicas ocasiones en que las autoridades del Estado tienen derecho a abordar un barco sin consultar al Estado de pabellón. A nivel internacional, se podría mejorar el intercambio de información sobre buques sospechosos entre Gobiernos, entidades administrativas marítimas y autoridades pertinentes de control del Estado rector del puerto. En particular, los Estados miembros deben crear un mecanismo de intercambio de información con el fin de confeccionar una lista de buques y cargamentos sospechosos, que podría integrarse en otros sistemas de la UE, tales como aquellos bajo la autoridad de la Agencia Europea de Seguridad Marítima (AESM), como parte de un enfoque holístico para la seguridad marítima y la ejecución de embargos de armas de la UE.

Dada la situación descrita:

¿Es consciente la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta de que la mayoría de los barcos involucrados en casos de incumplimiento de sanciones o tráfico ilícito de drogas, armas u otros equipos militares son propiedad de empresas procedentes de países pertenecientes a la UE y la OTAN?

¿Está la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta considerando la creación de un mecanismo comunitario para compartir información acerca de envíos y buques sospechosos, con el fin de mejorar la seguridad humana global?

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

(6 de julio de 2012)

De acuerdo con las prácticas operativas en la navegación internacional, el propietario de un buque puede ser distinto de su operador o del pabellón con el que el buque se haga a la mar. Por tanto, puede resultar engañoso extraer conclusiones sobre el comercio ilegal basándose únicamente en la estadística de propiedad.

La UE ha adoptado medidas importantes para aumentar la seguridad y la protección marítima. SafeSeaNet, plataforma de la UE para el intercambio de información sobre tráfico marítimo, gestionada por la AESM está plenamente operativa y ofrece a las autoridades de los Estados miembros información de los movimientos de buques en torno a la UE prácticamente en tiempo real. Esta plataforma se verá enriquecida con otras fuentes de información incluida la vigilancia por satélite. En cuanto el Sistema Europeo de Vigilancia de Fronteras (Eurosur) esté plenamente operativo se ocupará del Mar Mediterráneo (126) de manera prioritaria. Eurosur se ocupa de todos los delitos de carácter transfronterizo en las fronteras exteriores de la UE. Por último, la Comisión está trabajando con los Estados miembros para lograr la integración de la vigilancia marítima que permita, con fines específicos, el intercambio de los servicios de información a través de las fronteras y entre los diferentes sectores (127). El resultado final, la creación de un marco comunitario para compartir información, conectará los diferentes sistemas de vigilancia y las autoridades públicas en un entorno rentable aumentando la sensibilización marítima y la eficacia de la intervención pública en el mar. Permitirá el intercambio informatizado y la elaboración de unas listas de buques sospechosos por cualquier autoridad pública que necesite alertar, vigilar o interceptar un buque sospechoso.

Complemento esencial sería que todos los Estados miembros de la UE ratificaran el Protocolo de 2005 del Convenio de la Organización Marítima Internacional para la represión de actos ilícitos contra la seguridad de la navegación marítima, para reprimir el tráfico ilegal de mercancías de doble uso y de otras mercancías destinadas a la proliferación o con fines terroristas.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004509/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto rappresentante)

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) e Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Spedizioni marittime illegali

I flussi di trasporto marittimo costituiscono la principale modalità di spostamento di una gamma di prodotti di base in grado di prolungare e infiammare i conflitti, compromettere i processi di democratizzazione e persino favorire la proliferazione delle armi di distruzione di massa. Secondo uno studio pubblicato di recente dall'Istituto internazionale di ricerca sulla pace di Stoccolma (SIPRI), oltre il 60 % delle imbarcazioni coinvolte in casi di sabotaggio delle sanzioni o di traffico illecito di droghe, armi e altro equipaggiamento militare appartiene a società di paesi membri dell'UE, della NATO o dell'OCSE. Questo commercio clandestino predilige il trasporto marittimo, anche in virtù della difficoltà di monitoraggio e regolamentazione delle aree di alto mare del pianeta. Nonostante l'evoluzione delle tecnologie di monitoraggio satellitare e navale, nessuna autorità è in grado di controllare in modo efficace un'area così vasta.

Inoltre, la giurisdizione sul traffico marittimo in acque internazionali spetta allo Stato di bandiera dell'imbarcazione e, di conseguenza, non è possibile salire a bordo delle navi sospettate del trasporto di prodotti di base illegali né è possibile procedere al sequestro di tali prodotti senza la previa autorizzazione dello Stato di bandiera. In effetti, la maggior parte delle imbarcazioni coinvolta nei casi segnalati di trasporto di equipaggiamenti militari illegali, beni a duplice uso e narcotici, batte le cosiddette bandiere di convenienza ed è registrata in Stati di bandiera con regolamentazione e controllo limitati sulle loro flotte mercantili. Le ispezioni di controllo realizzate dagli Stati di approdo sono, nella maggior parte dei casi, le sole occasioni in cui le autorità statali hanno il diritto di salire a bordo di un'imbarcazione senza interpellare lo Stato di bandiera. A livello internazionale, potrebbe essere migliorata la condivisione di informazioni sulle imbarcazioni sospette tra governi, entità amministrative marittime ed entità di controllo dello Stato di approdo interessate. In particolare, gli Stati membri dovrebbero creare un meccanismo di condivisione delle informazioni finalizzato alla compilazione di un elenco delle imbarcazioni e delle spedizioni sospette; tale meccanismo potrebbe integrare altri sistemi dell'UE, come quelli di competenza dell'Agenzia europea per la sicurezza marittima (EMSA), nell'ottica di un approccio olistico alla sicurezza marittima e all'attuazione dell'embargo sugli armamenti da parte dell'UE.

Considerata la situazione di cui sopra, può la Commissione rispondere alle seguenti domande:

L'Alto rappresentante/vicepresidente è a conoscenza del fatto che la maggior parte delle imbarcazioni coinvolte nei casi denunciati di sabotaggio delle sanzioni o di trasferimento illecito di armi, droghe e altri equipaggiamenti militari appartiene a società registrate in paesi membri dell'UE e della NATO?

Intende istituire un meccanismo UE per condividere informazioni sulle spedizioni e le imbarcazioni sospette al fine di migliorare la sicurezza delle popolazioni a livello globale?

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

(6 luglio 2012)

In base alla prassi operativa nel trasporto marittimo internazionale, il proprietario di una nave può essere una persona diversa dall'operatore oppure avere la cittadinanza di uno Stato diverso da quello di bandiera. Può quindi essere fuorviante trarre conclusioni sul commercio illegale basandosi sulla sola statistica della proprietà.

L'Unione ha preso importanti provvedimenti per rafforzare la sicurezza marittima. La piattaforma dell’Unione per lo scambio di informazioni sul traffico marittimo (SafeSeaNet), gestita dall’EMSA, è pienamente operativa e fornisce alle autorità degli Stati membri informazioni pressoché in tempo reale sugli spostamenti delle navi attorno all'Unione europea. Sarà arricchita da altre fonti di informazioni, tra cui il sistema di sorveglianza via satellite. Quando sarà pienamente operativo, il sistema europeo di sorveglianza delle frontiere (EUROSUR) si concentrerà in via prioritaria sul mar Mediterraneo (128). EUROSUR si occupa di tutti i reati transfrontalieri alle frontiere esterne dell'Unione. Infine, la Commissione collabora con gli Stati membri all'integrazione della sorveglianza marittima per rendere possibile lo scambio di informazioni tra servizi di vari paesi e settori per obiettivi mirati (129). La conseguente rete comune per lo scambio di informazioni metterà in collegamento i vari sistemi di sorveglianza e le varie autorità pubbliche in un ambiente efficiente sotto il profilo dei costi che rafforzerà la consapevolezza e l'efficacia degli interventi pubblici in mare. Consentirà lo scambio automatizzato e/o la compilazione di elenchi di imbarcazioni sospette da parte di qualunque autorità pubblica che debba acquisire informazioni, monitorare o intercettare un'imbarcazione sospetta.

Un altro elemento essenziale è la ratifica, da parte di tutti gli Stati membri dell'Unione, del protocollo del 2005 alla convenzione dell'Organizzazione marittima internazionale sulla soppressione degli atti illeciti in mare, che permette di reprimere il traffico illecito dei beni a duplice uso e di altri beni destinati alla proliferazione o a scopi terroristici.

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-004509/12

a Bizottság számára

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Bagó Zoltán (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) és Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2012. május 2.)

Tárgy: Alelnök/főképviselő — Illegális tengeri szállítmányok

A tengeri közlekedés egy sor olyan fogyasztási cikk szállítása terén játszik vezető szerepet, amelyek hozzájárulhatnak a konfliktusok elhúzódásához és elmérgesedéséhez, kisiklathatják a demokratizálódási folyamatokat és elősegíthetik a tömegpusztító fegyverek terjedését. A Stockholmi Nemzetközi Békekutató Intézet (SIPRI) által a közelmúltban közzétett tanulmány szerint a tiltott kereskedésben vagy a kábítószerek, fegyverek és más katonai felszerelések illegális szállításában érintett hajók több mint 60%-a az Unióhoz, a NATO-hoz vagy az OECD-hez tartozó országokban működő társaságok tulajdonában van. A tengeri szállítás e jogellenes kereskedelem közkedvelt módja, nem utolsósorban azért, mert a nyílt tengerek Földünk igen nehezen megfigyelhető vagy szabályozható területei közé tartoznak. A műholdas és hajómegfigyelési technológiák terén elért haladás ellenére nincs olyan hatóság, amely ilyen nagy kiterjedésű területet képes lenne hatékonyan ellenőrizni.

Ezenfelül a nemzetközi vizeken tevékenykedő kereskedelmi hajók a lobogó szerinti állam joghatósága alá tartoznak, így annak előzetes beleegyezése nélkül senki sem léphet az illegális árucikkek szállításával gyanúsított hajók fedélzetére vagy foglalhatja le az árut. Az illegális katonai felszerelések, kettős felhasználású termékek és kábítószerek szállításának napvilágra került eseteiben érintett hajók többsége valójában úgynevezett olcsó lobogó alatt hajózik, és a lajstromozást végző, lobogó szerinti államok csupán korlátozott szabályozással és ellenőrzéssel rendelkeznek kereskedelmi flottáik felett. A kikötő szerinti illetékes állam által végzett ellenőrzésekre a legtöbb esetben csupán akkor kerül sor, amikor az állami hatóságok a lobogó szerinti állammal folytatott konzultáció nélkül a hajó fedélzetére léphetnek. Nemzetközi szinten fokozni kellene a kormányok, a tengeri igazgatási egységek és a kikötő szerinti illetékes államok hatóságai között a gyanús hajókkal kapcsolatos információcserét. A gyanús hajók és rakományok jegyzékének összeállítása érdekében a tagállamoknak létre kellene hozniuk egy információmegosztási mechanizmust, amelyet a tengerbiztonsággal és az uniós fegyverembargók érvényesítésével kapcsolatos átfogó megközelítés részeként integrálhatnának az uniós rendszerekbe, például az Európai Tengerbiztonsági Ügynökség (EMSA) felügyelete alatt működő rendszerbe.

A fent ismertetett helyzetre tekintettel:

tisztában van azzal a főképviselő/alelnök, hogy a tiltott kereskedés vagy a fegyverek, kábítószerek és más katonai felszerelések illegális szállításának napvilágra került eseteiben érintett hajók többsége az Unióhoz, a NATO-hoz vagy az OECD-hez tartozó országokban bejegyzett társaságok tulajdonában van?

fontolóra veszi-e a főképviselő/alelnök a gyanús szállítmányokra és hajókra vonatkozó uniós információmegosztási mechanizmus létrehozását annak érdekében, hogy az emberek a világon mindenhol fokozott biztonságban legyenek?

Catherine Ashton alelnök/főképviselő válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. július 6.)

A nemzetközi hajózás működési gyakorlata alapján egy hajó tulajdonosa különbözhet a hajó üzemeltetőjétől vagy a lobogó szerinti tagállamtól. Félrevezető lehet éppen ezért következtetéseket levonni az illegális kereskedelemre vonatkozóan kizárólag a tulajdonjog alapján.

Az EU jelentős lépéseket tett a tengeri biztonság és védelem érdekében egyaránt. A SafeSeaNet, az Európai Tengerbiztonsági Ügynökség (EMSA) által működtetett tengerforgalmi információcserével foglalkozó európai platform teljesen működőképes és közel valós idejű információt nyújt a tagállami hatóságok számára a hajók EU-n belüli mozgásáról. Ezt további, többek között a műholdas megfigyelésből származó információforrások fogják kiegészíteni. Amint az európai határőrizeti rendszer (Eurosur) teljesen működőképessé válik, prioritásként a Földközi-tengert (130) fogja ellenőrizni. Az Eurosur foglalkozik a határokon átnyúló bűnözéssel az EU külső határain. Végül a Bizottság a tagállamokkal együttműködve törekszik a tengerfelügyelet integrálására, amely lehetővé teszi az információs szolgáltatások határokon átnyúló és ágazatok közötti, meghatározott célú cseréjét. (131) A végeredmény, a közös információ-megosztási környezet a különböző megfigyelési rendszereket és közigazgatási szerveket olyan költséghatékony környezetben kapcsolja össze, amely javítja a tengeri helyzetfelmérés és a tengeren való állami intervenció hatékonyságát. Ez lehetővé fogja tenni a gyanús hajók jegyzékének automatikus cseréjét és/vagy összeállítását valamennyi olyan közigazgatási szerv által, amelynek tudatosítania kell a gyanús hajók jelenlétét, illetve nyomon kell követnie vagy fel kell tartóztatnia azokat.

Alapvető kiegészítése lenne ennek, hogy valamennyi tagállam ratifikálja a Nemzetközi Tengerészeti Szervezetnek a tengeren elkövetett jogellenes cselekmények leküzdéséről szóló egyezménye 2005. évi jegyzőkönyvét, amely lehetővé teszi a kettős felhasználású termékek vagy más, terjesztésre szánt vagy terrorista célokra való felhasználásra szánt egyéb áruk illegális kereskedelmének visszaszorítását.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004509/12

à Comissão (Vice-Presidente / Alta Representante)

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) e Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2 de Maio de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Carregamentos marítimos ilegais

Os fluxos de transporte marítimo são o principal meio para transportar mercadorias que podem prolongar ou desencadear conflitos, prejudicar processos de democratização e até promover a proliferação de armas de destruição maciça. De acordo com um estudo recentemente publicado pelo SIPRI, mais de 60 % dos navios envolvidos em casos de violação de sanções ou de transferência ilícita de estupefacientes, armamento ou outros equipamentos militares pertencem a empresas de países da UE, das Nações Unidas ou da OCDE. O transporte marítimo é o meio de eleição deste comércio clandestino, já que o alto mar é uma área do nosso planeta de difícil controlo e regulamentação. Apesar dos progressos alcançados na tecnologia dos satélites e na vigilância dos navios, não existe uma autoridade capaz de controlar efetivamente um território tão vasto.

Além disso, a jurisdição relativa aos navios mercantes em águas internacionais corresponde à do Estado de bandeira do navio, não sendo possível, por esse motivo, o embarque em navios suspeitos de transporte de mercadorias ilegais e a respetiva apreensão dessas mercadorias, sem o acordo prévio do Estado de bandeira. De facto, a maior parte dos navios envolvidos no alegado transporte ilegal de equipamento militar, bens de dupla utilização e narcóticos navegam com as chamadas bandeiras de conveniência e estão registados em Estados de bandeira que apresentam uma regulamentação e um controlo limitados das suas frotas mercantes. As inspeções de navios pelo Estado do porto (PSC) são, na maior parte das vezes, a única ocasião em que as autoridades do Estado têm o direito de embarcar num navio sem consultar o Estado de bandeira. A nível internacional, a troca de informações sobre navios suspeitos entre os governos, as entidades administrativas marítimas e as entidades do Estado do porto encarregues de inspecionar os navios poderia ser melhorada. Os Estados-Membros devem criar, nomeadamente, um mecanismo de intercâmbio de informações, com vista à elaboração de uma lista de navios e carregamentos suspeitos, que pudesse ser incorporado em outros sistemas da UE, tais como os que estão sob a autoridade da Agência Europeia da Segurança Marítima (EMSA), como parte de uma abordagem holística da segurança marítima e da aplicação dos embargos de armas impostos pela UE.

Tendo em conta a situação exposta acima:

Está a Alta Representante/Vice‐Presidente consciente de que a maioria dos navios envolvidos em alegados casos de violação de sanções ou de transferência ilícita de armamento, estupefacientes e outros equipamentos militares pertencem a empresas registadas em países da UE e das Nações Unidas?

Está a Alta Representante/Vice‐Presidente a ponderar a criação de um mecanismo da UE de troca de informações sobre carregamentos e navios suspeitos, com o objetivo de melhorar a segurança humana global?

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

(6 de julho de 2012)

De acordo com as práticas operacionais no domínio do transporte marítimo internacional, o proprietário de um navio pode ser diferente do operador ou da bandeira que esse navio arvora. Tirar conclusões sobre comércio ilegal tendo por base apenas a propriedade é, por este motivo, enganador.

A União Europeia adotou medidas importantes para aumentar a segurança e a proteção marítimas. A SafeSeaNet, a plataforma da UE para o intercâmbio de informações relativas ao tráfego marítimo gerida pela ESMA, está plenamente operacional e fornece às autoridades dos Estados-Membros informações, quase em tempo real, sobre o movimento de navios na UE. Essa rede será enriquecida com outras fontes de informação, incluindo a vigilância por satélite. Assim que o Sistema Europeu de Vigilância das Fronteiras (Eurosur) estiver plenamente operacional, a sua área prioritária será o Mar Mediterrâneo (132). O Eurosur abrange todas as formas de criminalidade transfronteiriça nas fronteiras externas da UE. Por último, a Comissão está a trabalhar com os Estados-Membros para uma maior integração da vigilância marítima, a fim de permitir o intercâmbio de informações a nível internacional e de setores para finalidades específicas (133). O resultado final, ou seja, um ambiente comum de partilha de informações, interligará os diferentes sistemas de vigilância e as autoridades públicas com uma maior eficácia de custos, reforçando ainda a sensibilização para o ambiente marítimo e a eficácia da intervenção pública no mar. Permitirá o intercâmbio automatizado e/ou a elaboração de listas de embarcações suspeitas por qualquer autoridade pública que necessite de conhecer, controlar ou intercetar uma embarcação suspeita.

Um complemento importante seria todos os Estados-Membros da UE ratificarem o Protocolo de 2005 à Convenção da Organização Marítima Internacional relativo à supressão de atos ilícitos no mar, que permitiria reprimir o tráfico ilícito de produtos de dupla utilização e outros bens destinados a fins terroristas e sua proliferação.

(Slovenska različica)

Vprašanje za pisni odgovor E-004509/12

za Komisijo

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) in Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2. maj 2012)

Zadeva: Podpredsednica/visoka predstavnica – nezakonite pomorske pošiljke

Pomorski prometni tokovi so glavni način prevoza različnega blaga, ki lahko podaljša in zaostri spore, neugodno vpliva na procese demokratizacije in celo spodbudi širjenje orožja za množično uničevanje. Glede na študijo, ki jo je pred kratkim objavil inštitut SIPRI, je več kot 60 % ladij, ki so povezane s primeri kršitev sankcij ali nezakonitim prometom z drogami, orožjem in drugo vojaško opremo, v lasti družb iz držav članic EU, Nata ali OECD. Pomorski promet je prednostni način te nezakonite trgovine, zlasti ker je odprto morje območje na našem planetu, ki ga je zelo težko nadzorovati ali pravno urejati. Kljub napredku na področju satelitske in ladijske nadzorne tehnologije noben organ ne more učinkovito nadzorovati tako velikega ozemlja.

Poleg tega je za trgovsko ladjevje v mednarodnih vodah pristojna država zastave plovila, zato brez predhodnega soglasja države zastave ladij, ki domnevno prevažajo nezakonito blago, ni mogoče pregledati in zaseči blaga. Po navedbah poročila dejansko večina ladij, ki so povezane s prevozom nezakonite vojaške opreme, blaga z dvojno rabo in mamil, pluje pod t. i. zastavami ugodnosti, pri čemer so registrirane v državah zastave z omejeno regulacijo in nadzorom trgovskega ladjevja. Nadzorni pregledi pomorske inšpekcije so v večini primerov edina priložnost, ko lahko državni organi pregledajo ladjo brez soglasja države zastave. Na mednarodni ravni bi bilo mogoče okrepiti izmenjavo informacij o sumljivih plovilih med vladami, pomorskimi upravnimi organi in zadevnimi pomorskimi inšpekcijskimi organi. Države članice bi morale zlasti oblikovati mehanizem za izmenjavo informacij, da bi sestavile seznam sumljivih ladij in pošiljk, ki bi ga bilo mogoče vključiti v druge sisteme EU, na primer sisteme v pristojnosti Evropske agencije za varnost v pomorskem prometu, kot del celostnega pristopa k pomorski varnosti in izvajanja embargov EU na orožje.

Glede na zgoraj opisano stanje sprašujemo:

ali je visoka predstavnica/podpredsednica seznanjena z dejstvom, da je več kot 60 % ladij, ki so povezane s primeri kršitev sankcij ali nezakonitim prometom z drogami, orožjem in drugo vojaško opremo, v lasti družb, ki so registrirane v državah članicah EU in Nata?

ali visoka predstavnica/podpredsednica razmišlja o možnosti, da bi vzpostavili mehanizem EU za izmenjavo informacij o sumljivih pošiljkah in ladjah za boljšo splošno varnost ljudi?

Odgovor visoke predstavnice in podpredsednice Catherine Ashton v imenu Komisije

(6. julij 2012)

V skladu z operativno prakso v mednarodnem ladijskem prometu, se lahko lastnik ladje razlikuje od njenega upravljavca ali pa je drugačna zastava, pod katero ladja pluje. Oblikovanje zaključkov o nezakoniti trgovini zgolj na podlagi statistike o lastništvu je zato lahko zavajajoče.

Evropska unija je precej napredovala na področju krepitve pomorske varnosti in zaščite. SafeSeaNet, platforma Evropske unije za izmenjavo informacij o pomorskem prometu, ki jo upravlja Evropska agencija za pomorsko varnost, že ustaljeno deluje in organom držav članic zagotavlja informacije o premikih ladij okrog Evropske unije skoraj v realnem času. Te informacije bodo obogatili dodatni viri, vključno s sistemom satelitskega nadzora. Ko bo evropski sistem nadzorovanja meja (EUROSUR) dosegel polno operativnost, bo njegova prednostna naloga nadzor Sredozemskega morja (134). V področje pristojnosti sistema EUROSUR spada ves čezmejni kriminal na zunanjih mejah EU. Nazadnje je treba omeniti, da si Komisija z državami članicami prizadeva za združitev sistemov pomorskega nadzora, kar bi omogočilo storitve čezmejne in medsektorske izmenjave informacij za uresničitev izbranih namenov (135). Končni rezultat bo skupno okolje za izmenjavo informacij, ki bo med seboj povezalo različne sisteme nadzora in javne organe v stroškovno učinkovitem okolju, kar bo okrepilo ozaveščenost glede pomorskih zadev in učinkovitost javnih intervencij na morju. S tem bo omogočeno, da bo lahko kateri koli javni organ z namenom ozaveščanja o sumljivih plovilih, njihovega spremljanja ali prestrezanja, samodejno izmenjaval in/ali sestavljal tovrstne sezname sumljivih plovil.

Če bi vse države članice ratificirale Protokol (2005) h Konvenciji Svetovne pomorske organizacije za preprečevanje protipravnih dejanj zoper varnost pomorske plovbe, bi to bistveno dopolnilo tovrstne dejavnosti, saj bi omogočilo zatiranje nezakonitega prometa z blagom z dvojno rabo ali drugim blagom, namenjenim za širjenje ali teroristične namene.

(Suomenkielinen versio)

Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-004509/12

komissiolle (Varapuheenjohtajalle/Korkealle edustajalle)

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) ja Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2. toukokuuta 2012)

Aihe: VP/HR – Laittomat merikuljetukset

Merikuljetus on pääasiallisin keino siirtää erilaisia hyödykkeitä, jotka voivat pitkittää tai käynnistää konflikteja, häiritä demokratiakehitystä ja jopa lisätä joukkotuhoaseiden määrää. Tukholman kansainvälisen rauhantutkimuslaitoksen (SIPRI) äskettäin julkaiseman tutkimuksen mukaan yli 60 prosenttia aluksista, jotka osallistuvat pakotteita rikkovaan toimintaan tai huumeiden, aseiden tai muun sotilaskaluston laittomaan siirtoon, on EU:n, Naton tai OECD:n jäsenvaltioissa rekisteröityjen yritysten omistuksessa. Merikuljetuksen suosio laittomassa kaupassa johtuu suurelta osin siitä, että maapallon avomerialueita on erittäin vaikea valvoa tai säännellä. Vaikka satelliitti‐ ja alusten valvontatekniikat ovat kehittyneet, yksikään viranomainen ei kykene tehokkaasti valvomaan laajoja merialueita.

Lisäksi kauppa-aluksia koskeva oikeudenkäyttövalta kansainvälisillä vesillä kuuluu aluksen lippuvaltiolle, minkä vuoksi laittomien hyödykkeiden kuljettamisesta epäiltyihin aluksiin ei voi nousta eikä lastia takavarikoida ilman lippuvaltion etukäteen antamaa suostumusta. Suurin osa aluksista, jotka raporttien mukaan kuljettavat laittomasti sotilaskalustoa, kaksikäyttötuotteita tai huumausaineita, purjehtii niin sanottujen mukavuuslippujen alla ja on rekisteröity lippuvaltioissa, joiden kauppalaivastoja koskeva sääntely ja valvonta on vähäistä. Usein satamavaltioiden suorittamaan valvontaan liittyvät tarkastukset ovat ainoita tilaisuuksia, jolloin valtion viranomaisilla on oikeus nousta alukseen ilman lippuvaltion kuulemista. Epäilyksen kohteena olevia aluksia koskevaa kansainvälistä tiedonvaihtoa voitaisiin parantaa hallitusten, merenkulun viranomaisten ja asianomaisten satamavaltion valvontaviranomaisten välillä. Jäsenvaltioiden tulisi erityisesti kehittää tiedonvaihtomekanismi, jonka avulla laaditaan luettelo epäilyksen kohteena olevista aluksista ja kuljetuksista. Luettelo voitaisiin yhdistää muihin EU:n järjestelmiin, kuten Euroopan meriturvallisuusviraston (EMSA) hallinnoimiin järjestelmiin, mikä olisi osa meriturvallisuuden kokonaisvaltaista lähestymistapaa ja vahvistaisi osaltaan EU:n aseidenvientikieltoja.

Kun otetaan yllä esitetty tilanne huomioon,

1. onko korkea edustaja/varapuheenjohtaja tietoinen siitä, suurin osa aluksista, jotka osallistuvat pakotteita rikkovaan toimintaan tai huumeiden, aseiden tai muun sotilaskaluston laittomaan siirtoon, on EU:n tai Naton jäsenvaltioissa rekisteröityjen yritysten omistuksessa

2. aikooko korkea edustaja/varapuheenjohtaja perustaa EU:n mekanismin epäilyksen kohteena olevia aluksia ja kuljetuksia koskevien tietojen vaihtoon, millä parannettaisiin maailmanlaajuisesti inhimillistä turvallisuutta?

Korkean edustajan, varapuheenjohtaja Catherine Ashtonin komission puolesta antama vastaus

(6. heinäkuuta 2012)

Kansainvälisen merenkulun toimintakäytänteiden mukaan aluksen omistaja ei välttämättä ole aluksen liikennöitsijä eikä valtio, jonka lipun alla kyseinen alus purjehtii. Näin ollen voi olla harhaanjohtavaa tehdä päätelmiä laittomasta kaupankäynnistä ainoastaan omistajuuden perusteella.

EU on toteuttanut merkittäviä toimenpiteitä merenkulun turvallisuuden ja turvatoimien tehostamiseksi. Euroopan meriturvallisuusviraston (EMSA) hallinnoima EU:n merenkulkualan tiedonvaihtojärjestelmä, SafeSeaNet, toimii jo täydellä teholla ja tarjoaa jäsenvaltioiden viranomaisille lähes reaaliaikaisia tietoja alusten liikkeistä EU:n alueella. Sen toimintaa täydennetään jatkossa muiden tietolähteiden, kuten satelliittivalvonnan avulla. Kun Euroopan rajavalvontajärjestelmä (Eurosur) saadaan toimintavalmiiksi, sen ensisijainen valvonta-alue on Välimeri (136). Eurosurin toiminta-alaan kuuluu kaikenlainen rajatylittävä rikollisuus EU:n ulkorajoilla. Lisäksi komissio on yhdessä jäsenvaltioiden kanssa luomassa yhteistä merivalvontaa, joka mahdollistaisi tiedonvaihdon yli valtioiden ja hallinnonalojen rajojen tiettyjä tarkoituksia varten (137). Näin syntyvä yhteinen tietojenvaihtoympäristö kytkee yhteen eri valvontajärjestelmät ja viranomaiset kustannustehokkaasti lisäten samalla tietoa merenkulusta ja tehostaen merellä toteutettavia viranomaisten toimia. Sen avulla kaikki viranomaiset voivat automaattisesti vaihtaa ja/tai laatia luetteloja epäilyttävistä aluksista, jos niiden on tarpeen tiedottaa epäilyttävästä aluksesta, valvoa sitä tai pysäyttää se.

Näitä toimia täydentäisi merkittävästi se, että kaikki EU:n jäsenvaltiot ratifioisivat Kansainvälisen merenkulkujärjestön merenkulun turvallisuuteen kohdistuvien laittomien tekojen ehkäisemistä koskevan yleissopimuksen vuonna 2005 laaditun pöytäkirjan, jossa mahdollistetaan kaksikäyttötuotteiden ja muiden aseiden leviämiseen tai terrorismitarkoituksiin tarkoitettujen tavaroiden laittoman kaupan torjunta.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004509/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), John Attard-Montalto (S&D), Lara Comi (PPE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Salvatore Tatarella (PPE), Luís Paulo Alves (S&D) and Roberto Gualtieri (S&D)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Illegal maritime shipments

Maritime transport flows are the dominant means of moving a range of commodities that can prolong and inflame conflicts, derail democratisation processes and even foster the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. According to a study recently published by SIPRI, more than 60 % of the ships involved in cases of sanctions-busting or the illicit transfer of drugs, arms and other military equipment are owned by companies from countries belonging to the EU, NATO or the OECD. Maritime transport is the preferred mode of this clandestine trade, not least because the high seas are very difficult areas of our planet to monitor or regulate. Despite advances in satellite and ship monitoring technologies, there is no authority capable of effectively controlling such a vast territory.

In addition, jurisdiction over merchant shipping in international waters rests with a vessel’s flag state and, as a result, ships suspected of carrying illegal commodities cannot be boarded — and the commodity seized — without the prior agreement of the flag state. In fact, the majority of ships involved in the reported transport of illegal military equipment, dual-use goods and narcotics sail under so-called flags of convenience and are registered in flag states with limited regulation and control of their merchant fleets. Port state control (PSC) inspections in most cases are the only occasions when state authorities have the right to board a ship without consulting the flag state. At international level, information sharing on suspect vessels between governments, maritime administrative entities and relevant PSC authorities could be enhanced. In particular, the Member States should create an information-sharing mechanism with a view to compiling a list of suspect ships and shipments, which could be integrated into other EU systems, such as those under the authority of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), as part of a holistic approach to maritime security and the enforcement of EU arms embargoes.

Given the situation described above:

is the High Representative/Vice-President aware of the fact that the majority of ships involved in reported cases of sanctions-busting or illicit transfer of arms, drugs and other military equipment are owned by companies registered in countries belonging to the EU and NATO?

is the High Representative/Vice-President considering establishing an EU mechanism for sharing information on suspect shipments and ships, with the aim of improving global human security?

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

(6 July 2012)

According to operational practice in international shipping, the owner of a ship can be different from her operator or the flag under which the ship sails. It can be thus misleading to draw conclusions on illegal trading based on the one statistic of ownership.

The EU has taken major steps to enhance both maritime safety and security. SafeSeaNet, the EU platform for maritime traffic information exchange operated by EMSA is fully operational and provides Member State authorities with near real-time information of ship's movements around the EU. It will be enriched with further information sources including from satellite surveillance. Once the EU system for border surveillance (Eurosur) becomes fully operational it will cover the Mediterranean Sea (138) as priority. Eurosur covers all cross-border crime at the EU external borders. Finally the Commission is working with Member States towards integrating maritime surveillance enabling exchange of information services across borders and sectors for targeted purposes. (139) The final result, a Common Information Sharing Environment, will interlink the different surveillance systems and public authorities in a cost effective environment enhancing maritime awareness and effectiveness of public intervention at sea. It will enable the automated exchange and/or compiling of such lists of suspect vessels by any public authority that needs to establish awareness, monitor or intercept a suspect vessel.

An essential complement would be that all EU Member States ratify the 2005 Protocol to the Convention of the International Maritime Organisation on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts at Sea allowing for the repression of illegal traffic of dual use goods and other goods destined to proliferation or terrorist ends.

(Svensk version)

Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-004510/12

till kommissionen

Anna Hedh (S&D)

(2 maj 2012)

Angående: Alkoholpolitik

Med anledning av kommissionens svar på min fråga E-001265/2012 om tidsplanen för nästa fas i arbetet mot alkoholrelaterade skador och investeringar i alkoholpolitik vill jag ställa en följdfråga.

Jag vill veta mer om de medel som kommissionen nämner avsätts inom ramen för EU:s jordbrukspolitik (1,5 miljoner euro per år) för informationsinsatser. Vilka är mottagare av dessa medel och på vilket vis används de för att informera om de negativa konsekvenserna av alkoholkonsumtion? Går någon andel av dessa medel till alkoholindustrin? Om så, ser kommissionen att det kan föreligga någon intressekonflikt i detta?

Svar från John Dalli på kommissionens vägnar

(22 juni 2012)

Inom ramen för EU:s jordbrukspolitik har kommissionen samfinansierat ett initiativ som består av åtgärder med inriktning på ansvarsfulla konsumtionsmönster och risken för alkoholmissbruk – ett portugisiskt program med en budget på totalt 2,9 miljoner euro för tre år. Av denna budget tilldelas 805 000 euro till åtgärder för ansvarsfullt drickande och EU står för 60 % av denna summa (vilket i genomsnitt motsvarar 161 000 euro per år). Stödmottagaren är en organisation som representerar de yrken som är delaktiga i tillverkningen av och handeln med vinsorten Vinho Verde i norra Portugal. Åtgärderna för ansvarsfullt drickande omfattar tv-reklam, närvaro på internet och en affischkampanj på allmänna platser. Kampanjen genomförs i Portugal, Tyskland, Sverige och Förenade kungariket.

Programmet uppfyller kraven i EU:s system för informationskampanjer och säljfrämjande åtgärder för jordbruksprodukter, och det föreligger inte någon intressekonflikt (140). På den inre marknaden inbegriper systemet informationsåtgärder för ansvarsfullt drickande och de skadeeffekter som farlig alkoholkonsumtion medför.

Siffran som kommissionen angav i svaret på den skriftliga frågan E-001265/2012 (141) hänvisade till det genomsnittliga årliga belopp som tilldelades bredare informationsåtgärder om vin inom EU. För ytterligare information hänvisar kommissionen parlamentsledamoten till svaret på den skriftliga frågan E-010885/2010.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004510/12

to the Commission

Anna Hedh (S&D)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: Alcohol policy

Following the Commission’s answer to my Question E‐001265/2012 concerning the timetable for the next phase in the work to reduce alcohol-related harm and investments in alcohol policy, I would like to ask a supplementary question.

I would like to know more about the funding that the Commission mentions has been allocated within the framework of EU agricultural policy (EUR 1.5 million per year) for information measures. Who are the recipients of this funding and how is it being used to raise public awareness about the negative consequences of alcohol consumption? Does any proportion of this funding go to the alcohol industry? If so, does the Commission believe that there could be some conflict of interest in this?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

In the framework of the EU agricultural policy, the Commission co-financed one initiative containing measures on responsible drinking patterns and the risk of alcohol abuse — a Portuguese programme with a total budget of EUR 2.9 million for three years. In this budget, EUR 805 000 are allocated to measures on responsible drinking and the EU contribution is 60 % (equalling EUR 161 000 on average per year). The beneficiary is an organisation representing the professions involved in the Vinho Verde production and trade in Northern Portugal. The measures on responsible drinking include a TV spot, actions on the Internet and an outdoor poster campaign. The campaign is carried out in Portugal, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The programme fully meets the provisions of the EU regime for information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products, and there is no conflict of interest (142). On the internal market, the regime foresees information measures on responsible drinking and the damaging effects of dangerous alcohol consumption.

The figure given in the Commission’s reply to Written Question E‐001265/2012 (143) referred in fact to the average yearly amount allocated to the wider wine information measures within the EU. For further details the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question E‐010885/2010.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004516/12

to the Commission

Derek Vaughan (S&D)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: Paints Directive (2004/42/EC)

The Paints Directive (2004/42/EC) aims to significantly reduce the quantity of dangerous solvents in paints and cut emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs); however, manufacturers and decorators have found that the new VOC 2010-compliant paints are yellowing within a year of being used. This means surfaces are being repainted on an annual basis and therefore more paint is being used.

— Does the Commission know whether more VOCs are released with this increased use of VOC-compliant paints? If it is the case that more VOCs are being released, how does the Commission propose to address this issue?

— How does the Commission propose to address the issue of yellowing of the new VOC 2010-compliant paints? Do alternative VOC 2010-compliant paints exist that do not yellow, or have alternatives to the yellowing paint been developed?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

Under Directive (2004/42/EC) (144), producers have developed new water-based decorative paints that address customer needs and fit new environmental standards. Up to now, the Commission has not been informed of a lowering of the quality of paints that would lead to greater quantities of paints being used and, accordingly, to an increase of production and emissions of VOC.

A first report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation and review of Directive (2004/42/EC) (145) concluded that: (i) VOC emissions from the application of coatings in the EU in 2008 were 1,378 kt (16.6 % of the total VOC emissions reported); (ii) VOC emissions in 2006 caused by the use of decorative paints covered by the Paint Directive amounted to 470 kt, (iii) VOC emissions should decrease to 373 kt in 2010 due to stricter limit values coming into force. Member States have now submitted their second implementation report covering the year 2010 and the Commission's analysis thereof is now under preparation. The Commission will look carefully at any data that might confirm the observations and concerns raised by the Honourable MEP.

(Wersja polska)

Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-004518/12

do Komisji

Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR)

(2 maja 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Przewidywane środki na dostosowanie rzeźni (Rozporządzenie Rady (WE) nr 1099/2009 załącznik II)

Przepisy załącznika II w sprawie wymagań infrastrukturalnych dla rzeźni, Rozporządzenia Rady (WE) nr 1099/2009, wchodzą w życie od 8 grudnia 2019 r.

Czy Komisja przewiduje w ramach II filaru WPR środki na dostosowanie rzeźni?

Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Daciana Cioloșa w imieniu Komisji

(6 czerwca 2012 r.)

W ramach obecnej polityki rozwoju obszarów wiejskich wsparcie na dostosowanie rzeźni do nowych norm UE można uzyskać w ramach środka „zwiększanie wartości dodanej produktów rolnych i leśnych” (art. 28 rozporządzenia (WE) nr 1698/2005) (146).

Wsparcie w ramach tego środka można uzyskać na inwestycje, które poprawiają ogólne wyniki przedsiębiorstwa. Inwestycje takie dotyczą przetwarzania produktów wymienionych w załączniku I do Traktatu (z wyjątkiem produktów rybnych) oraz produktów leśnych lub obrotu tymi produktami, lub też rozwoju nowych produktów, procesów i technologii związanych z produktami wymienionymi w załączniku I do Traktatu (z wyjątkiem produktów rybnych) i produktów leśnych. Inwestycje takie muszą również uwzględniać normy UE mające zastosowanie do danej inwestycji.

W przypadkach, gdy inwestycje mają na celu doprowadzenie do zgodności z normami UE, wsparcie można przyznawać jedynie mikroprzedsiębiorstwom (147). W takim przypadku na potrzeby doprowadzenia do zgodności z daną normą można przyznać okres karencji nieprzekraczający 36 miesięcy od dnia, w którym dana norma staje się obowiązująca dla przedsiębiorstwa.

Państwa członkowskie nie mają obowiązku włączenia omawianego środka do swych krajowych lub regionalnych programów rozwoju obszarów wiejskich, w związku z czym zagwarantowanie dostępu do tego wsparcia zależy od danego państwa członkowskiego.

W przyszłej polityce rozwoju obszarów wiejskich na lata 2014-2020 wspieranie inwestycji w rzeźniach będzie możliwe w ramach proponowanego środka „inwestycje w aktywa” [art. 18 COM(2011)627] (148). W ramach tego środka proponuje się, aby wsparcie można było przyznawać na inwestycje związane z przetwarzaniem, wprowadzaniem do obrotu lub rozwojem produktów rolnych wymienionych w załączniku I do Traktatu.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004518/12

to the Commission

Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: Measures envisaged to adapt slaughterhouses (Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 Annex II)

The provisions of Annex II to Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the infrastructure requirements for slaughterhouses enter into force on 8 December 2019.

Is the Commission planning to provide funds for adapting slaughterhouses under pillar 2 of the CAP?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2012)

Under the current Rural Development Policy, support for adapting slaughterhouses to new EU standards is possible through the measure ‘Adding value to agricultural and forestry products’ (Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005) (149).

Support under this measure may be granted to investments which improve the overall performance of an enterprise. The investment shall concern the processing and/or marketing of products covered by Annex I of the Treaty (except fishery products) and forestry products, and/or the development of new products, processes and technologies linked to products covered by Annex I of the Treaty (except fishery products) and forestry products. The investment shall also respect the EU standards applicable to the investment concerned.

Where investments are made to comply with EU standards, support may only be granted to micro-enterprises (150). In this case a period of grace not exceeding 36 months from the date the standard becomes mandatory for the enterprise may be provided to meet the standard.

Since this measure is not obligatory for Member States to include in their national or regional rural development programme, it is up to the Member State to make the support available.

For the future Rural Development Policy 2014-2020, the support for investments in slaughterhouses would be possible under the proposed measure ‘Investments in physical assets’ (Article 18 of COM(2011) 627) (151) Under this measure it is proposed that support may be granted to investments which concern the processing, marketing and/or development of agricultural products covered by Annex I of the Treaty.

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-004519/12

a Bizottság számára

Gáll-Pelcz Ildikó (PPE)

(2012. május 2.)

Tárgy: A pénzügyi kultúra fejlesztésére irányuló uniós stratégiáról

A pénzügyekben való jártasság mind egyéni, mind össztársadalmi szinten kiemelt fontosságú. Felismerve a pénzügyi tudatosság és jártasság fejlesztésének egyre növekvő fontosságát, az OECD és az Európai Unió is számos lépést tett a tagállamok ezirányú tevékenységének ösztönzése és támogatása érdekében. Így, többek között, az OECD Tanácsa 2005-ben ajánlást fogadott el, az EU Bizottsága pedig 2007 decemberében közleményt adott ki, amelyekben mindkét szervezet megfogalmazta a magas színvonalú pénzügyi kultúra fejlesztésének legfontosabb alapelveit. Azonban szomorú tény, hogy az elmúlt években nem történt előrelépés e kérdésben.

A gazdasági válság keserű hatásaként az Unió polgárai azzal szembesültek, hogy például a korábban kedvező finanszírozási formának tartott devizahitelük megdrágult, s miközben a munkahelyük kérdésessé vált, az is világossá lett számukra, hogy megtakarításaik még jó esetben is csak nagyon rövid krízis átvészelését teszik lehetővé. A tagállami intézkedések nyomán az emberek ma már világosan látják, hogy az államra nem feltétlenül lehet számítani, ám miután eddig nem igazán foglalkoztak a befektetési/megtakarítási lehetőségekkel, így meglehetősen idegenül mozognak ezek között.

A pénzügyi kultúra fejlesztésére irányuló színvonalas programokkal nemzetgazdasági szintű jóléti többlet teremthető, hiszen a pénzügyekben való tájékozottság növelése erősíti a stabilitást, és így távlatilag hozzájárul a gazdaság növekedéséhez is.

Mindezek alapján a következő kérdéseket szeretném feltenni a Bizottságnak:

Tervezi-e a Bizottság, hogy a közeljövőben egy újabb, átfogó vizsgálatot folytat a tagországok pénzügyi kultúrájának fejlesztését célzó, képzésjellegű programjairól?

Tervezi-e a Bizottság olyan egységes intézkedések vagy esetleges egységes uniós stratégia meghozatalát, amelyek értelmében az EU tagállamaiban fejleszthető a pénzügyi kultúra, és amelyek megkönnyíthetik a pénzügyi szolgálatók közötti összehasonlítást?

Michel Barnier válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. június 19.)

A Bizottság egyelőre nem tervezi a pénzügyi oktatás terén bevezetett tagállami programok újbóli vizsgálatát.

A Bizottság nemrég készített feltérképező tanulmányt azokról a nonprofit szervezetekről, amelyek általános pénzügyi tanácsadást nyújtanak fogyasztók részére (152). Majd a tanulmány eredményeiből kiindulva új projektet indított útjára, hogy kapacitásépítési célú képzést nyújtson ezeknek az EU-szerte tevékenykedő nonprofit szervezeteknek a pénzügyi tanácsadás terén (153).

A Bizottság ezenkívül szorosan figyelemmel kíséri az OECD pénzügyi képzésekkel foglalkozó nemzetközi hálózatának kezdeményezéseit. Ez a hálózat aktív szerepet tölt be nemzetközi szinten, és tevékenységével elősegíti a pénzügyi oktatásra vonatkozó nemzeti stratégiák elfogadását.

Mivel az oktatás a tagállamok hatáskörébe tartozik, a Bizottság a pénzügyi oktatással kapcsolatos nemzeti stratégiák és projektek összehangolására és támogatására összpontosít, és ennek keretében állami és nonprofit szervezetek által szervezett események és konferenciák védnökeként működik közre.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004519/12

to the Commission

Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: EU strategy aimed at developing financial culture

Financial skills are extremely important at the level of the individual and society. Recognising the increasing importance of developing financial awareness and skills, the OECD and the European Union have taken numerous steps to encourage and support Member States’ activities in this field. These included the OECD Council accepting a proposal in 2005 and the EU Commission issuing a communication in December 2007, in which both organisations set forth the most important principles for developing high-quality financial culture. However, it is a sad fact that there has been no progress on this issue in recent years.

As a bitter effect of the economic crisis, EU citizens have found that, for example, their foreign currency loans, previously considered to be advantageous, have become more expensive. Whilst their jobs are in danger, it has also become clear that their savings are at best only sufficient to get them through a very brief crisis. As a result of the measures taken by Member States, people have realised that they cannot necessarily depend on the state, but since they are not aware of the possibilities in investments/savings, they find themselves in unfamiliar waters.

High-quality programmes aimed at developing financial culture can establish a welfare surplus at the level of national economies, since an increase in financial awareness strengthens stability and thus contributes to long-term economic growth.

1. Does the Commission plan to conduct another comprehensive investigation regarding the Member States’ training programmes to develop financial culture in the near future?

2. Does the Commission plan to implement uniform measures or possible uniform EU strategies that will help develop financial culture in the Member States and that facilitate the comparability of financial services?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2012)

The Commission is not planning to carry out another analysis of the programmes of Member States in the area of financial education at this point of time.

The Commission has recently carried out a mapping study on non‐profit entities that provide general financial advice to consumers (154). As a follow-up initiative the Commission has launched a project with the aim of providing these non-profit entities across the EU with training courses, in order to build up capacity in the area of financial advice (155).

In addition, the Commission closely follows the initiatives of the OECD's International Network on Financial Education (INFE) which plays an active international role and promotes the adoption of national strategies on financial education.

Since education is the competence of Member States, the Commission focuses on coordination and support of national strategies and projects in the area of financial education through granting patronage to events and conferences organised by public or non-profit actors.

(Svensk version)

Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-004521/12

till kommissionen

Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)

(2 maj 2012)

Angående: Åtskillnad när det gäller kommissionens åtgärder mot smuggling och förfalskning

Sedan 2004 har Europeiska byrån för bedrägeribekämpning (Olaf) avtal med världens fyra största tobaksproducenter med målet att minska cigarettsmugglingen–iksom de förluster i tullavgifter, moms och punktskatter som detta får till följd–ch annan olaglig handel med cigaretter.

I den första av tre artiklar i dessa avtal finns ett avsnitt med definitioner som omfattar olika aspekter av cigarettsmuggling, smuggelcigaretter (som har importerats till eller distribuerats eller sålts i en medlemsstat, eller var på väg till en medlemsstat för försäljning där i strid med tillämplig skatt–ller tullagstiftning) och förfalskade cigaretter (cigaretter som tillverkas av tredje part utan medgivande från den cigarettillverkare som innehar det registrerade varumärket). Det avtal som ingicks mellan Olaf och British American Tobacco i juli 2010 innehåller dock ingen definition av ”smuggelcigaretter”, men däremot en definition av ”förfalskade cigaretter”.

Med tanke på att kommissionen och Olaf har betonat skillnaden mellan smugglade och förfalskade cigaretter i definitionerna i de andra avtal som har ingåtts med Japanese Tobacco International, Imperial Tobacco Limited och Philip Morris International undrar jag följande:

Hur motiverar kommissionen att det saknas en sådan åtskillnad och att det inte finns någon definition av ”förfalskade cigaretter” i avtalet med British American Tobacco?

Hur kommer kommissionen att se till att avsaknaden av en åtskillnad inte ger upphov till förvirring kring begreppen smuggling och förfalskning, och på så sätt hindrar insatser mot problemet med skattefusk och skattesmitning?

Svar från Algirdas Šemeta på kommissionens vägnar

(15 juni 2012)

1.

Smuggelcigaretter och piratkopierade cigaretter behandlas likadant i alla fyra avtalen. Enligt avtalen måste avgifter betalas för beslagtagna smuggelcigaretter som bär samarbetsföretagens varumärke. Detta gäller så länge de beslagtagna cigaretterna är äkta, dvs. om de är tillverkade av ett samarbetsföretag eller av tredje man med tillstånd av ett samarbetsföretag. De tillämpliga bestämmelserna i avtalet med British American Tobacco

1.

Smuggelcigaretter och piratkopierade cigaretter behandlas likadant i alla fyra avtalen. Enligt avtalen måste avgifter betalas för beslagtagna smuggelcigaretter som bär samarbetsföretagens varumärke. Detta gäller så länge de beslagtagna cigaretterna är äkta, dvs. om de är tillverkade av ett samarbetsföretag eller av tredje man med tillstånd av ett samarbetsföretag. De tillämpliga bestämmelserna i avtalet med British American Tobacco

 (156) är i sak identiska med motsvarande bestämmelser i de andra avtalen. (157) Distinktionen mellan smuggelgods och piratkopierat gods ser alltså likadan ut i alla tillämpliga avtal. Att det inte finns någon definition av smuggelgods i avtalet med British American Tobacco spelar därför ingen roll.

2.

Varje avtal är noggrant utformat för att tydligt skilja mellan beslagtagna äkta cigaretter (där tilläggsavgifter ska erläggas och företaget är skyldigt att samarbeta och lämna begärda upplysningar) respektive piratkopierade cigaretter (där samarbetsföretaget inte längre kan hållas ansvarigt). Även om innebörden av ordet smuggelgods är entydig beslutade Europeiska unionen/medlemsstaterna att avgränsa vad som avses med piratkopiering. Det fanns flera anledningar till detta, däribland att beteckningen piratkopierade cigaretter användes för att samarbetsföretagen skulle undslippa ansvar för beslagtagna cigaretter. Därför används olika definitioner i varje avtal i syfte att begränsa undantag och klargöra många situationer där cigaretter enligt avtalen inte ska anses vara piratkopierade.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004521/12

to the Commission

Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)

(2 May 2012)

Subject: Separation of the Commission's activities against contraband and counterfeiting

Since 2004 the European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, has signed agreements with the world’s four leading tobacco producers with the aim of reducing cigarette smuggling — as well as the resulting losses to customs, VAT and excise duties — and other illicit trading in cigarettes.

In the first article of three of these agreements there is a definitions section which tackles different aspects of cigarette smuggling, contraband cigarettes (that have been imported into, distributed in, or sold in a Member State, or were en route to a Member State for sale there in violation of the applicable tax, duty or other fiscal laws) and counterfeited cigarettes (cigarettes that are manufactured by a third party without the consent of the cigarette manufacturer holding the given registered trademark). However, the agreement signed by OLAF and British American Tobacco in July 2010 contains no definition of ‘contraband cigarettes’, whilst there is a definition of ‘counterfeited cigarettes’.

Given that the Commission and OLAF, in the other agreements signed with Japanese Tobacco International, Imperial Tobacco Limited and Philip Morris International, have emphasised the difference between contraband and counterfeit cigarettes in the definitions, how does the Commission justify the absence of such a differentiation and the lack of a definition of ‘contraband cigarettes’ in the British American Tobacco agreement?

Furthermore, how will the Commission guarantee that this lack of differentiation does not give rise to confusion between counterfeit and contraband, thus hindering the response to the problem of tax fraud and tax evasion?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2012)

1.

The treatment of contraband and counterfeit cigarettes remains exactly the same across all four agreements. In effect, all four agreements call for payments to be made on seized contraband cigarettes bearing the cooperating company’s trademarks, as long as those seized cigarettes are genuine; i.e., were in fact made by the cooperating company or by some third party acting with authorisation from the cooperating company. The operative provisions in the BAT Agreement

1.

The treatment of contraband and counterfeit cigarettes remains exactly the same across all four agreements. In effect, all four agreements call for payments to be made on seized contraband cigarettes bearing the cooperating company’s trademarks, as long as those seized cigarettes are genuine; i.e., were in fact made by the cooperating company or by some third party acting with authorisation from the cooperating company. The operative provisions in the BAT Agreement

 (158) are functionally identical with those in the other agreements (159). As such, the emphasis placed by each agreement on the difference between contraband and counterfeit remains exactly the same. The fact that there is no definition of contraband in the BAT Agreement does not affect this result.

2.

In each agreement, great care has been taken to clearly differentiate between seized genuine cigarettes (upon which additional payments are due, and in relation to which each company must cooperate, including the provision of information) and counterfeit cigarettes (for which the cooperating company is not responsible). However, while the plain meaning of the word contraband is clear, it was determined that the European Union/Member States wanted to limit the use of the designation of counterfeit. The reasons for this were several and included the fact that designation of cigarettes as counterfeit served to relieve the cooperating company of responsibility in relation to a particular seizure of cigarettes. As such, a definition was used in each agreement which serves to limit this exception and clarifies several situations in which cigarettes are not to be deemed counterfeit for purposes of the agreements.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004537/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Centrali OTEC

Raccogliere energia direttamente dal mare, sfruttando il calore delle acque tropicali per attivare centrali termoelettriche nell'oceano: un progetto che a prima vista può sembrare semplice, ma una centrale sottomarina efficiente richiede la costruzione di un enorme sistema di pompaggio largo alcuni metri che si estende per oltre un chilometro di profondità. Praticamente, è come costruire un tunnel della metropolitana e immergerlo verticalmente negli abissi marini per una profondità pari a tre grattacieli. Una sfida tecnologica molto ambiziosa, ma che secondo alcuni ingegneri potrebbe essere realizzabile in pochi anni.

Un'azienda americana, nota per la sua attività nel campo aeronautico, sta lavorando a un prototipo di centrale capace di sfruttare il calore degli oceani tropicali e convertirlo in energia elettrica. Il prototipo, che dovrebbe produrre dieci megawatt, potrebbe essere completato entro quest'anno e rappresenterebbe una svolta nel campo delle energie rinnovabili. La centrale sviluppata dagli americani utilizza l'energia talassotermica, cioè sfrutta la differenza di temperatura fra l'acqua in superficie e in profondità per attivare i generatori elettrici. Le centrali a conversione di energia termica dell'oceano, o OTEC (Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion), sono sofisticate macchine termiche nelle quali un fluido scorre in un circuito e sostituisce il calore con l'acqua a diverse temperature.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere:

se è a conoscenza dello studio summenzionato e ritiene che si possa sperimentarlo nel Mediterraneo;

se ritiene che possa essere finanziato attraverso il settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico (2007-2013) (7° PQ), tenuto conto che il problema dell'energia è oggi una delle principali sfide per l'Europa?

Risposta di Máire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è a conoscenza dello studio condotto alle isole Hawaii dall'azienda Lockheed-Martin su un prototipo di centrale a conversione di energia talassotermica (OTEC) con una capacità di 10 MW. Secondo la Commissione il Mediterraneo non rappresenta una scelta ottimale per le OTEC, che potrebbero invece fornire una soluzione nel settore delle energie rinnovabili per i territori d'oltremare dell'UE ai Caraibi e nell'Oceano Indiano.

Le tecnologie per l'energia degli oceani, ivi comprese le OTEC, rientrano nell'ambito del Settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico (7° PQ 2007-2013). Sinora non è stato approvato alcun progetto riguardante le OTEC. Tuttavia, nell'ambito degli inviti a presentare proposte relative alle tecnologie energetiche future, sono già stati finanziati due progetti sulle tecnologie per generare energia da gradienti salini (REAPpower (160) e CAPMIX (161)). Inoltre, le OTEC saranno prese in considerazione nel quadro del programma Orizzonte 2020, la proposta della Commissione per il programma di ricerca e innovazione dell'UE per il periodo 2014-2020.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004537/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: OTEC facilities

Obtaining energy directly from the sea, using the heat of tropical waters to drive thermal power plants in the ocean is a project which at first glance seems simple. However, an efficient undersea facility requires the construction of an enormous pumping system which is a few metres wide and descends to a depth of more than one kilometre. It is, in fact, like building an underground train tunnel and inserting it vertically into the depths of the sea — the total depth would be equal to the height of three skyscrapers. This is an incredibly ambitious technological challenge, but according to some engineers it might be possible in a few years.

An American company, famous for its aeronautical activities, is working on the prototype of a facility capable of converting the heat of the tropical oceans into electricity. The prototype, which should produce ten megawatts, could be completed before the end of the year and would represent a turning point in the field of renewable energy. The plant developed by the Americans uses ocean thermal energy, i.e. it uses the difference in temperature between the ocean surface waters and the deep waters to drive the electrical generators. Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) plants are sophisticated thermal machines in which a fluid running in a circuit replaces heat with water at various temperatures.

In view of this, can the Commission state:

Is it aware of the aforementioned study and does it consider that it could be tested in the Mediterranean?

Does it consider that this could be funded through the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technical Development (2007‐2013) (FP7), bearing in mind that the energy problem is one of the greatest challenges facing Europe today?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of the work carried out by Lockheed-Martin on a 10 MW prototype Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) plant in Hawaii. The Commission believes that the Mediterranean is not an optimal option for OTEC but it could provide a renewable energy solution for EU overseas territories in the Caribbean and Indian Ocean.

Ocean Technologies, including OTEC, is within the scope of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7, 2007-2013), no projects on OTEC have been approved so far. Two projects on salinity gradient technology have however already been funded under the ‘Future Energy Technologies’ calls for proposals (REAPower (162) and CAPMIX (163)). Moreover, OTEC will be considered in Horizon 2020, the Commission's proposal for the EU Research and Innovation Programme for 2014-2020.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004542/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Staminali rimpiazzano spermatozoi

Gli spermatozoi possono essere sostituiti nella fecondazione assistita con cellule staminali embrionali «dimezzate». Questa nuova tecnica in futuro potrebbe essere applicata anche alla fecondazione assistita nell'uomo, per evitare la trasmissione di malattie genetiche. I «sostituti» degli spermatozoi altro non sono altro che cellule staminali embrionali dotate di un solo set di cromosomi al posto dei canonici due ereditati dai genitori e per questo sono chiamate cellule «aploidi». I ricercatori hanno ottenuto queste staminali «dimezzate» iniettando uno spermatozoo in una cellula uovo a cui era stato tolto il nucleo. Il prossimo passo sarà quello di renderle sempre più simili agli spermatozoi.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere se è a conoscenza della nuova ricerca e, vista l'importanza che la tutela della salute riveste nelle politiche dell'UE, se ritiene che si debba finanziarla per consentire di tradurre lo studio in applicazioni cliniche?

Risposta di Máire Geoghegan-Quinn a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è al corrente delle ricerche sulle cellule staminali embrionali aploidi che l'onorevole parlamentare menziona.

L'evoluzione di questi lavori per applicazioni cliniche sull'uomo non può beneficiare di finanziamenti dell'UE in forza dell'articolo 6 (principi etici) del Settimo programma quadro per le attività di ricerca, sviluppo tecnologico e dimostrazione (2007-2013), che al paragrafo 2 recita:

«I seguenti settori di ricerca non sono finanziati a titolo del presente programma quadro:

—	le attività di ricerca volte alla clonazione umana a fini riproduttivi,

—	le attività di ricerca volte a modificare il patrimonio genetico degli esseri umani che potrebbero rendere ereditarie tali modifiche,

—	le attività di ricerca volte alla creazione di embrioni umani esclusivamente a fini di ricerca o per la produzione di cellule staminali, anche mediante il trasferimento di nuclei di cellule somatiche.»

La proposta della Commissione relativa a «Orizzonte 2020» mantiene lo stesso approccio del programma quadro attualmente in corso, ossia di non finanziare tali attività (articolo 16, paragrafo 3).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004542/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Stem cells replace sperm

Sperm can be substituted with ‘halved’ embryonic stem cells in assisted fertilisation. In the future, this new technique could be used in human assisted fertilisation in order to prevent the transmission of genetic diseases. The sperm ‘substitutes’ are embryonic stem cells with a single set of chromosomes, instead of the standard two inherited from both parents, and are called haploid cells. Researchers obtained these ‘halved’ stem cells by injecting a sperm cell into an egg from which the nucleus had been removed. The next step is to make the stem cells more similar to sperm.

Can the Commission say whether it is aware of this new research and whether, in view of the value that EU policy places on health protection, it considers that it should provide funding to allow the research to be translated into clinical applications?

Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of the work in mice on haploid embryonic stem cells mentioned by the Honourable Member.

Developing this work for clinical application in humans could not be financed by the EU because of Article 6 Ethical principles of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) whose second paragraph states:

‘The following fields of research shall not be financed under this framework Programme:

—	research activity aiming at human cloning for reproductive purposes,

—	research activity intended to modify the genetic heritage of human beings which could make such changes heritable,

—	research activities intended to create human embryos solely for the purpose of research or for the purpose of stem cell procurement, including by means of somatic cell nuclear transfer’.

The Commission proposal for ‘Horizon 2020’ maintains the same approach as under the current Framework Programme not to finance such activities (Article 16 paragraph 3).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004543/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Programmi per fondi diretti e città di Pescara

Gli enti territoriali, quali comuni e province, sono tra i primi possibili beneficiari dei Fondi diretti programmati ed erogati da parte delle direzioni generali della Commissione europea. Tra i fondi disponibili ci sono ad esempio: il programma cultura, il programma per l'occupazione e la solidarietà sociale «Progress», il programma cittadinanza «l'Europa per i cittadini», quello per l'ambiente «Life +», quello per gestire i flussi migratori «Programma gestione Flussi Migratori», quello dedicato alle risorse umane «Programma Investire nelle persone» e tanti altri.

In merito a questo e ad altri programmi disponibili, può la Commissione far sapere:

Per i quali programmi la città di Pescara ha fatto richiesta?

In caso affermativo, quali sono i progetti che hanno avuto accesso a fondi europei e con quali risultati i suddetti programmi sono stati portati a termine?

Risposta di Janusz Lewandowski a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

Le richieste di finanziamento diretto presentate dalla città di Pescara alla Commissione sono illustrate nell'allegato, trasmesso direttamente all'onorevole parlamentare e al segretariato del Parlamento.

La Commissione nota che l'onorevole parlamentare è interessato ai finanziamenti concessi direttamente alle città italiane nell'ambito di specifici programmi dell'Unione europea gestiti dalla Commissione. Se l'onorevole parlamentare lo desidera, la Commissione può fornirgli una tabella contenente queste informazioni per le principali città italiane che potrebbero partecipare a tali programmi; ciò darebbe all’onorevole parlamentare un unico insieme esauriente di dati, evitando alla Commissione di dover rispondere a ogni singola domanda.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004543/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Direct funding programmes and the city of Pescara

Local authorities, such as municipalities and provincial councils, are among the main potential beneficiaries of the direct funding planned and allocated by the Commission’s directorates-general. The many funding programmes available include the Culture programme, the Progress programme for employment and social solidarity, the Europe for Citizens programme aimed at promoting citizenship, the Life+ programme for the environment, the Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows programme for managing migration flows and the Investing in People programme for human resources.

1.	Has the city of Pescara applied for funding under any of the programmes available?

2.	If it has, for which projects has EU funding been provided and what results have these programmes achieved?

Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The requests for direct funding submitted by the City of Pescara to the Commission are presented in Annex, sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

The Commission notes that the Honourable Member is interested in the funding granted directly to Italian cities from specific EU programmes managed by the Commission. Should the Honourable Member so wish, the Commission could prepare a table providing this information for the major Italian cities likely to take part in these programmes. This would save the Commission time needed to reply to each individual question and provide the Honourable Member with one single set of comprehensive data.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004544/12

alla Commissione

Aldo Patriciello (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Il mercato europeo delle professioni e gli ordini professionali

Premesso che:

—	la direttiva sulle qualifiche professionali è essenziale per consentire agli operatori di avviare una nuova attività o trovare un posto di lavoro in un altro Stato membro che richiede una qualifica specifica per poter esercitare una determinata attività professionale;

—

nel novembre 2011 il Parlamento europeo ha adottato una risoluzione sull'attuazione della direttiva 2005/36/CE relativa al riconoscimento delle qualifiche professionali. La Commissione ha infatti adottato una proposta di revisione della direttiva al fine di rendere più semplice ad affidabile il riconoscimento delle qualifiche professionali attraverso l'introduzione di una tessera professionale elettronica e sportelli unici per ottenere informazioni;

—

tuttavia, non appare corretto agire sulla semplificazione della mobilità se prima non vengono regolati i differenti iter formativi al fine di evitare disparità in un contesto allargato di applicazione delle qualifiche professionali. Prima di procedere all'armonizzazione delle professioni e alla semplificazione della mobilità all'interno dello spazio europeo occorrerebbe rendere omogenei i differenti livelli di istruzione attraverso l'introduzione di un sistema di titoli accademici facilmente riconoscibili e comparabili;

—

un altro ostacolo ad ccesso e mobilità delle libere professioni sono gli ordini professionali, i quali pongono chiari dubbi riguardo alla compatibilità di alcune pratiche con le regole di concorrenza europee. Una regolamentazione eccessiva in materia di autorizzazione all'esercizio della professione riduce il numero di prestatori di servizi con conseguenze negative per la concorrenza e la qualità dei servizi. Inoltre, le esperienze di alcuni paesi suggeriscono che l'ammorbidimento delle restrizioni in talune professioni ha determinato una riduzione dei prezzi, senza detrimento apparente per la qualità dei servizi prestati.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere come intende creare una maggiore omogeneità nel caso degli ordini professionali? Infatti, ogni ordine può disciplinare l'accesso alla professione dei propri connazionali, ma non escludere chi, preso il titolo in modo diverso ma ugualmente valido nel proprio Stato di origine, voglia esercitare all’estero, innescando talvolta una sorta di concorrenza sleale sul mercato del lavoro.

Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione

(5 luglio 2012)

Le norme per l’accesso alle professioni regolamentate e la loro disciplina, compresi i requisiti in materia di qualifiche, sono definite a livello nazionale. Le associazioni professionali possono svolgere un ruolo in questo settore, a condizione di non creare ostacoli ingiustificati e sproporzionati all'esercizio di attività professionali.

La Commissione è consapevole della disparità delle legislazioni che disciplinano l’accesso alle professioni negli Stati membri. Per tale ragione, nella sua proposta di modifica della direttiva relativa al riconoscimento delle qualifiche professionali (164), la Commissione introduce un meccanismo di valutazione reciproca delle professioni regolamentate. Qualora tale proposta venisse adottata, gli Stati membri dovranno notificare l'elenco delle professioni per le quali esigono qualifiche specifiche, giustificare la necessità di regolamentare tali professioni e effettuarne una valutazione reciproca. Inoltre la Commissione ha elaborato raccomandazioni specifiche per 8 Stati membri sulla necessità di ridurre gli ostacoli normativi nei servizi professionali e in questo contesto intende avviare nel 2012, in collaborazione con gli Stati membri, un esercizio al fine di progredire il più rapidamente possibile in questo settore (165).

La direttiva definisce un sistema di riconoscimento reciproco delle qualifiche che consente a un professionista qualificato in uno Stato membro di esercitare la professione in un altro Stato membro. Per la maggior parte delle professioni il sistema si basa su un raffronto tra la qualifica posseduta dal lavoratore migrante e quella richiesta dallo Stato membro ospite e sull'uso di misure di compensazione in caso di differenze sostanziali. Tale valutazione caso per caso permette di evitare la concorrenza sleale tra cittadini nazionali e professionisti qualificati in altri Stati membri nell'accesso alle professioni regolamentate.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004544/12

to the Commission

Aldo Patriciello (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Professions and professional associations in the EU

The Professional Qualifications Directive is essential in order to allow people to take up new activities or find a job in another Member State that requires a specific qualification in order to pursue a particular profession.

In November 2011, Parliament adopted a resolution on the implementation of Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications, and the Commission has now adopted a proposal for a review of the directive aimed at making the recognition of professional qualifications simpler and more reliable through the introduction of an electronic professional card and points of single contact (one-stop information centres).

However, it does not seem right to take action to facilitate mobility until the different educational curricula have been regulated in order to avoid disparities in the broader market for professional qualifications. Before action is taken to harmonise professions and facilitate mobility within the EU, the different educational requirements need to be standardised by introducing a system of easily recognisable and comparable academic qualifications.

Another obstacle to accessing professions and ensuring mobility in this area is the existence of professional associations, in connection with which there are serious doubts as to the compatibility of certain practices with European competition rules. Over-regulation of access to a profession reduces the number of service providers, with negative consequences for competition and service quality. Furthermore, the experience gained in some countries would suggest that the relaxation of restrictions in some professions has caused prices to fall, without any apparent deterioration in the quality of the services provided.

In view of the above, can the Commission state how it intends to ensure greater uniformity with regard to professional associations? As things stand, an association in a given country is able to regulate access to a profession by nationals of that country but cannot exclude those who, having obtained their qualifications in a different but equally valid manner in their country of origin, wish to practice abroad — a situation which in some cases gives rise to a form of unfair competition on the labour market.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2012)

The rules for accessing and governing regulated professions, including the qualifications requirements, are defined at national level. Professional associations can play a role in this area, provided they do not create unjustified and disproportionate barriers to the exercise of professional activities.

The Commission is aware of the disparity of the legislations regulating the access to the professions in the Member States. For this reason, in its proposal for modernising the Professional Qualifications Directive (166), the Commission introduces a mutual evaluation mechanism on regulated professions. If adopted, Member States will have to notify the list of professions for which they require a specific qualification, justify the need for regulating these professions and evaluate them on a mutual basis. In addition, the Commission has addressed country specific recommendations to 8 Member States on the need to reduce regulatory barriers in professional services and in this context it will launch an exercise in 2012 with Member States in order to make progress as rapidly as possible (167).

The directive defines a system of mutual recognition of qualifications, which allows a professional qualified in a Member State to exercise his or her profession in another Member State. For the vast majority of professions, the system is based on a comparison between the qualification hold by the migrant and the qualification required in the host Member State and on the use of compensation measures in case of substantial differences. This case-by-case assessment allows to avoid unfair competition between nationals and professionals qualified in other Member States in the access to regulated professions.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004545/12

à Comissão

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 de Maio de 2012)

Assunto: Plano de Emergência para o Douro

A situação social na Região Demarcada do Douro agrava-se de forma preocupante. O Encontro da Lavoura Duriense, recentemente realizado, caracterizou esta situação como sendo calamitosa e exigiu medidas imediatas que a permitam reverter. As falências e insolvências de empresas do comércio de vinhos — como foi o caso da Fernando Mendes e Bior, em Vila Real — e até de Adegas Cooperativas, somam-se à falta de escoamento das produções de vinhos, azeite e frutas (produções de alta qualidade) e aos persistentes baixos preços à produção. Ao mesmo tempo, estão mais caros que nunca os custos de fatores de produção — como combustíveis, eletricidade, adubos e pesticidas. Também os custos com seguros agrícolas e com o crédito bancário não param de aumentar. Neste cenário difícil, o encerramento de serviços públicos, os aumentos de impostos e a perda de poder de compra da generalidade da população — consequências do programa FMI-UE — agravam ainda mais as dificuldades dos produtores.

Perante esta situação de calamidade social, o Encontro da Lavoura Duriense exige a criação de um «Fundo de Emergência», destinado a acudir a situações de crise aguda como aquela que estão a viver as centenas de vitivinicultores (e suas famílias) afetados pelas falências ou insolvências dos compradores ou recetores das suas uvas e vinhos. A criação deste Fundo deverá ser uma das medidas de um «Plano de Emergência para o Douro», a criar para defender e promover a Região Demarcada do Douro, as suas gentes e as suas excelentes produções. Entre outras medidas, este Plano deverá criar condições para melhorar o escoamento das produções e os preços à produção para os vinhos, o azeite e as frutas.

Em face do exposto, solicito à Comissão que me informe sobre que medidas e programas comunitários poderão apoiar a constituição do supramencionado «Fundo de Emergência», assim como a criação e a prossecução dos objetivos do referido «Plano de Emergência para o Douro».

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloș em nome da Comissão

(28 de junho de 2012)

A UE concede já, na sequência da reforma da OCM do vinho de 2008, um contribuição importante para o setor do vinho. Nesse contexto, os programas nacionais de apoio constituem um dos instrumentos disponíveis. Esses programas são criados pelos Estados-Membros a partir de um conjunto de medidas, entre as quais se contam a reestruturação da vinha, a promoção em países terceiros, o seguro de colheita e a ajuda à constituição de fundos mutualistas, que podem contribuir para fazer face às preocupações expressas pelo Senhor Deputado. As três primeiras medidas referidas fazem parte das medidas do programa de ajuda português. É ao Estado-Membro que incumbe, se necessário, reorientar as prioridades do seu programa em função das necessidades que surjam.

Quanto ao Desenvolvimento Rural, estão previstas várias medidas para promover o apoio estrutural para os produtos da região, incluindo a modernização das explorações agrícolas, o aumento do valor acrescentado dos produtos agrícolas e florestais e o apoio específico à conservação dos terraços típicos da região.

No âmbito do apoio específico previsto no artigo 68.° do Regulamento (CE) n.° 73/2009 do Conselho (168), Portugal aplicou medidas relativas à proteção do património oleícola nacional, aos sistemas de criação das raças autóctones e à melhoria da qualidade de certos produtos agrícolas, que são também aplicáveis na região do Douro.

O programa «Norte 2007-2013» prevê uma vasta gama de projetos que podem ser apoiados. Podem ser pedidas às autoridades nacionais competentes (169) mais informações sobre estes programas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004545/12

to the Commission

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Emergency plan for the Douro Region

The social situation in the Douro Demarcated Region is deteriorating at an alarming rate. At the recent Encontro da Lavoura Duriense (Meeting of the Douro Region Farmers), the situation was described as calamitous, and remedies were called as a matter of urgency. In addition to the bankruptcy and insolvency of wine-trading companies — for example Fernando Mendes & Bior in Vila Real — and even of cooperative wineries, the (high-quality) wines, olive oil and fruit are becoming difficult to sell, and producer prices remain persistently low. At the same time, input costs — fuel, electricity, fertilisers and pesticides — are higher than ever. Furthermore, the cost of agricultural insurance and bank loans is continuing to rise. Against this difficult backdrop, the closure of public services, tax increases and the general public’s loss of purchasing power — resulting from the IMF-EU programme — have further exacerbated the problems for producers.

To address this socially calamitous situation, the Encontro da Lavoura Duriense is calling for an ‘Emergency Fund’ to be set up to tackle the crisis into which hundreds of wine producers (and their families) have been thrown by the bankruptcies or insolvencies of their customers or recipients of their grapes and wines. The establishment of such a fund should be one of the measures in an ‘Emergency Plan for the Douro’ to support and promote the Douro Demarcated Region, its people and its excellent produce. Among other measures, this plan should create the conditions required to improve sales and raise producer prices for wine, olive oil and fruit.

In view of the foregoing, can Commission provide more information on EU measures and programmes which could be employed to establish the aforementioned ‘Emergency Fund’ and to help define and implement the objectives of the ‘Emergency Plan for the Douro Region’ as referred to above?

Answer given by Mr Cioloș on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2012)

The EU already makes a significant contribution to the wine sector, following the 2008 reform of the CMO in wine. In this context, national aid programmes constitute one of the instruments available. They are set up by the Member States based on a menu of measures. These include the restructuring of vineyards, promotion in third countries, harvest insurance and aid for setting up mutual funds; these measures may contribute towards addressing the Honourable Member's concerns. The first three measures referred to form part of the Portuguese aid programme's measures. It is up to the Member State, if necessary, to adjust the priorities of its programme in the light of the needs expressed.

In relation to rural development several measures are provided for to promote structural support for the region's products, including the modernisation of agricultural holdings, increasing the added value of agricultural and forestry products, as well as specific support for maintaining the typical terraces of the region.

Within the framework of the specific support provided for in Article 68 of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (170), Portugal has implemented measures to protect the national olive heritage, systems for rearing indigenous breeds, and improvements to the quality of certain agricultural products; these measures also apply in the Douro region.

The programme ‘Norte 2007‐13’ provides for a wide range of projects that can be supported. Further information related to these programmes can be requested from the relevant national authorities (171).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004546/12

à Comissão

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: Rede pela Soberania e Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional

Em Portugal, foi recentemente constituída a Realimentar — a Rede Portuguesa pela Soberania e Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional. Trata-se de uma iniciativa da sociedade civil, que visa constituir um espaço de debate, diálogo, articulação de esforços, recursos e ações para a intervenção nos processos de formulação e tomada de decisão sobre políticas públicas nacionais e internacionais relacionadas com a soberania e segurança alimentar e nutricional, em Portugal e no mundo, e o direito humano à alimentação.

Na Carta de Princípios da Realimentar, figuram princípios como:

—	O direito dos povos a decidirem e a gerirem os seus próprios sistemas agrícolas e alimentares;

—	O direito dos países a protegerem os seus produtos e produtores e de controlar a sua produção de alimentos;

—	A necessidade de uma agricultura e comércio sustentáveis que não comprometam o acesso a outras necessidades essenciais e o sistema alimentar futuro;

—	Uma alimentação de base dos povos sustentada na produção e no consumo local de alimentos;

—	A necessidade da existência de instrumentos públicos fortes de regulação do mercado e da produção;

—	A atribuição, à agricultura familiar, da importância devida do ponto de vista económico, social e ambiental e da necessidade de reposição de preços à produção que travem a sua destruição.

Pergunto à Comissão:

De que indicadores e informação estatística dispõe relativamente à soberania alimentar de cada um dos 27 Estados-Membros?

Dispõe de informação sobre a evolução da dependência alimentar de cada um dos 27 Estados-Membros? E sobre a evolução da pequena agricultura e da agricultura familiar?

De que forma serão os princípios acima enunciados tidos em conta na próxima reforma da Política Agrícola Comum?

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloş em nome da Comissão

(7 de junho de 2012)

1.

No que respeita à soberania alimentar, o grau de autossuficiência em produtos agrícolas permite‐nos avaliar se a UE produz mais ou menos do que necessita para o consumo. A base de dados Eurostat contém dados estatísticos na matéria, ao nível dos Estados-Membros e da União, tanto no contexto dos balanços de aprovisionamento de produtos agrícolas

 (172)  (173)

2.	A evolução da dependência alimentar é traduzida por vários indicadores: comércio de produtos agrícolas

 (174) per capita  (175)  (176)  (177)  (178)

1.

No que respeita à soberania alimentar, o grau de autossuficiência em produtos agrícolas permite‐nos avaliar se a UE produz mais ou menos do que necessita para o consumo. A base de dados Eurostat contém dados estatísticos na matéria, ao nível dos Estados-Membros e da União, tanto no contexto dos balanços de aprovisionamento de produtos agrícolas

2.	A evolução da dependência alimentar é traduzida por vários indicadores: comércio de produtos agrícolas

3.

As propostas para a PAC pós-2013 centram‐se em três grandes objetivos políticos: produção alimentar viável, gestão sustentável dos recursos naturais e desenvolvimento territorial equilibrado. Uma maior orientação para o mercado permitirá que os agricultores tomem decisões livres sobre a sua produção, reforçando, em simultâneo, o dispositivo de segurança. Os pagamentos diretos continuarão a garantir um apoio fixo de base ao rendimento dos agricultores, abrangendo a regionalização, um pagamento complementar específico para os jovens agricultores, um pagamento para as zonas com condicionantes naturais e um apoio associado voluntário às regiões ou setores vulneráveis. A sustentabilidade a longo prazo da agricultura da UE será facilitada pela

1.

No que respeita à soberania alimentar, o grau de autossuficiência em produtos agrícolas permite‐nos avaliar se a UE produz mais ou menos do que necessita para o consumo. A base de dados Eurostat contém dados estatísticos na matéria, ao nível dos Estados-Membros e da União, tanto no contexto dos balanços de aprovisionamento de produtos agrícolas

 (172) como das estatísticas «do campo à mesa» (173)).

2.	A evolução da dependência alimentar é traduzida por vários indicadores: comércio de produtos agrícolas

 (174) que fornece uma indicação da procura de alimentos na UE), consumo per capita  (175) que exprime a quantidade, em quilogramas, de carne, cereais e produtos lácteos consumida anualmente por habitante) e quota das despesas com a alimentação nas despesas totais dos agregados familiares (176). O inquérito sobre a estrutura das explorações agrícolas (177) constitui uma fonte harmonizada de uma vasta gama de dados estruturais sobre as explorações agrícolas da UE (dimensões, afetação dos solos, mão de obra, efetivos pecuários, etc.), incluindo as pequenas explorações (178).

3.

As propostas para a PAC pós-2013 centram‐se em três grandes objetivos políticos: produção alimentar viável, gestão sustentável dos recursos naturais e desenvolvimento territorial equilibrado. Uma maior orientação para o mercado permitirá que os agricultores tomem decisões livres sobre a sua produção, reforçando, em simultâneo, o dispositivo de segurança. Os pagamentos diretos continuarão a garantir um apoio fixo de base ao rendimento dos agricultores, abrangendo a regionalização, um pagamento complementar específico para os jovens agricultores, um pagamento para as zonas com condicionantes naturais e um apoio associado voluntário às regiões ou setores vulneráveis. A sustentabilidade a longo prazo da agricultura da UE será facilitada pela

«ecologização» dos pagamentos diretos associada à condicionalidade. As medidas de desenvolvimento rural permitirão que os Estados-Membros se centrem nos desafios específicos das suas regiões (nomeadamente gestão dos riscos e apoio às cadeias curtas).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004546/12

to the Commission

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: REALIMENTAR, the Portuguese network for food and nutritional sovereignty and security

REALIMENTAR — the Portuguese network for food and nutritional sovereignty and security — has recently been set up. This is a civil society initiative intended to provide a forum for debate, dialogue, and coordination of efforts, resources and actions to be brought to bear on decision-making procedures relating to national and international public policy on food and nutritional sovereignty and security, in Portugal and around the world, and on the human right to food.

REALIMENTAR’s Charter includes the following principles:

the right of peoples to decide on and manage their own agricultural and food systems;

the right of countries to protect their products and producers and to control their food production;

the need for sustainable agriculture and trade, without jeopardising access to other essential needs and the future food system;

a basic diet for all peoples, based on local food production and consumption;

the need for strong public systems to regulate the market and production;

the provision of the economic, social and environmental resources necessary for family farming and the need to adjust producer prices to prevent its destruction.

What indicators and statistical information are available on the food sovereignty of each of the 27 Member States?

Is there any information on the development of food dependency in each of the 27 Member States? And on the development of small-scale and family farming?

How will the above principles be taken into account in the forthcoming reform of the common agricultural policy?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2012)

1.

As regards food sovereignty, the degree of self sufficiency in agricultural products allows us to evaluate if the EU produces more or less than it needs for consumption. Statistical information on self sufficiency at Member State and EU level can be found in Eurostat database, either in the supply balance sheets for agricultural products

1.

As regards food sovereignty, the degree of self sufficiency in agricultural products allows us to evaluate if the EU produces more or less than it needs for consumption. Statistical information on self sufficiency at Member State and EU level can be found in Eurostat database, either in the supply balance sheets for agricultural products

 (179) or in the ‘from farm to fork’ statistics) (180).

2.	Several indicators evaluate the developments of food dependency: agricultural trade

2.	Several indicators evaluate the developments of food dependency: agricultural trade

 (181) gives an indication on the EU food demands), per capita consumption (182) shows how many kg of meat/cereals/dairy products an inhabitant consumes in a year), the share of food expenditure in total household expenditure (183). Farm Structure Survey (184) (FSS) represents a harmonised source for a wide range of structural data on EU farms (size, land use, labour force, livestock, etc.) including small scale farms (185).

3.

CAP post-2013 proposals focus on three major policy objectives: viable food production, sustainable management of natural resources and balanced territorial development. Further market orientation will enable farmers to decide freely on their production, while keeping an enhanced safety net mechanism. Direct payments will continue to guarantee a basic fixed income support to farmers, (and include regionalisation, specific top-up for young farmers, a payment for areas with natural constraints and a voluntary coupled support to vulnerable regions or sectors). The long term sustainability of EU agriculture is facilitated by the greening of direct payments together with cross compliance. Rural development measures will provide Member States to focus on challenges that are specific to their regions (including risk management and support for short chains).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004547/12

à Comissão

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 de Maio de 2012)

Assunto: Reversão da decisão de acabar com os direitos de plantação da vinha

Notícias recentes na imprensa portuguesa dão conta de que 14 países da UE terão defendido a manutenção dos limites à plantação de vinha, considerando que a liberalização prevista «afetará a qualidade e a competitividade do setor a nível mundial». Ainda de acordo com estas notícias, os 14 países terão defendido a necessidade de reverter a decisão de acabar com os «direitos de plantação», uma vez que a liberalização prevista, para além de se traduzir numa perda de qualidade, poderá acarretar graves consequências para a produção em zonas em que a vinha assume hoje (e historicamente) um papel importante.

Esta posição vem ao encontro das reivindicações de muitas organizações de produtores, designadamente em Portugal, segundo as quais a manutenção dos direitos de plantação da vinha é vital para a vitivinicultura e para a economia de amplas regiões.

Em face do exposto, pergunto à Comissão:

Qual o ponto de situação relativamente a esta matéria?

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloș em nome da Comissão

(22 de Junho de 2012)

Como refere o Senhor Deputado, vários Estados-Membros produtores de vinho, um grande número de profissionais do setor, aos níveis nacional e europeu, e alguns eurodeputados têm expresso, desde o ano passado, preocupações quanto à próxima supressão do regime dos direitos de plantação de vinhas. Por esse motivo, foi criado em 2012 um Grupo de Alto Nível, encarregado de organizar um fórum de debate sobre o assunto. O grupo é presidido pelo Diretor‐Geral da Agricultura e do Desenvolvimento Rural e é constituído por representantes dos Estados-Membros e das principais organizações do setor. O Parlamento Europeu e o Conselho participam também no fórum, na qualidade de observadores.

O objetivo do grupo consiste em avaliar diversos aspetos da aplicação do regime nos Estados-Membros, bem como os efeitos da supressão do mesmo para o setor e o mercado do vinho. Na sequência dos seus trabalhos, o grupo apresentará ao Comissário Cioloș, até ao final do ano, um relatório sobre os temas abordados.

A supressão do regime não constitui uma medida isolada, inserindo-se no âmbito da reforma da OCM do vinho, adotada pelo Conselho em 2008. Esta reforma destina-se a restabelecer o equilíbrio do mercado do vinho, a aumentar a competitividade, dotando os produtores de instrumentos adequados a esse fim, e a reforçar a política de qualidade, tanto no interesse dos produtores como dos consumidores.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004547/12

to the Commission

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Reversal of the decision to abolish vine planting rights

The Portuguese press has recently reported that 14 EU countries have backed the continuation of vine planting restrictions, arguing that the planned liberalisation would affect quality and the competitiveness of the sector at global level. Furthermore, according to these reports, the 14 countries have backed the reversal of the decision to abolish ‘planting rights’, since the planned liberalisation could result in lower quality and have serious consequences for production in areas where vines play (and historically have played) an important role.

This stance goes against claims made by numerous producer organisations, particularly in Portugal, which believe that preserving vine planting rights is vital for the wine sector and for the economy over wide areas.

What is the current state of play as regards this issue?

(Version française)

Comme le souligne l'Honorable Parlementaire, des États membres producteurs de vin, de nombreux professionnels au niveau national et européen ainsi que plusieurs députés européens ont exprimé depuis l'an dernier leurs préoccupations sur la fin prochaine du régime des droits de plantation de vignes. C'est pourquoi un Groupe de haut Niveau a été créé en 2012 pour organiser un forum de discussion sur le sujet. Le groupe est présidé par le Directeur General de l'Agriculture et Développement Rural et est constitué par représentants des États membres et des principales organisations du secteur. Le Parlement Européen et le Conseil sont aussi présents à ces discussions comme observateurs.

L'objectif de ce groupe est d'évaluer différents aspects du fonctionnement de ce régime dans les États membres, ainsi que les effets de son abolition pour le secteur et le marché du vin. À l'issue de ses travaux, le groupe présentera au Commissaire Cioloș un rapport sur les thèmes abordés avant la fin de l'année.

La fin de ce régime n'est pas une mesure isolée; elle fait partie de la réforme de l'OCM vin, adoptée par le Conseil en 2008. Cette réforme vise à rétablir l'équilibre du marché du vin à accroître la compétitivité en fournissant aux producteurs des outils pour son amélioration et à renforcer la politique de qualité du vin, tant dans l'intérêt des producteurs que des consommateurs.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004548/12

a la Comisión

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(3 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: Pulverización de pesticidas en Galicia

En las últimas semanas, se ha constituido en Galicia una plataforma cívica formada por diversas organizaciones ecologistas y sindicatos agrícolas, entre otros grupos sociales, denominada «Plataforma contra las fumigaciones», con el fin de denunciar la utilización de pesticidas tóxicos para las abejas. La Plataforma afirma que la Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Pasta, Papel y Cartón (Aspapel), con la colaboración de empresas químicas y la connivencia de los poderes públicos, pretende fumigar con un producto altamente tóxico (el principio activo flufenoxurón) las zonas de Galicia en las que la población de eucaliptos está afectada por una enfermedad llamada Gonipterus scutellatus.

La utilización de flufenoxurón está prohibida en la Unión Europea, tanto por razones de seguridad alimentaria como por los importantes daños que causa a especies animales como las abejas (para las que esta sustancia es mortal) y al equilibrio del medio natural. La prohibición de este principio activo está prevista en el Reglamento de Ejecución (UE) n° 942/2011 de la Comisión, de 22 de septiembre de 2011, por el que se establece la no aprobación de la sustancia activa flufenoxurón, de conformidad con el Reglamento (CE) n° 1107/2009 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, relativo a la comercialización de productos fitosanitarios, y se modifica la Decisión 2008/934/CE de la Comisión, de 5 de diciembre de  2008, relativa a la no inclusión de determinadas sustancias activas en el anexo I de la Directiva 91/414/CEE del Consejo y a la retirada de las autorizaciones de los productos fitosanitarios que contengan esas sustancias, que determina la no inclusión del paclobutrazol.

Esta denuncia pone de manifiesto la importancia social de la cuestión, así como la creciente preocupación por la falta de intervención pública del Gobierno gallego en un asunto tan relevante y que afecta a puestos de trabajo en un sector tan importante como es la agricultura en Galicia.

¿Está la Comisión al corriente de esta situación? ¿Tiene intención de autorizar la fumigación de las plantaciones de eucaliptos con esta sustancia, a pesar de que su comercialización está prohibida desde el 31 de diciembre de  2011? De demostrarse los nefastos efectos de su uso, ¿considera que esta sustancia se podría beneficiar del período de gracia previsto para la aplicación del Reglamento de Ejecución (UE) n° 942/2011 de la Comisión, de 22 de septiembre de 2011?

Respuesta del Sr. Dalli en nombre de la Comisión

(22 de junio de 2012)

Tal como afirma Su Señoría, la Comisión no aprobó la sustancia activa flufenoxurón para su utilización en productos fitosanitarios (Reglamento (UE) n° 942/2011) (186).

Como consecuencia de esta decisión, los Estados miembros se vieron obligados a retirar todas las autorizaciones antes del 31 de diciembre de  2011. Después de esta fecha, los Estados miembros podían conceder un periodo de gracia para la utilización de las existencias de esta sustancia hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2012 a más tardar. España había autorizado productos fitosanitarios para su utilización en eucaliptos y, por consiguiente, también puede acogerse a la excepción prevista para utilizar las existencias de esta sustancia hasta finales de 2012 en estos árboles.

La Comisión tiene conocimiento de que España concedió este periodo de gracia de conformidad con la legislación. Corresponde a los Estados miembros imponer medidas de reducción del riesgo así como definir las condiciones apropiadas de uso a nivel nacional, regional o local.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004548/12

to the Commission

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Pesticide spraying in Galicia

In recent weeks, a civil society coalition named ‘The Alliance against Fumigation’ (Plataforma contra as Fumigações) has been formed in Galicia by various environmental organisations, farmers’ unions and other social groups to campaign against the use of pesticides which are toxic to bees. The Alliance states that the Spanish Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers, in collaboration with chemical companies and with the connivance of the public authorities, intends to fumigate parts of Galicia where eucalyptus trees are affected by a pest called Gonipterus scutellatus using a highly toxic product (active substance flufenoxuron).

The use of flufenoxuron is prohibited in the European Union both for reasons of food safety and because of the significant harm caused to insect species such as bees (for which flufenoxuron is deadly) and to environmental equilibrium. The prohibition of this active substance is set out in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 942/2011 of 22 September 2011 concerning the non-approval of the active substance flufenoxuron, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending Commission Decision 2008/934/EC of 5 December 2008 concerning the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing these substances, which provides for the non-inclusion of paclobutrazol.

This campaign highlights the social importance of this issue and the growing concern about the failure of the Galician Government to publicly intervene on a subject that is very relevant and affects the employees of such an important sector as the Galician agriculture sector.

Is the Commission aware of this situation? Does the Commission intend to authorise the fumigation of the eucalyptus plantations with this substance, regardless of the fact there has been a ban on it being marketed since 31 December 2011? As the harmful effects of its use have been demonstrated, does the Commission believe that this substance may benefit from the derogation period provided for in applying Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 942/2011 of 22 September 2011?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

As highlighted by the Honourable Member, the Commission has not approved flufenoxuron as an active substance to be used in plant protection products (Regulation (EU) No 942/2011) (187).

Following this decision, Member States had to withdraw all authorisations by 31 December 2011. After this date, Member States could grant a period of grace for the use of existing stocks until 31 December 2012 at the latest. Spain had authorised plant protection products for use on eucalyptus trees and can therefore benefit from the derogation to use existing stocks until end 2012 also on eucalyptus trees.

The Commission is aware that Spain granted such a period of grace in accordance with the legislation. It is the responsibility of Member States to impose risk mitigation measures and to define the appropriate conditions of use at national, regional or local level.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-004549/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Eleni Theocharous (PPE)

(3 Μαΐου 2012)

Θέμα: Έρευνες της Τουρκίας για υδρογονάνθρακες

Με απόφαση του Υπουργικού Συμβουλίου της, η Τουρκία θα προχωρήσει σε έρευνες για την εξεύρεση υδρογονανθράκων εντός της υφαλοκρηπίδας της Ελλάδας, πλησίον του Καστελόριζου και της Κύπρου, εντός της αποκλειστικής οικονομικής της ζώνης, που σημαίνει απειλή για παραβίαση κυριαρχικών δικαιωμάτων κρατών μελών της ΕΕ και του διεθνούς δικαίου της θάλασσας, που αποτελεί τμήμα του κοινοτικού κεκτημένου. Ήδη η Τουρκία, διά της Τουρκικής Εταιρίας Πετρελαίων, προχώρησε σε παράνομες γεωτρήσεις στα κατεχόμενα εδάφη της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας. Προτίθεται η ΕΕ να προβεί σε διαβήματα προς την Τουρκία και ποια;

Προτίθεται επίσης να επιβάλει μέτρα για να υπερασπιστεί τα κυριαρχικά δικαιώματα κρατών μελών της στη λογική και την πρακτική εφαρμογή της αλληλεγγύης;

Θα επιβληθούν κυρώσεις και θα αποκλειστούν από διαγωνισμούς και εμπορικές και άλλες συναλλαγές της ΕΕ όσες εταιρίες εμπλακούν στις έρευνες που θα διεξάγει η Τουρκία, παραβιάζοντας το δίκαιο της θάλασσας, το κοινοτικό κεκτημένο και την διεθνή καθώς και την κοινοτική έννομη τάξη;

Θα εισηγηθεί η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή ακόμη και την αναστολή των τουρκικών ενταξιακών διαδικασιών, εφόσον η τουρκική κυβέρνηση παραβιάσει κυριαρχικά δικαιώματα της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας εντός της κυπριακής Αποκλειστικής Οικονομικής Ζώνης (ΑΟΖ);

Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(20 Ιουνίου 2012)

Η Επιτροπή είναι ενήμερη σχετικά με τις δραστηριότητες αναζήτησης πετρελαίου και φυσικού αερίου της Τουρκίας.

H Επιτροπή παραπέμπει στα συμπεράσματα του Συμβουλίου της 5ης Δεκεμβρίου 2011, στα οποία τονίζεται ότι «η Τουρκία πρέπει να δεσμευθεί ανεπιφύλακτα σε καλές σχέσεις γειτονίας και στην ειρηνική επίλυση διαφορών σύμφωνα με το Χάρτη των Ηνωμένων Εθνών, με προσφυγή, εφόσον απαιτείται, στο Διεθνές Δικαστήριο. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο, η Ένωση εκφράζει σοβαρές ανησυχίες και προτρέπει να αποφεύγεται κάθε είδους απειλή ή ενέργεια στρεφόμενη κατά κράτους μέλους, ή αιτία τριβής ή ενέργειες, που θα μπορούσαν να βλάψουν τις καλές σχέσεις γειτονίας και την ειρηνική επίλυση των διαφορών. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, η Ένωση εκφράζει σοβαρές ανησυχίες και απευθύνει έκκληση για την αποφυγή κάθε απειλής ή ενέργειας κατά ενός κράτους μέλους, ή αιτίας προστριβών ή ενεργειών που μπορούν να βλάψουν τις σχέσεις καλής γειτονίας και τον ειρηνικό διακανονισμό διαφορών». Σχετικά με τις διαπραγματεύσεις προσχώρησης, η Επιτροπή θα ήθελε να επιστήσει την προσοχή του Αξιότιμου Μέλους στις διατάξεις που καθορίζονται με σαφήνεια στο διαπραγματευτικό πλαίσιο το οποίο ενέκριναν όλα τα κράτη μέλη το 2005, καθώς και στην απόφαση του Συμβουλίου του Δεκεμβρίου του 2006.

Όσον αφορά διαφορές που αφορούν την οριοθέτηση των θαλάσσιων περιοχών, αυτές θα πρέπει να διευθετηθούν μεταξύ της Κύπρου και της Τουρκίας σύμφωνα με τις αρχές του Δικαίου της Θαλάσσης. Η Επιτροπή δεν είναι σε θέση να επέμβει σχετικά με αυτό το θέμα.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004549/12

to the Commission

Eleni Theocharous (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Prospecting for hydrocarbons by Turkey

The Turkish cabinet has decided to go ahead with prospecting for hydrocarbons on the Greek continental shelf near Kastelorizo and Cyprus, within the latter’s exclusive economic zone, threatening to encroach upon the sovereign rights of EU Member States and infringe the International Law of the Sea, which is part of the <I>acquis communautaire</I>. Through the Turkish state oil company, Turkey has already carried out illegal drilling in the occupied territory of the Republic of Cyprus. What measures if any will the EU take with regard to Turkey?

Does it also intend to enforce measures to defend the sovereign rights of its Member States as part of the reasonable and practical implementation of the principle of solidarity?

Will the companies involved in prospecting to be carried out by Turkey, breaching the Law of the Sea, the <I>acquis communautaire</I> and the international as well as the Community legal order, face sanctions and be excluded from competitions and trade or any other dealings with the EU?

As long as the Turkish Government is infringing upon the sovereign rights of the Republic of Cyprus within the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone, will the European Commission also propose suspending Turkish accession negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of Turkey's gas/oil exploration activities.

The Commission refers to the Council conclusions of 5 December 2011, which underline that ‘Turkey needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations and to the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter, having recourse, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice. In this context, the Union expresses serious concern and urges the avoidance of any kind of threat or action directed against a Member State, or source of friction or actions, which could damage good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes’. Regarding the accession negotiations, the Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the provisions clearly set out in the Negotiating Framework agreed by all Member States in 2005 as well as the Council decision of December 2006.

As regards disputes concerning the delimitation of marine zones, they would need to be settled between Cyprus and Turkey according to the principles of the law of the sea. The Commission is not in a position to intervene in that respect.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004550/12

to the Commission

Jim Higgins (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: State-subsidised routes in Galway City

Could the Commission investigate the tendering process in the provision of state-subsidised routes in Galway City, Ireland?

Is the Commission aware that state aid is given to one semi-state bus operator in the city and that another private operator competes on city routes, but with no state aid?

Could the Commission clarify whether or not the Irish Government needs to provide details as to the amount of the subsidy received by Bus Éireann services in Galway City? Previous attempts to obtain such information have yielded only the total annual subsidy received by Bus Éireann nationally.

Does the Commission know that all routes in Galway City which are operated by Bus Éireann are classed as Public Service Obligation routes, but that routes operated by the private sector are not considered PSO routes?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2012)

The Commission has examined various aspects of the tendering and public procurement processes for bus services in Ireland in the context of its decision to open a formal investigation procedure into state aid to Córas Iompair Éireann Bus Companies (Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann) (188). This investigation is nationwide and hence would include Galway.

As stated in the answer to Written Question P‐003626/2012 (189) regarding school transport in Ireland, a final decision for this case should be adopted in 2012, but in the meantime it is not possible for the Commission to comment further on specific competition aspects of bus services in Ireland, since the investigation is ongoing.

In general, public service obligations for public passenger transport must be governed by a public service contract, according to rules set out in EC Regulation 1370/2007 (190). Such contracts must clearly define the geographical areas concerned by the public service obligation, and the parameters on the basis of which the compensation payment is calculated. However, there is no specific requirement for this compensation to be broken down at city or any other geographical level.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-004551/12

au Conseil

Christine De Veyrac (PPE)

(3 mai 2012)

Objet: Lutte contre le terrorisme solitaire

Les tragiques évènements survenus ces dernières semaines, avec l'assassinat à Toulouse de 7 personnes en mars 2012 par un islamiste radical, et la récente ouverture du procès du présumé auteur des tueries d'Oslo en juillet 2011, sont venus rappeler la vulnérabilité de nos sociétés modernes face au terrorisme et la nécessité de lutter ensemble et plus efficacement contre son expansion.

Il convient en effet de prévoir toutes les dispositions nécessaires pour garantir une meilleure sécurité de l'ensemble de nos concitoyens et ainsi répondre à leurs justes préoccupations.

Dans cette optique, la rencontre organisée le 26 avril 2012 entre les ministres de l'intérieur des 27 États membres et le coordinateur de l'UE pour la lutte contre le terrorisme, M. Gilles de Kerchove, semble avoir avancé quelques pistes de réflexion pour trouver des solutions au phénomène du «terrorisme solitaire».

Outre les questions qui restent en suspens pour la mise en place d'un «PNR européen»(Passenger Name Record), le Conseil peut-il préciser les enseignements qu'il tire de cet échange et les pistes de travail et priorités qu'il compte retenir en vue du réexamen des lignes directrices de la politique antiterroriste européenne?

La Présidence chypriote compte-t-elle parvenir à l'adoption de mesures avant la fin 2012, conformément au programme du trio de la Présidence défini en juin 2011?

Réponse

(22 juin 2012)

Le Conseil a suivi avec inquiétude les tragiques évènements survenus à Toulouse en mars 2012 et en Norvège en juillet 2011.

En ce qui concerne les questions spécifiques de l'Honorable Parlementaire, le Conseil n'a pas tenu de discussion formelle le 26 avril 2012 sur le document de réflexion rédigé par le coordinateur de l'UE pour la lutte contre le terrorisme et portant sur la prévention du terrorisme solitaire (191). Le Conseil n'a, par conséquent, tiré aucune conclusion à ce sujet.

La future présidence chypriote n'a pas encore fourni de présentation détaillée des thèmes auxquels elle a l'intention de s'attacher durant son semestre.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004551/12

to the Council

Christine De Veyrac (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Combating ‘solitary terrorists’

The tragic events of recent weeks, with seven people killed in Toulouse in March 2012 by a radical Islamic fundamentalist, and the start recently of the trial of the alleged perpetrator of the Oslo killings in July 2011, remind us of modern society’s vulnerability to terrorism and the need to combat its expansion more effectively by working together.

All necessary measures should be taken to ensure improved security for all our fellow citizens, in response to their legitimate concerns.

With this in mind, the meeting held on 26 April 2012 between the Ministers for Home Affairs of the 27 Member States and Gilles de Kerchove, the EU’s counter-terrorism coordinator, seems to have put forward various avenues for discussion in order to find solutions to the phenomenon of ‘solitary terrorists’.

Besides the issues still outstanding in regard to the establishment of a ‘European Passenger Name Record’, could the Council state what conclusions it has drawn from this exchange, and what courses of action and priorities it intends to adopt with a view to reviewing the guidelines for the EU’s counter-terrorism policy?

Is the Cypriot Presidency expecting to adopt measures before the end of 2012, in line with the Presidency trio’s programme set out in June 2011?

Reply

(22 June 2012)

The Council followed the tragic events in Toulouse in March 2012 and in Norway in July 2011 with concern.

As far as the Honourable Member's specific questions are concerned, the Council did not hold a formal discussion on 26 April 2012 about the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator's ‘food for thought’ paper on preventing lone actor terrorism (192) and therefore did not draw conclusions on this issue.

The incoming Cypriot Presidency has not yet offered a detailed overview of the topics that it intends to focus on during its Presidency.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004552/12

alla Commissione

Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Partenariato UE-Cina sull'urbanizzazione

Il 14 febbraio 2012 i leader della Cina e dell'Unione Europea hanno annunciato il raggiungimento di un accordo tra le parti per un protocollo relativo all'implementazione di piani di sviluppo urbano sostenibile tra UE e Cina.

La stesura e l'attuazione di un piano di sviluppo urbano sostenibile costituiscono un'importante sfida, da un lato, in ottica ambientale e per l'utilizzo responsabile delle risorse energetiche, dall'altro, dal punto di vista economico per stimolare ed incentivare la ripresa delle economie nazionali dell'UE nel settore della costruzione e dello sviluppo urbano.

Già durante l'Expo di Shangai «Better City, Better Life», è stata ideata e proposta una serie di iniziative e di programmi atti ad assistere i sindaci dei comuni cinesi nella pianificazione e nell'attuazione delle politiche sostenibili. Inoltre la creazione del Forum annuale UE-Cina permetterà una migliore sincronizzazione e un migliore supporto da parte delle autorità europee per l'attuazione di questo piano.

Alla luce di quanto sopra illustrato, può la Commissione far sapere se, oltre alle iniziative sopracitate, ha previsto altri piani d'azione con le autorità e le città cinesi? Saranno comprese tra le azioni di cooperazione anche quelle legate all'housing e all'edilizia popolare, visto che si tratta di questioni fondamentali legate allo sviluppo urbano?

Quali ritiene che potrebbero essere i reali vantaggi di questo protocollo in termini di sviluppo urbano integrato per le città e le aree urbane dell'UE?

Intende presentare una proposta di eventuali strumenti finanziari al fine di sostenere finanziariamente le azioni congiunte e i progetti integrati di sviluppo urbano tra le città cinesi e quelle dell'UE?

Risposta di Günther Oettinger a nome della Commissione

(27 giugno 2012)

Il 3 maggio 2012 la Cina e l'Unione europea hanno firmato una dichiarazione congiunta relativa al partenariato UE-Cina sull'urbanizzazione. Un forum annuale UE-Cina sull'urbanizzazione svolgerà un ruolo direttivo. Il forum dei sindaci UE-Cina sarà una piattaforma importante per sostenere il partenariato.

Il partenariato sosterrà la cooperazione vigente e futura relativa, tra l'altro, a: «Patto dei sindaci», progetto EC-Link, sistema di scambio di emissioni UE-Cina, progetto UE-Cina di riforma della protezione sociale, progetto UE-Cina di gestione del rischio di catastrofi, progetto di governance per le aree urbane e le città satelliti.

A seguito del dialogo con le autorità cinesi possono essere istituite nuove iniziative settoriali da attuarsi sin d'ora. Le aree di lavoro sono quelle indicate nella dichiarazione congiunta, nella quale è inclusa anche la tematica dell'edilizia abitativa.

La Commissione ritiene che il partenariato apporterà benefici reciproci e può potenzialmente recare utili vantaggi anche alle imprese dell'UE.

Il progetto EC-Link sosterrà il forum dei sindaci UE-Cina. Per il momento non è allo studio nessuna altra proposta di nuovi strumenti finanziari per azioni comuni e progetti di sviluppo urbano integrato tra città, in Cina e nell'UE.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004552/12

to the Commission

Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: EU‐China urbanisation partnership

On 14 February 2012, the leaders of China and the European Union announced the conclusion of an agreement for a protocol on the implementation of sustainable urban development plans between China and the EU.

The drafting and implementation of a sustainable urban development plan represents a considerable challenge in terms of the environment and the responsible use of energy resources on the one hand, and on the other, from an economic point of view in stimulating and boosting the recovery of the EU’s national economies in the construction and urban development sector.

A series of initiatives and programmes has already been conceived and proposed, during the ‘Better City, Better Life’ Expo in Shanghai, to assist mayors of Chinese municipalities in the planning and implementation of sustainable policies. Furthermore, the creation of the annual urban China-EU Forum will improve harmonisation and enable EU authorities to provide greater support in implementing this plan.

In view of the above, has the Commission drawn up any other action plans with the Chinese authorities and Chinese cities, besides the aforementioned initiatives? Will these cooperation measures include ones on social housing and accommodation, given that these are fundamental issues in urban development?

What does the Commission consider might be the real benefits of this protocol in terms of integrated urban development for the cities and urban areas of the EU?

Does the Commission intend to present any proposals for financial instruments that would provide financial support for joint measures and integrated urban development projects between cities in China and the EU?

Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

On 3 May 2012 China and the European Union signed a Joint Declaration on the EU‐China Partnership on Urbanisation. An annual EU‐China Urbanisation Forum will play a steering role. EU‐China Mayors’ Forum will be an important platform for supporting the Partnership.

The partnership will support existing and upcoming cooperation on, inter alia, the Covenant of Mayors, EC‐Link Project, EU‐China Emissions Trading Scheme, EU‐China Social Protection Reform Project, EU‐China Disaster Risk Management Project, Satellite cities and Metropolitan Governance Project.

New sectoral initiatives can be drawn up as a consequence of the dialogue with Chinese authorities to be started now. The work areas are those mentioned in the Joint Declaration, and housing is included.

The Commission considers that the partnership will be mutually beneficial and has potential to bring benefit for EU business.

The EC‐Link project will suport the EU‐China Mayors’ Forum. No other proposal for new financial instruments for joint measures and integrated urban development projects between cities in China and the EU is underway for now.

(Ελληνική έκδοση)

Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-004553/12

προς την Επιτροπή

Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE)

(3 Μαΐου 2012)

Θέμα: Διόγκωση περιφερειακών ανισοτήτων — Ανάγκη νέων καινοτόμων εργαλείων στο πλαίσιο του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινωνικού Ταμείου

Η ομοσπονδιακή υπουργός Εργασίας και Κοινωνικών Υποθέσεων της Γερμανίας κα Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen, μέσω συνέντευξής της (193), απηύθυνε κάλεσμα στους άνεργους εξειδικευμένους νέους ευρωπαϊκών κρατών — μελών, τα οποία και παρουσιάζουν ιδιαίτερα υψηλό ποσοστό ανεργίας, να ανταποκριθούν στην αυξημένη ζήτηση της γερμανικής αγοράς εργασίας για ανθρώπινο δυναμικό. Σύμφωνα με τα άρθρο 145 και 147 της Συνθήκης για τη Λειτουργία της ΕΕ (194)«Τα κράτη μέλη και η Ένωση εργάζονται για την ανάπτυξη συντονισμένης στρατηγικής για την απασχόληση, και δη για να προάγουν τη δημιουργία εξειδικευμένου εργατικού δυναμικού» και «η Ένωση συμβάλλει στην επίτευξη υψηλού επιπέδου απασχόλησης ενθαρρύνοντας τη συνεργασία μεταξύ κρατών μελών, υποστηρίζοντας και, εάν χρειάζεται, συμπληρώνοντας τη δράση τους». Δεδομένων των υφιστάμενων ευρύτατων περιφερειακών ανισοτήτων εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης σε επίπεδο ανάπτυξης, παραγωγικότητας και απασχόλησης και βάσει του κανονισμού (195) του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινωνικού Ταμείου για την προώθηση και ενσωμάτωση καινοτόμων δραστηριοτήτων στο πεδίο του, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:

Προβλέπονται νέες ενέργειες οργανωμένης κινητικότητας εργατικού δυναμικού σε διακρατικό επίπεδο;

Θεωρεί πως θα μπορούσε να υπάρξει σύμπραξη δύο χωρών στο πρότυπο των διασυνοριακών συμπράξεων της EURES (196);

Προβλέπεται γενικότερα η ανάπτυξη κάποιας νέας μεθόδου ή εργαλείου προκειμένου να διευκολυνθεί η αντιστοίχιση τόσο των αναγκών της γερμανικής ή άλλης αγοράς εργασίας όσο και αυτών των κρατών-μελών με αυξημένη ανεργία στους νέους;

Ποια τα παραδείγματα και οι βέλτιστες πρακτικές στο πλαίσιο καινοτόμων διακρατικών δραστηριοτήτων, ανταλλαγών και προγραμμάτων κινητικότητας κατά την προγραμματική περίοδο 2007-2013;

Προσφέρουν οι διογκούμενες περιφερειακές ανισότητες νέες ανάγκες για καινοτόμες δράσεις, ενόψει των προτάσεων για την έναρξη μίας νέας γενιάς προγραμμάτων πολιτικής συνοχής, το 2014;

Απάντηση του κ. Andor εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής

(26 Ιουνίου 2012)

Η Επιτροπή δρομολόγησε πρόσφατα το πιλοτικό έργο «Η πρώτη σου δουλειά μέσω του EURES» με σκοπό να διαπιστώσει την αποτελεσματικότητα της εξατομικευμένης υπηρεσίας εξεύρεσης εργασίας σε συνδυασμό με τη χρηματοδοτική υποστήριξη. Έως το 2013 προβλέπεται η τοποθέτηση 5 000 νέων σε θέσεις εργασίας. Για την περίοδο 2014-2020, η Επιτροπή πρότεινε στοχοθετημένα προγράμματα κινητικότητας, στο πλαίσιο του προγράμματος για την κοινωνική αλλαγή και την καινοτομία (ΠΚΑΚ), τα οποία βασίζονται σε παρόμοια προσέγγιση.

Οι διασυνοριακές συμπράξεις EURES φέρνουν σε επαφή τις παραμεθόριες περιφέρειες γειτονικών χωρών με στόχο την από κοινού παροχή υπηρεσιών για το δίκτυο EURES. Ωστόσο, αυτό αποτελεί μία μόνο πλευρά των πιθανών τρόπων συνεργασίας των κρατών μελών, τα οποία στο πλαίσιο του EURES μπορούν να αναπτύξουν διάφορες μορφές συνεργασίας.

Στην πρόσφατη «δέσμη μέτρων για την απασχόληση» η Επιτροπή περιέγραψε τον τρόπο με τον οποίο θα μεταρρυθμιστεί το EURES, ώστε να καταστεί ένα μέσο για την απασχόληση το οποίο θα διευκολύνει τη ροή κινητικότητας διαφόρων ομάδων-στόχων στο εσωτερικό της ΕΕ, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των νέων, μεταξύ όλων των κρατών μελών είτε διαθέτουν πλεόνασμα είτε έλλειψη εξειδικευμένου εργατικού δυναμικού.

Εντός της περιόδου προγραμματισμού 2007-2013 του ΕΚΤ, θα χρησιμοποιηθούν 3 δισ. ευρώ τουλάχιστον για τη διακρατική συνεργασία. Η προκαταρκτική αξιολόγηση του «IDA — ένταξη μέσω ανταλλαγής» (197), ενός προγράμματος που βοηθά να αυξηθούν οι πιθανότητες επιτυχίας των μειονεκτούντων νέων στην αγορά εργασίας μέσω της απόκτησης επαγγελματικής πείρας σε άλλες χώρες της ΕΕ, είναι εντυπωσιακή (198).

Η καινοτομία και η κοινωνική καινοτομία καλύπτεται από ένα ειδικό άρθρο του σχεδίου κανονισμού του ΕΚΤ για την περίοδο 2014-2020. Η Επιτροπή θα αναλάβει ενεργό ρόλο όσον αφορά την υποστήριξη των κρατών μελών για την προώθηση καινοτόμων ενεργειών, ιδίως μέσω της δημιουργίας ικανοτήτων, της αμοιβαίας μάθησης, της δημιουργίας δικτύων και της διάδοσης καλών πρακτικών και μεθοδολογιών, καθώς και, υπό ορισμένες συνθήκες, μέσω της αυξημένης χρηματοδότησης.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004553/12

to the Commission

Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Growing regional inequalities — Need for innovative new tools in the framework of the European Social Fund

In an interview (199), the German Federal Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen, addressed an appeal to unemployed young people with specialised skills living in EU Member States with high levels of unemployment, urging them to respond to the German labour market’s increased labour demands. According to Articles 145 and 147 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (200)‘Member States and the Union shall, in accordance with this Title, work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment and particularly for promoting a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce’ and ‘The Union shall contribute to a high level of employment by encouraging cooperation between Member States and by supporting and, if necessary, complementing their action.’ Given the existing extremely wide regional inequalities within the European Union in terms of development, productivity and employment and the provisions of the regulation on the European Social Fund (201) regarding the promotion and mainstreaming of innovative activities in its remit, can the Commission answer the following:

Are any new initiatives anticipated with respect to organised labour mobility between Member States?

Does it consider that there could be a partnership between two countries on the model of the EURES cross-border partnerships? (202)

In general, is it anticipated that a new method or mechanism will be developed to facilitate the harmonisation between the requirements of the German or other labour markets and the requirements of Member States with high levels of youth unemployment?

What examples and best practices are there in the context of innovative crossborder activities, exchanges and mobility programmes for the 2007‐2013 programming period?

Are the growing regional inequalities creating new needs for innovative action in view of the proposals for the commencement of a new generation of political cohesion programmes in 2014?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

The Commission has recently launched the pilot project ‘Your first EURES job’ to test the effectiveness of a customised job placement service combined with financial support. Until 2013 it is planned to place 5 000 young people in a job. For the period 2014‐2020 the Commission has proposed within the Programme for Social Change and Innovation (PSCI) targeted mobility schemes which follow a similar approach.

EURES cross-border partnerships bring together the border regions of neighbouring countries with the objective to jointly provide EURES services. This is however only one option how Member States can cooperate. Within EURES they can develop other cooperation forms.

In its recent ‘Employment Package’ the Commission has outlined how EURES will be reformed to become an employment instrument facilitating intra-EU mobility flows of various target groups, including young people, between all Member States with shortages or surpluses of skilled labour.

Within the 2007-2013 ESF programming period, at least EUR 3 billion will be used for transnational cooperation. The preliminary assessment of ‘IDA — Integration through exchange’ (203), a programme which helps to improve the chances of disadvantaged young people on the labour market through work experience in other EU countries is striking (204).

Innovation and social innovation is covered by a dedicated article of the draft ESF regulation 2014‐2020. The Commission will play an active role in supporting Member States to promote innovative actions, in particular through capacity building, mutual learning, establishing networks and disseminating good practices and methodologies and under some conditions with increased financing.

(České znění)

Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-004554/12

Komisi

Andrea Češková (ECR)

(3. května 2012)

Předmět: Hodnocení projektů z hlediska čerpání finančních prostředků EU v rámci kontroly Evropského účetního dvora

Vzhledem k tomu, že čerpání finančních prostředků z evropských fondů je často doprovázeno vysokou mírou chybovosti a že Evropský účetní dvůr ve svých výročních zprávách opětovně shledává, že tyto chyby jsou administrativního charakteru, si dovoluji Komisi položit následující otázky a prosím o jejich zodpovězení:

Nemyslí si Komise, že by snížení administrativní zátěže a zjednodušení formálních pravidel pro příjemce vedlo ke snížení míry chybovosti?

Nemyslí si Komise, že je lepší brát v úvahu smysluplnost projektu a jeho společenský přínos než ho posuzovat podle takových kritérií, jako je například včasnost čerpání, formální vyúčtování či administrativní zpracování?

Odpověď Johannese Hahna jménem Komise

(21. června 2012)

1.

V

1.

V

pracovním dokumentu útvarů Komise z roku 2011 o analýze chyb v politice soudržnosti (205) se uvádí, že nedodržení pravidel způsobilosti je jednou z nejběžnějších vyčíslitelných chyb (39 %) (206) zjištěných Účetním dvorem. Pravidla způsobilosti jsou v současnosti stanovena na vnitrostátní úrovni nebo na úrovni programů, aby je vnitrostátní orgány mohly přizpůsobovat zvláštním potřebám programů a stávajícím vnitrostátním a regionálním pravidlům. Přestože byl tento systém ve srovnání s obdobím 2000‐2006 zjednodušen, některé členské státy stanovily pravidla, která jsou přísnější než pravidla EU. To zvyšuje složitost a riziko chyb pro příjemce. V posledních letech Komise dále zjednodušila provádění programů, aby snížila administrativní zátěž příjemců a riziko výskytu chyb. Ve svých návrzích na období 2014‐2020 (207) Komise navrhuje další zjednodušení spočívající v harmonizaci pravidel pro několik fondů, ve zvýšení flexibility a proporcionality a ve vyjasnění pravidel za účelem zvýšení právní jistoty. Dalšího zjednodušení pravidel hodlá Komise dosáhnout probíhající revizí směrnic o zadávání veřejných zakázek. V souhrnu tato opatření přispějí k dalšímu snížení rizika výskytu chyb a ke zvýšení míry jistoty poskytované vnitrostátními realizačními systémy.

2.

Oba požadavky jsou důležité a nezbytné: projekt musí přispívat k cílům programu a výdaje musí být zákonné a řádné, aby byl zajištěn správný poměr mezi kvalitou a cenou, transparentnost a rovné zacházení. Na období 2014‐2020 Komise navrhuje zjednodušení a zaměření na výsledky, jasné programové cíle a výběrová kritéria pro projekty, které budou tyto cíle odrážet, dále pak účinné sledování a vyhodnocování.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004554/12

to the Commission

Andrea Češková (ECR)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Evaluation of projects with regard to the drawing EU financial resources within the framework of monitoring by the European Court of Auditors

Given that the drawing of financial resources from European funds is often accompanied by a high level of errors, and that the European Court of Auditors repeatedly finds in its annual reports that these errors are of an administrative character, I would like to put the following questions to the Commission:

Does the Commission not think that reducing red tape and simplifying the formal rules for the recipient would lead to a reduction in the level of errors?

Does the Commission not think that it is better to consider how meaningful the project is and how it can contribute to society rather than to judge the project according to criteria such as, for example, the punctuality of the drawing of funds, formal accounting or administrative processing?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

1.	In the Commission's staff working document of 2011 on analysing the errors in cohesion policy

1.	In the Commission's staff working document of 2011 on analysing the errors in cohesion policy

 (208), non-compliance with eligibility rules is one of the most common quantifiable errors reported by the Court of Auditors (39%) (209). Eligibility rules are currently set at national or programme level, so national authorities can adapt them to the specific needs of a programme and can align them to existing national and regional rules. Even though this is a simplification compared to the 2000-06 period, some Member States have set rules which are stricter than the EU rules. This increases the complexity and the risk of errors for beneficiaries. In recent years, the Commission has further simplified programme implementation, aiming to reduce administrative burdens on beneficiaries and the risk of errors. In its proposals for the 2014-20 period (210), the Commission proposes further simplification through harmonising rules for several funds, increasing flexibility and proportionality and clarifying rules to improve legal certainty. The Commission is also revising the public procurement directives to simplify the rules. As a whole, these measures will help to further reduce the risk of errors and to increase the assurance given by national delivery systems.

2.

Both elements are important and necessary: a project must contribute to the objectives of the programme and expenditure has to be legal and regular to secure value-for-money, transparency and equal treatment. For 2014-20, the Commission proposes simplifications and a focus on results, with clear objectives for programmes, selection criteria for projects that reflect these objectives and effective monitoring and evaluation.

(České znění)

Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-004555/12

Komisi

Andrea Češková (ECR)

(3. května 2012)

Předmět: Kontrola čerpání finančních prostředků z fondů EU v ČR

Na zasedání Výboru pro rozpočtovou kontrolu v listopadu 2011 předložil Evropský účetní dvůr svou výroční zprávu za rok 2010. Česká republika byla zmíněna v souvislosti s vysokou mírou chybovosti při čerpání evropských fondů a je nyní předmětem diskuze týkající se pozastavení plateb u operačních programů. Vzhledem k tomu, že většina chyb byla Evropským účetním dvorem shledána jako nevyčíslitelná a pouze administrativního charakteru, nejedná se o závažné chyby.

V této souvislosti si dovoluji položit Komisi následující otázky a požádat o jejich individuální zodpovězení:

Mohla by Komise vysvětlit, proč mají být zastaveny dotace z evropských fondů, jestliže se jedná převážně o chyby administrativního charakteru?

Jakým způsobem chce Komise platby z evropských fondů pozastavit?

Mohla by Komise konkrétně jmenovat operační programy, kterých se chybovost a pozastavení finančních prostředků týká?

Nemyslí si Komise, že by měla respektovat zjištění Evropského účetního dvora a držet se jeho doporučení?

Odpověď Johannese Hahna jménem Komise

(26. června 2012)

1.

Komise může na základě článku 92 nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1083/2006 rozhodnout o pozastavení všech průběžných plateb nebo jejich částí, jestliže v řídicím a kontrolním systému programu existují závažné nedostatky. Rozhodnutí o pozastavení je založeno na všech příslušných informacích, které má Komise k dispozici, například na zjištěních Účetního dvora a na výsledcích auditů Komise a výsledcích vnitrostátní auditů. Evropský parlament ve svých usneseních k absolutoriím za roky 2009 a 2010 požádal Komisi, aby v případě zjištění nedostatků jednala ve věci přerušení plateb důrazně (211).

2.

V

případě přerušení plateb zasílá schvalující osoba členskému státu dopis o přerušení, čímž mu umožňuje přezkoumat zjištěné nedostatky a přijmout příslušná nápravná opatření. Rozhodnutí pozastavit platby přijme Komise tehdy, jsou-li nedostatky závažné a členský stát nepřijal žádné opatření k jejich nápravě.

3.

Pokud se jedná o Českou republiku, byly zaznamenány nedostatky horizontální povahy, které se týkají ověřování prováděných řídícími orgány, funkcí auditního orgánu, nápravných opatření přijatých v případě zjištění nesrovnalostí, dále pak zpětného získávání vyplacených částek a statutu veřejných zaměstnanců. Byly zjištěny také problémy týkající se konkrétních programů. Pověřená schvalující osoba rozhodla, že budoucí žádosti o průběžné platby pro všechny programy nebudou zpracovány, dokud vnitrostátní orgány nepřijmou nezbytná nápravná opatření.

4.	Ke dnešnímu dni nebylo dosud provedeno žádné pozastavení. Komise je toho názoru, že pokud jde o dosud přijatá opatření, dodržela zjištění a doporučení Účetního dvora.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004555/12

to the Commission

Andrea Češková (ECR)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Control of the drawing of financial resources from EU funds in the Czech Republic

The European Court of Auditors presented its annual report for 2010 at the meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Control in November 2011. The Czech Republic was mentioned in relation to a high level of errors made when drawing from European funds, and it is now the subject of a discussion relating to the suspension of payments for operational programmes. Given that most of the errors were found by the European Court of Auditors to be non‐quantifiable and merely administrative in nature, these are not major errors.

In this connection, I would like to ask the Commission the following questions and request that they be answered individually:

Can the Commission explain why grants from European funds should be suspended if the errors are mostly administrative in nature?

What method is the Commission going to use to suspend payments from European funds?

Can the Commission name the specific operational programmes to which the errors and the suspension of financial resources relate?

Does the Commission not think that it should respect the findings of the European Court of Auditors and adhere to its recommendations?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

1.

The Commission may decide, based on Article 92 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 to suspend all or part of the interim payments in a situation where there is a serious deficiency in the management and control system. A decision to suspend is based on all relevant information at the disposal of the Commission, such as findings of the Court of Auditors, and the results of Commission and national audits. The European Parliament, in its 2009 and 2010 discharge resolutions, requested the Commission to take a strong approach on interrupting payments as soon as deficiencies are detected

1.

The Commission may decide, based on Article 92 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 to suspend all or part of the interim payments in a situation where there is a serious deficiency in the management and control system. A decision to suspend is based on all relevant information at the disposal of the Commission, such as findings of the Court of Auditors, and the results of Commission and national audits. The European Parliament, in its 2009 and 2010 discharge resolutions, requested the Commission to take a strong approach on interrupting payments as soon as deficiencies are detected

 (212).

2.

In the event of an interruption, the authorising officer sends an interruption letter enabling the Member State to examine the suggested deficiencies and to take the appropriate corrective actions. A decision to suspend payments will be taken by the Commission when the deficiencies are serious and no corrective actions have been taken by the Member State.

3.

For the Czech Republic, deficiencies are noted with a horizontal nature relating to management verifications, the audit function, treatment of irregularities and recovery procedures and the statute of government employees. There are also programme specific issues. The authorising officer by delegation decided that future applications for interim payment for all programmes would not be processed until the national authorities had taken the necessary corrective measures.

4.	To date, no suspension has been implemented. The Commission is of the opinion that, with the steps taken to date, it has respected the findings and recommendations of the Court of Auditors.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004556/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Aspartame: possibile sospensione dal mercato e trasparenza per i consumatori europei

L'aspartame è da tempo al centro di una grossa polemica: sono molte le voci e le ricerche scientifiche che, a partire dalla sua approvazione negli Stati Uniti e poi in Europa trent'anni fa come dolcificante e additivo in numerosissimi cibi e farmaci, hanno messo in evidenza le possibili conseguenze negative sulla salute umana — in particolare il suo effetto cancerogeno. La sua commercializzazione, infatti, si basa su ricerche statunitensi considerate da molti controverse, non indipendenti e finanziate dall'azienda produttrice stessa: la stessa «U.S. Food and Drug Administration», prima dell'inaspettata approvazione nel 1981, le aveva ritenute scorrette e poco affidabili sospendendo e revocando più volte l'autorizzazione dell'aspartame. In seguito, tutti gli altri Stati che hanno approvato l'aspartame si sono basati sulle stesse controverse ricerche statunitensi degli anni Settanta. Tuttavia, alcuni scienziati, medici e ricercatori cominciarono ad associare alcune patologie al consumo di aspartame. Tra questi, l'Istituto Ramazzini di Bologna (IT), noto per la sua indipendenza dall'industria, che nel suo studio autofinanziato del 2005 sostiene come l'aspartame sia chiaramente un agente cancerogeno.

La Commissione europea ha dunque richiesto nel maggio del 2011 all'EFSA di rivalutare la sicurezza dell'aspartame entro settembre 2012: data la potenziale pericolosità per i consumatori europei di questo edulcorante contenuto in moltissimi alimenti e farmaci e la dubbia validità delle ricerche statunitensi degli anni Settanta, non ritiene la Commissione opportuno sospendere temporaneamente il prodotto dal mercato in attesa del riesame dell'EFSA?

Inoltre, anche la dose giornaliera di aspartame fissata dall'OMS negli anni ' 70 a 40 mg per Kg pare non essere condivisa da tutto il mondo scientifico: sempre l'istituto Ramazzini ha recentemente dimostrato che il rischio di cancro sarebbe associato a una dose di 20 mg per Kg, cioè la metà di quella ammessa. Ritiene la Commissione di dover prendere misure affinché anche quest'aspetto venga rivalutato e la quantità di aspartame presente negli alimenti venga indicata chiaramente sulle etichette, in modo da rendere i cittadini europei più consapevoli e in grado di tutelare la propria salute?

Risposta di John Dalli a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La dose giornaliera ammissibile (DGA) di aspartame pari a 40 mg/kg di peso corporeo è stata stabilita dal comitato scientifico dell'alimentazione umana (SCF) nel 1984. Nel 2002, l'SCF ha esaminato più di 500 documenti della letteratura scientifica pubblicati dopo la prima valutazione e ha concluso che non vi sono elementi che giustificano la necessità di rivedere il risultato della precedente valutazione dei rischi.

Nel 2005 la Commissione ha chiesto all'Autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare (EFSA) di valutare lo studio dell'istituto Ramazzini e di indicare se fosse necessario rivedere il precedente parere sull'aspartame formulato dall'SCF nel 2002. L'EFSA ha concluso che non vi era motivo di rivedere la DGA stabilita dall'SCF.

Nel 2011 è stato inoltre chiesto all' EFSA di fornire assistenza scientifica e tecnica in relazione alle pubblicazioni più recenti sulla sicurezza dell'aspartame. L'EFSA ha concluso che le nuove informazioni non hanno dato motivo di riconsiderare le precedenti valutazioni dell'edulcorante.

La Commissione ha chiesto all'EFSA di effettuare una nuova valutazione completa della sicurezza dell'aspartame entro la fine di settembre 2012. Sulla base dell'esito della nuova valutazione, se necessario, verranno adottati adeguati provvedimenti per proteggere la sicurezza dei consumatori.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004556/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Aspartame: possible removal from the market and transparency for European consumers

Aspartame has long been at the centre of a major controversy: there have been many rumours and scientific studies since its U.S. and European approval 30 years ago as a sweetener and additive in many foods and drugs. These studies have highlighted the possible negative consequences for human health — especially its carcinogenic effect. Its commercialisation, in fact, is based on American studies considered by many to be controversial, since the studies were not independent but were funded by the manufacturing company itself. Before its unexpected approval in 1981, even the American Food and Drug Administration had rejected the studies as flawed and unreliable, suspending and revoking the authorisation of aspartame on many occasions. Subsequently, all other countries that approved aspartame based this decision on the same controversial American research from the 1970s. However, some scientists, doctors and researchers were beginning to associate certain pathologies with the consumption of aspartame. Among them the Ramazzini Institute of Bologna (IT), known for its independence from the industry, which, in its self‐funded study of 2005, argued that aspartame is clearly a carcinogenic agent.

In May 2011, the Commission therefore requested the European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA) to re‐evaluate the safety of aspartame by September 2012. Given this sweetener’s potential danger to European consumers — it is contained in many foods and drugs — and the dubious validity of the 1970s American study, does the Commission not consider it appropriate to temporarily suspend the product from the market pending the EFSA’s re‐examination?

In addition, even the daily dose of aspartame set by the WHO in the 1970s of 40 mg per kg does not seem to be shared by the entire scientific world: the Ramazzini Institute recently demonstrated that the risk of cancer appears to be associated with a dose of 20 mg per kg, in other words, half of the permitted dose.

Does the Commission not think it should take measures to ensure that this aspect, too, is reassessed and that the quantity of aspartame present in food be clearly indicated on labels in order to make European citizens more aware and able to protect their own health?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of aspartame of 40 mg/kg bw was established by the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) in 1984. In 2002 the SCF reviewed over 500 papers published in the scientific literature since the original evaluation and concluded that there was no evidence to suggest a need to revise the outcome of the earlier risk assessment.

In 2005, the Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to assess the study of the Ramazzini Institute and to advise whether it is necessary to revise the previous opinion on aspartame carried out by the SCF in 2002. EFSA concluded that there was no reason to revise the ADI established by the SCF.

In addition, in 2011, EFSA was requested to provide scientific and technical assistance in relation to more recent publications about the safety of aspartame. EFSA concluded that the new information did not give reason to reconsider the previous evaluations of the sweetener.

The Commission has asked EFSA to perform a full re-evaluation of the safety of aspartame by the end of September 2012. Based on the outcome of the full re-evaluation, if needed, appropriate action will be taken to protect the safety of the consumer.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004557/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Fondo di risoluzione

Il Vicepresidente della BCE, in una conferenza tenutasi a Francoforte, ha dichiarato e auspicato: «La sequenza è ora muoverci il più possibile verso un regime di risoluzione (bancaria) paneuropeo che sia armonizzato». Ha poi aggiunto: «Per quanto riguarda le banche di rilevanza sistemica — ce ne sono trentasei — abbiamo veramente bisogno di un fondo di risoluzione, perché questo è il solo modo per superare il tema spinoso del condividere il fardello in una crisi».

Nella sua relazione semestrale sulla stabilità finanziaria, presentata alla vigilia della riunione del FMI e della Banca Mondiale svoltasi a Washington dal 20 al 22 aprile scorsi, il FMI ha accennato ad un imminente meltdown da 3,8 mila miliardi di dollari delle banche della zona euro. Un alto funzionario che ha partecipato agli incontri, tuttavia, ha riferito all'agenzia EIR che circolava anche una versione precedente con un quadro molto più preoccupante, con una stima di 9 mila miliardi di dollari (6,8 mila miliardi di euro) per la cifra necessaria a salvare le banche private europee nel 2012.

È la Commissione in grado di indicare da quali soggetti dovrebbe essere finanziato il fondo di risoluzione al quale accenna il Vicepresidente della BCE?

Può confermare le cifre dichiarate nella relazione semestrale del FMI relative alle banche della zona euro?

C'è un rapporto diretto tra l'eventuale ammontare del fondo di risoluzione e le cifre pubblicate nella summenzionata relazione del FMI?

Intende presentare proposte per far fronte a questa drammatica e critica realtà?

Risposta di Olli Rehn a nome della Commissione

(28 giugno 2012)

Il 6 giugno 2012 la Commissione ha pubblicato una proposta legislativa su un quadro di gestione per il risanamento e la risoluzione delle crisi degli enti creditizi. Il regime proposto fornirà alle autorità gli strumenti per intervenire con sufficiente anticipo e rapidità presso un ente creditizio in effettivo o probabile dissesto al fine di assicurare la continuità delle sue funzioni essenziali, minimizzando l'impatto del processo di risoluzione della crisi sulla stabilità finanziaria e provvedendo affinché azionisti e creditori sopportino le perdite in modo adeguato. La proposta contiene accordi di finanziamento sull'uso dei fondi disponibili a livello nazionale per la risoluzione delle crisi e assicura un'adeguata ripartizione degli oneri tra pubblico e privato.

Per quanto riguarda l'ultima relazione sulla stabilità finanziaria mondiale, il Fondo monetario internazionale prevede (in uno scenario sfavorevole) che le banche della zona euro saranno obbligate a ridurre le attività per un importo pari a 3,8 trilioni di dollari (circa il 10 % del loro bilancio globale) entro la fine del 2013. La stima va considerata nel contesto delle ipotesi del Fondo, ossia senza tener conto di diverse misure recentemente adottate, tra le quali l'operazione di rifinanziamento a lungo termine della Banca centrale europea e i risultati preliminari del piano di ricapitalizzazione dell'Autorità bancaria europea (ABE). Finora nessun dato definitivo dimostra che il processo di riduzione dell'indebitamento nell'insieme dell'UE sia diventato eccessivo o disordinato e quindi penalizzante per l'economia reale.

A lungo termine, l'approfondita revisione della regolamentazione e della vigilanza finanziaria nell'UE migliorerà la resilienza dei mercati finanziari in generale e misure quali il piano di ricapitalizzazione dell'ABE dovranno aumentare la resilienza del settore finanziario in particolare.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004557/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Resolution fund

At a conference held in Frankfurt, the Vice-President of the European Central Bank (ECB) declared and hoped that ‘The sequence now is to go as much as possible for a pan-European [banking] resolution regime that is harmonised’. He then added ‘Also for the biggest systemically relevant banks — there are around 36 big banks — we really need a resolution fund, because that is the only way of overcoming the very thorny question of burden-sharing in a crisis’.

In its half-yearly report on financial stability, made public on the eve of the IMF-World Bank meeting held in Washington D.C. from 20 to 22 April 2012, the IMF warned of an imminent USD 3.8 trillion meltdown of the euro area banks. However, a senior official attending the meetings told the Executive Intelligence Review that an earlier draft version existed which had painted a much worse picture, concluding that an estimated USD 9 trillion (EUR 6.8 trillion) would be needed to bail out private European banks this year.

Is the Commission in a position to indicate which bodies may finance the resolution fund mentioned by the Vice-President of the ECB?

Can the Commission confirm the figures mentioned in the IMF’s half-yearly report which relate to the euro area banks?

Is there a direct link between the possible total amount of the resolution fund and the figures published in the aforementioned IMF report?

Does the Commission intend to present proposals to tackle these dramatic and critical circumstances?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2012)

On 6 June 2012 the Commission published a draft legislative proposal on a crisis management framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions. The proposed regime will provide authorities with tools to intervene sufficiently early and quickly in a failing or likely to fail credit institution to ensure the continuity of its essential functions, while minimising the impact of the resolution process on financial stability and ensuring that shareholders and creditors bear appropriate losses. The proposal includes financing arrangements regarding the use of funds available at national level for resolution and ensure appropriate public-private burden sharing.

As for the latest Global Financial Stability Report, the International Monetary Fund estimates (under its adverse scenario) that Euro Area banks would be forced to reduce their assets by USD 3.8 trillion (or about 10% of their total balance sheet) by end-2013. This estimate should be considered against the background of its underlying assumptions, i.e. not accounting for several recent policy measures, including the European Central Bank's Very Long Term Refinancing Operation and the preliminary evidence on the European Banking Authority (EBA) recapitalisation plan. There is no clear-cut evidence so far that the deleveraging process in the EU as a whole has become excessive or disorderly which could be detrimental for the real economy.

In the long term, the fundamental overhaul of financial regulation and supervision in the EU is expected to improve the resilience of financial markets in general, and measures like the recapitalisation plan of the EBA should increase the resilience of the banking sector in particular.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004558/12

alla Commissione

Cristiana Muscardini (PPE)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: L'inferno di Dadaab

Dadaab, il campo profughi più grande al mondo, accoglie 400 000 persone che vivono dentro capanne di sterpi in un deserto tempestato dal vento e dalla polvere accecante. Al confine tra Kenia e Somalia, Dadaab è diventato il simbolo più crudele di ogni calamità del Corno d'Africa. Tutti i giorni arrivano più di mille disperati che scappano dalle atrocità della follia islamista di Al Shabaab, dalla fame e dalla siccità e dai pirati, che uccidono, sequestrano aiuti umanitari e rapiscono rappresentanti delle ONG.

In principio sembrava che le Corti islamiche, tanto corteggiate e comprese dalle istituzioni internazionali e dalla stessa UE, avessero dato l'illusione di un forzato equilibrio. Poi la furia folle degli Shabaab ha affondato il paese nel caos, nell'orrore e nella miseria. Usano la religione come alibi, ma sparano sui poveri che accettano aiuti, mozzano braccia e gambe e terrorizzano la popolazione. Chi ce la fa fugge a Dadaab, trasferendosi da un inferno a un'altro. Il personale addetto al campo non può fare miracoli e gli ospedali organizzati con mezzi di fortuna non riescono a far fronte a tutti i bisogni che si presentano quotidianamente.

1.	È la Commissione presente con le strutture di aiuto umanitario?

2.	In caso affermativo, quanto personale è impegnato nelle operazioni di soccorso in questo campo?

3.	Qual è il contributo finanziario concesso?

4.	A quanto ammontano gli aiuti forniti alla Somalia nel 2011 e quelli impegnati per il 2012?

5.	È in grado di monitorare gli eventuali risultati di questo sostegno?

Risposta di Kristalina Georgieva a nome della Commissione

(27 giugno 2012)

La Commissione ha risposto con determinazione alla crisi dei rifugiati che colpisce il Corno d’Africa finanziando operazioni umanitarie, tramite i partner in Kenya e nel campo profughi di Dadaab, per un importo di 14 milioni di EUR nel 2011 e di 16,4 milioni di EUR impegnati finora per il 2012. I fondi finanziano un’operazione multisettoriale per la fornitura di ricoveri, derrate alimentari, protezione, risorse idriche, servizi igienico-sanitari e assistenza medica.

Le ONG internazionali, l’ONU e la Croce rossa sono presenti a Dadaab con numerosi operatori, sia nazionali che stranieri, ma è difficile precisare le figure professionali dato il loro rapido avvicendarsi e la precarietà della situazione. Gli operatori umanitari dovrebbero comunque aggirarsi in totale tra i 1 500 e i 2 000 addetti.

La Commissione continua inoltre a sostenere l’impegno umanitario in Somalia. Nel 2011 la DG ECHO ha impegnato 77 milioni di EUR (che hanno aiutato ad assistere più di 2 milioni di persone) e nel 2012 sono stati finora impegnati 40 milioni di EUR.

Per risolvere i problemi di monitoraggio, l’UE cerca di incanalare gli aiuti in modo diversificato collaborando con partner più flessibili che utilizzano diversi dispositivi di controllo e di gestione delle emergenze. L’UE ha commissionato una serie di audit e di valutazioni indipendenti nei settori di intervento in Somalia e ha adottato sistemi di monitoraggio che prevedono diversi livelli di controllo ex-ante o ex-post. Durante la realizzazione dei progetti vengono condotti controlli e valutazioni regolari con visite sul posto e valutazioni intermedie e finali. Va comunque ricordato che il conflitto in corso e l’insicurezza in certe regioni della Somalia possono impedire alla Commissione di operare sul posto e di monitorare i progetti.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004558/12

to the Commission

Cristiana Muscardini (PPE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: The hell of Dadaab

Dadaab, the world’s largest refugee camp, is home to 400 000 people who live in huts built from twigs in a desert ravaged by wind and blinding dust. Situated on the border of Kenya and Somalia, Dadaab has come to symbolise, in the most pitiful way, every disaster to affect the Horn of Africa. Every day, over 1 000 displaced people arrive there, fleeing the atrocities committed by the militant Islamist group Al-Shabaab, the ongoing famine and drought, and pirates who kill, steal humanitarian aid and abduct representatives of non-governmental organisations.

At first it appeared that the Islamic Courts Union, so courted and accepted by international institutions and the EU itself, had created the illusion of a strained equilibrium. Then the wild violence of Al-Shabaab militants plunged the country into chaos, causing terror and poverty. While claiming to act in the name of religion, they shoot poverty-stricken people accepting aid, chop off people’s arms and legs and terrorise the population. Those who survive seek refuge in Dadaab, exchanging one hell for another. The camp staff cannot perform miracles and the makeshift hospitals are not able to cope with all the demands placed on them every day.

1.	Does the Commission have a presence alongside the humanitarian aid agencies?

2.	If so, how many members of staff are involved in the relief operations in this camp?

3.	What is the level of its financial contribution?

4.	How much aid was granted to Somalia in 2011 and how much has been earmarked for 2012?

5.	Is the Commission able to monitor any results of this aid?

Answer given by Ms Georgieva on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

The Commission has massively responded to the refugee crisis affecting the Horn of Africa, funding humanitarian operations through its partners in Kenya/Dadaab with EUR 14 million in 2011 and EUR 16.4 million mobilised so far in 2012. The funding covers a multi-sectorial operation with provision of shelter, food assistance, protection, water, sanitation, hygiene and health.

There is a considerable expatriate and national staff presence in Dadaab from International NGOs, the UN and the Red Cross. Precise staffing figures are hard to establish as they fluctuate with the high turn over due to the volatile situation. However, humanitarian staff is estimated between 1 500 and 2 000.

The Commission also continues to sustain humanitarian efforts in Somalia. EUR 77 million were committed by ECHO in 2011 (contributing to assisting over 2 million people). EUR 40 million are so far allocated in 2012.

To address the monitoring challenges the EU tries to diversify the channels of its aid working with more flexible partners which have put in place many diversified contingency and control mechanisms. The EU has commissioned a number of independent audits and evaluations on its sectors of intervention in Somalia and has put in place control systems consisting of several layers of checks through ex-ante or ex-post controls. During the project implementation, regular monitoring and evaluations are carried out through field visits and mid‐term and end-term assessments. It is however important to underline that the ongoing conflict and the insecurity in certain areas of Somalia may have a restraining impact on the capacity of the Commission to access the field and monitor projects.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004559/12

alla Commissione

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(3 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Caso Trentino NGN

La Provincia autonoma di Trento, nel quadro della comunicazione intitolata «Una strategia per una crescita intelligente, sostenibile e inclusiva», ha deliberato lo sviluppo delle reti di accesso in fibra ottica sul territorio provinciale (delibera di giunta, n. 2774 del 14 dicembre 2011).

La Provincia autonoma di Trento ha provveduto alla costituzione di una società a capitale misto pubblico-privato, denominata «Trentino NGN S.r.l. a socio unico». La società in oggetto è compartecipata poi da Trentino Sviluppo, agenzia a sua volta creata dalla Provincia autonoma di Trento, con l'obiettivo ancora più ambizioso di avere la banda ultra-larga in fibra ottica entro il 2018 per il 100 % della popolazione ed altri importanti obiettivi. La Società Trentino NGN realizzerà la banda larga a seguito del conferimento della rete in rame di Telecom Italia.

Alla luce di quanto sopra esposto, può la Commissione far sapere se è agli atti un esposto, presentato da parte di alcuni operatori di telecomunicazioni, per presunti aiuti di Stato nell'operazione svolta dalla Provincia autonoma di Trento con la società Trentino NGN?

Potrebbe inoltre comunicare se le indagini sono iniziate e quali risultati stanno ottenendo?

Risposta di Joaquín Almunia a nome della Commissione

(26 giugno 2012)

È un’informazione di dominio pubblico che la società Trentino NGN sia stata creata dalla Provincia di Trento e che sia compartecipata da azionisti privati, tra cui figurano Telecom Italia e altri due azionisti minori. Telecom Italia darà il suo contributo alla società attraverso il conferimento di un diritto d’uso della sua rete di rame con la prospettiva di migrare i suoi clienti alla fibra ottica.

La Commissione segue attentamente gli eventi che riguardano il caso a cui fa riferimento l’onorevole parlamentare ed è costantemente in contatto con tutte le parti interessate per chiarire i fatti pertinenti e per valutare se il progetto solleva questioni di compatibilità con il mercato interno. La Commissione comunicherà il suo parere una volta che l’esame preliminare sarà concluso.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004559/12

to the Commission

Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: The Trentino NGN Case

In connection with the communication entitled ‘A strategy for intelligent, sustainable and inclusive growth’, the Autonomous Province of Trento voted to develop fibre-optic access networks across the province (Council Resolution No 2774 of 14 December 2011).

The Autonomous Province of Trento set up a company that is funded by both public and private capital, called Trentino NGN s.r.l., with a single shareholder. Trentino Sviluppo is an investor in the company, and is an agency created by the Autonomous Province of Trento, with the even more ambitious aim of delivering ultra high-speed fibre-optic broadband to the entire population by 2018, along with other important objectives. Trentino NGN will provide broadband, having been granted Telecom Italia’s copper network.

In view of the above, can the Commission state whether a complaint has been made in relation to these events by some of the telecommunications operators, regarding alleged state aid used in the operation undertaken by the Autonomous Province of Trento and Trentino NGN?

Can the Commission also state if investigations have begun and what has been discovered so far?

Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

It is public information that the company Trentino NGN was created by the Province of Trento and is open for participation by private shareholders, which include Telecom Italia and two other minor shareholders. Telecom Italia will contribute to the company with the handover of its copper network in view to migrate its customers to fibre.

The Commission is closely following the events concerning the case referred to by the Honourable Member. It is in constant touch with all parties involved to clarify the relevant facts and to assess whether the project raises any issues of compatibility with the internal Market. The Commission will make its views known as soon as the initial examination has been concluded.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004560/12

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(3 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: Nacionalización de Red Eléctrica Española, en Bolivia

El Gobierno boliviano, encabezado por Evo Morales, ha tomado la decisión de nacionalizar la filial boliviana de la empresa Red Eléctrica Española. Los motivos argumentados se relacionan con la supuesta falta de inversión en el país por parte de la empresa.

Esta supuesta falta de inversión ha sido contestada por la empresa aportando datos según los cuales la inversión realizada ha sido considerable, muy cercana a la suma que se invirtió para la compra de la empresa TDE (Transportadora de Electricidad).

El Gobierno boliviano se ha comprometido a pagar una reparación adecuada a Red Eléctrica para compensar los efectos de la nacionalización y las pérdidas que ocasionará a la empresa. Y es necesario añadir que esta no ha sido la primera nacionalización de una empresa extranjera en el país andino, sino la número 15 bajo gobierno de Evo Morales.

Este incidente, unido a la nacionalización reciente de la empresa YPF, significa un peligroso precedente y puede ser interpretado como un ataque a la seguridad jurídica de aquellos inversores que deciden actuar en la región. Hecho especialmente grave debido a los grandes flujos comerciales entre Europa y Sudamérica.

1.	La Comisión se ha mostrado preocupada por lo sucedido. ¿Qué impacto tendrán estos hechos para la negociación del tratado de libre comercio con Mercosur? ¿Se tendrán en cuenta?

2.	¿Piensa la Comisión crear una herramienta que permita tomar medidas en caso de nacionalización de una empresa sus accionistas sean debidamente compensados?

3.	¿No cree la Comisión que es necesario tomar medidas firmes para evitar que esta oleada de nacionalizaciones de raíz populista se extienda?

Respuesta del Sr. De Gucht en nombre de la Comisión

(8 de junio de 2012)

La Comisión coincide con Su Señoría en que las acciones de determinados gobiernos de Latinoamérica envían señales negativas a los inversores.

En la Declaración de la UE y los EE.UU. sobre principios comunes para la inversión internacional, adoptada recientemente, se subrayó la importancia de crear y mantener un clima y unas políticas abiertos y estables en materia de inversión y se instó a los gobiernos a proporcionar el mayor nivel posible de seguridad jurídica y protección frente al trato discriminatorio, arbitrario, desleal o perjudicial que puedan recibir los inversores y las inversiones en sus respectivos territorios. Las expropiaciones en sí no son contrarias a la ley, pero pasan a serlo cuando no respetan determinadas condiciones, en particular el pago de una compensación rápida, adecuada y efectiva.

No existe ningún acuerdo de la UE con ningún país latinoamericano que proteja frente a las expropiaciones contrarias a la ley. Algunos Estados miembros han celebrado este tipo de acuerdos, que otorgan a los inversores de la UE el derecho a someter a arbitraje internacional las acciones de los gobiernos que afecten a sus inversiones. La competencia exclusiva de la UE en materia de inversiones se deriva del Tratado y, por tanto, la Comisión no necesita ningún instrumento jurídico específico para manifestar su preocupación y adoptar todas las medidas oportunas en defensa de las inversiones de la UE en Argentina, Bolivia o cualquier otro tercer país.

Por lo que respecta a las negociaciones entre la UE y Mercosur, cabe recordar que la Comisión no está negociando con Argentina de manera bilateral, sino con Mercosur como región. No obstante, la Comisión considera que las medidas tomadas por Argentina no son coherentes con el espíritu que anima esta negociación y que, si queremos concluir dicha negociación, es fundamental mantener un clima de confianza y seguridad. Este mensaje ya ha sido transmitido a Argentina.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004560/12

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Nationalisation of Red Eléctrica Española in Bolivia

The Bolivian Government, led by Evo Morales, has decided to nationalise the Bolivian subsidiary of the company Red Eléctrica Española. The reasons given are the company’s alleged failure to invest in the country.

The company has challenged this accusation by providing information showing that considerable investment was made, involving a sum very close to that which it invested in the purchase of the company TDE (Transportadora de Electricidad).

The Bolivian Government has promised to pay an adequate amount to Red Eléctrica Española as compensation for the effects of nationalisation and the losses incurred as a result by the company. It should also be added that this is not the first nationalisation of a foreign company in Bolivia, but the fifteenth under Evo Morales’s government.

This incident, coupled with the recent nationalisation of YPF, establishes a dangerous precedent and can be interpreted as an attack on the legal security of investors deciding to operate in the region. It is especially serious in light of the significant trade flow between Europe and South America.

1.	The Commission has shown concern about these events. What impact will they have on negotiations on the free trade agreement with Mercosur? Will they be taken into account?

2.	Does the Commission plan to create an instrument enabling measures to be applied in the event of a company being nationalised to ensure that its shareholders are duly compensated?

3.	Does the Commission not consider it necessary to take strong measures to prevent further expansion of this wave of populist nationalisations?

Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission

(8 June 2012)

The Commission concurs with the Honourable Member's view that the actions of certain Latin America governments send a negative signal to investors.

The recently adopted EU‐US Statement on Shared Principles for International Investment underlined the importance of creating and maintaining open and stable investment climates and policies, while it urged governments to provide the highest possible level of legal certainty and protection against discriminatory, arbitrary, unfair or harmfultreatment to all investors and investments in their territories. Expropriations are not unlawful per se; they become unlawful when they do not respect certain conditions, notably the payment of prompt, adequate, and effective compensation.

There is no EU level agreement with any Latin American country protecting against unlawful expropriations. Member States have concluded such agreements, which provide EU investors the right to challenge in international arbitration government acts impairing their investments. The EU's exclusive competence on investment stems from the Treaty and therefore the Commission does not need a specific legal instrument to express its concern and to take all appropriate measures in defence of EU investments in Argentina, Bolivia or in any third country.

Regarding the impact on EU‐Mercosur negotiations, it should be recalled that the Commission does not negotiate with Argentina bilaterally but with Mercosur as a region. The Commission is nevertheless of the opinion that measures taken by Argentina appear inconsistent with the spirit underpinning this negotiation and that it is crucial to maintain a climate of trust and confidence if we want this negotiation to be concluded. This message was conveyed to Argentina.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004561/12

a la Comisión

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(3 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: Inclusión de las personas discapacitadas en la Directiva de imposición energética

La reforma de la Directiva 2003/96/EC sobre imposiciones en los carburantes fue aprobada por el plenario del Parlamento Europeo el pasado 19 de abril.

Como sabe la Comisión, en ella se incluirían todas aquellas disposiciones relativas a la imposición tributaria sobre los carburantes.

En fecha reciente he recibido una propuesta que me ha parecido de gran interés y que quizás la Comisión Europea puede incluir en el texto final que sea aprobado por el diálogo tripartito.

La idea sería la creación de exenciones o reducciones fiscales en la imposición para aquellos ciudadanos que aún en plenas facultades físicas y mentales cuentan con problemas graves de movilidad derivados de una disminución crónica en su capacidad locomotriz. Además para este sector de la población es vital poder contar con un medio de transporte barato ya que en muchas ocasiones sus ingresos son escasos.

1.	¿Considerará la Comisión la posibilidad de incluir en la nueva Directiva 2003/96/EC disposiciones que tengan en cuenta los problemas de estos ciudadanos europeos así como de sus familias?

2.	En caso de no incluirse en ella por motivos legales de forma, ¿tendrá en cuenta la Comisión estas consideraciones para el futuro? ¿Qué medidas cree la Comisión que serían necesarias para proteger la libertad de movimientos de estos ciudadanos discapacitados y sus familias?

Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión

(21 de junio de 2012)

La Directiva 2003/96/CE (213) ya contiene una disposición especial (artículo 5) que permite a los Estados miembros reducir el tipo impositivo de los productos energéticos y de la electricidad para usos destinados a personas minusválidas, a condición de que se respeten los tipos impositivos mínimos establecidos en la Directiva. Los Estados miembros son libres de decidir si hacen uso o no de esta posibilidad. También pueden aplicar regímenes de ayuda a personas minusválidas fuera del ámbito de la imposición de la energía, ya sea de forma independiente o adicionalmente a un régimen de tipos reducidos conforme al artículo 5 de la Directiva.

La reciente propuesta de la Comisión para revisar la Directiva (214) prevé la división de la imposición en impuestos relacionados con el CO2 e impuestos sobre el consumo general de energía; ello permitiría que las reducciones impositivas en favor de personas minusválidas solo se aplicaran a los impuestos sobre el consumo general de energía.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004561/12

to the Commission

Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Inclusion of disabled persons in the Energy Taxation Directive

The proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2003/96/EC restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity was approved by the European Parliament at its plenary sitting on 19 April 2012.

As the Commission is aware, the reform will include all regulations related to the taxation of fuels.

I recently received a proposal which was of great interest to me and which the European Commission can perhaps include in the final text that will be approved by tripartite dialogue.

The idea would be to create tax reductions or exemptions for those citizens who, while still in full possession of their mental and physical faculties, have serious mobility issues due to a chronic loss of locomotive ability. Furthermore, it is essential for these members of the population that they have access to an inexpensive means of transport, since their income is often limited.

1.	Will the Commission consider the possibility of including provisions in the new Directive 2003/96/EC to address the problems of these European citizens and their families?

2.	If such provisions cannot be included in this directive for reasons of legal formality, will the Commission bear them in mind in the future? What measures does the Commission think would be necessary to protect the freedom of movement of these disabled citizens and their families?

Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

Directive 2003/96/EC (215) already contains a special provision (Article 5) which allows Member States to reduce the rate of taxation for energy products and electricity for uses for disabled people, provided that the minimum taxation rates, set by the directive are respected. Member States are free to decide whether or not to use this possibility. They may also apply support schemes for disabled people outside the area of energy taxation, either alone or in addition to a scheme of reduced rates under Article 5 of the directive.

The recent Commission proposal for revision of the directive (216) envisages the split of taxation into CO2-related and general energy consumption taxation and would allow the option for tax reductions for disabled people to apply only to general energy consumption taxation.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004562/12

a la Comisión

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(3 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: Inclusión de Arquitectura Paisajística (Landscape Architecture) en la lista de profesiones reguladas en la Unión Europea

La Arquitectura del Paisaje (Landscape Architecture) es una profesión reconocida y regulada en varios Estados miembros, con una identidad diferenciada de otras profesiones y estudios. Desafortunadamente, esta profesión no tiene reconocimiento oficial en el Estado español. La falta de regulación adecuada y la falta de atribuciones propias, la inexistencia de colegios profesionales para el amparo y defensa de esta protección y la falta de un sistema de homologación de los títulos y cualificaciones de esta profesión obtenidos en otros Estados miembros o en otros lugares del mundo, dificulta el ejercicio de la profesión en condiciones dignas, provocando una situación injusta. Estos profesionales no pueden acceder a concursos, contratos o convocatorias públicas, e incluso tienen dificultades para obtener un seguro de responsabilidad civil y profesional.

Por tanto, esa falta de reconocimiento tiene unas consecuencias jurídicas que van contra las normas del mercado único, en concreto no cumple las indicaciones establecidas en la Directiva 2006/123/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 12 de diciembre de  2006, relativa a los servicios en el mercado interior.

La Comisión Europea ha reconocido recientemente que la Directiva 2005/36/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 7 de septiembre de 2005, relativa al reconocimiento de cualificaciones profesionales que actualizar ésta es una de las prioridades del Acta del Mercado Único y contribuirá a hacer más competitiva la economía europea, además de estimular el crecimiento y la creación de empleo.

— ¿Tiene conocimiento la Comisión de esta discriminación?

— ¿Cómo va a dirigirse la actuación de la Comisión para garantizar el reconocimiento de la titulación de Arquitectura del Paisaje para que sea homologada en los Estados miembros, que como el español, no reconocen su existencia ni el hecho de que existan profesionales en esta materia formados en otros Estados miembros, de nacionalidad española o no, que deseen ejercer esta profesión en dicho Estado en iguales condiciones que el ejercicio de cualquier otra profesión y sin trabas a su desarrollo y reconocimiento?

Respuesta del Sr. Barnier en nombre de la Comisión

(17 de julio de 2012)

Los Estados miembros pueden reservar, de conformidad con las libertades del mercado interior establecidas en las disposiciones del TFUE y sin perjuicio del cumplimiento de los principios de proporcionalidad y de no discriminación, la prestación de algunos servicios a profesionales que cuenten con cualificaciones profesionales específicas. Ni la Directiva 2005/36/CE, relativa al reconocimiento de cualificaciones profesionales, ni la Directiva 2006/123/CE, relativa a los servicios, abordan la cuestión de la proporcionalidad de estos requisitos.

La Comisión tiene conocimiento de la disparidad existente en lo tocante a la regulación del acceso a las profesiones en los Estados miembros. Por ello, en su propuesta para modernizar la Directiva relativa al reconocimiento de cualificaciones profesionales (217), ha introducido un mecanismo de evaluación recíproca de las profesiones reguladas. Si se adopta esa propuesta, los Estados miembros deberán comunicar la lista de profesiones para las que exigen una cualificación específica, justificar la necesidad de regular tales profesiones y evaluar estas de manera recíproca. Además, la Comisión ha formulado recomendaciones específicas a ocho Estados miembros sobre la necesidad de reducir los obstáculos reglamentarios para la prestación de servicios profesionales que serán objeto de seguimiento en el marco del Semestre Europeo de 2013 (218). La Comisión ayudará a los Estados miembros a llevar a efecto las recomendaciones especificas para cada país relativas a los servicios profesionales y, en tal sentido, pondrá en marcha en 2012, conjuntamente con los Estados miembros, un ejercicio orientado a realizar avances con la mayor celeridad posible (219).

En lo que atañe al reconocimiento de las cualificaciones profesionales obtenidas en otro Estado miembro, la Directiva relativa a las cualificaciones profesionales establece las condiciones en que los Estados miembros deben reconocer tales cualificaciones. Se invita a Su Señoría a que consulte la respuesta de la Comisión a la pregunta E-004206/2012 sobre la situación en España y la acción que la Comisión se propone emprender.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004562/12

to the Commission

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)

(3 May 2012)

Subject: Inclusion of landscape architecture in the regulated professions list of the European Union

Landscape architecture is recognised and regulated as a profession in various Member States, with a separate identity from other professions and studies. Unfortunately, it is not officially recognised as a profession in Spain. Without any proper regulation or official definition of this profession, with no professional associations to protect and promote it or any system for the recognition of diplomas and qualifications obtained in other Member States or in other parts of the world, it is difficult to carry out the profession in dignified conditions, thereby creating an unjust situation. Professionals in this field are unable to take part in public procurement processes, contracts or calls for proposals and even have difficulties in obtaining civil and professional liability insurance.

This lack of recognition has legal consequences which contravene the rules of the single market; more specifically, it does not comply with the terms of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market.

The European Commission has recently acknowledged that updating Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications is one of the priorities of the Single Market Act and will contribute to making the European economy more competitive, in addition to stimulating job creation and growth.

— Is the Commission aware of this discrimination?

— What action will the Commission take to ensure that qualifications in Landscape Architecture are recognised and accepted in Member States such as Spain, which do not acknowledge its existence or the fact that there are trained professionals (Spanish or otherwise) in this field who wish to practise their profession in these countries, under the same conditions applied to any other profession and without hindrance to its development and recognition?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2012)

Member States may reserve, in accordance with the internal market freedoms under the TFUE rules and subject to compliance with the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination, the provision of some services to professionals holding specific professional qualifications. Neither the Professional Qualifications Directive 2005/36/EC nor the Services Directive 2006/123/EC deal with the proportionality of those requirements.

The Commission is aware of the disparity of the legislations regulating the access to the professions in the Member States. For this reason, in its proposal for modernising the Professional Qualifications Directive (220), the Commission introduces a mutual evaluation mechanism on regulated professions. If adopted, Member States will have to notify the list of professions for which they require a specific qualification, justify the need for regulating these professions and evaluate them on a mutual basis. In addition, the Commission has addressed country specific recommendations to eight Member States on the need to reduce regulatory barriers in professional services which will be followed up in the European Semester exercise for 2013 (221). The Commission will assist Member States with the implementation of the country specific recommendations and in this context launch an exercise in 2012 with Member States in order to make progress as rapidly as possible (222).

Concerning the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in another Member State, the Professional Qualifications Directive sets out the conditions under which a Member State must recognise those professional qualifications. The Honourable Member is invited to consult the answer given by the Commission to Question E‐004206/2012 concerning the situation in Spain and the action which the Commission intends to take.

(Dansk udgave)

Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-004563/12

til Kommissionen

Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE)

(4. maj 2012)

Om: Overholdelse af EU‐Domstolens afgørelse om minedrift i åbne brud i León, Spanien

Den 24. november 2011 afgjorde EU‐Domstolen, at Spanien havde overtrådt direktivet om vurdering af indvirkningen på miljøet (85/33/EØF) og habitatdirektivet (92/43/EØF) ved at tillade en række minedriftsaktiviteter i åbne brud i Laciana‐ og Babia-dalene i León, Spanien. Trods denne afgørelse finder der stadig i dag en række af disse ulovlige mineaktiviteter sted inden for Natura 2000‐områders grænser. Jeg har personligt set de meget alvorlige permanente konsekvenser for miljøet (f.eks. vandforureningen for nylig i modstrid med vandrammedirektivet (2000/60/EF) (223)) af disse offentligt støttede mineaktiviteter.

Kommissionen mødtes for nylig med lokale og regionale myndigheder fra området og fik ved den lejlighed stærkt overdrevne og fejlagtige oplysninger om beskæftigelsen og miljøet i forbindelse med minedriftsaktiviteterne i åbne brud. De spanske myndigheders tilsagn om økonomisk støtte til genopretningen af minerne (2 mio. EUR) er på ingen måde tilstrækkelig i forhold til den skade, der er sket. Jeg har desuden erfaret, at de for øjeblikket er i gang med at behandle både nye tilladelser og tilladelser med tilbagevirkende kraft til minedrift i åbne brud inden for samme beskyttede Natura 2000‐områder.

— Har Kommissionen givet de spanske myndigheder en frist for at efterleve EU‐Domstolens afgørelse?

— Hvilke foranstaltninger eller bøder overvejer Kommissionen at anmode EU‐Domstolen om at pålægge med henblik på at kompensere for de miljøskader, der er sket til dato?

— Hvad vil Kommissionen foretage for at sikre overholdelse af EU's miljølovgivning, f.eks. vandrammedirektivet i ovennævnte sag om vandforurening, eller i anledning af de spanske myndigheders behandling af nye eller »tilbagevirkende« miljøtilladelser til minedrift i åbne brud, som der henvises til i EU‐Domstolens afgørelse af 24. november 2011?

Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Janez Potočnik

(6. juni 2012)

Med hensyn til de to første spørgsmål henvises det ærede medlem til svarene på skriftlig forespørgsel E‐00325/2012 og E‐2859/2012, der er fremsat af Francisco Sosa Wagner (224).

Kommissionen har ikke kendskab til nyere tilfælde af vandforurening i området, men er parat til at foretage en nærmere undersøgelse, hvis der forelægges yderligere oplysninger om den mine, der berøres af den påståede forureningshændelse.

Kommissionen har understreget, at aktiviteten i området ikke må videreføres på samme betingelser, førend EU‐retten ikke længere overtrædes Sideløbende har Kommissionen ikke kendskab til, at der skulle være udstedt nye tilladelser.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004563/12

to the Commission

Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Compliance with the European Court of Justice ruling on open-cast mining in León, Spain

On 24 November 2011 the European Court of Justice ruled that Spain had violated the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85/337/EEC) and the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) by authorising a number of open-cast mining operations in the Laciana and Babia valleys in León, Spain. Despite that ruling, a number of these illegal mining operations are still operating today within the boundaries of Natura 2000 areas. I have personally seen the tremendous permanent environmental impact of these publicly subsidised mining operations (for example, the recent water pollution in violation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC) (225)).

Recently, the Commission met local and regional authorities from the area which had provided it with grossly exaggerated and erroneous information concerning employment and the environment in relation to the open-cast mining operations. The Spanish authorities’ financial investment in the restoration of the mines (EUR 2 million) is totally insufficient compared with the damage done. Moreover, I have been informed that they are currently processing both new and retroactive authorisations of open-cast mining within the same Natura 2000 protected areas.

— Has the Commission given the Spanish authorities a deadline for compliance with the ECJ ruling?

— What measures or fines has the Commission considered asking the ECJ to impose in order to compensate for the environmental damage inflicted to date?

— What action will the Commission take with regard to compliance with EU environmental legislation, for example the WFD in the case of the water pollution mentioned above, or the processing by the Spanish authorities of new or ‘retroactive’ environmental authorisations for open-cast mining sites referred to in the 24 November 2011 ECJ ruling?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2012)

Regarding the first two questions, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answers given to Written Questions E‐00325/2012 and E‐2859/2012 by Mr Sosa Wagner (226).

The Commission is not aware of any recent incident of water pollution in the area but would be ready to enquire if further details are provided regarding the mine concerned by this alleged pollution.

The Commission has stressed that the activity in the area cannot continue under the same conditions until the breach of EC law has been addressed. In the meantime, the Commission is not aware any new authorisation having been issued.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004565/12

to the Commission

Nessa Childers (S&D)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Grants for senior citizens' groups

As this is the European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations, could the Commission please identify what funding streams or grants are available specifically for Irish senior citizens’ groups to support their activities?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2012)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E‐11891/2011 (227).

As far as financial support at the national level is concerned, the Honourable Member may want to contact the National Coordinator of the European Year 2012 in Ireland (228).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004566/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(4 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Diabete di tipo 2

Da un recente studio pubblicato sul New England Journal of Medicine si evince che, dagli anni '90 ai giorni nostri, il diabete di tipo 2 si è pericolosamente diffuso fra i bambini e gli adolescenti. La malattia, una volta quasi sconosciuta in dette fasce di età (gli unici casi erano quelli determinati da cause genetiche), è oggi invece sempre più presente anche tra i giovani, e si lega a fattori quali l'obesità infantile, l'alimentazione scorretta e lo scarso esercizio fisico; recenti dati relativi ai 27 Stati membri stimano in 18 milioni il numero di bambini obesi e quindi a rischio. In Italia sono 3 milioni i casi di diabete di tipo 2 diagnosticati (in Europa 35 milioni), con un costo diretto per ogni cittadino europeo stimato in 150 euro l'anno e un costo in termini di vite umane pari a diciotto decessi connessi alla malattia ogni ora.

L'emergenza descritta si unisce a un'ulteriore preoccupazione: esiste infatti una seria difficoltà del mondo scientifico nel mettere a punto una cura adeguata per la patologia in oggetto, dal momento che le attuali terapie messe a punto per i pazienti adulti spesso hanno scarsa efficacia sui soggetti più giovani. Lo studio, condotto su 699 pazienti adolescenti per 4 anni, ha mostrato come le normali terapie divengano inefficaci per il 39 % dei pazienti e come in 1 caso su 5 nei soggetti trattati insorgano complicazioni gravi.

—	È la Commissione al corrente della situazione descritta?

—	Dispone la Commissione di notizie più specifiche circa i progressi nella ricerca di nuovi farmaci contro il diabete di tipo 2?

—	In che modo intende combattere il fenomeno descritto, che minaccia il futuro dei giovani cittadini degli Stati membri?

—	Non ritiene necessario sostenere una campagna di informazione e sensibilizzazione della popolazione in merito alla malattia e alla sua prevenzione?

Risposta di John Dalli a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è consapevole della situazione descritta dall'onorevole parlamentare. Il carico di morbilità causato dal diabete di tipo 2 potrebbe in gran parte essere prevenuto agendo sui fattori di rischio, tra cui alimentazione e attività fisica: in questo campo la Commissione ha messo in atto una strategia globale (229).

Mediante la piattaforma d'azione europea per l'alimentazione, l'attività fisica e la salute, una serie di parti interessate si sono impegnate a realizzare azioni di sensibilizzazione e di informazione. È più appropriato che le campagne di informazione diretta rivolte ai cittadini siano portate avanti a livello nazionale o regionale e mirate alle rispettive situazioni.

La Commissione finanzia inoltre una serie di progetti relativi al diabete nel quadro del programma per la salute 2007-2013 (230), quali «Better control in paediatric and adolescent diabetes in the EU: working to create Centres of Reference (SWEET) (231)» (Migliorare il controllo del diabete pediatrico e adolescenziale nell'UE: la creazione di centri di riferimento), «EUropean Best Information through Regional Outcomes in Diabetes (EUBIROD) (232)» (Informazione ottimale a livello europeo mediante gli esiti dei dati regionali sul diabete), e «Development & Implementation of a European Guideline and training standards for Diabetes Prevention (IMAGE) (233)» (Sviluppo e attuazione di linee guida europee e norme sulla formazione per la prevenzione del diabete).

Dal 1995 la Commissione ha concesso più di 50 autorizzazioni all'immissione in commercio di medicinali per la cura del diabete, che contengono 15 diverse sostanze attive come componenti uniche o in combinazione. Per quanto riguarda i progressi nel campo della ricerca di nuovi farmaci, la Commissione ha dedicato più di 270 milioni di euro per finanziare progetti di ricerca su diabete e obesità nell'ambito del settimo programma quadro per la ricerca e lo sviluppo tecnologico (234) (FP7 2007-2013). Uno dei settori specifici finanziati riguarda la ricerca di migliori approcci terapeutici.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004566/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Type 2 diabetes

A recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that, since the 1990s, type 2 diabetes has become dangerously widespread in children and adolescents. The disease, once almost unheard of in these age groups (apart from hereditary cases), is, however, now increasingly common in young people too, and is linked to factors such as child obesity, poor nutrition and lack of exercise. Recent statistics for the 27 Member States estimate that 18 million children are obese and therefore at risk. In Italy, 3 million cases of type 2 diabetes have been diagnosed (35 million in Europe), with an estimated direct cost of EUR 150 for each European citizen per year, and a cost in terms of human lives of 18 deaths per hour associated with this disease.

The above emergency is coupled with a further concern: scientists are having great difficulty developing suitable treatment for the disease in question, since the current treatments developed for adult patients often have little effect in younger patients. The study, conducted on 699 adolescent patients over 4 years, shows that normal treatments are ineffective in 39 % of patients and that serious complications arise in 1 in 5 patients treated.

— Is the Commission aware of the situation described above?

— Does the Commission have more specific information regarding progress in research into new drugs to treat type 2 diabetes?

— How does it intend to tackle the above phenomenon, which threatens the future of the Member States’ young citizens?

— Does it not consider there is a need to support a public information and awareness campaign on the disease and its prevention?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of the situation described by the Honourable Member. Much of the disease burden caused by diabetes 2 is preventable by taking action on risk factors such as nutrition and physical activity, where the Commission has put in place a comprehensive strategy (235).

Through the EU Platform on diet, physical activity and health, a number of stakeholders have committed themselves to undertaking awareness raising and information actions. In terms of direct information campaigns addressed to citizens, it is more appropriate for these to be taken forward at national or regional level and targeted to the respective situation.

In addition, the Commission has been financing projects related to diabetes under the 2007-2013 Health Programme (236) such as, ‘Better control in paediatric and adolescent diabetes in the EU: working to create Centres of Reference (SWEET)’ (237), ‘European Best Information through Regional Outcomes in Diabetes (EUBIROD)’ (238), and ‘Development & Implementation of a European Guideline and training standards for Diabetes Prevention (IMAGE)’ (239).

Since 1995 the Commission has granted more than 50 marketing authorisations for medicinal product for treatment of diabetes, which contain 15 different active substances as monocomponents or in combination. With regards to progress in research into new drugs, the Commission has devoted over EUR 270 million to finance diabetes and obesity research projects under the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (240) (FP7, 2007-2013). One of the specific areas financed was the search for better therapeutic approaches.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004567/12

alla Commissione

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(4 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Delocalizzazione Cargill

I vertici della Cargill di Vigonza (Padova) hanno deciso di delocalizzare l'attività in Olanda; per molti operai sono partite lettere di licenziamento e per ventidue di loro è stata avviata la procedura di mobilità.

Nel 2011 l'azienda ha registrato un fatturato di 45 milioni di euro e, secondo le dichiarazioni dei sindacati, è in perfetto stato di salute.

— È la Commissione a conoscenza del caso?

— Intende la Commissione porre un freno agli episodi di delocalizzazione e dumping sociale come quello descritto, che sono quasi all'ordine del giorno e portano a una progressiva deindustrializzazione dei territori?

Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione

(26 giugno 2012)

La Commissione non era a conoscenza della situazione cui fa riferimento l'onorevole deputato.

Essa ribadisce la necessità che le operazioni di ristrutturazione siano gestite e preparate in anticipo nonché l'importanza di applicare efficacemente in tutta l'UE buone pratiche per la previsione, la preparazione e la gestione delle ristrutturazioni. La consultazione pubblica che la Commissione ha avviato attraverso il Libro verde «Ristrutturare e anticipare i cambiamenti: quali insegnamenti trarre dall'esperienza recente?» (241) intende identificare le pratiche e le politiche rivelatesi efficaci in tale ambito al fine di promuovere l'occupazione, la crescita e la competitività e di migliorare le sinergie tra tutti gli attori.

La Commissione prenderà le mosse dalle risposte al Libro verde per diffondere le buone pratiche e assicurare un adeguato seguito al Libro verde.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004567/12

to the Commission

Mara Bizzotto (EFD)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Relocation of the Cargill plant

The management of Cargill in Vigonza (Padua) has decided to relocate operations to the Netherlands. Many workers have been sent letters of dismissal and the ‘mobility procedure’ has been initiated for 22 of them.

In 2011, the company reported a turnover of EUR 45 million, and according to the trade unions, it is in perfect health.

— Is the Commission aware of this matter?

— Does the Commission intend to curb instances of relocation and social dumping, such as this, which are virtually an everyday occurrence and are leading to the gradual deindustrialisation of one region after another?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

The Commission was not aware of the situation referred to by the Honourable Member.

It reaffirms the need for restructuring operations to be anticipated and prepared in advance and for good practice on anticipating, preparing and managing restructuring to be applied more effectively across the EU. The public consultation which the Commission launched through the Green Paper ‘Restructuring and anticipation of change: What lessons from recent experience?’ (242) sought to identify successful practice and policy in this field with a view to promoting employment, growth and competitiveness and improving synergy between all the actors.

The Commission will base itself on the replies to its Green Paper to disseminate best practice and will follow up the Paper appropriately.

(Dansk udgave)

Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-004568/12

til Kommissionen

Christel Schaldemose (S&D)

(4. maj 2012)

Om: Små virksomheder i Europa

I forlængelse af spørgsmål E‐1300/09 af 2. marts 2009 bedes Kommissionen redegøre for sin holdning til store virksomheders misbrug over for små virksomheder, som hverken har de juridiske eller finansielle midler til at kæmpe imod de store virksomheder. I forretningsmæssig henseende er forholdet mellem de store og de små virksomheder således ulige, fordi de store virksomheder har langt flere midler og især finansielle ressourcer til at lade tvister trække i langdrag. Sådanne sager er både meget tidskrævende og dyre for de små virksomheder, hvilket i værste fald, og desværre ofte, medfører den lille virksomheds forsvinden.

Selv om Kommissionen er meget engageret i forsvaret af de små og mellemstore virksomheder, bl.a. gennem vedtagelsen af »Small Business Act« af juni 2008, er der stadig væsentlige mangler med hensyn til støtte til og bevarelse af de små og mellemstore virksomheder, især for så vidt angår vækst og konkurrencedygtighed. Kommissionen understreger i sin pressemeddelelse af 23. februar 2001 nødvendigheden af at styrke et af hovedprincipperne, som allerede er trådt i kraft: »Think Small First«.

Blandt et af hovedprincipperne i ændringsforslaget, bør det noteres, at Kommissionen har til hensigt at koncentrere indsatsn om de små og mellemstore virksomheders adgang til finansiering, udviklingen af en sammenhængende lovgivning, som gør det muligt for de små og mellemstore virksomheder at koncentrere sig om deres hovedaktiviteter og hjælpe de små og mellemstore virksomheder på baggrund af verdenssituationen og klimaforandringerne. Det forekommer dog ikke, at prioriteten har været skabelse og bevarelse af arbejdspladser.

— Hvorledes har Kommissionen tænkt sig at hjælpe de små virksomheder med at forsvare sig overfor de store virksomheder i forbindelse med retssager, som bringer deres eksistens i fare med skæbnesvangre konsekvenser for arbejdspladserne?

— Mener Kommissionen, at beskyttelsen af de små og mellemstore virksomheder indenfor EU imod de store og dominerende virksomheders misbrug af retssager til at eliminere konkurrerende virksomheder fra markedet, snarere henhører under det nationale retsvæsen og at der således ikke findes nogen fællesskabsinteresse i at hjælpe de små og mellemstore virksomheder, som er ofre for misbrug af retsmidler, hvilket vil kunne medføre deres forsvinden fra markedet især på grund af de meget høje retsomkostninger?

— Vurderer Kommissionen, at sådanne virksomheder og disses rettigheder kan beskyttes effektivt på nationalt plan i de tilfælde, hvor misbruget foretages af en virksomhed, som har en dominerende stilling inden for EU, hvor konsekvenserne ikke begrænset til et enkelt medlemsland, og hvor omkostningerne og tidsforbruget langt overskrider det nationale aspekt?

Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Antonio Tajani

(8. august 2012)

Tvister mellem SMV’er og store virksomheder henhører normalt under de nationale domstole. Medlemsstaterne kan hjælpe SMV’er med at afbøde de markedssvigt, som de udsættes for, gennem mange eksisterende statsstøtteregler.

Kommissionen er på sin side i færd med at analysere illoyal handelspraksis virksomheder imellem i detailforsyningskæden og planlægger at udarbejde en meddelelse inden udgangen af 2012.

I Kommissionens forslag om en omarbejdning af direktivet om bekæmpelse af overskridelse af betalingsfrister i handelstransaktioner fastsættes det bl.a., at offentlige myndigheder skal betale for de varer og tjenester, de indkøber, inden for 30 dage.

Det nyligt vedtagne forslag til en forordning om en fælles EU‐købelov (243) kunne give SMV’er tillid til at indgå kontrakter på tværs af grænserne og spare dem for omkostningerne til at forhandle lovvalg.

Kommissionen har planlagt at fremsætte et lovforslag for at sikre effektive erstatningssøgsmål ved nationale domstole for overtrædelse af EU’s antitrustregler og for at præcisere forbindelsen mellem sådanne private søgsmål og offentlig håndhævelse ved Kommissionen og de nationale konkurrencemyndigheder, især for så vidt angår beskyttelsen af bødenedsættelsesordninger, for at opretholde den centrale rolle, som offentlig håndhævelse spiller i EU. Dette vil også være til gavn for SMV’er.

Kommissionen er også i færd med at undersøge, hvilke problemer der hindrer virksomhederne i at benytte alternativ tvistbilæggelse virksomhederne imellem og forelægger måske et initiativ på dette område som led i retfærdighed for vækst-dagsordenen.

Endelig støtter Kommissionen aktivt en dialog om illoyal aftalepraksis mellem virksomheder i forummet på højt plan for en bedre fungerende fødevareforsyningskæde. Dette har allerede udmøntet sig i, at elleve erhvervsorganisationer har vedtaget principper for god praksis (244).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004568/12

to the Commission

Christel Schaldemose (S&D)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Small businesses in Europe

Further to Question E‐1300/09 of 2 March 2009, will the Commission account for its opinion of large companies taking advantage of small businesses that have neither the legal nor the financial resources to fight against them? From a business point of view, the relationship between large and small companies is thus unequal, as large companies have far more resources, especially financially, to allow disputes to drag on for long periods of time. Such cases are both time-consuming and expensive for small businesses and in the worst cases unfortunately often lead to their closure.

Although the Commission is very involved in protecting small and medium-sized businesses with, among other things, the adoption of the Small Business Act of June 2008, there are still significant omissions in terms of the support and protection of small and medium-sized businesses, particularly with regard to growth and competitive ability. In its press release of 23 February 2011, the Commission stressed the necessity of strengthening one of the central principles that is already in force: ‘Think Small First’.

Among the main principles of the draft amendment, it should be noted that the Commission intends to concentrate its efforts on small and medium-sized businesses’ access to financing, the development of cohesive legislation that enables small and medium-sized businesses to concentrate on their main activities and the provision of support for small and medium-sized businesses in relation to the global situation and climate changes. However, it is not apparent that the priority has been the creation and preservation of jobs.

— How does the Commission intend to help small businesses defend themselves against large companies in connection with legal disputes that threaten their existence, with fatal consequences for jobs?

— Does the Commission believe that the protection of small and medium-sized businesses within the EU against large and dominant companies’ misuse of court cases to eliminate competition from the market should be the responsibility of the national courts and that there is no common interest in helping small and medium-sized businesses, who are victims of a misuse of legal systems that could lead to their disappearance from the market due to extremely high legal costs?

— Does the Commission believe that these businesses and their rights can be effectively protected at national level in cases where the misuse is carried out by a company with a dominant position in the EU, where the consequences are not limited to one Member State and where the costs and length of time far exceed the national aspects?

Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission

(8 August 2012)

Legal disputes between SMEs and large companies are normally under the jurisdiction of national courts. Member States may help SMEs to overcome the specific market failures they face via many existing state aid possibilities (245).

The Commission is on its side analysing unfair trading practises between businesses in the retail supply chain and plans to come forward with a communication by end 2012.

The Commission proposal of a recast of the directive on combating late payment in commercial transactions stipulates, among other things, that public authorities will have to pay for the goods and services that they procure within 30 days.

The recently adopted proposal for a regulation on a Common European Sales Law (246) could give SMEs the confidence to conclude cross-border contracts, saving them the costs to negotiate the applicable law.

The Commission has scheduled a legislative proposal to ensure effective damages actions before national courts for breaches of EU antitrust rules and to clarify the interrelation of such private actions with public enforcement by the Commission and the national competition authorities, notably as regards the protection of leniency programmes, in order to preserve the central role of public enforcement in the EU (247). This will serve also SMEs.

The Commission is also examining the problems that hinder businesses from using ADR (248) in a Business-to-Business and may present an initiative in this area as part of the Justice for Growth Agenda.

Finally the Commission actively supports a dialogue on unfair business-to-business contractual practices within the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain. This has already resulted in Principles of Good Practice agreed by eleven business organisations (249).

(Leagan Gaeilge)

Ceist i gcomhair freagra scríofa E-004569/12

chuig an gCoimisiún

Liam Aylward (ALDE)

(4 Bealtaine 2012)

Ábhar: Briseadh isteach ar chórais faisnéise leictreonacha

Is mó agus is mó atá muintir na hEorpa ag brath ar chórais faisnéise agus ar ghréasáin leictreonacha. Le blianta beaga anuas, rinneadh ionsaithe móra contúirteacha ar na córais sin, ionsaithe nár fhacthas a leithéidí riamh. Tá ‘Comhar Breithiúnach in Ábhair Choiriúla: Ionsaithe ar Chórais Faisnéise a Chomhrac 2010/0273(COD)’ beartaithe ag an gCoimisiún Eorpach in áit Chinneadh Réime 2005/222/JHA (an 24 Feabhra 2005) ón gComhairle maidir le hionsaithe ar chórais faisnéise.

Tá gá le reachtaíocht den chineál sin don lá atá inniu ann; tá imní ann, áfach, i dtaca leis an tionchar a bheadh ag an togra seo orthu siúd a bhíonn ag obair i réimse an taighde, na slándála agus fhorbairt na ríomhaireachta. Faoin togra seo, is mídhleathach a bheadh sé bogearraí nó uirlisí um briseadh isteach — ar nós ‘róbatlíonta’ — a bheith i seilbh duine ar bith. Bíonn ar thaighdeoirí slándála uirlisí den chineál sin a úsáid uaireanta, áfach, chun rochtain gan cead a fháil ar chórais faisnéise ar leith, gan intinn choiriúil ar bith i gceist.

An bhfuil sé i gceist ag an gCoimisiún prótacail ar bith a chur i bhfeidhm d’fhonn taighdeoirí agus lucht forbartha ríomhaireachta a mbíonn orthu uirlisí den chineál seo a úsáid don obair nó don taighde a chosaint?

Freagra ón gCoimisinéir Malmström thar ceann an Choimisiúin

(18 Meitheamh 2012)

Is eol don Choimisiún go bhfuil ról tábhachtach ag taighdeoirí slándála i méadú athléimneachta córas agus gréasán faisnéise, agus go dteastaíonn uathu an taighde ar laigí córas (nó ‘briseadh isteach an hata bháin’ mar a thugtar air) a dhéanamh mar chuid den obair sin. Tá léiriú ar an méid sin in aithris 10 den Togra ón gCoimisiún le haghaidh Treorach maidir le hIonsaithe ar Chórais Fhaisnéise (250), ina ndeirtear go sainráite nach ‘[bhfuil] rún sa Treoir [seo] dliteanas coiriúil a fhorchur i gcás ina ndéantar na cionta gan intinn choiriúil, cuir i gcás tástáil údaraithe nó cosaint córas faisnéise.’ Lena chois sin, sa mholadh atá déanta ag an gCoimisiún maidir le cionta a bheith coiriúil, chaithfeadh intinn (choiriúil) a bheith ann i gcónaí. Faoi réir modhnuithe ar an togra le linn na hidirbheartaíochta atá ar siúl faoi láthair, ba chóir go mbeadh cosaint na dtaighdeoirí slándála cinntithe.

Ní rún don Choimisiún faoi láthair aon phrótacal a chur chun feidhme.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004569/12

to the Commission

Liam Aylward (ALDE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Hacking into electronic infomation systems

Europe’s reliance on information systems and on electronic networks continues to grow apace. In the last few years, major, dangerous attacks of a type not seen hitherto have been carried out on those systems. The European Commission intends to replace Council Framework Decision 2005/222 JHA (24 February 2005) with ‘Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters: Combating Attacks against Information Systems 2010/0273(COD)’ concerning attacks against information systems.

Such legislation is required for these times; however there is concern about the influence this proposal could have on those who work in research, security and computer development. This proposal would make it illegal for anyone to possess hacking software or tools‐ ‘botnets’ for example. Security researchers sometimes need to use such tools to obtain unpermitted access to certain information systems, with no criminal intent.

Does the Commission intend to implement any protocols in order to protect researchers and computer developers who are obliged to use such tools for their work or research?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2012)

The Commission is aware of the important role that security researchers play in increasing the resilience of information systems and networks, and of their need to conduct research into system weaknesses as part of that work (so-called ‘white hat hacking’). This is reflected in Recital 10 of the Commission's Proposal for a directive on Attacks against Information Systems (251),which explicitly states that ‘[t]his Directive does not intend to impose criminal liability where the offences are committed without criminal intent, such as for authorised testing or protection of information systems’. Furthermore, the criminalization of offences as proposed by the Commission always requires the presence of (criminal) intent. Subject to modifications to the proposal in the current ongoing negotiations, appropriate protection of security researchers should thus be ensured.

The Commission currently does not have any plans to implement specific protocols.

(Leagan Gaeilge)

Ceist i gcomhair freagra scríofa E-004570/12

chuig an gCoimisiún

Liam Aylward (ALDE)

(4 Bealtaine 2012)

Ábhar: Treoir um Oibrithe a Phostú — cúrsaí riaracháin ó thaobh gnóthas beag agus meánmhéide de

Is minic nach mbíonn an t-airgead ná na hacmhainní ná an fhoireann ag gnóthais bheaga agus mheánmhéide chun an t-eolas ar fad maidir leis an bpá atá á íoc leo siúd atá fostaithe ag fochonraitheoirí a fháil. D’fhéadfaí, mar sin, go gcruthódh na rialacha i dtaca le feidhmiú agus dliteanas ualach riaracháin bhreise do na gnóthais sin. Chuirfeadh an riachtanas riaracháin nua seo costas breise ar chuideachtaí agus d’fhéadfadh sé dochar a dhéanamh do chumas iomaíochta gnóthas beag agus meánmhéide Eorpach.

Céard atá beartaithe ag an gCoimisiún a dhéanamh chun a chinntiú go ngearrfaí siar ar an rómhaorlathas agus ar an ualach riaracháin atá ar ghnóthais bheaga agus mheánmhéide Eorpacha agus go ndéanfaí na bearta nua seo lena bhfuil breis riaracháin i gceist a chur i bhfeidhm?

An bhféadfadh an Coimisiún eolas a thabhairt maidir leis an méid atá ar intinn aige a dhéanamh chun an comhoibriú idir údaráis inniúla náisiúnta a fheabhsú? Céard is féidir a dhéanamh chun a chinntiú nach mbíonn cuideachtaí ‘boscaí litreach’ ag seachaint nó ag sárú na caighdeáin, na cearta agus na rialacha atá i bhfeidhm agus, sa mhéid seo, chun a chinntiú nach mbíonn ‘dumpáil shóisialta’ ar siúl?

Freagra ón gCoimisinéir Andor thar ceann an Choimisiúin

(26 Meitheamh 2012)

Tá an fhoráil maidir le dliteanas comhpháirteach agus leithleach ina gné bhunúsach den phacáiste cothromaithe beart dá bhforáiltear sa togra le haghaidh Rialacháin Forfheidhmithe maidir le hOibrithe a Phostú (252). Chun nach gcuirfear ualaí nach gá ar chuideachtaí, teorannaíodh an dliteanas sin d’fhochonraitheoireacht dhíreach in earnáil na tógála agus níl feidhm aige ach ar ghlan-íosphá, ar ranníocaíochtaí isteach i gcistí comhpháirtithe sóisialta maille le ranníocaíochtaí slándála sóisialta agus cánacha a coinníodh siar go míchuí. Mar ghné bhreise, féadfar conraitheoirí a dhíolmhú ó dhliteanas má dhéanann siad dícheall cuí a áirithiú. Lena chois sin, sa togra ón gCoimisiún déantar foráil maidir le rochtain níos éasca a bheith ar fhaisnéis a bhaineann leis na dálaí oibre is infheidhme ar oibrithe postaithe agus maidir leis an bhfaisnéis sin a bheith mionsonraithe soláimhsithe. Laghdóidh sin an t‐ualach riaracháin atá ar chuideachtaí a phostaíonn oibrithe thar lear, fiontair bheaga agus mheánmhéide go háirithe.

I dtaca le comhar riaracháin de, soiléirítear sa togra freagrachtaí na mBallstát, socraítear rialacha maidir le comhar a chleachtadh (lena n‐áirítear sprioc‐amanna ardaidhmeannacha maidir le freagraí ar iarrataí ar fhaisnéis) agus déantar foráil ann maidir le huirlis leictreonach chun malartú faisnéise níos éifeachtúla idir na húdaráis fhreagracha a éascú. Soiléirítear fosta sa togra bunghnéithe choincheap an phostaithe chun cumas na n‐údarás cigireachta a neartú maidir le cuideachtaí ‘bosca litreach’, is é sin cuideachtaí a úsáideann an postú chun dul timpeall ar an dlí, a shainaithint agus chun a chinntiú nach rachaidh na cuideachtaí sin i líonmhaireacht.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004570/12

to the Commission

Liam Aylward (ALDE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: The Posting of Workers Directive — administrative matters for small and medium-sized businesses

Frequently, small and medium-sized businesses have neither the money, nor the resources nor the staff to look for information about the wages of people who are employed by sub‐contractors. Therefore, the rules concerning implementation and liability may present an additional administrative burden to these businesses. This new administrative requirement may impose additional costs on companies and damage the competitiveness of small and medium-sized European businesses.

What does the Commission intend to do to ensure that excessive bureaucracy and the administrative burden on small and medium-sized European businesses is reduced and to ensure that these new measures, which imply additional administration, are implemented?

Can the Commission give any information about what it intends to do to improve cooperation between national competent authorities? What can be done to ensure that ‘letter box’ companies do not by-pass or breach the standards, rights and regulations which are in force, and that ‘social dumping’ does not occur?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

The provision on joint and several liability is an essential element of the balanced package of measures provided for in the proposal for an Enforcement Directive on the Posting of Workers (253). In order to avoid unnecessary burdens on companies, this liability has been limited to direct subcontracting in the construction sector and applies only to net minimum wages, contributions to social partners' funds and unduly withheld social security contributions and taxes. As an additional element, contractors can be exempted from liability if they ensure due diligence. Moreover, the Commission's proposal provides for more easily accessible, detailed and user-friendly information concerning the working conditions applicable to posted workers. This will reduce the administrative burden imposed on companies posting workers abroad, in particular small to medium-sized enterprises.

With regard to administrative cooperation, the proposal clarifies the responsibilities of the Member States, sets rules for cooperation in practice (including ambitious deadlines for replies to information requests) and provides for an electronic tool to facilitate a more efficient exchange of information between the responsible authorities. The proposal also clarifies the elements of the notion of posting in order to better enable inspection authorities to identify ‘letter-box’ companies that use posting as a means of circumventing the law and to avoid their proliferation.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004572/12

to the Commission

Nicole Sinclaire (NI)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Training of seafarers

Has the Commission conducted an analysis of the cost to Member States of implementing the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2008/106/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers (COM(2011)0555)?

Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2012)

The Commission did not carry out an impact assessment of the proposal referred to by the Honourable Member, since the proposal integrates into EC law amendments to an international Convention (254), already accepted by the Member States, by which they are already bound under international law.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004573/12

to the Commission

Nicole Sinclaire (NI)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Accession of Croatia to the EU

Will the Commission confirm that Croatia’s accession to the EU will be subject to that country fully meeting the Union’s published criteria for accession, and in particular:

stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;

the existence of a functioning market economy, as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union;

ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

In 1993, at the Copenhagen European Council, the EU decided that a candidate country must meet the criteria as listed by the Honourable Member in order to become a member of the EU. The same criteria apply for Croatia.

The Commission considers that Croatia meets the political criteria and expects Croatia to meet the economic and acquis criteria and to be ready for membership by 1 July 2013. The complete Commission assessment of Croatia's fulfilment of the Copenhagen criteria for EU membership can be found in the most recent Progress Report at:

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/press_corner/key-documents/reports_oct_2011_en.htm

A monitoring report focusing on a selected number of issues, in line with Article 36 of the Act of Accession was adopted by the Commission on 24 April 2012 and can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/fule/docs/news/20120424_report_final.pdf

The overall level of preparedness achieved by Croatia allowed the Commission to give a favourable opinion on Croatia's accession in October 2011. Parliament has given its consent on 1 December 2011.

The 27 Member States and Croatia signed the Accession Treaty on 9 December 2011, which is now subject to the national ratification procedure. The Treaty establishes that the foreseen date for the Accession of Croatia is 1 July 2013.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004574/12

alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(4 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Esplosione a Buenos Aires

Secondo quanto riportato dalle tv locali, davanti al portone di ingresso dell'edificio che ospita gli uffici dell'UE a Buenos Aires, nel quartiere di Recoleta, intorno alle 2.45 della notte (ora locale) si è registrata un'esplosione. Al momento non è chiaro che cosa sia stato a provocarla e si pensa a un ordigno rudimentale o a una bomba artigianale. Secondo gli abitanti del palazzo, subito dopo la detonazione si è avvertito un forte odore di polvere esplosiva. Sul posto, oltre alla polizia e ai vigili del fuoco, è accorsa anche una squadra di artificieri.

L'episodio si inserisce in un momento di contrapposizione tra Argentina e Unione europea a seguito di una decisione presa dal paese sudamericano nei confronti di una compagnia petrolifera spagnola.

La polizia sta esaminando i filmati delle telecamere a circuito chiuso dell'edificio che ospita la sede della delegazione dell'Unione europea in Argentina per cercare di risalire agli autori dell'attentato avvenuto nella notte. Secondo le testimonianze raccolte dalla polizia del commissariato 17 che si occupa del caso, uno degli addetti alla sicurezza del palazzo, che sorge in via Ayachuco, avrebbe notato due uomini che abbandonavano uno zaino davanti al portone subito prima della deflagrazione. Intanto, fonti delle forze dell'ordine fanno sapere che, poco distante dal luogo della detonazione, vive anche il capo della Corte suprema di giustizia. Al momento nessuna organizzazione politica ha rivendicato l'attentato.

Alla luce di quanto precede l'interrogante chiede all'Alto Rappresentante se è a conoscenza della vicenda e se dispone di ulteriori informazioni circa i danni provocati dall'esplosione a persone o cose.

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

(26 giugno 2012)

Un ordigno esplosivo improvvisato è esploso alle 2.30 del mattino di martedì 1o maggio 2012 al di fuori dell'edificio della delegazione UE a Buenos Aires. L'esplosione non ha provocato feriti ma ha distrutto parte del portone d'ingresso del palazzo e ha infranto i vetri delle finestre di un edificio adiacente. Una guardia di sicurezza in servizio nell'edificio in quel momento ha riportato problemi all'udito in seguito all'esplosione e si è recata in ospedale per un controllo medico.

Siamo stati informati che un gruppo anarchico, «Nucleo de conspiradores por la extensión del caos/FEDERACIÓN ANARQUISTA INFORMAL», ha pubblicato un messaggio sul proprio sito web rivendicando la responsabilità dell'attacco. La delegazione ha chiesto al Servizio pubblico federale per la giustizia di indagare sul caso e al momento si attendono i riscontri. Non sono ancora stati comunicati risultati.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004574/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Explosion in Buenos Aires

According to local TV reports, an explosion occurred outside the front door of the building housing the EU offices in the Recoleta neighbourhood of Buenos Aires, at around 2.45 a.m. (local time). It is not clear at the moment what caused the explosion, but it is believed to have been a rudimentary device or a homemade bomb. According to the building’s residents, there was a strong smell of explosive powder immediately after the blast. In addition to the police and firefighters, a bomb squad also attended the scene.

This episode comes at a time of tension between Argentina and the European Union following a decision by the South American country concerning a Spanish oil company.

The police are studying closed-circuit television pictures from the building housing the headquarters of the European Union in Argentina in an attempt to trace the perpetrators of the attack that took place during the night. According to witness statements taken by police officers from Police Station 17, which is investigating the case, one of the security guards for the building, located on via Ayachuco, noticed two men leaving a rucksack outside the door immediately before the blast. Meanwhile, police sources are saying that the president of the Supreme Court of Justice lives near the scene of the explosion. So far, no political organisation has claimed responsibility for the attack.

In view of the above, can the High Representative state whether she is aware of the matter and whether she has any further information regarding damage to property or harm to persons caused by the explosion?

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

(26 June 2012)

An improvised explosive device bomb exploded at 2.30 am on Tuesday 1 May 2012 outside the EU Delegation in Buenos Aires. The explosion caused no injuries but broke part of the delegation's entrance door and shattered windows in an adjacent building. A local security guard, on duty inside the building at the time, suffered some hearing problems and went to a hospital for a medical check up.

We were informed that an anarchist group, ‘Nucleo de conspiradores por la extension de! caos/FEDERACIÓN ANARQUISTA INFORMAL’, posted on its website a message claiming responsibility for the attack. The Delegation asked the Federal Justice to investigate the case and we are waiting for their findings. No results have yet been communicated.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004575/12

à Comissão

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: EUA: fundo de pensões vai esgotar antes do esperado

Segundo a agência Reuters, o fundo de pensões norte-americano irá ficar sem dinheiro três anos antes do inicialmente previsto, o que está a pressionar o legislador a reformar a segurança social para milhões de americanos.

O fundo ficará insolvente em 2033, enquanto os fundos da Medicare irão terminar em 2024, a data prevista ainda no ano passado.

O principal fator da revisão desta previsão prende-se com o facto de a média salarial ter crescido mais lentamente do que o esperado, o que levou a uma menor arrecadação das receitas que financiam o fundo.

Também na UE, vários países registam sérios problemas relativamente à sustentabilidade da segurança social.

Pergunto à Comissão:

Como avalia a sustentabilidade dos sistemas de proteção social, no futuro próximo, na UE?

Julga possível que o cenário americano venha a afetar todo o sistema de pensões pensado para o mundo ocidental nas últimas décadas?

Resposta dada por Olli Rehn em nome da Comissão

(22 de junho de 2012)

Em maio de 2012, a Comissão e o Comité de Política Económica apresentaram as últimas previsões de despesas ligadas ao envelhecimento da população, nomeadamente com pensões, no contexto do relatório daquele ano sobre o envelhecimento demográfico (255).

Prevê‐se que o impacto orçamental do envelhecimento demográfico seja considerável em quase todos os Estados-Membros, devendo os efeitos tornar‐se evidentes já na próxima década. Os resultados das previsões atuais confirmam que, de modo geral, o envelhecimento demográfico representa um importante desafio para a sustentabilidade das finanças públicas. No que respeita às pensões, as reformas implementadas em alguns Estados-Membros mostram algum impacto positivo. Contudo, em certos países, o âmbito das reformas tem‐se revelado insuficiente para uma estabilização futura das tendências das finanças públicas, sendo necessários mais esforços para enfrentar as consequências do aumento da quota de idosos na população. Uma das principais respostas consiste em aumentar a idade de reforma em função do aumento da esperança de vida, como já sucede em vários países.

De modo geral, os resultados das previsões revelam que, em alguns países, é necessário tomar em devida conta os futuros aumentos das despesas públicas, nomeadamente por meio da modernização das políticas sociais. Noutros países, foram já tomadas medidas políticas destinadas a limitar de forma significativa os futuros aumentos das despesas públicas.

No âmbito da atualização de 2012 do relatório da Comissão sobre a sustentabilidade (256), proceder-se-á a uma avaliação extensiva dos riscos para a sustentabilidade das finanças públicas, incluindo a identificação das respostas adequadas.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004575/12

to the Commission

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: United States: pension fund will run out sooner than expected

According to the Reuters news agency, the US pension fund will run out of money three years earlier than forecast, putting pressure on the legislature to reform social security for millions of Americans.

The fund will become insolvent in 2033, and Medicare funds will run out in 2024, the date calculated only last year.

The main reason for revising the prediction is that the average salary has risen more slowly than expected, resulting in less income to finance the fund.

Several EU countries are also having serious problems regarding the sustainability of social security.

How does the Commission assess the sustainability of EU social welfare systems in the near future?

Does it think that the US scenario could affect the entire pension system as conceived for the Western world in recent decades?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

In May 2012 the Commission and the Economic Policy Committee presented the latest projections for ageing-related public spending, including pensions, in the 2012 Ageing Report (257).

The fiscal impact of ageing is projected to be substantial in almost all Member States, with effects becoming apparent already during the next decade. The current projection results confirm, overall, that population ageing is posing a major challenge for public finance sustainability. As regards pensions, reforms implemented in some Member States are having visible positive impacts. Nonetheless, in some countries, the scale of reforms has been insufficient to stabilise future public finance trends, and further efforts are needed to cope with the consequences of an increasing share of older people in the population. A key policy response is to raise the effective retirement age in line with changes in life expectancy, as it is already happening in a number of countries.

Overall, the projection results reveal that, in some countries, there is a need to take due account of future increases in government expenditure, including through the modernisation of social policies. In other countries, policy action has already been taken, significantly limiting the future increase in government expenditure.

A comprehensive assessment of risks to the sustainability of public finances, including the identification of relevant policy responses, will be made in the 2012 update of the Commission's Sustainability Report (258).

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004576/12

à Comissão

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: Diminuição dos apoios para as Regiões Ultraperiféricas

Considerando que:

—	Na proposta da CE para as perspetivas financeiras 2014/2020, o envelope financeiro para a política de coesão aumentou de 347 mil milhões de euros para 376 mil milhões de euros, com aumento de 29 mil milhões de euros;

—	A UE está vinculada pelo artigo 349.° do Tratado a apoiar as Regiões Ultraperiféricas, por forma a compensar os seus constrangimentos estruturais, que são permanentes.

Pergunto à Comissão:

Como justifica que, apesar de a política de coesão ter mais verba disponível, se preveja dentro desta uma redução de 47 %, de cerca de 1 513 milhões de euros para cerca de 926 milhões de euros, dos apoios para as Regiões Ultraperiféricas e as regiões Nórdicas de baixa densidade?

Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão

(8 de junho de 2012)

O valor referido pelo Senhor Deputado, ou seja, 376 mil milhões de euros, inclui tanto o orçamento para a política de coesão como o orçamento para o novo Mecanismo Interligar a Europa. O orçamento da política de coesão para o período de 2014/2020 que a Comissão propôs eleva-se apenas a 336 mil milhões de euros (259). Com efeito, em comparação com o período de 2007/2013, em que orçamento para a política de coesão se elevava a 355 milhões de euros (a preços de 2011), a proposta da Comissão prevê uma redução do envelope da coesão de cerca de 19 mil milhões de euros. Assim, a redução do financiamento para as regiões ultraperiféricas está relacionada com a proposta de redução global do orçamento de coesão.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004576/12

to the Commission

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Reduction in support for the outermost regions

The financial envelope for cohesion policy has been increased from EUR 347 billion to EUR 376 billion in the Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020, an increase of EUR 29 billion. The EU is bound by Article 349 of the Treaty to support the outermost regions, as compensation for their permanent structural constraints.

I would ask the Commission:

Given that there is a larger budget available for cohesion policy, how does it justify the intended 47% reduction in support for the outermost regions and the sparsely populated Nordic regions, from around EUR 1 513 million to around EUR 926 million?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(8 June 2012)

The figure mentioned by the Honourable Member, i.e. EUR 376 billion, comprises both the budget for cohesion policy as well as the budget for the new Connecting Europe Facility. The budget for cohesion policy for the period 2014-20 proposed by the Commission only amounts to EUR 336 billion (260). Compared to the period 2007-2013, where the budget for cohesion policy amounts to EUR 355 million (in 2011 prices), the Commission proposal in fact foresees a reduction of the cohesion envelope of around EUR 19 billion. Consequently, the reduction in the funding of the outermost regions is related to the overall decrease of the cohesion budget.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004577/12

à Comissão

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: Diminuição dos apoios para as Regiões Ultraperiféricas

Considerando que:

—	Na proposta da CE para as perspetivas financeiras 2014/2020, se prevê uma redução de apenas 3 % nas verbas disponíveis para as regiões mais ricas do objetivo 2 (competitividade e emprego), de cerca de 55 mil milhões de euros, para cerca de 53 mil milhões de euros para o período de 2014/2020;

—	Estas regiões chegam já a atingir, em muitos casos, cerca de 330 % da média comunitária em termos de PIB.

Pergunta-se à Comissão:

Como é possível que Regiões Ultraperiféricas, nas quais se integram os arquipélagos dos Açores e da Madeira, que para além dos constrangimentos estruturais permanentes, são regiões de um país sujeito a um rigoroso plano de austeridade, se preveja uma diminuição das verbas disponíveis para o período 2014/2020, de cerca de 1 513 milhões de euros para cerca de 926 milhões de euros, o que equivale a uma diminuição de cerca de 47 %, a preços de 2011?

Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão

(19 de junho de 2012)

A redução do financiamento em cerca de 2 mil milhões de euros proposta pela Comissão para o futuro objetivo «Competitividade regional e emprego», ou seja, a nova categoria de regiões mais desenvolvidas, tem em conta o facto de cerca de 306 milhões de habitantes em toda a UE serem elegíveis para o novo objetivo. Por conseguinte, a intensidade média de auxílio para regiões mais desenvolvidas será inferior a 25 euros per capita por ano, o que a Comissão considera uma massa crítica suficiente para que os programas de coesão tenham um impacto económico e social.

Com base nas estatísticas mais recentes, seis das oito regiões ultraperiféricas, incluindo os Açores, serão elegíveis para o futuro objetivo de «Convergência», ou seja, a nova categoria de regiões menos desenvolvidas, as quais, de acordo com a proposta da Comissão, beneficiarão de uma intensidade média de auxílio de cerca de 200 euros per capita por ano. Apenas a Madeira fará parte da categoria das regiões mais desenvolvidas, com um PIB per capita mais elevado do que a média da UE (103 %).

A Comissão propôs uma série de medidas que abordam os problemas específicos das regiões ultraperiféricas, tais como taxas de cofinanciamento preferencial para as regiões ultraperiféricas, independentemente do nível do seu PIB, bem como uma dotação adicional no domínio da cooperação.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004577/12

to the Commission

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Reduction in aid for the outermost regions

The Commission proposal for the 2014‐2020 financial perspective reduces the grants available to the richest Objective 2 regions (competitiveness and employment) by only 3%, from approximately EUR 55 billion to approximately EUR 53 billion for the period 2014‐2020.

In many cases, these regions have already reached around 330% of the average GDP in the EU.

I would ask the Commission:

How is it possible that the outermost regions, of which the Archipelagos of the Azores and Madeira are a part, and which, in addition to ongoing structural constraints, are regions of a country subject to a rigorous austerity programme, are facing a proposed cut in the budget available for the period 2014‐2020 from approximately EUR 1513 billion to approximately EUR 926 million, which is the equivalent of close to a 47% reduction at 2011 prices?

Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2012)

The reduction in funding of around EUR 2 billion proposed by the Commission for the future regional Competitiveness and Employment objective, i.e. the new category of more developed regions, takes into account that around 306 million inhabitants across the EU will be eligible for this new objective. Hence, the average aid intensity for more developed regions will be less than EUR 25 per capita per year, which the Commission considers to be a critical mass for cohesion programmes to have an economic and social impact.

On the basis of the latest statistics, six of the eight outermost regions, including the Azores, will be eligible for the future Convergence objective, i.e. the new category of less developed regions, which will — according to the Commission proposal — benefit from an average aid intensity of around EUR 200 per capita per year. Only Madeira would be in the category of more developed regions, with a higher GDP per capita than the EU average (103%).

The Commission has proposed a series of measures which address the specific problems of the outermost regions, such as preferential co-financing rates for the outermost regions irrespective of their GDP level, as well as an extra allocation in the field of cooperation.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004578/12

à Comissão

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: Apoios específicos aos apicultores afetados pela seca

Considerando que:

—	Em resultado do fenómeno da seca em Portugal, a Federação de Apicultores de Portugal (FAP) considera imperativo um apoio extraordinário para a aquisição de alimentos para a manutenção dos seus enxames e apiários ativos;

—	O setor da apicultura está gravemente ameaçado em todo o mundo, registando-se perdas a um ritmo 100 a 1 000 vezes superior ao normal;

—

O referido setor desempenha um papel estratégico na sociedade, tendo em conta o serviço público e ambiental que prestam os apicultores, e que esta atividade é um valioso exemplo de «emprego verde» (melhoria e manutenção da biodiversidade, equilíbrio ecológico e conservação da flora), bem como um modelo de produção sustentável no meio rural;

—	Há um número crescente de jovens agricultores a apostar no setor do mel e, por isso, sem grandes possibilidades monetárias para fazer face a esta situação.

Pergunto à Comissão:

Tem conhecimento desta situação?

Existem, ou estão previstas no espaço da UE, ajudas financeiras extraordinárias ao setor apícola, para compra de alimentos?

Resposta dada por Dacian Cioloș em nome da Comissão

(26 de junho de 2012)

A Comissão está plenamente ciente da importância das abelhas para a polinização e da sua contribuição para assegurar a biodiversidade, bem como da valiosa contribuição dos apicultores para a economia rural. Quanto aos efeitos da seca, Portugal levantou a questão e solicitou a ativação de medidas especiais. Os mecanismos existentes que podem ser ativados e que poderão ser pertinentes para os apicultores são a eventual ajuda nacional com a aplicação de limites de minimis, bem como as regras relativas aos auxílios estatais e o possível ajustamento dos programas de desenvolvimento rural pertinentes.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004578/12

to the Commission

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Special support for beekeepers affected by the drought

Due to the drought in Portugal, the Portuguese Beekeeping Association (Federação de Apicultores de Portugal) urgently requires special support to purchase feed in order to maintain its active swarms and bee hives. The beekeeping industry is under serious threat throughout the world, recording losses at a rate 100‐1 000 times greater than normal. This industry plays a strategic role in society, due to the public and environmental service that beekeepers provide, and is a fine example of ‘green employment’ (improvement and preservation of biodiversity, ecological balance and flora conservation), as well as a sustainable production model in rural areas. A growing number of young farmers are investing in the honey sector, and they do not have the financial resources to cope with this situation.

I would ask the Commission:

Is it aware of this situation?

Is there, or does the EU plan to provide, any special financial support for the beekeeping industry to purchase the required feed?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

The Commission is fully aware of the importance of bees for pollination and their contribution to ensuring biodiversity as well as the valuable role played by beekeepers in the rural economy. As regards the effects of the drought Portugal raised the issue and requested the activation of special measures. The existing mechanisms which could be activated and which may be relevant for beekeepers are possible national aid with the application of de minimis limits, as well as the rules applying to state aid and possible adjustment to the relevant rural development programmes.

(Versão portuguesa)

Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-004580/12

à Comissão

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 de maio de 2012)

Assunto: George Soros — crise do euro pode destruir a UE

Recentemente, o norte-americano George Soros afirmou, numa conferência em Copenhaga, que a crise da zona euro está a ganhar cada vez mais força e a minar a coesão da União Europeia, porque os decisores estão a aplicar os remédios errados.

Segundo o milionário nascido na Hungria, a crise do euro estaria a ser resolvida pelos decisores políticos como uma crise orçamental, apesar de ela ter começado com o colapso do sistema bancário nos Estados Unidos e de ter sido agravada devido à divergência de competitividade entre os países europeus.

Neste contexto, pergunto à Comissão como entende a afirmação de George Soros, segundo a qual a divergência de competitividade entre os países europeus é uma das principais consequências da crise do euro?

Resposta dada por Olli Rehn em nome da Comissão

(22 de junho de 2012)

A Comissão não tem por hábito comentar artigos de imprensa nem declarações de personalidades políticas ou de outras personalidades dos Estados-Membros. A Comissão apresentou a sua análise da crise da dívida soberana na área do euro em vários documentos, dos quais se ressalta a Análise Anual do Crescimento de 2012 (261). A Comissão definiu também um plano de ação abrangente (262). Este plano, em conjunto com as medidas já tomadas, nomeadamente sobre supervisão bancária e agências de notação de risco, mostra de forma inequívoca que a UE tem procurado abarcar todos os aspetos da crise.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004580/12

to the Commission

Nuno Melo (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: The euro crisis could destroy the EU, says George Soros

At a recent conference in Copenhagen George Soros, an American, said that the euro area crisis is becoming ever more serious and is undermining the cohesion of the European Union, given that decision‐makers are applying the wrong remedies.

According to the Hungarian-born millionaire, the euro crisis is being dealt with by policy‐makers as a fiscal crisis, even though it started with the collapse of the banking system in the United States and has been aggravated by differences in competitiveness among the European countries.

In this context, how does the Commission understand George Soros’s assertion that the differences in competitiveness among the European countries are one of the main consequences of the euro crisis?

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

It is Commission policy not to comment on articles appearing in the press or on statements by politicians or other individuals in the Member States. The Commission has provided its analysis of the sovereign debt crisis in the euro area in various documents, among them importantly the 2012 Annual Growth Survey (263). It has also set out the blueprint for a comprehensive response (264). This blueprint and the actions taken already, including on bank supervision and credit rating agencies, show clearly that the EU has been and is addressing all aspects of the crisis.

(Version française)

Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-004581/12

à la Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(4 mai 2012)

Objet: Publication retardée du rapport annuel de l'Agence européenne des droits fondamentaux sur les discriminations à l'encontre des Roms

L'Agence européenne des droits fondamentaux devait rendre, lundi 23 avril, son rapport annuel sur les discriminations des Roms, sévère sur le cas de la France.

Mais elle en aurait retardé la publication en raison de l'élection présidentielle française.

La Commission européenne semble craindre l'instrumentalisation politique de cette enquête d'une ampleur inédite, pour laquelle 80 000 personnes ont été interrogées dans 11 pays, et dont les conclusions sont sévères pour Paris.

La Commission peut-elle me préciser les raisons du retard de la publication du rapport?

Ne s'agit-il pas de protéger le président sortant de tout impact négatif que ce rapport pourrait avoir dans le cadre de sa campagne à l'élection présidentielle?

Réponse donnée par Mme Reding au nom de la Commission

(1er juin 2012)

L'Agence des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne («FRA») est un organe indépendant par rapport à la Commission, et cette dernière n'assume pas la responsabilité de la gestion quotidienne de son activité. En tant qu'acteur du cadre de l'Union européenne pour les stratégies nationales d'intégration des Roms pour la période allant jusque 2020, la Commission fait rapport annuellement au Parlement européen et au Conseil sur les progrès réalisés dans l'intégration de la population rom dans les États membres et sur la réalisation des objectifs d'intégration des Roms fixés par l'UE.

Les rapports de la Commission se fonderont sur le projet pilote d'enquête sur les ménages roms, menée dans le cadre du programme des Nations unies pour le développement en coopération avec la Banque mondiale et l'Agence des droits fondamentaux de l'UE. À cette fin, la Commission a demandé à l'Agence d'étendre cette enquête sur les ménages roms à l'ensemble des États membres et de la mener régulièrement pour mesurer les progrès sur le terrain. L'Agence publiera les premiers résultats de cette enquête au printemps 2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004581/12

to the Commission

Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Delayed publication of the annual report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights on discrimination against the Roma

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights was due to publish its annual report on discrimination against the Roma on 23 April 2012. In the case of France, the report is harsh.

Apparently, it has delayed publication because of the French presidential election.

The Commission seems to fear that this survey, which has been on an unprecedented scale, with 80 000 people interviewed in 11 countries, and whose conclusions are serious for Paris, will be used for political ends.

Can the Commission clarify the reasons for the delay in publishing the report?

Is this not an attempt to protect the outgoing president from any negative impact the report might have on his presidential election campaign?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(1 June 2012)

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) is an independent organ from the Commission, which bears no responsibility for the daily management of the Agency's tasks.

As part of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020, the Commission will report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on progress in the integration of the Roma population in Member States and on the achievement of the EU Roma integration goals.

The Commission's reporting will build on the Roma household survey pilot project carried out by the United Nations Development Programme in cooperation with the World Bank and the EU Fundamental Rights Agency. To this end, the Commission requested that the Fundamental Rights Agency expands the household survey on Roma to all Member States and to run it regularly to measure progress on the ground. The Agency will publish the first results of this survey in spring 2012.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004582/12

a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(4 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Colonización de Israel en Cisjordania: legalización de los asentamientos ilegales de Brujín, Rejelim y Sansana

Según denunció el pasado 24 de abril el grupo pacifista israelí «Paz Ahora», el Gobierno de Israel ha apoyado la creación de tres nuevas colonias en Cisjordania por primera vez desde 1990 al legalizar los asentamientos ilegales de Brujín, Rejelim y Sansana.

Esta nueva violación del Derecho internacional, que establece como ilegales todos los asentamientos construidos en los territorios ocupados tras la guerra de 1967, quedó reflejada en un anuncio gubernamental oficial que dice: «El equipo ministerial encargado por el Gobierno ha decidido legalizar las comunidades de Sansana, Rejelim y Brujín, que fueron establecidas en los noventa con base en anteriores decisiones gubernamentales». Estos tres asentamientos, además de ser ilegales como el arresto de asentamientos según el Derecho internacional, estaban, hasta la fecha, categorizados por las autoridades israelíes como territorios «no autorizados» que el Gobierno de Israel se había comprometido a evacuar como parte de la «hoja de ruta» para la paz firmada en el 2003.

En un contexto marcado por los constantes ataques del Ejército israelí sobre territorio palestino, el mantenimiento de un bloqueo ilegal sobre Gaza, así como la permanente expansión ilegal de las colonias israelíes, la Autoridad Nacional Palestina envió hace varias semanas una carta al Presidente Netanyahu explicando sus demandas para volver a la mesa de negociación. Tal y como afirman fuentes de la Presidencia de la Autoridad Nacional Palestina, la decisión de legalizar estos asentamientos supone «una nueva elección israelí de los asentamientos, en vez de la paz», suponiendo una nueva y flagrante violación del Derecho internacional y dificultando enormemente la consecución de una solución al conflicto basada en la existencia de dos Estados con las fronteras anteriores a 1967, tal y como establecen diferentes resoluciones de las Naciones Unidas.

1.	¿Se ha dirigido, o piensa dirigirse, formalmente la Alta Representante al Gobierno israelí para mostrar su rechazo frontal a esta medida?

2.	¿Ha alertado la Alta Representante al Gobierno de Israel con la posibilidad de que la Unión Europea congele el Acuerdo de Asociación vigente por el incumplimiento constante de lo establecido en la cláusula segunda del mismo, relativa al respeto de los derechos humanos y del Derecho internacional?

3.

A luz de la ineficiencia de las medidas de presión adoptadas por la UE hasta la fecha, tal y como demuestran los constantes incumplimientos del Derecho internacional y de unos compromisos mínimos por parte del Gobierno de Israel, ¿considera la Alta Representante necesario endurecer la estrategia adoptada por la UE respecto a Israel?

Respuesta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Sra. Ashton en nombre de la Comisión

(10 de julio de 2012)

La posición de la UE sobre los asentamientos está clara. De acuerdo con el Derecho Internacional y con independencia de las recientes decisiones del Gobierno de Israel, los asentamientos siguen siendo ilegales. La UE no reconocerá ningún cambio en las fronteras previas a 1967, tampoco en el caso de Jerusalén, que no se atenga a lo acordado por las partes.

El crecimiento de asentamientos en Cisjordania reduce las perspectivas para que la solución de la existencia de dos Estados sea viable.

El reciente anuncio del Gobierno de Israel sobre los planes para construir más de 800 nuevas viviendas en asentamientos, así como para relocalizar a algunos de los colonos procedentes de Ulpana en el territorio palestino ocupado son inaceptables.

Jerusalén Este está quedando cada vez más separada del resto de Cisjordania. Los planes para la ampliación de importantes asentamientos en torno a la franja meridional de la ciudad plantean el riesgo de que esta situación se consolide y debilitan aún más la perspectiva de Jerusalén como futura capital de dos Estados.

En sus relaciones bilaterales con Israel, la UE plantea regularmente la cuestión de los asentamientos. El Consejo de Asuntos Exteriores de 14 de mayo también emitió rotundas conclusiones sobre estos asuntos.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004582/12

to the Commission

Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Israeli colonisation in the West Bank: legalisation of the illegal settlements of Bruchín, Rechelim and Sansana

As the Israeli peace group ‘Peace Now’ reported on 24 April 2012, the Israeli Government has supported the creation of three new colonies in the West Bank for the first time since 1990 by legalising the illegal settlements of Bruchín, Rechelim and Sansana.

This new violation of international law, under which all of the settlements built in the territories occupied after the 1967 ware are illegal, is reflected in the official government announcement that the ministerial team mandated by the Government had decided to legalise the communities of Sansana, Rechelim and Bruchín that were built in the 1990s based on previous governmental decisions. These three settlements, aside from being illegal according to the suspension of settlements under international law, had hitherto been categorised by the Israeli authorities as ‘unauthorised’ territories that the Israeli Government had committed to evacuating as part of the road map for peace signed in 2003.

In a context marked by constant attacks by the Israeli Army on Palestinian territory, the ongoing illegal blockade on Gaza, and the permanent illegal expansion of Israeli colonies, the Palestinian National Authority sent a letter to President Netanyahu several weeks ago explaining its demands for a return to the negotiating table. As sources liked to the President of the Palestinian National Authority confirm, the decision to legalise these settlements reflects a new Israeli choice of settlements instead of peace, implying a new and flagrant violation of international law and making it enormously difficult to reach a solution to the conflict based on the existence of the two States with pre-1967 borders, as established by various United Nations resolutions.

1.	Has the High Representative formally contacted, or does she plan to contact, the Israeli Government in order to express her outright rejection of this measure?

2.	Has the High Representative alerted the Israeli Government to the possibility that the European Union may freeze the current Association Agreement owing to the constant infringement of the provisions of its second clause regarding respect for human rights and international law?

3.

In light of the ineffectiveness of the means of exerting pressure adopted by the EU to date, demonstrated by the constant breaches of international law as well as minimum commitments by the Israeli Government, does the High Representative think it necessary to toughen up the strategy adopted by the EU regarding Israel?

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

(10 July 2012)

The EU position on settlements is clear. Settlements remain illegal under international law, irrespective of recent decisions by the government of Israel. The EU will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 lines including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties.

The growth of settlements in the West Bank reduces prospects for a viable two-state solution.

The recent announcement by the Israeli Government of plans to build over 800 additional settlement housing units as well as relocating some of the settlers from Ulpana within the occupied Palestinian territory are unacceptable.

East Jerusalem is becoming ever more detached from the rest of West Bank. Plans for major settlement expansion around the city’s southern flank risk cementing this and the prospect of Jerusalem as future capital of two states is further undermined.

The EU regularly raises the question of settlements in its bi-lateral relations with Israel. The Foreign Affairs Council of 14 May also issued robust conclusions on these matters.

(Dansk udgave)

Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-004583/12

til Kommissionen

Christel Schaldemose (S&D)

(4. maj 2012)

Om: Revision af direktiv om anerkendelse af erhvervsmæssige kvalifikationer

Kommissionen fremsatte den 19. december 2011 et forslag til direktiv om ændring af direktiv 2005/36/EF om anerkendelse af erhvervsmæssige kvalifikationer (KOM(2011)0883), også kendt som anerkendelsesdirektivet. Parlamentets Udvalg om Det Indre Marked og Forbrugerbeskyttelse er i gang med behandlingen af forslaget, og jeg har følgende spørgsmål vedrørende indholdet af Kommissionens forslag.

I artikel 7, stk. 4, i udkastet til revideret direktiv lægges der op til, at mulighederne for at indføre forhåndskontrol af tjenesteudbyderes kvalifikationer begrænses til »konsekvenser for den offentlige sundhed og sikkerhed« og »tjenestemodtagerens sundhed og sikkerhed«.

Betyder det, at medlemsstater ikke længere kan kræve forhåndsgodkendelse af udenlandske arbejderes kvalifikationer ud fra hensynet til tjenesteudbyderens sundhed og sikkerhed?

Her tænkes særligt på arbejde med kraner og stilladser. I Danmark giver uddannelse i at føre kraner ret til at betjene forskellige krantyper, og det er nødvendigt at betragte kompetenceprofilen som ét hele, da kraner arbejder under yderst komplicerede forhold. For så vidt angår stilladser er der i Danmark ret strenge uddannelseskrav. Der kræves således 3 ugers kursus for at få ret til at opstille systemstillads. Dette krav er indført både af hensyn til den offentlige sikkerhed og af hensyn til arbejdsudførernes sikkerhed. Vil det fortsat være muligt at kræve forhåndsgodkendelse på dette område?

Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Michel Barnier

(29. juni 2012)

Bestemmelserne i artikel 7, stk. 4, i forslaget til ændring af direktiv 2005/36/EF, som det ærede medlem refererer til, er allerede en del af direktivet. De eneste ændringer er, at medlemsstaterne skal præcisere, hvilke erhverv der berøres af disse bestemmelser, og at de skal forelægge Kommissionen en begrundelse for hvert enkelt erhverv.

Med hensyn til arbejde med kraner og stilladser kan de danske myndigheder i henhold til artikel 7, stk. 4, kontrollere kvalifikationerne hos de tjenesteydere, der kommer fra andre medlemsstater for permanent eller midlertidigt at udøve erhvervsmæssige aktiviteter, hvis de vurderer, at denne kontrol er nødvendig for at undgå alvorlig skade for tjenestemodtagerens sundhed eller sikkerhed. Hvis de foreslåede ændringer træder i kraft, vil Danmark skulle sikre, at betjening af kraner og stilladser er opført på listen over erhverv, der er omfattet af artikel 7, stk. 4. Dette skal sikre en konsekvent kontrol, som de involverede parter forventer og kan forberede sig på. Danmark skal derudover forelægge Kommissionen en detaljeret redegørelse for de sundheds‐ og sikkerhedsaspekter, som ligger til grund for anvendelsen af bestemmelserne i artikel 7, stk. 4, på disse erhverv.

For at sikre arbejdstageres sikkerhed og sundhed fastsætter direktiv 2009/104/EF (265) minimumskrav til brug af arbejdsudstyr, dvs. maskiner, apparater, værktøjer eller installationer.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004583/12

to the Commission

Christel Schaldemose (S&D)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Revision of the directive on the recognition of professional qualifications

On 19 December 2011, the Commission submitted a proposal for a directive amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications and regulation on administrative cooperation through the internal market Information System (COM(2011)0883), also known as the Recognition Directive. The Committee on the internal market and Consumer Protection is discussing the proposal, and I have the following question regarding the content of the Commission’s proposal.

Article 7(4) of the draft revised directive suggests that the possibility for carrying out prior checks of the qualifications of service providers be limited to those that may have ‘public health or safety implications’ and ‘where the purpose of the check is to avoid serious damage to the health or safety of the service recipient’.

Does this mean that Member States could no longer require prior recognition of foreign workers’ qualifications with regard to the health and safety of the service provider?

This is with particular reference to work with cranes and scaffolding. In Denmark, crane operator training qualifies the operator to work with different types of cranes, and it is thus necessary to see the competence profile as a whole, as cranes operate under extremely complicated conditions. With regard to scaffolding, Denmark has very strict requirements with regard to training. To obtain permission to erect scaffolding, a three-week course must be taken. This requirement was introduced in the interests of both public safety and scaffolders’ personal safety. Will it still be possible to require prior recognition in this area?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2012)

The provisions of Article 7(4) of the proposal for the modernisation of Directive 2005/36/EC to which the Honourable Member is referring are already part of the directive today. The only changes relate to an obligation for Member States to specify the professions affected by these provisions and provide the Commission with justifications with respect to each specified profession.

With regards to work with cranes and scaffolding, the Danish authorities can verify the qualifications of operators coming from other Member States to provide services on temporary or occasional basis under Article 7(4), if they consider this to be necessary to avoid serious damage to the health or safety of the service recipient. Should the amendments proposed enter into force, Denmark will have to ensure that operation of cranes and erection of scaffolding are included on a list of all the professions to which Article 7(4) applies. This is to ensure that the verification is conducted consistently and that the professionals concerned expect it and can prepare accordingly. In addition, Denmark will have to provide the Commission with a detailed explanation of the health and safety implications which are the reason for applying the provisions of Article 7(4) to these professional activities.

To protect the health and safety of workers, Directive 2009/104/EC (266) imposes minimum requirements for the use of work equipment, i.e. any machine, apparatus, tool or installation.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-004586/12

adresată Comisiei

Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)

(4 mai 2012)

Subiect: Consolidarea cooperării dintre statele membre în domeniul confiscării și al recuperării activelor: măsuri de consolidarea a birourilor de recuperare a activelor din statele membre

În nota sa din 12 martie (MEMO/12/179), Comisia menționează statisticile existente pentru 2009 care estimează suma profitului provenit din săvârșirea de infracțiuni la 2,1 bilioane de dolari americani. Deși salutăm propunerea de consolidare a normelor comune privind înghețarea și confiscarea activelor ca un pas necesar în crearea unui regim al UE pentru sechestrarea banilor „murdari”, am dori să subliniem că normele trebuie să fie însoțite de un cadru instituțional funcțional. Articolul 1 din Decizia 2007/845/JAI a Consiliului prevede că statele membre înființează sau desemnează un birou național de recuperare a activelor, în scopul de a facilita urmărirea și identificarea profiturilor ilegale. Comisia subliniază importanța consolidării cooperării în acest domeniu în Comunicarea sa din 20 noiembrie 2008 intitulată „Produsele provenite din activități de criminalitate organizată — Garantarea principiului potrivit căruia «criminalitatea nu aduce venituri»”, în care afirmă că existența unor agenții naționale eficace care sunt însărcinate cu urmărirea activelor de acest tip este o condiție prealabilă pentru reușita operațiunilor de confiscare. Punerea în aplicare a Deciziei 2007/845/JAI a Consiliului a fost neuniformă. Raportul Comisie din 4 decembrie 2011 evidențiază lipsa unor notificări din partea mai multor state membre.

1. Ce măsuri intenționează Comisia să adopte pentru a asigura punerea în aplicare completă a Deciziei 2007/845/JAI a Consiliului în ceea ce privește cooperarea, schimbul de informații, respectarea normelor privind protecția datelor și schimbul de cele mai bune practici între birourilor de recuperare a activelor din statele membre?

2. Ce măsuri intenționează Comisia să adopte pentru a susține activitățile Biroului Europol pentru active provenite din săvârșirea de infracțiuni?

Răspuns dat de dl Malmström în numele Comisiei

(29 iunie 2012)

În cadrul Platformei birourilor de recuperare a activelor din UE, Comisia a organizat în 2009 zece reuniuni și conferințe la nivel înalt cu birourile naționale de recuperare a activelor, în scopul de a facilita schimbul de informații și de bune practici privind identificarea și urmărirea activelor provenite din săvârșirea de infracțiuni. Ca rezultat al acestor inițiative, 25 de state membre au notificat Comisiei informații privind propriile birouri de recuperare a activelor, iar în cele două țări rămase, sunt în curs de înființare structuri de acest tip. În plus, numărul cererilor de schimburi de informații între birourile de recuperare a activelor este în continuă creștere. În cadrul Platformei birourilor de recuperare a activelor sunt discutate în mod regulat aspecte esențiale, cum ar fi utilizarea unui sistem securizat pentru schimbul de informații, accesul la toate bazele de date relevante, resursele și competențele birourilor de recuperare a activelor.

Biroul Europol pentru active provenite din săvârșirea de infracțiuni este pe deplin implicat în aceste activități. Reuniunile Platformei birourilor de recuperare a activelor din UE sunt pregătite în comun și coprezidate de serviciile competente ale Comisiei și de Biroul Europol pentru active provenite din săvârșirea de infracțiuni.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004586/12

to the Commission

Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Enhancing cooperation between Member States in the area of confiscation and asset recovery: Measures to strengthen Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) in Member States

In its 12 March memo (MEMO/12/179) the Commission quoted existing statistics for 2009 which estimated the amount of criminal profit at USD 2.1 trillion. While we welcome the proposal to strengthen common rules on the freezing and confiscation of assets as a necessary step in the creation of an EU regime on the seizure of ‘dirty’ money, we would like to point out that rules must be accompanied by a functioning institutional framework. Article 1 of Council Decision 2007/845/JHA requests that Member States set up or designate national Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) to facilitate the tracing and identification of illegal profits. The Commission emphasised the significance of enhancing cooperation in this field in its 20 November 2008 Communication entitled ‘Proceeds of organised crime — ensuring that crime does not pay’, in which it stated that effective national agencies charged with tracing assets are a precondition for successful confiscation. Implementation of Council Decision 2007/845/JHA has been uneven. The Commission’s report of 4 December 2011 highlighted missing notifications by several Member States.

1. What measures does the Commission intend to adopt to ensure the full implementation of Council Decision 2007/845/JAI in relation to cooperation, exchange of information, compliance with data protection rules and the exchange of best practices between Asset Recovery Offices in Member States?

2. What measures does the Commission plan to adopt to support the activities of Europol’s Criminal Asset Bureau?

Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2012)

Under the EU Asset Recovery Offices Platform, the Commission organised since 2009 ten meetings and high level conferences with national Asset Recovery Offices (AROs) in order to facilitate the exchange of information and best practices on the identification and tracing of criminal assets. As a result of these initiatives, 25 Member States have notified their AROs to the Commission and structures are being established in the two missing countries. Moreover, the number of requests for information exchanged between AROs is steadily increasing. Vital issues for the AROs such as the use of a secure system to exchange information, the access to all relevant databases, the resources and powers of the AROs, are regularly discussed in the ARO platform.

The Europol Criminal Asset Bureau is fully involved in these activities. The EU ARO Platform meetings are jointly prepared and co-chaired between the relevant Commission services and the Europol Criminal Asset Bureau.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004590/12

an die Kommission

Martin Kastler (PPE)

(4. Mai 2012)

Betrifft: Differenzierung zwischen Ehrenamt und Arbeitszeit im EU-Recht

2011 war das „Europäische Jahr für den Freiwilligendienst“ — mit einem klaren Bekenntnis der EU zum ehrenamtlichen Engagement. Über 100 Millionen Menschen in Europa engagieren sich ehrenamtlich. Fast jeder vierte Europäer ist freiwillig und unentgeltlich tätig. Viele davon im sozialen Bereich: Feuerwehren, Rettungsdienste oder Katastrophenschutz. Gerade im technischen Ehrenamt — oft aber auch in anderen ehrenamtlichen Führungspositionen — ergeben sich juristische Spezialfälle eines Arbeitnehmer-Arbeitgeber-Verhältnisses.

Anders als viele nationale Gesetze grenzt die arbeitsschutzrechtliche Rahmenrichtlinie 89/391/EWG den Arbeitnehmerbegriff bislang nicht klar vom Ehrenamt ab. Das sorgt immer wieder für rechtliche Grauzonen und Verunsicherung bei den Ehrenamtlichen in Europa.

1. Hat die Kommission eine Erklärung für diesen Sachverhalt und seine Ursache?

2. Gibt es konkrete Bestrebungen und den politischen Willen der Kommission, eine im EU-Arbeitsrecht verankerte Arbeitnehmerdefinition zu finden, die klar und unmissverständlich zwischen Arbeitszeit und Ehrenamt differenziert?

3. Ist sich die Kommission der Tatsache bewusst, dass es im Fall einer Höchstarbeitszeitgrenze im Rahmen der Arbeitszeitrichtlinie zu neuen rechtlichen Unklarheiten bezüglich des Ehrenamtes kommen wird, wenn der Arbeitnehmerbegriff in der Richtlinie 89/391/EWG nicht parallel geändert wird?

Antwort von Herrn Andor im Namen der Kommission

(27. Juni 2012)

Die Definition des Begriffs „Arbeitnehmer“ in Artikel 3 Buchstabe a der Richtlinie 89/391/EWG (267) verweist auf ein Beschäftigungsverhältnis zwischen Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber. Von einem Arbeitsentgelt ist dagegen nicht die Rede. Somit schließt die Definition in der Richtlinie grundsätzlich auch Personen ein, die freiwillig tätig sind. Der Gerichtshof hat jedoch festgestellt, dass diese Definition nicht für die Arbeitszeitrichtlinie (268) gilt: Im Kontext jener Richtlinie sei der Begriff „Arbeitnehmer“ anhand objektiver Kriterien zu definieren, die das Arbeitsverhältnis charakterisieren (269).

Da es unterschiedlichste Freiwilligentätigkeiten gibt, ist auch die Frage, inwieweit eine freiwillig tätige Person den für einen Arbeitnehmer geltenden Kriterien entspricht, unterschiedlich zu beantworten. Die Kommission hat festgestellt (270), dass es sehr schwierig wäre, allgemeine Regeln auf ein solch breites Spektrum anzuwenden. Ferner hat sie 2011 in ihrer Mitteilung zur Freiwilligentätigkeit (271) unterstrichen, dass Freiwillige „nicht als Alternative zu normalen Arbeitskräften betrachtet werden“ dürfen.

Zudem bestehen auch bei der Definition des Begriffs „Beschäftigter“ und den dafür verwendeten rechtlichen Kriterien Unterschiede zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten. In ihrem Grünbuch zur Modernisierung des Arbeitsrechts (272) regte die Kommission 2006 die Erarbeitung einer gemeinsamen Definition an, fand für diese Initiative jedoch nicht genügend Unterstützung (273).

Die Kommission hat keinen Vorschlag zur Anwendung der in der Arbeitszeitrichtlinie festgelegten Arbeitszeitbegrenzungen auf freiwillige Tätigkeiten vorgelegt. Derzeit verhandeln die Sozialpartner auf europäischer Ebene über die Überarbeitung dieser Richtlinie, und die Kommission hat erklärt, dass sie keine Vorschläge zur Änderung der Richtlinie unterbreiten wird, solange die im Vertrag vorgesehene Frist für die Verhandlungen zwischen den Sozialpartnern läuft.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004590/12

to the Commission

Martin Kastler (PPE)

(4 May 2012)

Subject: Differentiation between voluntary work and working time in EU legislation

The year 2011was designated ‘European Year of Volunteering’, with the EU making a clear commitment to voluntary service. Over 100 million people in Europe are engaged in voluntary service. Almost one in four Europeans is involved in voluntary, unpaid work. Many of them are involved in social areas (fire services, emergency rescue services, civil protection). Particularly in technical voluntary service, but also frequently in other unpaid management positions, employer‐employee relationships constitute special legal cases.

Unlike many national laws, Framework Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work, in its current form, fails to make a clear differentiation between the terms employee and voluntary worker. This frequently leads to legal grey areas and uncertainty for Europe’s volunteers.

1. Can the Commission explain this situation and the reason behind it?

2. Are there specific efforts being made and does the political will exist within the Commission to find a definition of employee, based in EU labour law, that makes a clear and unambiguous distinction between working time and voluntary activity?

3. Is the Commission aware of the fact that if a new maximum limit for working time is introduced as part of the Working Time Directive, new legal uncertainties will arise in relation to voluntary work unless the meaning of the term employee is also amended in Directive 89/391/EEC?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

The definition of ‘worker’ in Article 3(a) of Directive 89/391/EEC (274) refers to an employment relationship between any person employed and an employer. It makes no reference to remuneration. Thus, persons performing voluntary work fall in principle within the scope of that definition in that directive. However, the Court has held that that definition does not apply to the Working Time Directive (275), where the concept of ‘worker’ should be based on objective criteria characterising the employment relationship (276).

The nature of voluntary activities and the extent to which a person performing them may meet the criteria to be considered a worker vary greatly. The Commission has stated (277) that it would be very difficult to apply general rules to such a range of situations. As a general principle, moreover, in its 2011 Communication on volunteering (278), the Commission emphasised that volunteers ‘must not be considered as an alternative to a regular workforce’.

The definition of ‘employee’ and the legal criteria used also vary with the Member State. In its 2006 Green Paper on modernising labour law (279), the Commission suggested working towards a common definition, but this did not receive the necessary support (280).

The Commission has made no proposal to apply the working time limits laid down in the Working Time Directive to voluntary work. The social partners at European level are currently negotiating on the review of that directive. The Commission has also stated that it would not put forward any proposal to amend the directive during the period provided for their negotiations under the Treaty.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004597/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(7 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Fendimetrazina, farmaco illegale

La fendimetrazina è un farmaco anti-fame venduto in Italia, nonostante sia illegale dal 2000. Una storia controversa che lo porta dall'essere bandito nel 2000 dal Ministero della salute perché dannoso all'essere poi venduto a partire dal 2006. Solo nell'agosto 2011 la fendimetrazina viene inserita tra le sostanze «stupefacenti e psicotrope», ma i medici continuano a prescriverla.

La fendimetrazina fa parte delle anfetamine e in base a un decreto degli anni ’90 avrebbe dovuto essere inserita tra gli stupefacenti. L'Ufficio stupefacenti del ministero non avrebbe dunque vigilato sull’inserimento. Il primo divieto di commercializzazione arriva solo nel 2000 e viene messo in atto solo dopo un lungo lasso di tempo in cui case farmaceutiche hanno lucrato dalle vendite della droga, che possiede un forte potere tossicomanigeno. Oltre all'Ufficio stupefacenti è finita nel mirino della magistratura anche la Direzione generale dei farmaci e dei dispositivi medici, con l'accusa di omissione in atti d'ufficio.

Alla luce di quanto precede, potrebbe la Commissione far sapere:

Se l'Agenzia europea per i medicinali (EMA), che coordina la valutazione scientifica della qualità, sicurezza ed efficacia dei prodotti farmaceutici, ha in precedenza preso in esame il farmaco summenzionato?

Quali sono le disposizioni, per il farmaco in questione, stabilite dal sistema europeo di farmacovigilanza?

Risposta di John Dalli a nome della Commissione

(28 giugno 2012)

Per quanto concerne le attività dell'Agenzia europea per i medicinali, la fendimetrazina è stata oggetto di due riesami relativi alle sostanze anoressanti eseguiti dal comitato per i medicinali per uso umano (CHMP) ex comitato per le specialità medicinali (CPMP).

Nel maggio 1995 la fendimetrazina è stata inclusa in un riesame avviato a causa di preoccupazioni quanto alla correlazione tra l'uso di sostanze anoressanti e il manifestarsi di ipertensione polmonare primaria. In seguito a tale riesame (281) si sono concordate modifiche da apportare al foglietto informativo, compresa la limitazione della durata del trattamento, avvertimenti e indicazione degli effetti indesiderabili.

Un secondo riesame è stato avviato nell'agosto 1998 in seguito alla segnalazione di disfunzioni cardiovalvolari in relazione a prodotti contenenti amfepramone e fentermina che hanno un meccanismo d'azione affine a quello di altre sostanze anoressanti quali la fendimetrazina. Nel suo parere finale (282) il CPMP ha concluso che la valutazione rischio/beneficio era sfavorevole, ragion per cui è stata ritirata l'autorizzazione all'immissione in commercio.

Tuttavia, questi riesami sono stati al centro di cause presso la Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea (283) la quale ha ritenuto che, in forza della legislazione UE sui medicinali in vigore a quell'epoca, tali riesami non erano di competenza dell'UE. Di conseguenza, non essendovi medicinali contenenti fendimetrazina autorizzati a livello centrale, la sorveglianza di tali prodotti rimaneva di responsabilità degli Stati membri. È importante notare che dall'epoca di tali riesami la farmacovigilanza è stata rafforzata, in particolare grazie alla legislazione adottata nel 2010 (284).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004597/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(7 May 2012)

Subject: Phendimetrazine, illegal drug

Phendimetrazine is an anti-hunger drug sold in Italy, although it has been illegal since 2000. A controversial story led to it being banned in 2000 by the Ministry of Health as being harmful, only to then be sold from 2006. Only in August 2011, was phendimetrazine included in the list of ‘narcotic and psychotropic’ substances, but doctors continue to prescribe it.

Phendimetrazine is an amphetamine and it should have been included in the list of narcotic substances under the terms of a decree passed in the 1990s. It seems, however, that the Ministry’s Narcotics Office did not ensure its inclusion. The first sales ban was introduced in 2000 and was only applied after a long delay, during which pharmaceutical companies profited from sales of the drug, which has a strong addictive effect. Besides the Narcotics Office, the judiciary has also targeted the Directorate for Drugs and Medical Devices, which has been accused of failing to perform its official duties.

In view of the above, could the Commission state:

Whether the European Medicines Agency, which coordinates the scientific assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy of pharmaceutical products, has previously examined the aforementioned drug?

What provisions have been established for the drug in question by the European system of pharmacovigilance?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2012)

Regarding the activities of the European Medicines Agency, phendimetrazine has been the subject of two reviews of anorectic agents performed by the Scientific Committee for Medicines for Human Use (CHMP) formerly Committee of Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP).

In May 1995 phendimatrizine was included in a review initiated due to concerns about the relationship between use of anorectic agents and the occurrence of primary pulmonary hypertension. As an outcome of this review (285) changes to the Product Information were agreed, including the limitation of the duration of treatment, warnings and undesirable effects.

A second review was initiated in August 1998 following reports of cardiac valve disorders with products containing amfepramone and phentermine which share a similar mechanism of action of other anorectic agents such as phendimetrazine. In its final Opinion (286) the CPMP concluded that the benefit/risk balance was unfavourable and therefore the Marketing Authorisations should be withdrawn.

However, these reviews were subject to court cases (287) where the Court of Justice of the European Union took the view that under the EU medicines legislation at that time, these reviews were not an EU competence. As a result, as there were no centrally authorised medicines containing phendimetrazine, surveillance of these products remained the responsibility of the Member States. It is important to note that since these reviews pharmacovigilance has been strengthened, in particular through the legislation adopted in 2010 (288).

(Suomenkielinen versio)

Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-004607/12

komissiolle (Varapuheenjohtajalle/Korkealle edustajalle)

Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE)

(7. toukokuuta 2012)

Aihe: VP/HR – Kashgar ja uiguurialueet

Parlamentti keskusteli reilu vuosi sitten Kiinassa, uiguurialueella sijaitsevan Kashgarin kaupungin tilanteesta. Parlamentti äänesti tuolloin myös asiaa koskevasta päätöslauselmasta (P7_TA(2011)0100).

Kashgarin kaupunki on historiallista uiguurialuetta, jolle on esitetty Unescon maailmanperintökohteen statusta, mutta Kiinan hallitus ei ole toistaiseksi vienyt asiaa eteenpäin. Lisäksi Kiinan viranomaiset ovat määränneet osan kaupungista uudelleenrakennettavaksi, mikä tuhoaisi historiallisia uiguurikaupunginosia.

Vuosi sitten parlamentin Kashgar-keskusteluissa komissiota ja ulkosuhdehallintoa edustanut komissaari Hahn vakuutti, että EU tekee kaikkensa, jotta Kashgarista tehdään maailmanperintökohde ja että historialliset kaupunginosat säilytetään ja uiguureja kuunnellaan.

Mitä korkea edustaja Catherine Ashton on tehnyt sen eteen, että Kashgarin kaupungista tehtäisin Unescon maailmanperintökohde? Miten korkea edustaja aikoo edistää edellä mainittua tavoitetta ja tukea uiguurikulttuuria jatkossa?

Catherine Ashtonin komission puolesta antama vastaus

(30. elokuuta 2012)

EU on huolissaan tiedoista, jotka todistavat, että uiguurien kulttuuriperinnön kulmakiviin kuuluvasta Kashgarin vanhastakaupungista on tuhottu suuria osia helmikuussa 2009 ilmoitetun laajan ”kunnostushankkeen” yhteydessä.

EU ilmaisi huolensa kunnostushankkeesta ihmisoikeuksia koskevan EU:n ja Kiinan vuoropuhelun edellisellä kierroksella, joka järjestettiin Brysselissä 29. toukokuuta, ja kysyi Kiinan viranomaisilta, harkitsevatko ne yhteistyötä Unescon kanssa sen varmistamiseksi, että Kashgarin kehittämisessä otetaan huomioon alan kansainväliset parhaat käytännöt. Lisäksi otettiin esiin kysymys Kiinan viranomaisten mahdollisista toimista, joilla varmistetaan Kashgarin asukkaiden kokonaisvaltainen kuuleminen kaupungin tulevaisuudesta sekä heidän mielipiteidensä huomioon ottaminen.

Vastauksessaan Kiina esitti, että paikalliset asukkaat suhtautuivat myönteisesti Kashgarin vanhojen ja ränsistyneiden alueiden korjaamiseen ja että heitä kuultiin koko prosessin ajan. Lisäsyy hankkeeseen oli, että vanhat rakennukset olivat terveydelle vaarallisia, eivätkä ne olisi maanjäristyksen sattuessa riittävän kestäviä. Kiinan keskusviranomaisille ei ollut kantautunut tietoja siitä, että kansalaiset olisivat vedonneet purkamista vastaan.

Euroopan ulkosuhdehallinto ja Unesco työskentelevät parhaillaan sellaisten Kiinan viranomaisille esitettävien ehdotusten parissa, jotka koskevat tietojenvaihdon ja yhteistyön kehittämistä Kashgarin kulttuuriperinnön suojelemiseksi.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004607/12

to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)

Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE)

(7 May 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Kashgar and the Uyghur regions

Over a year ago, Parliament discussed the situation in the city of Kashgar, in the Uyghur region of China, and also adopted a resolution on that subject (P7_TA(2011)0100).

Kashgar is historically part of the Uyghur region and it has been proposed that the city be listed as a Unesco World Heritage Site. However, China’s Government has as yet not taken the matter further. In addition, the Chinese authorities have designated part of the city as a redevelopment area, which would destroy old Uyghur city quarters.

During Parliament’s debate on Kashgar a year ago, Commissioner Hahn, representing the Commission and the European External Action Service, gave an assurance that the EU would do everything in its power to ensure that Kashgar becomes a World Heritage Site, the old city is saved, and the Uyghur people are heard.

What action has High Representative Catherine Ashton taken to help the city of Kashgar become a Unesco World Heritage Site? How does she intend to further this cause and support the Uyghur culture in the future?

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

(30 August 2012)

The EU is concerned by reports documenting the destruction of large parts of the old town in Kashgar, a cornerstone of Uighur cultural heritage, as part of an extensive ‘renovation project’ announced in February 2009.

At the last round of the EU‐China human rights dialogue which took place in Brussels on 29 May, the EU expressed its concerns regarding this renovation project and asked the Chinese authorities whether they considered opening contacts with Unesco to ensure that any redevelopment of Kashgar meets international best practice in this field. The question of possible steps taken by the Chinese authorities to ensure that the inhabitants of Kashgar are fully consulted about the future of their city and that their views are taken into account was also raised.

In reply, the Chinese side said that the renovation of the old and dilapidated districts of Kashgar was welcomed by local residents who were consulted during the whole process. A further reason for this project was that the old buildings were unsound and that their resistance to earthquakes was insufficient. The Chinese central government had not received information regarding residents petitioning to complain about the demolition.

The EEAS is working with Unesco on proposals to the Chinese authorities to develop exchanges and cooperation on the protection of cultural heritage in Kashgar.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-004618/12

alla Commissione

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(7 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: «Action team» della Commissione — Misure a favore dell'occupazione e per contrastare la disoccupazione giovanile — Situazione in Italia

Lo scorso 30 gennaio, durante il vertice informale del Consiglio europeo, la Commissione ha proposto l'istituzione di otto «Action team» da inviare nei Paesi europei ad alto tasso di disoccupazione (Italia, Spagna, Grecia, Slovacchia, Lituania, Portogallo, Lettonia e Irlanda). Al contempo, la Commissione stessa ha annunciato l'impiego di 82 miliardi di euro, di cui 8 destinati all'Italia, per sostenere misure intese a rilanciare la crescita e a contrastare la disoccupazione giovanile. Tali importi non rappresentano risorse aggiuntive, ma importi non utilizzati dagli Stati membri nel capitolo relativo ai Fondi strutturali e al Fondo sociale europeo. Tali «Action team» composti da rappresentanti delle differenti Direzioni generali della Commissione e delle autorità nazionali, in collaborazione anche con le parti sociali, hanno il compito di elaborare riforme concrete a favore dell'occupazione, soprattutto giovanile, e delle PMI anche attraverso un migliore utilizzo da parte degli Stati membri dei Fondi strutturali. Il team si è recato in Italia il 22 febbraio scorso.

Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere:

quali sono stati i contenuti dell'incontro con i rappresentanti del governo italiano e deiministeri competenti;

quali sono gli obiettivi e le misure concertate con il governo italiano e quale sarà la tempistica per la loro attuazione;

se e in che modo sono state consultate le parti sociali e le organizzazioni giovanili, dal momento che la Commissione nella sua comunicazione «Opportunità per i giovani» afferma che «si consulterà con le parti sociali europee per richiedere il loro attivo econcreto coinvolgimento in questa iniziativa e cercherà il sostegno e il contributo di tutti i soggetti interessati»;

quando sarà presentato un quadro del lavoro svolto negli otto Stati membri e qualisaranno le modalità di applicazione delle misure previste;

quale sarà la nuova riprogrammazione dei Fondi strutturali destinati all'occupazione?

Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione

(12 giugno 2012)

1., 2. e 5. L'obiettivo della discussione con le autorità italiane era determinare il modo per ristanziare finanziamenti strutturali UE non utilizzati al fine di promuovere le opportunità occupazionali e sostenere l'imprenditorialità dei giovani. Sono state identificate diverse azioni tra cui la promozione delle opportunità educative nelle regioni meridionali, l'espansione del sistema di «credito fiscale» per il reclutamento di disoccupati svantaggiati, il potenziamento dei regimi di mobilità, un ulteriore rafforzamento dei tirocini, il sostegno ai servizi di assistenza (compresi i servizi di custodia dei bambini) e la promozione dell'imprenditorialità giovanile. Molte delle misure summenzionate saranno implementate nel quadro del «Piano d'azione Coesione» concordato con la Commissione nel novembre 2011 che è destinato a riorientare il Fondo sociale europeo e a riprogrammare il Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale su cinque priorità: occupazione, istruzione, agenda digitale, ferrovie e servizi all'infanzia e agli anziani. Le misure identificate dai gruppi che condurranno tali azioni verranno completate entro l'attuale periodo di programmazione.

3. La Commissione è a stretto contatto con gli attori pertinenti (tra cui le parti sociali e la società civile) per assicurare una rapida implementazione delle misure politiche contemplate nell'iniziativa Opportunità per i giovani. La Commissione li incoraggerà ad attivarsi maggiormente in tale processo.

4. La Commissione rinvia l'onorevole deputato alla presentazione fatta dal Presidente della Commissione in occasione del Consiglio europeo del 24 maggio.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004618/12

to the Commission

Roberta Angelilli (PPE)

(7 May 2012)

Subject: The Commission's ‘action teams’ — measures to boost jobs and tackle youth unemployment: the situation in Italy

On 30 January 2012, at the Informal European Council, the Commission proposed setting up eight ‘action teams’, to be sent to European countries with a high rate of unemployment (Italy, Spain, Greece, Slovakia, Lithuania, Portugal, Latvia and Ireland). At the same time, the Commission announced that EUR 82 billion, EUR 8 billion of which earmarked for Italy, would be deployed to support measures to boost growth and tackle youth unemployment. This money is not additional money, but money unspent by the Member States under the Structural Funds and the European Social Fund. These ‘action teams’, made up of representatives of several of the Commission’s Directorates-General and of the national authorities, in collaboration with social partners, are responsible for drawing up concrete reforms to support employment, particularly youth employment, and SMEs, including through better use of the Structural Funds on the part of Member States. A team arrived in Italy on 22 February 2012.

In view of the above, can the Commission answer the following questions:

What was discussed at the meeting with the representatives of the Italian Government and of the competent ministries?

What targets and measures have been planned with the Italian Government and what will be the timetable for implementing them?

Given that the Commission, in its ‘Youth Opportunities’ communication, said that it would ‘liaise with European social partners to seek their active and concrete involvement in this initiative, and will seek the support and contribution of all stakeholders’, have social partners and youth organisations been consulted? If so, how?

When will an overview be given of the work carried out in the eight Member States and how will the planned measures be implemented?

How will the structural funds for employment be reprogrammed?

Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission

(12 June 2012)

1, 2 and 5. The aim of the discussion with the Italian authorities was to see how to re-allocate unused EU structural funds in order to promote job opportunities and support entrepreneurship for young people. A number of actions have been identified, including boosting education opportunities in the Southern regions, expanding the ‘tax credit’ scheme for the recruitment of disadvantaged unemployed, increasing mobility schemes, further strengthening apprenticeship schemes, supporting care services (including childcare services) and promoting youth entrepreneurship. Most of the abovementioned measures will be implemented within the framework of the ‘Cohesion Action Plan’ agreed with the Commission in November 2011 which is designed to redirect the European Social Fund and reprogramme the European Regional Development Fund towards five priorities: employment, education, the digital agenda, railways and child and elderly care services. The measures identified by the Actions teams will be completed within the current programming period.

3. The Commission is in close contact with the relevant stakeholders (including social partners and civil society) in order to ensure rapid implementation of the policy measures set out in the Youth Opportunities Initiative. The Commission would encourage them to become more active in this process.

4. The Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to the presentation made by the Commission's President on the occasion of the European Council of 24 May.

(Versiunea în limba română)

Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-004632/12

adresată Comisiei

Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)

(7 mai 2012)

Subiect: Utilizarea acrilamidei în produsele alimentare

Acrilamida, o substanță considerată cancerigenă, a fost identificată, în cantități care depășesc limita maximă admisă, de autoritățile din Marea Britanie în 13 produse ale unor mărci renumite, cum sunt Heinz și Nescafe. Acrilamida din toate aceste produse era peste limita considerată nepericuloasă pentru organismul uman.

Comisia este rugată să precizeze:

care sunt reglementările în vigoare cu privire la utilizarea acrilamidei în produsele destinate consumului uman și

dacă are în vedere verificări privind respectarea acestor norme în statele membre.

Răspuns dat de dl Dalli în numele Comisiei

(22 iunie 2012)

Acrilamida este o substanță care se formează în timpul gătirii — în special la temperaturi înalte (de exemplu prin prăjire sau coacere) — în produsele alimentare care conțin amidon. Precursorii formării acestei substanțe sunt anumiți aminoacizi și zaharuri. Acrilamida nu se adaugă ca atare în produsele alimentare.

Începând cu anul 2007, statele membre sunt invitate să monitorizeze nivelurile de acrilamidă din grupele relevante de produse alimentare conform recomandărilor specifice ale UE în materie de monitorizare (289). Rezultatele sunt colectate într-un raport anual și sunt publicate de către Autoritatea Europeană pentru Siguranța Alimentară (EFSA). Cel mai recent raport a fost emis în martie 2011 (290).

De asemenea, se solicită statelor membre să efectueze investigații la fața locului în cazurile în care au fost depistate niveluri ridicate de acrilamidă (291). Investigațiile respective contribuie la verificarea modului în care operatorii economici aplică măsurile actuale de reducere a nivelurilor de acrilamidă din alimente. Măsurile existente de reducere a nivelurilor de acrilamidă sunt cele prevăzute în Codul de practici din Codex pentru acrilamidă (292), precum și cele elaborate de industrie „setul de instrumente” (293) FDE referitor la acrilamidă).

Comisia se află, în prezent, în plin proces de colectare de informații preliminare de la statele membre cu privire la rezultatul investigațiilor, un exercițiu care va continua în 2012. Până la sfârșitul anului 2012, Comisia va evalua rezultatele acestor investigații, precum și rezultatele exercițiului de monitorizare a nivelurilor de acrilamidă cu scopul de a decide cu privire la necesitatea adoptării unor alte măsuri corespunzătoare.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004632/12

to the Commission

Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)

(7 May 2012)

Subject: Use of acrylamide in food products

Acrylamide, a substance considered carcinogenic, was identified in quantities in excess of the maximum permitted limits by the authorities of the United Kingdom in 13 products of renowned brands such as Heinz and Nescafé. In all these products, acrylamide was over the limit considered safe for the human body.

In view of this:

Can the Commission state what are the applicable regulations on the use of acrylamide in products intended for human consumption?

Does the Commission envisage any checks to see whether these norms are being complied with in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

Acrylamide is a substance which is formed in starchy food as a result of cooking practices, especially at high temperatures, e.g. roasting, baking, frying. Precursors of formation are certain amino acids and sugars. It is not added to food as such.

Since 2007 the Member States are requested to monitor acrylamide levels in relevant food groups under specific EU monitoring recommendations (294). The results are annually compiled in a report and published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The most recent report was issued in March 2011 (295).

Furthermore, Member States are requested to carry out on-the-spot investigations in cases where high acrylamide levels have been found (296).. The investigations serve to find out how the currently available mitigation measures for reducing acrylamide in food are implemented by food business operators. Existing mitigation measures are those laid down in the Codex Code of Practice for acrylamide (297), as well as those developed by industry (the FDE acrylamide ‘toolbox’ (298)).

The Commission is currently in the process of collecting preliminary information from the Member States on the outcome of the investigations, an exercise which will continue during 2012. By the end of 2012 the Commission will evaluate the results of these investigations as well as the results from the acrylamide monitoring exercise in view of deciding about the need for other appropriate measures.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004644/12

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8. Mai 2012)

Betrifft: Investitionen aus EU-Mitteln in der Türkei

In der Türkei fällt auf, dass Investitionen aus EU-Mitteln augenscheinlich vor allem in den großen Städten (Istanbul, Ankara) erfolgen. Dies wäre regionalpolitisch unausgewogen, es benachteiligt die Landbevölkerung und führt in der Türkei zu einem Ost-West-Gefälle.

1. Kann die Kommission erläutern, wie sich die Projekte, die unter Verwendung von EU-Mitteln entstehen, regional über die Türkei verteilen? Bitte genaue Aufstellung mit Ortsangabe, Projektbeschreibung sowie dem jeweiligen Gesamtbetrag, der aus EU-Finanzmitteln beigesteuert wird. Bitte auch um Angabe, welchen prozentualen Anteil der Gesamtbetrag aus EU-Mitteln an den jeweiligen Projekt-Gesamtkosten hat.

2. Was gedenkt die Kommission zu tun, sollte es ein derart beschriebenes Ost-West-Gefälle bei EU-Investitionen in der Türkei geben?

Antwort von Herrn Füle im Namen der Kommission

(3. Juli 2012)

Die Türkei erhält gezielte EU-Förderung im Rahmen des Instruments für Heranführungshilfe (Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance — IPA), im Einklang mit den Prioritäten des indikativen Mehrjahresplanungsdokumentshttp://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/planning-ipa_de.htm

das die Kommission in enger Absprache mit den türkischen Behörden ausgearbeitet hat.

Was die geografische Verteilung betrifft, finanziert die EU im Rahmen des Instruments für Heranführungshilfe Projekte in verschiedenen Regionen der Türkei und konzentriert sich nicht notwendigerweise auf die größeren Städte. Über die IPA-Komponente I (Übergangshilfe und Institutionenaufbau) wird zum Beispiel eine Reihe von Projekten im östlichen Teil der Türkei finanziert. Ausführliche Informationen zu den Projekten, die für eine Finanzierung im Rahmen der Komponente I ausgewählt wurden, sind unter dem folgenden Link zu finden:http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/candidate-countries/turkey/financial-assistance/index_en.htm

Investitionen in der Türkei werden vor allem im Rahmen der IPA-Komponente III (Regionalentwicklung) durch drei operative Programme finanziert: Umwelt, Verkehr und regionale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Eines der Hauptziele der Komponente III ist es, die Konvergenz durch Verringerung des regionalen Gefälles in der Türkei sicherzustellen. Das Programm zur Förderung der regionalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit konzentriert sich auf Regionen mit einem Pro-Kopf-Einkommen von unter 75 % des Durchschnitts der Türkei, die sich im östlichen Teil des Landes befinden. Das Hauptziel des Verkehrsprogramms ist hingegen die Verbesserung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur, insbesondere im Hinblick auf Investitionen in den Bereichen Schienenverkehr, Integration mit dem transeuropäischen Verkehrsnetz (TEN-T) und Häfen. Die Programme mit den genannten Prioritäten sind auf der folgenden Website zu finden:http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/funds/ipa/turkey_development_en.htm

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004644/12

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Investment of EU funds in Turkey

It is noticeable that EU funding in Turkey is mainly spent in the larger cities (Istanbul, Ankara). This would be an unbalanced approach in regional political terms, placing the rural population at a disadvantage and drawing Turkey into an East‐West divide.

1. Can the Commission explain how the projects established using EU funds are distributed regionally throughout Turkey? Please provide a detailed list of how EU funding is delivered, indicating the relevant locations, project descriptions and total amount involved in each case. Please also indicate what percentage of the total cost of each project is covered by EU funding.

2. What does the Commission plan to do if such an East‐West divide is found to exist in relation to EU investment in Turkey?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2012)

Turkey receives focused EU funding through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) in line with the priorities set out in the multi-annual indicative planning document (MIPD) (http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/planning-ipa_en.htm), which was prepared by the Commission in close consultation with Turkish authorities.

In terms of geographical concentration, the EU finances projects through IPA financial assistance in different regions of Turkey and does not necessarily focus on the larger cities. For example under IPA Component I (Transition Assistance and Institutional Building) a number of projects is being financed in the Eastern part of Turkey. For detailed information on the projects selected for financing under Component I please see the following link: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/candidate-countries/turkey/financial-assistance/index_en.htm

Investments in Turkey are mainly financed under IPA Component III Regional Development, through three operational programmes, i.e. Environment, Transport and Regional Competitiveness. One of the key objectives of Component III is to ensure convergence by decreasing the regional disparities in Turkey. The regional Competiveness programme concentrates on regions having an income per capita below 75 % of Turkish national average, which are indeed in the Eastern part of the country while the main objective of the Transport programme is to support the improvement of transport specifically targeting the investments in the area of rail, integration with TEN‐T network and ports. The programmes with the above priorities can be found in the following website (http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/funds/ipa/turkey_development_en.htm).

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004646/12

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8. Mai 2012)

Betrifft: Äußerungen des türkischen Ministers für europäische Angelegenheiten

Am 2. März 2012 hat sich Herr Egemen Bagis, der türkische Minister für europäische Angelegenheiten, in einem Interview in der BBC-Sendung Hardtalk wie folgt geäußert: „Wir werden nicht die Beziehungen zur gesamten EU einfrieren. Wir werden lediglich die sogenannte Präsidentschaft ein halbes Jahr lang ignorieren“.

„Wir können es nicht akzeptieren, dass ein von uns nicht anerkanntes Land (Zypern) die Führung der gesamten Union übernimmt. Ich erkläre Ihnen, warum. Wir sind bereit, unsere Häfen für Schiffe und Flugzeuge aus dem griechischen Teil Zyperns zu öffnen; wir sind sogar bereit, unseren Luftraum zu öffnen, vorausgesetzt, dass die EU ihre eigene Entscheidung umsetzt. Am 26. April 2004 haben die EU-Mitgliedstaaten einstimmig beschlossen, die Isolierung von ‚Nordzypern‘ zu beenden, ‚Nordzypern‘ also wie Taiwan zu behandeln. Taiwan wird von vielen Ländern nicht anerkannt, die jedoch mit Taiwan Handel treiben. Genauso könnten sie es mit ‚Nordzypern‘ halten. Ich verspreche Ihnen, dass an dem Tag, an dem British Airways auf dem Flughafen Ercan landet, die Türkei ihren Luftraum, ihre Flughäfen öffnet. Der einzige Mitgliedstaat, der diesen Beschluss umgesetzt hat, ist Südzypern. Die griechischen Zyprer können in den Norden fahren, einkaufen und verkaufen, sie können reisen, aber gestehen anderen Mitgliedstaaten dieses Privileg nicht zu. Das ist ein Widerspruch in sich“.

1. Sind der Kommission diese Äußerungen bekannt? Wie bezieht die Kommission dazu Stellung? Hat die Kommission aufgrund dieser Äußerungen etwas unternommen?

2. Stellen diese Äußerungen nach Auffassung der Kommission eine Bedrohung für die Europäische Union dar?

3. Ist dieses Verhalten und Auftreten vereinbar mit den Hunderten Millionen von Euro, die die Türkei jährlich aus dem EU-Haushalt erhält (auch über das Instrument für Heranführungshilfe)?

Antwort von Herrn Füle im Namen der Kommission

(21. Juni 2012)

Die Kommission verweist auf ihre gebündelte Beantwortung der schriftlichen Anfragen E-004214/2012, E-004215/2012 und E-004218/2012.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004646/12

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Statements by the Turkish Minister for European Affairs

On 2 March 2012 Mr Egemen Bagis, the Turkish Minister for European Affairs, stated during an interview on the BBC’s Hardtalk programme: ‘We will not freeze relations with the entire EU. We will just ignore the so-called Presidency for half a year.’

‘We cannot accept a country (Cyprus) that we do not recognise to assume the leadership of the whole Union. I’ll tell you why. We’re ready to open our ports to Greek Cypriot vessels and planes; we’re even ready to open our airspace, provided that the EU implements its own decision. On 26 April 2004 EU Member States unanimously agreed to put an end to the isolation of “Northern Cyprus”, which means treating “Northern Cyprus” like Taiwan. Many countries do not recognise Taiwan, but they trade with Taiwan. They could do the same with “Northern Cyprus”. The day that British Airways lands in Ercan Airport, I promise you that Turkey will open its airspace, its airports. The only Member State that is implementing that decision is Southern Cyprus. Greek Cypriots can go to the north, buy and sell, they can travel, but they will not allow other Member States to have the same privilege. That’s an oxymoron.’

1. Is the Commission aware of these statements? What comments does the Commission have to make on them? Has the Commission taken action following these remarks?

2. Do these statements, in the Commission’s view, constitute a threat to the European Union?

3. Is this kind of behaviour and conduct compatible with the hundreds of millions of euros Turkey receives every year from the EU budget (including through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance)?

Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2012)

The Commission would like to refer to the joint reply to Written Questions E‐004214/2012, E‐004215/2012 and E‐004218/2012.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004650/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(8 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Falco pecchiaiolo

Strage di falchi in provincia di Reggio Calabria. Sono almeno cento gli esemplari di falco pecchiaiolo, una specie protetta dagli inizi degli anni Settanta, abbattuti ieri in riva allo Stretto di Messina, secondo quanto denunciato da una lega italiana per la protezione degli uccelli, impegnata con i propri volontari in un campo antibracconaggio in supporto all'azione di controllo straordinario del territorio realizzata dal Noa (il Nucleo operativo antibracconaggio) del Corpo Forestale dello Stato.

Approfittando del massiccio passaggio migratorio di almeno cinquemila falchi, registrato in un solo giorno, i fucili dei bracconieri hanno aperto il fuoco come se fosse una normale giornata di caccia: settanta gli spari uditi dai volontari solo in una piccola zona compresa tra gli abitati di Embrisi e Santa Venera. Dopo aver individuato quattro persone, i volontari hanno accompagnato sul posto una pattuglia del Noa, che ha poi individuato e denunciato due bracconieri recuperando anche alcuni falchi pecchiaioli appena uccisi.

Sempre nel pomeriggio di ieri, in zona Campicello, gli uomini del Noa hanno sorpreso tre bracconieri con due fucili di piccolo calibro e due falchi pecchiaioli appena abbattuti. Il bilancio finale della giornata è pesantissimo. Il rischio di altre stragi andrà avanti fino ai primi di giugno, quando si sarà concluso il cosiddetto «passo», ovvero la migrazione di falchi pecchiaioli, poiane, nibbi e albanelle dall'Africa centrale verso i rilievi dell'Europa nordoccidentale e dei Balcani.

Alla luce di quanto sopraesposto, si interroga la Commissione per sapere:

se è a conoscenza della vicenda e del blitz del corpo forestale in Calabria;

quali sono i volatili inclusi nella «lista rossa» per la salvaguardia degli uccelli e se vi rientra il falco pecchiaiolo;

se l'UE non intende rivedere la direttiva Uccelli al fine di far rientrare tra le specie protette anche il falco pecchiaiolo, visto il continuo abbattimento della specie in esame.

Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La Commissione ha appreso dai media quanto riferito dall'onorevole parlamentare in relazione ai casi di abbattimento illegale di falchi pecchiaioli verificatisi nella provincia di Reggio Calabria. È inoltre consapevole dell'importante ruolo svolto dal Nucleo Operativo Antibracconaggio del Corpo forestale dello Stato e dai volontari delle ONG nel tentativo di contrastare tali pratiche illegali.

Una lista rossa europea per gli uccelli, stilata in base alla valutazione dello stato di conservazione delle singole specie, è attualmente in corso di elaborazione.

A prescindere dalla lista rossa, il falco pecchiaiolo costituisce già, a tutti gli effetti, una specie protetta nell'ambito della direttiva «Uccelli» (299).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004650/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: European honey buzzard

Massacre of European honey buzzards in the province of Reggio Calabria. At least 100 European honey buzzards, a protected species since the early 1970s, were shot yesterday on the shore of the Strait of Messina, according to reports by an Italian league for the protection of birds, whose volunteers work at an anti-poaching camp supporting the extraordinary surveillance work carried out in the area by the NOA (anti-poaching operational unit) of the State Forestry Police.

Taking advantage of the huge migratory passage of at least 5 000 European honey buzzards, recorded in just one day, poachers opened fire as though it were a normal day’s hunting. Seventy shots were heard by the volunteers in just one small area between the villages of Embrisi and Santa Venera. After identifying four people, the volunteers went to this area with a NOA patrol, which then identified and reported two poachers, who were collecting some European honey buzzards that had just been shot.

Also, yesterday afternoon, in the Campicello area, the NOA representatives caught three poachers with two small rifles and two European honey buzzards that had just been killed. The day’s final toll is substantial. The risk of other massacres will continue until the beginning of June, when the ‘passage’ or, in other words, the migration of European honey buzzards, buzzards, kites and harriers from Central Africa towards north-western Europe and the Balkans will have ended.

In view of the above, we ask the Commission:

if it is aware of the event and the crackdown by the Forestry Police in Calabria;

which birds appear on the ‘red list’ for bird conservation and if the European honey buzzard is included;

if the EU intends to review the Birds Directive so as to include the European honey buzzard among the protected species, considering the continued slaughter of the species in question?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Commission is aware, through media reports, of the situation mentioned by the Honourable Member in relation to episodes of illegal killing of the European Honey Buzzard in the province of Reggio Calabria. It is also aware of the important role played by both the special anti-poaching unit of the State Forestry Police and the NGOs volunteers in trying to fight such illegal practices.

A European Red List of birds, focusing on the assessment of the conservation status, is currently under preparation.

Regardless of the abovementioned exercise (Red List), the European Honey Buzzard is already, legally, a fully protected species under the Birds Directive (300).

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004652/12

alla Commissione

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(8 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Le migliori pratiche del programma Gioventù in azione — Cooperazione con paesi diversi dai paesi limitrofi all'UE

Il programma Gioventù in azione promuove l'educazione non formale, i progetti europei di mobilità giovanile internazionale di gruppo e individuale attraverso gli scambi e le attività di volontariato all'estero, l'apprendimento interculturale e le iniziative dei giovani di età compresa tra i 13 e i 30 anni.

I suoi obiettivi sono i seguenti: migliorare la mobilità dei giovani e degli operatori socioeducativi nel settore della gioventù, nonché l'occupabilità dei giovani, promuovere la consapevolezza tra i giovani nonché il loro impegno attivo, sostenere il potenziamento delle capacità delle organizzazioni e delle strutture giovanili al fine di contribuire allo sviluppo della società civile, promuovere la cooperazione e lo scambio di esperienze e di buone prassi nel settore della gioventù e dell'istruzione informale, contribuire allo sviluppo delle politiche giovanili, del lavoro nel settore della gioventù e del volontariato, sviluppare partenariati e reti sostenibili fra organizzazioni giovanili.

Alla luce dei fatti sopraesposti, può dire la Commissione quali sono stati i casi di eccellenza risultanti dallo strumento Gioventù in azione — Cooperazione con paesi diversi dai paesi limitrofi all'UE?

Risposta di Androulla Vassiliou a nome della Commissione

(28 giugno 2012)

Tra il 2007 e il 2011, la sottoazione «Gioventù nel mondo — Cooperazione con paesi diversi dai paesi limitrofi all'Unione europea» del programma «Gioventù in azione» ha permesso di dare sostegno a 153 progetti selezionati tra le 926 domande di sovvenzione ricevute.

Tali progetti presentano una grande varietà di casi diversi di cooperazione con diverse zone geografiche. La loro qualità e la loro capacità d'ispirare alle organizzazioni giovanili buone pratiche in materia di cooperazione sul piano internazionale sono state giudicate alla luce di criteri quali il loro effetto moltiplicatore e il loro impatto durevole, la qualità del contenuto e la metodologia adottata dai rispettivi programmi di lavoro, il coinvolgimento attivo dei giovani e la qualità dei partenariati mobilitati.

Le attività sostenute tramite questi progetti sono anch'esse estremamente diversificate: dall'incoraggiamento allo sviluppo di partenariati e di reti, al dialogo politico nell'ambito della gioventù, attività di formazione e sviluppo di competenze degli animatori giovanili, dei movimenti giovanili e dei moltiplicatori, avvenimenti di rilievo destinati ai giovani, campagne d'informazione e di sensibilizzazione a favore dei giovani.

Le sintesi dei progetti annuali selezionati sono disponibili sul sito dell'Agenzia esecutiva per l'istruzione, gli audiovisivi e la cultura:

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/youth/results_compendia/results_en.php.

Una selezione di questi progetti è riportata in un opuscolo accessibile al seguente indirizzo:

http://ec.europa.eu/youth/documents/publications/gp-int-coop_en.pdf.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004652/12

to the Commission

Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Best practices of the Youth in Action programme —'Youth in the world': Cooperation with countries other than the neighbouring countries of the European Union

The Youth in Action programme promotes informal education, European international youth mobility projects for groups and individuals, through exchanges and voluntary activities abroad, intercultural learning and initiatives for young people between the ages of 13 and 30.

The objectives of the programme are as follows: to improve the mobility of young people and youth workers, as well as the employability of young people; to foster awareness and active commitment among young people; to help organisations and facilities for young people become stronger and therefore contribute to the development of civil society; to promote cooperation and the exchange of experiences and good practices in the fields of youth work and informal education; to contribute to the development of youth policies, youth work and volunteering; and to develop long-lasting partnerships and networks among youth organisations.

In view of the above, can the Commission say what cases of excellence have emerged from the Youth in Action —‘Youth in the world’: Cooperation with countries other than the neighbouring countries of the European Union?

(Version française)

De 2007 à 2011, la sous-action «Jeunesse dans le monde — Coopération avec d'autres pays» du programme Jeunesse en Action a permis de soutenir 153 projets sélectionnés parmi les 926 demandes de subvention reçues.

Ces projets présentent une grande variété de cas différents de coopération avec des zones géographiques variées. Leur qualité et leur capacité à inspirer aux organisations de jeunesse de bonnes pratiques en matière de coopération au plan international ont notamment été jugées par rapport à des critères comme leur effet multiplicateur et leur impact durable, la qualité du contenu et de la méthodologie retenus par leurs programmes de travail, l'implication active des jeunes et la qualité des partenariats mobilisés.

Les activités soutenues à travers ces projets sont également diverses: encouragement au développement de partenariats et de réseaux, au dialogue politique dans le domaine de la jeunesse, activités de formation et de développement de compétences des animateurs de jeunesse, des mouvements de jeunesse et des acteurs multiplicateurs, événements à grande échelle destinés à la jeunesse, campagnes d'information et de sensibilisation en faveur des jeunes, notamment.

Les compendia des projets annuels sélectionnés sont disponibles sur le site de l'Agence exécutive Éducation, audiovisuel et culture: (http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/youth/results_compendia/results_en.php).

Une sélection de ces projets est incluse dans une brochure accessible à l'adresse suivante: (http://ec.europa.eu/youth/documents/publications/gp-int-coop_en.pdf).

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004656/12

to the Commission

Struan Stevenson (ECR)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Cross-border adoption of stray dogs

The recent explosion and abuse of stray dog populations in many Member States, particularly Greece and Romania, has been well documented. As a result, many Europeans now adopt rescued animals rather than buying pet dogs from a shop or a breeder.

Adoption of rescued animals is completely legal, but there is no EU legislation covering cross-border adoption. The Pet Passport scheme and Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 only cover pet animals which are accompanying their owners or are not intended to be sold or transferred to another owner. Previously, the Commission has stated that when a change in the ownership of the animal occurs, the animal can no longer be considered a ‘pet animal’ and therefore the movement falls outside of the regulation’s scope and is covered by the requirements of Council Directive 92/65/EEC.

Directive 92/65/EEC applies only to traders, who are required to have nationally issued health certificates in order to transfer animals. But to obtain such a certificate, it is necessary to produce a trader’s Tax Identification Number (TIN). As animal welfare charities are not traders, they cannot produce a TIN. Consequently, they are prevented from re-homing vulnerable dogs in other Member States. Sadly, many dogs perish because they cannot travel to the home that has been found for them.

1. Is the Commission taking steps to resolve this issue in order to help Member States maintain the highest standards of animal welfare and combat the severe health risks caused by flourishing stray dog populations?

2. Many charitable organisations are concerned that Commission officials are hesitant to resolve the issue as they face strong lobbying from dog breeders. Comprehensive legislation is therefore the only solution. Will this issue be dealt with in any upcoming EU‐wide legislation?

Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

As mentioned by the Honourable Member, dogs not meeting the criteria for non-commercial movement of pet animals in the definition in Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 (301) may be subject to intra-Union trade, provided they comply with the animal health conditions set out in Directive 92/65/EEC (302).

Directive 92/65/EEC provides that the animals must meet the health requirements set up in Article 10 thereof that refer to the relevant requirements laid down in Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 and are to come from registered holdings. The health certificate accompanying the animals shall therefore state the veterinary registration number assigned to that holding by the competent authority.

A charity organisation of a non-commercial status may register as a holding of origin. The obligation to produce a trader’s Tax Identification Number (TIN) is not a requirement resulting from the application of Directive 92/65EEC.

The Commission is aware that certain Member States required the consignor and the consignee to have a commercial status and requested a commercial tax reference number prior to issuing the abovementioned certificate. However, following clarification by the Commission, the competent authorities of those Member States informed the Commission that they had abandoned this practice.

Therefore, the Commission does not consider that further legislation is needed.

(Nederlandse versie)

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P-004659/12

aan de Commissie

Ivo Belet (PPE)

(8 mei 2012)

Betreft: Olie-exploratie in het Congolose Nationaal park Virunga

Recent werd bekend dat een consortium van oliemaatschappijen — waaronder het bedrijf SOCO Internatio.a. — vergunningen verkreeg van het Congolese Ministerie van Milieu om exploratieactiviteiten uit te voeren in het Virungapark in Congo. De ontginning van olie in het gebied zou echter een ernstige bedreiging betekenen voor de waardevolle fauna en flora in het natuurpark.

Het Nationaal park Virunga is immers één van de belangrijkste natuurreservaten in Centraal-Afrika. Het herbergt tal van bedreigde diersoorten, waaronder een populatie zeldzame berggorilla's. In 1979 werd het Virungapark door UNESCO erkend als werelderfgoed.

Het ontginnen van olie in het nationaal park is bovendien in strijd met de internationale afspraken van o.a. UNESCO en met de Congolese wetgeving. Begin vorig jaar ondertekende de Congolese premier Adolphe Muzito met de vertegenwoordigers van UNESCO een verklaring dat de Congolese overheid zich zou inzetten voor de bescherming van het Virungapark. Daarnaast beloofde de premier om geen olie-exploratie toe te laten voordat een strategische milieubeoordeling — die door de Europese Unie wordt gefinancierd — tegen het einde van 2012 zou zijn afgerond.

Ondanks deze afspraken, en ondanks het feit dat de Europese Commissie in het verleden — zoals vermeld in haar antwoord op schriftelijke vraag E-001691/2011 — ernstige bezorgheden heeft geuit over mogelijke olie-exploraties in het natuurpark, heeft de Congolese overheid nu toch toestemming gegeven aan de oliemaatschappijen om exploratieactiviteiten uit te voeren.

Welke maatregelen plant de Commissie in verband met de exploratieactiviteiten in het Virungapark in Congo?

Ziet de Commissie een mogelijkheid in het toekennen van steun aan de Democratische Republiek Congo uit de internationale klimaatfondsen in ruil voor het afzien van olie-exploraties in het nationaal park?

Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-004709/12

aan de Commissie

Bart Staes (Verts/ALE)

(9 mei 2012)

Betreft: Oliewinning in het Virungapark (DRC)

De Congolese regering heeft in januari 2011 officieel herhaald dat ze het verbod op oliewinning in het Virungapark zal respecteren. In maart vorig jaar kondigde de Congolese minister van Leefmilieu ook aan dat het zoeken naar olie in Virunga zouden worden opgeschort zolang een grondige studie naar de milieu-impact niet is afgerond. Ondanks deze mooie beloften heeft de Congolese regering al in september 2011 de toestemming gegeven aan oliemaatschappij Soco om de zoektocht naar olie in het Virungapark te starten.

De oliemaatschappijen zelf negeren ook het feit dat oliewinning in het park illegaal is, en wachten zelfs de resultaten van de milieueffectrapportage niet af. De houding van de Europese oliebedrijven is erg zorgwekkend.

Groot-Brittannië (Soco) en Frankrijk (Total) hebben beide het UNESCO-verdrag  ter bescherming van het werelderfgoed goedgekeurd. Deze conventie verbiedt uitdrukkelijk activiteiten zoals mijnbouw en oliewinning in de gebieden die door Unesco als werelderfgoed zijn erkend.

De Belgische minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, Didier Reynders, liet onlangs geen twijfel bestaan over het Belgische standpunt: „Oliewinning in Virunga is in strijd met de Congolese wetgeving en met internationaal gemaakte afspraken. Europa heeft al veel geïnvesteerd in de bescherming van het park en het is dus op zijn minst vreemd te noemen dat er geen officiële reactie volgt. Dat moet dus dringend veranderen.”

Welke stappen zet de Commissie in dit dossier om deze wetsovertredingen een halt toe te roepen? Overweegt de Commissie om de fondsen die het geeft aan de nationale parken in DRC, waaronder Virunga, op te schorten in afwachting van een totaalverbod op oliewinning?

Antwoord van de heer Piebalgs namens de Commissie

(8 juni 2012)

Sinds eind 2010 zijn de Europese Unie en de voornaamste donors die actief zijn op het gebied van natuurbescherming in de Democratische Republiek Kongo meermaals opgetreden om te voorkomen dat in het Virungapark oliewinning plaatsvindt die in strijd is met de Congolese wetgeving en met de internationale verbintenissen die het land is aangegaan.

In 2011 heeft de Europese Unie met de goedkeuring van de Congolese autoriteiten de financiering van een strategische milieubeoordeling van de olie-exploratie en —winning in de hele Albertine Rift (met inbegrip van het Virungapark) goedgekeurd. Diezelfde actoren zullen dit dossier beslist bespreken met de na de recentelijke regeringswissel benoemde minister.

De strategische milieubeoordeling is nog niet afgerond. Samen met de andere donors volgt de EU dit proces op de voet en let met name op het Virungapark. De beslissing om het park niet te exploiteren moet door de Congolese autoriteiten en de Congolese bevolking worden genomen op basis van het principe van „vrije, voorafgaande en geïnformeerde toestemming”. De analyse van het juridische en ecologische statuut van het Virungapark maakt natuurlijk een essentieel deel uit van de strategische milieubeoordeling. Een goed uitgevoerde strategische milieubeoordeling kan de Congolese regering helpen om in dit verband een beslissing te nemen, niet onder internationale druk, maar op basis van objectieve feiten die blijken uit de strategische milieubeoordeling. Samen met de Europese programma’s  ter ondersteuning van het park vormt dit de beste garantie om het Virungapark in de toekomst te behouden. Voorts is het onwaarschijnlijk dat het toekennen van tijdelijke financiële steun op lange  termijn een doeltreffende compensatie vormt voor een eventuele exploitatie van de betrokken natuurlijke hulpbronnen.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004659/12

to the Commission

Ivo Belet (PPE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Oil exploration in Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

It has emerged recently that a consortium of oil companies, including SOCO International, had received permits from the Congolese Ministry of the Environment to carry out exploration in Virunga Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). However, the extraction of oil in that area would pose a serious threat to the precious fauna and flora in the natural park.

Virunga National Park is one of the most important nature reserves in central Africa. It is home to a large number of endangered animal species, including a population of rare mountain gorillas. In 1979, Unesco designated Virunga Park a World Heritage Site.

Oil extraction in the national park would contravene international agreements, including those signed by Unesco, as well as Congolese legislation. Early last year, Congolese Prime Minister Adolphe Muzito together with Unesco representatives signed a declaration according to which the Congolese Government was going to commit itself to the protection of Virunga Park. The Prime Minister also promised not to allow any oil exploration until the completion, by the end of 2012, of a strategic environmental assessment, which is being financed by the European Union.

Despite these agreements, and despite the fact that the European Commission has in the past — as evident from its answer to Written Question E‐001691/2011 — expressed serious concern about possible oil exploration campaigns in the natural park, the Congolese government has still issued a permit to the oil companies to carry out exploration activities.

What action is the Commission planning in connection with the exploration activities in Virunga Park in the DRC?

Does the Commission feel it is possible to grant aid to the DRC from the international climate funds in exchange for the abandonment of oil exploration in the national park?

Question for written answer E-004709/12

to the Commission

Bart Staes (Verts/ALE)

(9 May 2012)

Subject: Oil extraction in Virunga National Park (Democratic Republic of Congo)

The Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo officially reiterated in January 2011 its commitment to the ban on oil extraction in Virunga National Park. In March 2011, the Congolese Minister of Environment also announced that oil exploration would be suspended in Virunga pending the completion of a thorough environmental impact study. Despite these fine promises, the Congolese Government granted permission to the SOCO Oil Company to begin oil exploration in Virunga National Park back in September 2011.

The oil companies, too, are ignoring the fact that oil extraction in the park is illegal, and are not even waiting for the conclusions of the environmental impact assessment. The stance of the European oil companies is extremely worrying.

The United Kingdom (SOCO) and France (Total) have both approved the Unesco convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. This convention expressly prohibits activities such as mining and oil extraction in the areas designated by Unesco as world heritage sites.

The Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Didier Reynders, recently expressed Belgium’s stance with absolute clarity, stating that oil exploration in Virunga is contrary to Congolese legislation and the country’s international commitments. He further stated that, as Europe has already invested a great deal in the protection of the park, he finds the lack of official reaction very strange, to say the least. This, he said, needs to change as a matter of urgency.

What action is the Commission taking on this issue in order to put a stop to these breaches of the law? Is the Commission considering suspending the funding for national parks in the Democratic Republic of Congo, including Virunga, pending a total ban on oil extraction?

(Version française)

Dès fin 2010, l'Union européenne et les principaux bailleurs de fonds œuvrant dans le domaine de la conservation en RDC sont intervenus à maintes reprises pour éviter une exploitation pétrolière dans le Parc des Virunga qui soit contraire à la législation congolaise et aux engagements internationaux pris par la RDC.

En 2011, l'Union européenne, avec l'approbation des autorités congolaises, a donné son accord pour financer une évaluation environnementale stratégique (EES) de l'exploration-exploitation du pétrole dans l'ensemble du Rift albertin incluant le Parc des Virunga. Ces mêmes intervenants ne manqueront pas d'évoquer ce dossier avec le nouveau ministre issu du récent changement de gouvernement.

Aujourd'hui, l'EES est en cours et l'Union européenne, conjointement avec les autres donateurs, suit le processus et apporte une attention particulière aux Virunga. La décision de non-exploitation doit être prise par les autorités et la population congolaises, sur base d'un consentement libre, informé et préalable. Naturellement, le statut environnemental et juridique du Parc des Virunga fait partie des éléments essentiels à analyser dans l'évaluation environnementale stratégique. Une EES menée correctement, outil d'aide à la décision pour le Gouvernement, ainsi que les programmes européens d'appui au Parc sont les meilleures garanties d'assurer la sauvegarde du Parc des Virunga, non pas sous la contrainte internationale, mais par l'analyse d'éléments objectifs qui ressortiront de l'évaluation environnementale stratégique. Il est d'autre part improbable qu'une aide financière momentanée puisse servir efficacement de compensation durable à une éventuelle exploitation des ressources concernées.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004662/12

alla Commissione

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(8 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Analisi delle acque potabili e mancata applicazione della Direttiva 2003/4/CE sull'accesso del pubblico all'informazione ambientale

Il 18 luglio 2011 il Coordinatore Regionale Guardie Giurate WWF Marche, Giuseppe Dini, membro della consulta utenti del Consorzio A.A.T.O. (303) n. 1 «Marche Nord», ha presentato richiesta di certificati di analisi del periodo 2010-2011 relativi alle acque potabili di tutti i comuni del territorio di Pesaro-Urbino, di competenza dei gestori privati di pubblico servizio Marche Multi Servizi di Pesaro e ASET di Fano.

Il 3 agosto 2011 Marche Multi Servizi ha risposto respingendo la richiesta di accesso alle analisi delle acque, in quanto « inammissibile per carenza di interesse » .

Nel frattempo, l'altro gestore del servizio idrico della Provincia di Pesaro-Urbino, ASET, ha concesso al sig. Dini le analisi delle acque potabili relative ai propri comuni.

Il Difensore Civico Regionale, attivato da Dini, ha risposto a Marche Multi Servizi smontandone le tesi giuridiche e chiedendo al gestore di rivedere il proprio rifiuto.

Ciononostante, il 22 settembre 2011 il gestore ha confermato il diniego dei documenti.

La Direttiva 2003/4/CE sull'accesso del pubblico all'informazione ambientale (recepita in Italia dal Decreto Legislativo 195/2005) all'art. 2 definisce l'« informazione ambientale » come « qualsiasi informazione disponibile in forma scritta, visiva, sonora, elettronica o in qualunque altra forma materiale concernente (…) lo stato degli elementi dell'ambiente, quali l'aria, l'atmosfera, l'acqua, il suolo, il territorio » e contempla come « autorità pubblica » « ogni persona fisica o giuridica avente responsabilità o funzioni pubbliche o che fornisca servizi pubblici connessi con l'ambiente » . All'art. 3 stabilisce altresì che « Gli Stati membri provvedono affinché le autorità pubbliche siano tenute (…) a rendere disponibile l'informazione ambientale detenuta da essi o per loro conto a chiunque ne faccia richiesta, senza che il richiedente debba dichiarare il proprio interesse » .

Il sig. Dini, dopo aver espletato tutta la prassi giuridica nazionale rivolgendosi al Difensore Civico, il 3 gennaio 2012 ha inviato denuncia alla Commissione europea per inadempimenti del diritto comunitario.

Alla luce di quanto esposto, come intende intervenire la Commissione per garantire che la Direttiva 2003/4/CE sia correttamente applicata in tutti gli Stati Membri?

Risposta di M. Potočnika a nome della Commissione

(22 giugno 2012)

La Commissione è consapevole del diniego di accesso alle informazioni cui fa riferimento l'onorevole parlamentare.

Nel marzo 2012 la Commissione ha inviato una richiesta formale di chiarimenti alle autorità italiane. La risposta e le informazioni fornite sono attualmente in corso di valutazione da parte dei servizi della Commissione.

La Commissione terrà informato l' onorevole parlamentare dei risultati della valutazione. In funzione dell’esito di questa valutazione, la Commissione deciderà le ulteriori misure da adottare.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004662/12

to the Commission

Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Testing of drinking water and failure to apply Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information

On 18 July 2011 the Marche region’s WWF security guard regional coordinator Giuseppe Dini, a member of the AATO Consortium (304) No 1 ‘Marche Nord’ (North Marche), submitted a request for 2010‐2011 drinking water test certificates for all the municipalities in the province of Pesaro-Urbino, which are the responsibility of the private companies managing public services, Marche Multi Servizi in Pesaro and ASET in Fano.

On 3 August 2011, Marche Multi Servizi replied by refusing access to the water tests, saying the request was ‘unjustified due to a lack of interest’.

Meanwhile ASET, the other water service provider in the province of Pesaro-Urbino, provided Mr Dini with the drinking water tests for the municipalities it serves.

Mr Dini called in the regional ombudsman, which replied to Marche Multi Servizi, refuting its legal claims and asking it to review its refusal.

Despite this action, on 22 September 2011 the water company confirmed its refusal to provide the documents.

Article 2 of Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information (transposed in Italy by Legislative Decree 195/2005) defines ‘environmental information’ as ‘any information in written, visual, aural, electronic or any other material form on (…) the state of the elements of the environment, such as air and atmosphere, water, soil, land’ and considers a ‘public authority’‘any natural or legal person having public responsibilities or functions, or providing public services, relating to the environment’. Article 3 also lays down that ‘Member States shall ensure that public authorities are required (…) to make available environmental information held by or for them to any applicant at his request and without his having to state an interest’.

After completing all the national legal procedures by appealing to the Ombudsman, Mr Dini filed a complaint with the European Commission for failure to comply with EC law on 3 January 2012.

In view of the above, how does the Commission intend to proceed in order to ensure that directive 2003/4/EC is correctly applied in all Member States?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2012)

The Commission is aware about the refused access to information referred to by the Honourable Member.

In March 2012 the Commission sent a formal request for clarification to the Italian authorities. The reply and the information provided are currently under assessment by the Commission services.

The Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed about the results of the assessment. Based on the assessment, the Commission will decide which further steps need to be taken.

(Latviešu valodas versija)

Jautājums, uz kuru jāatbild rakstiski, P-004665/12

Komisijai

Alexander Mirsky (S&D)

(2012. gada 8. maijs)

Temats: Pazemojošs formulējums Latvijas nepilsoņa pasē

1991. gada 15. oktobrī Latvijas Republikas Augstākā Padome pieņēma lēmumu “Par Latvijas Republikas pilsoņu tiesību atjaunošanu un naturalizācijas pamatnoteikumiem”. Tādējādi tā sadalīja Latvijas iedzīvotājus pilsoņos un citos iedzīvotājos, ar šādu rīcību pārkāpjot starptautiskās tiesības, kas paredz, ka tādas valsts iedzīvotājiem, kura ir tikko beigusi pastāvēt, ir tiesības brīvi izvēlēties pilsonību. Ir svarīgi norādīt, ka mazākumtautību pārstāvji 1990.–1991. gadā bija pilntiesīgi tikko atjaunotās un neatkarīgās Latvijas Republikas pilsoņi un piedalījās Augstākās Padomes vēlēšanās, jo uzskatīja Latviju par savu dzimteni un vēlējās tās neatkarību. Šiem cilvēkiem pašlaik ir piešķirta īpaša pase, ko angļu valodā sauc “alien’s passport”. Angļu valodas vārdnīcā ir sniegtas šādas vārda “alien” nozīmes:

—	(tieslietas) persona, kura dzīvo kādā valstī, bet ir lojāla citai valstij; ārvalstnieks;

—	jebkura būtne vai priekšmets, kas ir nepiederīgs videi, kurā tas attiecīgajā brīdī atrodas;

—	(literatūras un literatūrkritikas termini) (zinātniskajā fantastikā) būtne no citas pasaules, dažkārt tieši no ārpuszemes vides.

1. Vai Komisija piekrīt, ka Latvijas nepilsoņu apzīmēšana ar vārdu “alien” ir ne tikai netaisnīga un šos iedzīvotājus pazemojoša, bet arī nepārprotami pārkāpj Eiropas Savienības Pamattiesību hartas 1. un 21. pantu, t. i., negatīvi ietekmē Eiropas Savienības pamatvērtības?

2. Vai Komisija ir konstatējusi kādas juridiskas problēmas attiecībā uz personu ar šīm īpašajām pasēm brīvu pārvietošanos ES?

Atbildi Komisijas vārdā sniedza Viviāna Redinga

(2012. gada 1. jūnijs)

Principā Komisijas pilnvaras saistībā ar dalībvalstu darbībām un bezdarbību ir ierobežotas un attiecas tikai uz Savienības tiesību piemērošanas pārraudzību Tiesas uzraudzībā (kā paredzēts LES 17. panta 1. punktā). Jo īpaši Eiropas Komisijai nav vispārēju pilnvaru iejaukties dalībvalstu rīcībā pamattiesību jomā, un to var darīt tikai tad, ja ir skarts kāds Eiropas Savienības tiesību jautājums. Saskaņā ar ES Pamattiesību hartas 51. pantu Hartas noteikumi attiecas uz dalībvalstīm tikai tad, ja tās īsteno Savienības tiesību aktus.

Pamatojoties uz informāciju, ko sniedza godājamais Parlamenta deputāts, nešķiet, ka šajā jautājumā attiecīgā dalībvalsts rīkojās, īstenojot Savienības tiesību aktus. Dalībvalsts pilsonību reglamentē vienīgi attiecīgās dalībvalsts tiesību akti. Katra dalībvalsts ir kompetenta paredzēt nosacījumus pilsonības iegūšanai un zaudēšanai. Tādēļ novērtējumu, ko pieprasa godājamais Parlamenta deputāts, var veikt valsts iestādes, ņemot vērā saistītos apstākļus un kontekstu un saskaņā ar attiecīgajiem valsts un starptautiskajiem tiesību aktiem.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004665/12

to the Commission

Alexander Mirsky (S&D)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Non-citizen's passport in Latvia with humiliating wording

On 15 October 1991, the Supreme Council of the Latvian Republic adopted a resolution ‘on the restoration of the rights of citizens and basic conditions of naturalisation’. It thereby divided all Latvian residents into citizens and other inhabitants in defiance of international law, which stipulates that the population of a state which has just ceased to exist is entitled to opt for a free choice of citizenship. It is important to note that in 1990 and 1991 national minorities were fully-fledged citizens of the newly-restored independent Republic of Latvia, who participated in elections to the Supreme Council, since they considered Latvia to be their motherland and wanted it to be independent. These people are now given a special passport which is called an ‘alien’s passport’ in English. An English dictionary provides the following meanings of the word ‘alien’:

(law) a person owing allegiance to a country other than that in which he lives; foreigner;

any being or thing foreign to the environment in which it now exists;

(literary and literary critical terms) (in science fiction) a being from another world, sometimes specifically an extraterrestrial.

Does the Commission agree that being called an ‘alien’ is not only unfair and humiliating to non-citizens of Latvia, but also clearly infringes Articles 1 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, i.e. undermines the core values of European Union?

Has the Commission identified any legal problems as regards the free circulation within the EU of persons holding these special passports?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(1 June 2012)

As a matter of principle, the Commission's powers regarding acts and omissions by Member States are limited to overseeing the application of Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice (as provided for under Article 17 (1) TEU). In particular, the European Commission has no general powers to intervene with the Member States in the area of fundamental rights and can only do so if an issue of European Union law is involved. According to Art. 51 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the provisions of the Charter are addressed to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law.

On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, it does not appear that in the matter referred to the Member State concerned did act in the course of implementation of Union law. Nationality of a Member State is exclusively governed by national legislation of the Member State concerned. It is for each Member State to establish conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality. Therefore it is for national authorities to make the assessment requested by the Honourable Member, according to the surrounding circumstances and context, and in conformity with relevant national and international law.

(Deutsche Fassung)

Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-004674/12

an die Kommission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8. Mai 2012)

Betrifft: Halbierung des Pflanzenlebensraumes in den Alpen

Gemäß einer aktuellen Studie des Vienna Institute for Nature Conservation könnte sich der Lebensraum von Alpenpflanzen bis zum Ende dieses Jahrhunderts in etwa halbieren. Die Studie basiert auf Zukunftsszenarien des Weltklimarates IPCC. Aufgrund des Treibhausgasanstiegs und des damit verbundenen Anstiegs der Temperatur um 2,4 bis 6,4 Grad Celsius könnte sich der Lebensraum der Pflanzen in den Alpen um 44 bis 50 Prozent verkleinern. Dieses Szenario würde umfangreiche Bestände und insbesondere die Artenvielfalt in den Alpen gravierend beeinträchtigen, was wiederum sehr negative Auswirkungen auf Tourismus, Landwirtschaft und Lebensqualität in dieser Region hätte.

1. Ist sich die Kommission der erheblichen wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen dieser negativen Entwicklung in den Alpen bewusst?

2. Welche Maßnahmen hat die Kommission bisher unternommen, um den Lebens— und Wirtschaftsraum Alpen vermehrt zu schützen?

3. Welche weiter gehenden Pläne hat die Kommission, um dem oben beschriebenen Szenario zu begegnen?

4. Denkt die Kommission darüber nach, Wirtschaft, Landwirtschaft und Tourismus, die hiervon betroffen sind, gegebenenfalls zu kompensieren?

Antwort von Herrn Potočnik im Namen der Kommission

(3. Juli 2012)

Die Kommission kennt die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels auf die Biodiversität der Alpen und ist sich auch der immer deutlicher zutage tretenden, erheblichen wirtschaftlichen Folgen dieser Auswirkungen bewusst, wie in der aktuellen Studie des Vienna Institute for Nature Conservation illustriert.

Die Durchführung der Biodiversitätsstrategie der EU  (305) wird wesentlich zum Schutz der alpinen Biodiversität beitragen. Ziel 1 der Strategie betrifft Natura 2000 und ist insofern von besonderer Bedeutung, als die alpinen Regionen ein Bestandteil des Netzes sind, für das zurzeit Leitlinien für die Klimaanpassung ausgearbeitet werden. Ziel 2 betrifft die Wiederherstellung verschlechterter Ökosysteme und die Verbesserung von Ökosystemen durch grüne Infrastrukturen und soll helfen, die Resilienz der Ökosysteme zu verbessern und diese weniger anfälliger zu machen.

Verschiedene LIFE-Projekte  (306) haben zahlreichen Mitgliedstaaten geholfen, Erfahrungen mit der Förderung wirksamer Umweltmaßnahmen in Berggebieten zu sammeln. Außerdem werden über den ELER  (307) im Rahmen des Interreg-Programms für den Alpenraum verschiedene verwandte Projekte kofinanziert.

Viele Mitgliedstaaten nutzen den ELER  (308), um den Schutz und die gute Bewirtschaftung von Lebensräumen (für Pflanzen und Tiere) zu gewährleisten und den Zustand der Biodiversität generell zu verbessern. Der ELER ermöglicht auch die Förderung der Erhaltung seltener Rassen und Pflanzensorten. Die Lebensqualität in ländlichen Gebieten ist eine weitere Priorität der Politik für die Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums.

Die Kommission arbeitet zurzeit an einer Anpassungsstrategie für die EU, mit der sichergestellt werden soll, dass die EU für eine Bewältigung der Auswirkungen des Klimawandels gerüstet ist. Die Strategie soll die Wissensgrundlage für die Klimaanpassung verstärken (vor allem über die CLIMATE-ADAPT-Plattform  (309)), die Entwicklung von Anpassungsstrategien fördern und den Austausch zwischen den Interessenträgern erleichtern, um insbesondere grenzüberschreitende Probleme wie die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels auf die Alpen zu lösen.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004674/12

to the Commission

Angelika Werthmann (NI)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Halving of the plant habitat in the Alps

According to a current study by the Vienna Institute for Nature Conservation, the habitat of Alpine plants could be reduced by approximately half by the end of this century. The study is based on future scenarios depicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Because of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions and the concomitant rise in temperature by 2.4 to 6.4 degrees Celsius, the habitat area of plants in the Alps could be reduced by 44 to 50 %. This scenario would entail serious damage to a large number of species and especially the wide variety to be found in the Alps. In turn it would have a very negative effect on tourism, agriculture and quality of life in this region.

1. Is the Commission aware of the considerable economic effects of this negative development in the Alps?

2. What steps has the Commission taken so far to provide more protection for habitats and the economy in the Alps?

3. What further plans does the Commission have to deal with the scenario described above?

4. Is the Commission considering, if necessary, compensating industry, agriculture and tourism affected by this?

Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2012)

The Commission is aware of the impact of climate change on Alpine biodiversity. The Commission is also aware of increasing evidence on the significant economic effects linked to this impact, as illustrated by the recent study by the Vienna Institute for Nature Conservation.

The implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy (310) will make a significant contribution to the protection of Alpine biodiversity. Target 1, focusing on Natura 2000, is of particular relevance as Alpine Regions form an integral part of the network for which guidelines for climate adaptation are currently being prepared. Target 2, focusing on restoration and green infrastructure, will help increase resilience and reduce vulnerability.

Several LIFE projects (311) have helped many Member States to gain experience of supporting effective environmental action in mountain areas. In addition the ERDF (312) co-finances several related projects in the framework of the Interreg ‘Alpine Space’ programme.

Many Member States use the EAFRD (313) to ensure protection, good management of habitats (plants and animals) and to improve the state of biodiversity in general. EAFRD also allows supporting conservation of rare breeds and plant varieties. Quality of life in rural areas is another priority of rural development policy.

The Commission is preparing an EU Adaptation Strategy to ensure that the EU is prepared for the impacts of climate change. The strategy aims to strengthen the knowledge-base on adaptation, in particular through the CLIMATE-ADAPT platform (314), support the development of adaptation strategies and facilitate the exchange between stakeholders, in particular to address cross-border issues such as those impacting the Alps.

(Versión española)

Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-004678/12

a la Comisión

Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)

(8 de mayo de 2012)

Asunto: Tienda iTunes de Apple

Debería ser innecesario recordar a la Comisión que la Unión Europea ha de garantizar el mercado interior de mercancías. Sin embargo, subsisten prácticas en algunas empresas que mantienen las fronteras territoriales impidiendo la compraventa de algunos productos. Tal es el caso de la tienda iTunes de la empresa Apple con relación a las películas y vídeos. A diferencia de la fácil adquisición de música o audiolibros, resulta imposible para los ciudadanos europeos comprar películas de otros países miembros de la Unión en los que no son residentes. La empresa se excusa señalando que son las empresas productoras las que imponen la limitación.

Por ello, pregunto a la Comisión:

¿Es consciente de que esas prácticas están violando el artículo 26 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea?

¿Piensa adoptar alguna medida al respecto?

Respuesta del Sr. Barnier en nombre de la Comisión

(10 de julio de 2012)

La práctica de los prestadores de servicios, incluidos los minoristas que operan en línea, de discriminar por motivos de nacionalidad o de residencia del destinatario se trata explícitamente en el artículo 20, apartado 2, de la Directiva 123/2006/CE («Directiva de servicios»), que establece que: «Los Estados miembros harán lo necesario para que las condiciones generales de acceso a un servicio que el prestador ponga a disposición del público no contengan condiciones discriminatorias basadas en la nacionalidad o el lugar de residencia del destinatario […]». Sin embargo, se permiten diferencias en las condiciones de acceso cuando estén «directamente justificadas por criterios objetivos».

Con el fin de prestar sus servicios, un proveedor en línea a menudo debe adquirir licencias de un titular de derechos. Dentro de los límites del Derecho de la UE, los titulares de derechos pueden optar por restringir los territorios en los que conceden licencias para el ejercicio de la actividad. Cuando los prestadores de servicios no han obtenido dichas licencias, la no prestación de un servicio a un consumidor no constituye una discriminación ilegal.

Entre otras justificaciones objetivas para un trato diferente según el territorio cabe citar los costes adicionales derivados de las características técnicas de la prestación del servicio.

Como parte del «paquete de servicios» adoptado el 8 de junio de 2012 (315), la Comisión publicó un documento sobre la aplicación de esta disposición a fin de ayudar a las autoridades nacionales responsables del cumplimiento de la normativa a detectar y tratar mejor los posibles casos de discriminación.

La Comisión está elaborando actualmente un informe sobre los resultados de la consulta realizada sobre un libro verde relativo a la distribución en línea de obras audiovisuales (316), que incluye un debate sobre la posible necesidad de tomar medidas que faciliten la prestación transfronteriza de servicios audiovisuales.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004678/12

to the Commission

Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Apple iTunes Store

It should not be necessary to remind the Commission that the European Union must guarantee the internal market for goods. Nonetheless, there are still practices in some companies which maintain territorial borders and prevent the sale of certain products. Such is the case with films and videos in the Apple iTunes Store. European citizens find it easy to purchase music and audio books, yet they find it impossible to purchase films from European Union Member States in which they do not reside. Apple says that the production companies impose these limits.

Therefore, I would like to ask the Commission:

Is it aware that these practices violate Article 26 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?

Does it intend to take action on this issue?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2012)

The practice of service providers, including online retailers, discriminating on the grounds of the nationality or residence of the recipient is dealt with specifically by Article 20, paragraph 2 of Directive 123/2006/EC (the ‘Services Directive’) which states that ‘Member States shall ensure that the general conditions of access to a service, which are made available to the public at large by the provider, do not contain discriminatory provisions relating to the nationality or place of residence of the recipients […]’. However, differences in the conditions of access are allowed ‘when those differences are directly justified by objective criteria’.

In order to provide his services, an online retailer often needs to acquire licences from the right holders. Within the boundaries of EC law, right holders may choose to restrict the territories in which they grant licences for the use of their work. Where service providers have not secured such licences, the non-provision of a service to a consumer would not constitute unlawful discrimination.

Other objective justifications for a different treatment between territories could include additional costs incurred because of the technical characteristics of the provision of the service.

As part of the ‘Services Package’ adopted on 8 June 2012 (317), the Commission published a document on the application of this provision to help national enforcement authorities better identify and deal with possible cases of discrimination.

The Commission is also currently preparing a report on the results of a consultation on a Green Paper on the online distribution of audiovisual works (318), which included a discussion of whether steps need to be taken to facilitate the cross-border provision of audiovisual services.

(Verżjoni Maltija)

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004679/12

lill-Kummissjoni

Edward Scicluna (S&D)

(8 ta' Mejju 2012)

Suġġett: Impjiegi ġodda

1. Għandu l-Eurostat definizzjoni sodisfaċenti tat-terminu “impjiegi ġodda” maħluq mill-ekonomija tul iż-żmien?

2. L-Eurostat jiġbor informazzjoni għal “impjiegi ġodda” skont il-pajjiż?

3. Jista’ l-Eurostat jagħti stima ta’ kemm “impjiegi ġodda” nħolqu kull sena mill-ekonomija Maltija bejn l-ewwel tliet xhur tal-2008 u l-ewwel tliet xhur tal-2012?

4. Jista’ l-Eurostat jipprovdi klassifikazzjoni skont is-sess, l-età u s-settur/l-industrija ekonomiku/a tal-persuni li jibdew f'dawn l-“impjiegi ġodda” skont id-definizzjoni msemmija f’mistoqsija 1 hawn fuq?

Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-004680/12

lill-Kummissjoni

Edward Scicluna (S&D)

(8 ta' Mejju 2012)

Suġġett: Impjiegi mitlufa

1. Il-Eurostat għandha definizzjoni ta’ ħidma tat-terminu “impjiegi mitlufa” f'ekonomija fuq tul ta’ żmien?

2. Il-Eurostat tiġbor dejta dwar “impjiegi mitlufa” għal kull pajjiż?

3. Il-Eurostat tista' tistima kemm impjiegi ntilfu kull sena f'Malta bejn l-ewwel kwart tal-2008 u l-ewwel kwart tal-2012?

4. Il-Eurostat tista’ tipprovdi klassifikazzjoni skont is-sess, l-età u s-settur ekonomiku/l-industrija tal-persuni li tilfu l-impjieg tagħhom skont id-definizzjoni msemmija fl-ewwel mistoqsija hawn fuq?

Tweġiba konġunta mogħtija mis-Sur Šemeta f'isem il-Kummissjoni

(26 ta' Ġunju 2012)

1. Is-Sistema Ewropea tal-Kontijiet Nazzjonali (ESA1995) tiddefinixxi l-impjiegi ta’ impjegat u ħaddiem indipendenti. Madankollu, m’hemmx ġbir regolari ta’ dejta dwar l-impjiegi fl-Unjoni Ewropea.

2. Minflok, il-Kummissjoni (Eurostat) u l-Istituti Nazzjonali tal-Istatistika jiġbru u jippubblikaw statistika armonizzata kull tliet xhur u kull sena dwar in-numru ta’ persuni impjegati. Il-persuni impjegati u l-impjiegi m’għandhomx relazzjoni ta’ 1-għal-1 peress li persuna impjegata jista’ jkollha aktar minn impjieg wieħed. Hemm definizzjoijiet statistiċi internazzjonali tal-persuni impejgati mill-ESA1995 u l-Organizzazzjoni Dinjija tax-Xogħol (id-definizzjonijiet huma kompatibbli reċiprokament).

3. L-evoluzzjoni tan-numru ta’ persuni impjegati matul iż-żmien turi l-bidla netta fl-istokk ta’ persuni impjegati, jiġifieri, il-bilanċ tal-flussi ta’ persuni li jsibu impjieg u dawk li jħallu l-impjieg (li jsiru diżokkupati jew iħallu l-forza tax-xogħol). Id-dejta tal-Eurostat dwar l-impjiegi huma ċifri tal-istokk. L-informazzjoni dwar il-flussi mhix disponibbli.

4. It-tabella fl-anness tipprovdi serje ta’ żmien dwar in-numru ta’ persuni impjegati f’Malta kif ukoll tqassim skont is-settur ekonomiku wiesa’, is-sess u l-klassi tal-età. L-aħħar ċifra disponibbli ta' perjodu ta' tliet xhur għandha x'taqsam mar-raba' perjodu ta' tliet xhur tal-2011.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004679/12

to the Commission

Edward Scicluna (S&D)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: New jobs

1. Does Eurostat have a working definition of the term ‘new jobs’ created by the economy over time?

2. Does Eurostat collect data for ‘new jobs’ by country?

3. Can Eurostat estimate how many ‘new jobs’ were created annually by the Maltese economy between the first quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2012?

4. Can Eurostat provide a classification by gender, age and economic sector/industry of persons taking up these ‘new jobs’ in accordance with the definition referred to in question 1 above?

Question for written answer E-004680/12

to the Commission

Edward Scicluna (S&D)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Lost jobs

1. Does Eurostat have a working definition of the term ‘jobs lost’ in an economy over time?

2. Does Eurostat collect data on ‘jobs lost’ by country?

3. Can Eurostat estimate how many jobs were lost annually in Malta between the first quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2012?

4. Can Eurostat provide a classification by gender, age and economic sector/industry of persons who lost their jobs in accordance with the definition referred to in question 1 above?

Joint answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2012)

1. The European System of National Accounts (ESA1995) defines employee and self-employment jobs. However, there are no regular data collections on jobs in the European Union.

2. Instead, the Commission (Eurostat) and National Statistical Institutes collect and publish harmonised quarterly and annual statistics on the number of persons employed. Persons employed and jobs do not have a 1-to-1 relation as an employed person may have more than one job. There are international statistical definitions of persons employed from ESA1995 and the International Labour Organisation (the definitions are mutually compatible).

3. The evolution of the number of persons employed over time shows the net change in the stock of employed persons, i.e. the balance of the flows of persons becoming employed and those leaving employment (becoming unemployed or leaving the labour force). Eurostat data on employment are stock figures. Information on the flows is not available.

4. The table in annex provides time series on the total number of persons employed in Malta as well as breakdowns by broad economic sector, sex and age class. The latest quarterly figure available relates to the fourth quarter of 2011.

(Versione italiana)

Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-004686/12

alla Commissione

Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE)

(8 maggio 2012)

Oggetto: Registrazione del formaggio denominato «Halloumi» come prodotto DOP

Nel luglio 2009 la Repubblica di Cipro chiede la registrazione del formaggio denominato «Halloumi» come DOP, in base al regolamento (CE) n. 510/2006 sulla denominazione di origine protetta.

Tale richiesta rischia però di avere come conseguenza una discriminazione nei confronti dei produttori della parte settentrionale dell'isola che commerciano da tempo lo stesso formaggio con la denominazione «Hellim», che verrebbe così a trovarsi fuori dalla DOP. Inoltre, coprendo la produzione di Hellim il 15 % del totale delle esportazioni, tale richiesta avrebbe senz'altro un importante impatto economico.

Non applicandosi ai produttori del Nord né le misure previste per i produttori interni né quelle per i produttori di paesi terzi dell'UE, essi si trovano privi di qualsiasi efficace strumento di tutela del loro lavoro. Non è permesso loro l'accesso alla registrazione di una propria DOP, mentre una richiesta presso le autorità giudiziarie della Repubblica di Cipro è stata rigettata in quanto non viene loro riconosciuto lo status di «residenti» dell'isola.

— Alla luce di ciò, come intende la Commissione tutelare gli interessi dei produttori di Hellim?

— Non giudica l'applicazione del regolamento (CE) n. 510/2006 discriminatoria, essendo appunto la «non discriminazione» un principio fondamentale dell'UE?

Risposta di Dacian Cioloş a nome della Commissione

(27 giugno 2012)

La Commissione europea ha recentemente incontrato i rappresentanti della comunità turco-cipriota e ha preso atto delle loro preoccupazioni in merito alla registrazione dello Halloumi come denominazione di origine protetta (DOP).

Come l'onorevole parlamentare saprà, il governo di Cipro ha ritirato la domanda nell'aprile 2012. Ove il governo di Cipro presentasse una nuova domanda di registrazione, la Commissione si accerterà che siano rispettate tutte le disposizioni del regolamento (CE) n. 510/2006 del Consiglio e, di conseguenza, anche dell'articolo 5, paragrafo 5.

La questione sollevata dall'onorevole parlamentare evidenzia una volta di più l'urgente necessità di pervenire a una soluzione complessiva della questione cipriota. La Commissione ha invitato ripetutamente i leader di entrambe le comunità cipriote a cogliere l'occasione dei negoziati in corso per giungere a una soluzione reciprocamente accettabile e sostenibile.

(English version)

Question for written answer E-004686/12

to the Commission

Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Registering Halloumi cheese as a Protected Designation of Origin product

In July 2009, the Republic of Cyprus applied to register the cheese known as Halloumi as a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) product, in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of designations of origin.

However, there is a risk that this request could result in discrimination against producers in the northern part of the island that have been selling the same cheese under the name of Hellim for some time, as this cheese would find itself outside the PDO. Furthermore, given that production of Hellim covers 15 % of total exports, this request would undoubtedly have a significant economic impact.

As neither the measures for internal producers nor those from third countries in the EU apply to producers from the north, they are without any effective protection for their work. They are not allowed access to apply for their own PDO, and an application made to the judicial authorities of the Republic of Cyprus was also rejected as they are not recognised as ‘residents’ of the island.

— In view of the above, how does the Commission intend to safeguard the interests of Hellim producers?

— Does it not consider the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 discriminatory, given that non‐discrimination is one of the EU’s fundamental principles?

Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2012)

The European Commission recently met the representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community and took note of their concerns regarding the registration of Halloumi as a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO).

As the Honourable Member might be aware, the Cyprus Government withdrew the application in April 2012. In case a new application for registration will be submitted by the Cyprus Government, the Commission will make sure that the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, and therefore Article 5, paragraph 5, are respected.

The issue raised by the Honourable Member highlights once again the urgent need to reach a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem. The Commission has repeatedly called on the leaders of both communities in Cyprus to grasp the opportunity of the ongoing settlement talks to reach a mutually acceptable and sustainable solution.

(České znění)

Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení P-004690/12

Komisi

Jan Březina (PPE)

(8. května 2012)

Předmět: Marketingová kampaň na podporu karibského rumu v EU

S odkazem na oznámení předběžných informací o zakázce ohledně marketingové a komunikační kampaně značky „Pravý karibský rum“ na evropském trhu (2012/S 41‐065374) je cílem této zakázky „vytvořit, řídit a realizovat integrovanou marketingovou a komunikační kampaň, zaměřenou především na obchodní zákazníky a vlivné aktéry obchodu s nápoji za účelem propagace ‚Pravého karibského rumu‘ (značka ACR)“. Podle oznámení předběžných informací o zakázce by kampaň měla „rozvinout a realizovat činnosti, které povedou k rozšíření povědomí o značce ‚Pravý karibský rum‘ a vyvolají zájem o ni i o další značky z karibské oblasti AKT“, včetně „zavedení značky ‚Pravý karibský rum‘ na konkrétní nové evropské trhy“.

Se záměrem Komise, jak je uveden v oznámení předběžných informací o zakázce, důrazně nesouhlasím, neboť tato kampaň by poškodila tradiční českou značku s názvem „Tuzemák“. Původní značka, která se používala po mnoho let před přistoupením České republiky k EU, byla „Tuzemský rum“.

Proč má Komise v úmyslu finančně podporovat výrobek ze třetích zemí, jenž přímo konkuruje tradičnímu výrobku členského státu? To je v rozporu se zájmy evropských výrobců. Jaký má Komise názor na to, že realizace takovéto kampaně bude znamenat konkurenční znevýhodnění tradičního českého výrobku na vnitřním trhu EU ve srovnání s finančně podporovaným výrobkem ze třetích zemí?

Má-li Komise nadále v úmyslu poskytnout finanční podporu „Pravému karibskému rumu“ na vnitřním trhu EU, poskytne obdobnou finanční podporu rovněž tradiční české značce „Tuzemák“, a zajistí tak namísto podpory jedné značky a jiné nikoli spravedlivé a rovné tržní podmínky?

Odpověď pana Piebalgse jménem Komise

(14. června 2012)

Jakmile politiky EU vedou ke strukturálním změnám v tradičních odvětvích v partnerských zemích, EU často těmto odvětvím pomáhá se přizpůsobit na měnící se obchodní prostředí, někdy i s pomocí přechodných opatření.

Zakázka, na kterou odkazuje vážený pan a jejímž cílem je marketing rumu z karibské oblasti na trzích v Evropě a Severní Americe, nemá nikterak za cíl tradiční český výrobek nebo jakýkoli jiný evropský alkohol ve vztahu k rumu z karibské oblasti na vnitřním trhu EU konkurenčně znevýhodňovat. Program, v jehož rámci je zakázka financována, se spíše snaží zmírňovat následky odstraňování preferencí pro vývoz do Evropské unie, kterému výrobci karibského rumu v minulých letech čelili. Česká záležitost proto zde není srovnatelná.

Pro další informace o programu si Komise dovoluje váženého pana poslance odkázat na písemnou odpověď na otázku E-003619/2012 pana Pavla Poce (319).

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004690/12

to the Commission

Jan Březina (PPE)

(8 May 2012)

Subject: Marketing campaign for Caribbean rum in the EU

With reference to the contract forecast notice pertaining to the marketing and communications campaign for the ‘Authentic Caribbean rum’ brand on the European market (2012/S 41‐065374), the aim of the contract concerned is ‘to create, manage and implement an integrated marketing and communications campaign, predominantly to trade customers and influencers in the drinks trade, to promote the “Authentic Caribbean rum” (ACR) marque’. According to the contract forecast notice, ‘the campaign should develop and implement activities to generate awareness of and interest in the “Authentic Caribbean rum” marque and brands from the ACP Caribbean region’, including launching ‘the “Authentic Caribbean rum” marque in defined new European markets’.

I strongly disagree with the Commission’s intention as stated in the contract forecast notice, as such a campaign would harm a traditional Czech brand called Tuzemák. The original label, used for many years prior to the Czech Republic’s accession to the EU, was ‘Tuzemský rum’ (domestic rum).

Why does the Commission intend to financially support a third-country product that directly competes with a traditional Member State product? This is against the interests of European producers. What is the Commission’s view of the fact that the implementation of such a campaign will put the traditional Czech product at a competitive disadvantage in the EU internal market in relation to the financially supported third-country product?

If the Commission still intends to provide financial support for ‘Authentic Caribbean Rum’ in the EU internal market, will it be providing similar financial support for the traditional Czech brand ‘Tuzemák’, thus ensuring that market conditions are fair and equal, rather than distorted as a result of promoting one brand and not the other?

Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2012)

When EU policies lead to structural changes on traditional industries in partner countries, the EU often assists the industry in adapt to the changing trade environment, sometimes with transitional measures.

The contract, referred to in the question by the Honourable Member and which aims at marketing Caribbean rum in the European and North American markets, does not have the intention to put a traditional Czech product or any other European produced spirit at a competitive disadvantage in the EU internal market in relation to the Caribbean rum. The programme under which the contract is financed rather seeks to mitigate the effects of preference erosion for export to the European Union that the Caribbean rum producers have been encountering over the past years. Therefore the Czech case is not comparable.

For further information about the programme, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer to Written Question E‐003619/2012 by Mr Pavel Poc (320).

(Magyar változat)

Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés P-004704/12

a Bizottság számára

Deutsch Tamás (PPE)

(2012. május 9.)

Tárgy: Ombudsman választása Luxemburgban

Az Európai Bizottság több alkalommal is élesen kritizálta egyes tagállamok ombudsman-választással kapcsolatos törvényeit, eljárásait.

Luxemburgban csupán az ezredforduló után született meg az ombudsman intézményét létrehozó törvény. 2004. január 21-én választották meg az első ombudsmant, korábban csupán parlamenti petíciós bizottság létezett.

2012 februárjától az elkövetkező nyolc évben egy olyan volt szocialista parlamenti képviselő tölti be Luxemburgban ezt a posztot, aki saját maga kezdeményezte a jelenlegi pozicíóját szabályozó törvény létrehozását, és meghatározó módon részt vett annak megalkotásában.

Mindezek alapján kérdezem, hogy az ombudsmani intézménnyel kapcsolatos törvények, a közös európai normák, a demokrácia védelme szempontjából nem tartja-e a Bizottság súlyosan kifogásolhatónak a luxemburgi eljárást?

Viviane Reding válasza a Bizottság nevében

(2012. június 20.)

A tagállamok ombudsmanjainak szerepét illetően a Bizottságnak a tagállamok intézkedéseivel és mulasztásaival kapcsolatos hatásköre az uniós jog alkalmazásának felügyeletére korlátozódik, az Európai Bíróság ellenőrzése mellett.

Azokban a tagállamokban, amelyekben az ombudsman az adatvédelmi felügyeleti hatóság szerepét is betölti, tevékenysége e tekintetben az adatvédelemre vonatkozó uniós jogszabályok hatálya alá tartozik. Ebben az esetben a tagállamnak biztosítania kell, hogy az adatvédelmi felügyeleti hatóság függetlenségére vonatkozó követelmény az Európai Unió Alapjogi Chartájának, az Európai Unió működéséről szóló szerződésnek és a 95/46/EK adatvédelmi irányelvnek megfelelően teljesüljön. A Bizottság jogosult kötelezettségszegési eljárást indítani azon tagállam ellen, amely nem tesz eleget ezen kötelezettségének. E tekintetben a Bizottság 2012. április 25-én úgy határozott, hogy az adatvédelemre vonatkozó uniós jog megsértése kapcsán az Európai Unió Bíróságához fordul Magyarországgal szemben.

Az Ön kérdésében említett luxemburgi ombudsman ezzel szemben nem rendelkezik adatvédelmi felügyeleti hatósági hatáskörrel, tehát a fenti európai uniós jogszabály nem irányadó rá nézve. Az adatvédelemre vonatkozó uniós jogszabályok szerint ugyanis adatvédelmi felügyeleti hatóságként a 2002-ben létrehozott luxemburgi nemzeti adatvédelmi bizottság jár el.

A nemzeti ombudsman kinevezésének kérdése nemzeti hatáskörbe tartozik, és minden tagállam maga dönti el, hogy nevez-e ki nemzeti és/vagy regionális ombudsmant vagy sem.

(English version)

Question for written answer P-004704/12

to the Commission

Tamás Deutsch (PPE)

(9 May 2012)

Subject: Ombudsman election in Luxembourg

The European Commission has severely criticised on several occasions the laws and procedures relating to the election of ombudsmen in some Member States.

In Luxembourg, a law establishing the institution of ombudsman was only introduced after the new millennium. The first ombudsman was elected on 21 January 2004, whereas previously there had only been a parliamentary petitions committee.

From February 2012 and for the next eight years, the post of ombudsman in Luxembourg will be filled by a former socialist member of Parliament who herself initiated the introduction of the law governing her current position, and had a crucial involvement in drafting it.

On this basis, I am asking whether the Commission does not regard the procedure in Luxembourg as seriously unacceptable from the perspective of legislation on the ombudsman’s institution, our common European regulations and the protection of democracy?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2012)

As regards the situation of Ombudsmen in Member States, the powers of the Commission regarding acts and omissions by Member States are limited to overseeing the application of Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice.

In those Member States, where an Ombudsman is also acting as a data protection supervisory authority, its operation in this regard falls within the scope of Union legislation on data protection. In such cases, the Member State needs to ensure that the requirement of the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, as required by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC, is respected. The Commission has the power to launch infringement procedures against Member States which fail to respect this obligation. In that respect, the Commission decided on 25 April 2012 to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice for violation of Union law on data protection.

The Ombudsman in Luxembourg to which the Honourable Member refers in his question does not have the competence of a data protection supervisory authority. Accordingly, the Luxembourg Ombudsman does not fall under the abovementioned EU legislation. By contrast, the Luxembourg National Commission for data protection, created in 2002, acts as the data protection supervisory authority in accordance with Union legislation on data protection.

The issue of the appointment of national Ombudsmen is a matter of national competence and each Member State has the power to decide or not to appoint a national Ombudsman and/or regional Ombudsmen.

---

(1)  P5+1 è la denominazione informale data a un gruppo di sei paesi, vale a dire i cinque membri permanenti del Consiglio di sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite (Cina, Francia, Russia, Regno Unito e Stati Uniti) più la Germania, impegnati in sforzi diplomatici congiunti nei confronti dell'Iran circa il suo programma nucleare.

(2)  P5+1 is the informal name given to the group of six countries — the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) plus Germany — engaged in joint diplomatic efforts with Iran in regard to its nuclear programme.

(3)  EFSA: Europäische Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit.

(4)  EFSA: European Food Safety Authority.

(5)  Standing Committee on Food Chain and Animal Health.

(6)  http://www.enar-eu.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=15281&la=1&langue=EN.

(7)  http://www.enar-eu.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=15281&la=1&langue=EN

(8)  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/jha/129870.pdf

(9)  2011 Frontex gegevensverzameling van risicoanalyse.

(10)  http://www.labourmigration.eu/.

(11)  COM(2010) 379.

(12)  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/jha/129870.pdf

(13)  2011 Frontex risk analysis data collection.

(14)  http://www.labourmigration.eu/.

(15)  COM(2010) 379.

(16)  http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/human_rights/human_rights_in_third_countries/r10113_it.htm

(17)  COM(2008)55 def.

(18)  SEC(2008)135.

(19)  http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/human_rights/human_rights_in_third_countries/r10113_en.htm

(20)  COM(2008) 55 final.

(21)  SEC(2008) 135.

(22)  Véase: http://www.eutransportghg2050.eu/cms/assets/Uploads/Reports/EU-Transport-GHG-2050-II-Task-8-draftfinal14Feb12.pdf

(23)  Luego ha aparecido un informe más reciente del IIPA que tiene en cuenta las últimas previsiones de consumo de biocombustibles de los Estados miembros hasta 2020 y las reacciones de las partes interesadas ante los supuestos fundamentales. Se estima que los biocombustibles producidos a partir de azúcares y cereales pueden generar un ahorro total de gases de efecto invernadero de aproximadamente el 50 % frente a los combustibles fósiles, si se incluyen las emisiones derivadas del cambio indirecto del uso de la tierra (véase el cuadro ES1 del informe sobre las emisiones derivadas del cambio indirecto del uso de la tierra, que se puede consultar en la dirección siguiente: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011/october/tradoc_148289.pdf

(24)  Iniciativa «Todo menos armas».

(25)  Available here:

http://www.eutransportghg2050.eu/cms/assets/Uploads/Reports/EU‐Transport-GHG-2050-II-Task-8-draftfinal14Feb12.pdf.

(26)  A more recent report from IFPRI has since been published taking into account the latest biofuel consumption projections to 2020 from the Member States and stakeholder feedback on key assumptions. It estimates that biofuels made from sugars and cereals can have total greenhouse gas savings of around 50% compared to fossil fuels, when the indirect land-use change emissions are included (See table ES1 of the IFPRI report on indirect land-use change emissions, available here:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011/october/tradoc_148289.pdf).

(27)  ‘Everything But Arms’ initiative.

(28)  Άρθρο 13 της απόφασης αριθ. 573/2007/ EΚ, άρθρα 14 της απόφασης αριθ. 575/2007/ EΚ και της απόφασης αριθ. 574/2007/ EΚ.

(29)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2012-002742&language=EN.

(30)  Article 13 of Decision No 573/2007/ EC, Articles 14 of Decision No 575/2007/ EC and Decision No 574/2007/ EC.

(31)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E‐2012-002742&language=EN.

(32)  Paragraph 59 of the judgment in Case C‐30/01.

(33)  L'une des options à explorer, dans ce contexte, serait l'accès partiel à la profession qui, en Espagne, comprend les activités qui relèvent des qualifications d'un architecte paysagiste, sur le modèle du principe d'accès partiel développé par la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne dans l'affaire C-330/03 Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos.

(34)  Conclusions du Conseil européen de mars 2012.

(35)  COM(2012) 299 du 30 mai 2012.

(36)  One option which could be explored in this context is partial access to the profession which in Spain carries out the activities for which the landscape architect is qualified, in accordance with the principle of partial access developed by the European Court of Justice in the case C‐ 330/03 Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos.

(37)  European Council conclusions, March 2012.

(38)  COM(2012) 299 30 May 2012.

(39)  GU L 300 del 14.11.2009, pag. 88.

(40)   OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 88.

(41)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/rurdev/mountain-farming/working-paper-2009-text_en.pdf

(42)  COM(2010)733 definitivo.

(43)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/rurdev/mountain-farming/working-paper-2009-text_en.pdf

(44)  COM(2010) 733 final.

(45)  COM(2011)608 definitivo, proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio sul Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione 2014-2020.

(46)  COM(2011)608 final, Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) 2014-2020.

(47)  http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/fp7_documentation.

(48)  DROPS: http://www.drops-project.eu/; EUROOT: http://www.euroot.eu/; ADAPTAWHEAT: http://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/agriculture/projects/adaptawheat_en.htm; SWUP-MED: http://www.swup-med.dk/

(49)  DROPS: http://www.drops-project.eu/; EUROOT: http://www.euroot.eu/; ADAPTAWHEAT: http://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/agriculture/projects/adaptawheat_en.htm; SWUP-MED: http://www.swup-med.dk/

(50)  Richtlinie 2011/82/EU des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 25. Oktober 2011 zur Erleichterung des grenzüberschreitenden Austauschs von Informationen über die Straßenverkehrssicherheit gefährdende Verkehrsdelikte, ABl. L 288 vom 5.11.2011, S. 1-15.

(51)  Directive 2011/82/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 facilitating the cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences, OJ L 288, 5.11.2011, p. 1‐15.

(52)  IP/12/213 от 5 март 2012 г.

(53)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/gender-equality/opinion/120528_fr.htm

(54)  http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/consultations/index_fr.htm

(55)  JUST-GENDERBALANCE-CONSULTATION@ec.europa.eu.

(56)  IP/12/213 du 5 mars 2012.

(57)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/gender-equality/opinion/120528_fr.htm

(58)  http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/consultations/index_fr.htm

(59)  JUST-GENDERBALANCE-CONSULTATION@ec.europa.eu

(60)  COM(2011)933 tal-20.12.2011.

(61)  COM(2012)173 finali.

(62)  COM(2011) 933 of 20.12.2011.

(63)  COM(2012) 173 final.

(64)  COM(2012) 130 finali tal-21 ta’ Marzu 2012.

(65)  Ir-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 2679/98 tas-7 ta' Diċembru 1998 dwar il-ħidma tas-suq intern b'relazzjoni mal-moviment liberu tal-oġġetti fost l-Istati Membri ĠU L 337, 12.12.1998, p. 8.

(66)  COM(2012) 131 finali tal-21 ta’ Marzu 2012.

(67)  COM(2012) 130 final of 21 March 2012.

(68)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 of 7 December 1998 on the functioning of the internal market in relation to the free movement of goods among the Member States, OJ L 337, 12.12.1998, p. 8.

(69)  COM(2012) 131 final of 21 March 2012.

(70)  COM(2011)933.

(71)  SWD(2012)98.

(72)  COM(2011)933.

(73)  SWD(2012)98.

(74)  Richtlinie 2011/93/EU des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 13. Dezember 2011 zur Bekämpfung des sexuellen Missbrauchs und der sexuellen Ausbeutung von Kindern sowie der Kinderpornografie sowie zur Ersetzung des Rahmenbeschlusses 2004/68/JI des Rates, ABl. L 335 vom 17.12.2011, S. 1.

(75)  Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA, OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1.

(76)  Secondo i dati raccolti dalla ONG Centro per lo studio della democrazia la cui sede è a Sofia, le dodici attività della criminalità organizzata in Bulgaria generano 1,7 miliardi di EUR all’anno: http://www.csd.bg/artShow.php?id=15991. L’istituto di studi economici EURIPIDES ha calcolato che la mafia italiana guadagna ogni anno 220 miliardi di EUR dal crimine organizzato. Il fatturato annuo della criminalità organizzata nel Regno Unito è stimato pari a 15 miliardi di GBP. Si veda:

http://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/news/intro/docs/20120312/1_en_impact_assesment_part1_v4.pdf

(77)  www.economics.jku.at/members/Schneider/…/OrgCrime_Feld4.pdf

(78)  The top 12 organised crime activities in Bulgaria generate EUR 1.7 billion annually, according to the Sofia-based NGO Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD): http://www.csd.bg/artShow.php?id=15991. The economic institute EURIPIDES estimated in 2011 that the Italian mafia earns EUR 220 billion annually from organised crime. The annual turnover of organised crime in the UK is estimated to be GBP 15 billion. See http://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/news/intro/docs/20120312/1_en_impact_assesment_part1_v4.pdf

(79)  www.economics.jku.at/members/Schneider/…/OrgCrime_Feld4.pdf

(80)  EUVL L 102, 11.4.2006.

(81)  EUVL L 24, 29.1.2008.

(82)  EUVL L 26, 28.1.2012.

(83)  EYVL L 327, 22.12.2000.

(84)  OJ L 102, 11.4.2006.

(85)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2008.

(86)  OJ L 26, 28.1.2012.

(87)  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000.

(88)  PB L 140 van 5.6.2009, blz. 16.

(89)  Richtlijn 2009/28/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad  ter bevordering van het gebruik van energie uit hernieuwbare bronnen, PB L 140 van 5.6.2009.

(90)  COM(2012) 60 final http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0060:FIN:NL:PDF.

(91)  PB L 312 van 22.11.2008 .http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:160:0008:0016:NL:PDF.

(92)  PB C 160 van 19.6.2010. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:160:0008:0016:NL:PDF.

(93)  OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, p. 16.

(94)  Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, OJ L 140, 5.6.2009.

(95)  COM(2012) 60 final, http://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/201202_innovating_sustainable_growth_en.pdf

(96)  OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:160:0008:0016:EN:PDF.

(97)  OJ C 160, 19.6.2010, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:160:0008:0016:EN:PDF.

(98)  Verordening (EG) nr. 999/2001 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 22 mei 2001 houdende vaststelling van voorschriften inzake preventie, bestrijding en uitroeiing van bepaalde overdraagbare spongiforme encefalopathieën (PB L 147 van 31.5.2001).

(99)  De inspectieverslagen zijn te vinden op http://ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/index_en.cfm.

(100)  Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, OJ L 147, 31.5.2001.

(101)  Inspection reports are published at: http://ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/index_en.cfm

(102)  Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods, OJ L 404, 30.12.2006; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:404:0009:0025:EN:PDF.

(103)  Δράση του προγράμματος Δάφνη που τελειώνει στις αρχές του 2012 με τίτλο: ΑΝΑΤΡΟΦΗ ΠΑΙΔΙΩΝ ΜΕΣΑ ΑΠΟ ΤΑ ΚΑΓΚΕΛΑ ΤΗΣ ΦΥΛΑΚΗΣ του Ινστιτούτου Υγείας του Παιδιού, Τμήμα Ψυχικής Υγείας και Κοινωνικής Πρόνοιας, Κέντρο Μελέτης και Πρόληψης της Παιδικής Κακοποίησης και Εγκατάλειψης (Ελλάδα) http://www.mothers-in-prison.eu

(104)  just.c.1.dir(2012)679183.

(105)  Daphne project ending at the beginning of 2012 entitled: Raising a Child through Prison Bars by the Institute of Child Health, Department of Mental Health and Social Welfare, Center for the Study and Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (Greece), http://www.mothers-in-prison.eu

(106)  just.c.1.dir(2012)679183.

(107)  JO L 327, 16.12.2003, p. 34.

(108)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:327:0034:0038:EN:PDF

(109)  http://bookshop.europa.eu/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/EU-Bookshop-Site/en_GB/-/EUR/ViewPublication-Start?PublicationKey=ND3210390

(110)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/major_chronic_diseases/diseases/cancer/index_en.htm#fragment2

(111)  Comunicarea Comisiei către Parlamentul european, Consiliu, Comitetul economic şi social european şi Comitetul regiunilor — Bolile rare: o provocare pentru Europa {SEC(2008)2713} {SEC(2008)2712} /* COM/2008/0679 final */

(112)  Recomandarea Consiliului din 8 iunie 2009 privind o acțiune în domeniul bolilor rare (JO C 151, 3.7.2009, p. 7-10).

(113)  COM (2011) 808 final, 30.11.2011.

(114)  http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/index_en.cfm?pg=workshops&workshop=the_health_demographic_change_and_wellbeing_challenge

(115)  OJ L 327, 16.12.2003, p. 34.

(116)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:327:0034:0038:EN:PDF.

(117)  http://bookshop.europa.eu/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/EU‐Bookshop-Site/en_GB/-/EUR/ViewPublication-Start?PublicationKey=ND3210390.

(118)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/major_chronic_diseases/diseases/cancer/index_en.htm#fragment2.

(119)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Rare Diseases — Europe's challenges {SEC(2008) 2713} {SEC(2008)2712} /* COM/2008/0679 final */.

(120)  Council Recommendation of 8 June 2009 on an action in the field of rare diseases (OJ C 151, 3.7.2009, p. 7‐10).

(121)  COM(2011) 808 final, 30.11.2011.

(122)  http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/index_en.cfm?pg=workshops&workshop=the_health_demographic_change_and_wellbeing_challenge.

(123)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=DA.

(124)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=EL

(125)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=EN

(126)  La zona habitual de tránsito del tipo de actividades ilegales al que sus Señorías hacen referencia.

(127)  COM(2009) 538 final y COM(2010) 584 final.

(128)  La zona di transito abituale per il tipo di attività illegali cui fa riferimento l'onorevole parlamentare.

(129)  COM(2009)538 def., COM(2010)584 def.

(130)  A szokásos tranzitterület azon illegális tevékenységek számára, amelyeket a tisztelt képviselők említenek.

(131)  COM(2009) 538 végleges, COM(2010) 584 végleges.

(132)  A habitual zona de trânsito para este tipo de atividades ilegais a que os Senhores Deputados se referem.

(133)  COM(2009)538 final, COM(2010)584 final.

(134)  To je običajno tranzitno območje za take nezakonite dejavnosti, kot jih navaja spoštovani poslanec.

(135)  COM(2009) 538 final, COM(2010) 584 final.

(136)  Parlamentin jäsenen tarkoittaman laittoman toiminnan tavallisin läpikulkualue.

(137)  KOM(2009) 538 lopullinen ja KOM(2010) 584 lopullinen.

(138)  The usual transit area of the sort of illegal activities the Honourable Member refers to.

(139)  COM(2009)538 final, COM(2010)584 final.

(140)  Rådets förordning (EG) nr 3/2008 om informationskampanjer och säljfrämjande åtgärder för jordbruksprodukter på den inre marknaden och i tredjeland, och kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 501/2008 om tillämpningsföreskrifter för rådets förordning om informationskampanjer och säljfrämjande åtgärder för jordbruksprodukter på den inre marknaden och i tredjeland.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:2007D0076:20090303:SV:PDF

(141)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(142)  Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries and Commission Regulation (EC) No 501/2008 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:2008R0003:20090303:EN:PDF.

(143)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(144)  Directive 2004/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds due to the use of organic solvents in certain paints and varnishes and vehicle refinishing products and amending Directive 1999/13/EC, OJ L 143, 30.4.2004.

(145)  COM(2011) 297 final.

(146)  Rozporządzenie Rady (WE) nr 1698/2005 w sprawie wsparcia rozwoju obszarów wiejskich przez Europejski Fundusz Rolny na rzecz Rozwoju Obszarów Wiejskich (EFRROW).

(147)  W rozumieniu zalecenia Komisji 2003/361/WE.

(148)  COM(2011) 627: Wniosek dotyczący rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie wsparcia rozwoju obszarów wiejskich przez Europejski Fundusz Rolny na rzecz Rozwoju Obszarów Wiejskich (EFRROW).

(149)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD).

(150)  Within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.

(151)  COM(2011) 627: Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD).

(152)  http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/rights/docs/mapping_nonprofit_entities_en.pdf

(153)  http://www.ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:85575-2012:TEXT:EN:HTML&src=0

(154)  http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/rights/docs/mapping_nonprofit_entities_en.pdf

(155)  http://www.ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:85575-2012:TEXT:EN:HTML&src=0.

(156)  §§ 3.1–3.7.

(157)  Se Philip Morris International-artikel 4.01(a)–4.01(k); Japanese Tobacco International §§ 7.1–7.11; International Imperial Tobacco Limited-artikel 5.1–5.4 och artikel 6.1–6.4.

(158)  §§ 3.1-3.7.

(159)  see PMI Article 4.01(a)‐4.01(k); JTI §§ 7.1‐7.11; ITL Article 5.1‐5.4 and Article 6.1‐6.4.

(160)  www.reapower.eu.

(161)  www.capmix.eu.

(162)  www.reapower.eu.

(163)  www.capmix.eu.

(164)  Direttiva 2005/36/CE, GU L 255 del 30.9.2005, pag. 22.

(165)  COM(2012)261 final.

(166)  Directive 2005/36/CE, OJ L 255 p. 22, 30.9.2005.

(167)  COM(2012)261 final.

(168)  JO L 30 de 31.1.2009, p. 16.

(169)  Gabinete de Gestão do PO Regional do Norte, Rua Rainha D. Estefânia, 251, 4150-304 Porto

Telefone: +351 226 086 300

Fax: +351 226 061 489

Endereço eletrónico: novonorte@ccdr-n.pt

Web: http://www.novonorte.qren.pt/

Gabinete de Gestão do Proder, Rua Padre António Vieira, 1 — 8° andar, 1099-073 Lisboa

Telefone: 00 351 21 381 9318/19/20

Correio eletrónico geral: st.proder@gpp.pt

http://www.proder.pt/

IFAP, R. Castilho, n°. 45-51, 1269-164 Lisboa

Telefone: 213 846 000

http://www.ifap.pt

(170)  OJ L 30, 31.1.2009, p. 16.

(171)  Gabinete de Gestão do PO Regional do Norte, Rua Rainha D. Estefânia, 251, 4150-304 Porto;

Tel.: +351 226 086 300;

Fax.: +351 226 061 489

Email.: novonorte@ccdr-n.pt

Web: http://www.novonorte.qren.pt/

Gabinete de Gestão do Proder, Rua Padre António Vieira, 1 — 8o andar, 1099-073 Lisboa

Tel.: 00 351 21 381 9318/19/20

Email geral: st.proder@gpp.pt

http://www.proder.pt/

IFAP, R. Castilho, no. 45-51, 1269-164 Lisboa

Tel: 213 846 000

http://www.ifap.pt

(172)  (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/agriculture/data/database).

(173)  (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/food/data/database).

(174)  (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/external_trade/data/database).

(175)  Ver nota de rodapé n.° 1.

(176)  (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/hicp/data/database).

(177)  Ver nota de rodapé n.° 1.

(178)  (http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/agrista/economic-briefs/2011/02_en.pdf).

(179)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/agriculture/data/database.

(180)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/food/data/database.

(181)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/external_trade/data/database.

(182)  See footnote No 1.

(183)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/hicp/data/database.

(184)  See footnote No 1.

(185)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/agrista/economic-briefs/2011/02_en.pdf

(186)  DO L 246 de 23.9.2011.

(187)  OJ L 246, 23.9.2011.

(188)  Case C 31/07 (ex NN 17/07), OJ C 217, 15.9.2007, p. 44.

(189)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=EN.

(190)  OJ L 315, 3.12.2007, p. 1.

(191)  Doc. 9090/12.

(192)  9090/12.

(193)  http://www.deutsche-mittelstands-nachrichten.de/2012/04/41531/.

(194)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0047:0199:en:PDF.

(195)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0012:0018:EL:PDF.

(196)  http://ec.europa.eu/eures/main.jsp?lang=el&acro=eures&catId=56&langChanged=true.

(197)  Βλ.: http://www.esf.de/portal/generator/17840/ida__projects__calls.html.

(198)  Περισσότερα παραδείγματα υπάρχουν στη βάση δεδομένων με τα έργα του ΕΚΤ:http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/emplweb/esf_projects/search.cfm?lang=en.

(199)  http://www.deutsche-mittelstands-nachrichten.de/2012/04/41531/.

(200)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0047:0199:EN:PDF.

(201)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0012:0018:EN:PDF.

(202)  http://ec.europa.eu/eures/main.jsp?lang=en&acro=eures&catId=56&langChanged=true.

(203)  See Internet: http://www.esf.de/portal/generator/17840/ida__projects__calls.html

(204)  Further examples can be found in the ESF projects database:

http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/emplweb/esf_projects/search.cfm?lang=en

(205)  SEK(2011) 1179 v konečném znění.

(206)  Porušování pravidel pro zadávání veřejných zakázek představuje 41% vyčíslitelných chyb.

(207)  KOM(2011) 615 v konečném znění.

(208)  SEC(2011) 1179 final.

(209)  Breaches of public procurement rules count for 41% of the quantifiable errors.

(210)  COM(2011) 615 final.

(211)  Usnesení k absolutoriím za rok 2009 (par. 194‐196) a za rok 2010 (par. 113‐116 a 121‐122).

(212)  2009 discharge resolution §§194-196 and 2010 discharge resolution §§113-116 and 121-122.

(213)  Directiva 2003/96/CE del Consejo, de 27 de octubre de 2003, por la que se reestructura el régimen comunitario de imposición de los productos energéticos y de la electricidad (DO L 283 de 31.10.2003, pp. 51-70).

(214)  COM(2011) 169.

(215)  Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, OJ L 283, 31.10.2003, pp. 51-70.

(216)  COM(2011) 169.

(217)  Directiva 2005/36/CE (DO L 255 de 30.9.2005, p. 22).

(218)  COM(2012) 261 final.

(219)  COM(2012) 261 final.

(220)  Directive 2005/36/EC, OJ L 255, p. 22, 30.9.2005.

(221)  COM(2012) 261 final.

(222)  COM(2012) 261 final.

(223)  http://www.lacronicadeleon.es/2012/04/25/leon/el-rio-orallo-baja-otra-vez-negro-147559.htm

(224)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(225)  http://www.lacronicadeleon.es/2012/04/25/leon/el-rio-orallo-baja-otra-vez-negro-147559.htm

(226)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(227)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E‐2011-011891&language=EN.

(228)  http://europa.eu/ey2012/ey2012main.jsp?catId=986&langId=en.

(229)  Libro bianco — Una strategia europea sugli aspetti sanitari connessi all'alimentazione, al sovrappeso e all'obesità COM(2007)279.

(230)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:301:0003:0013:IT:PDF

(231)  http://sweet-project.eu

(232)  http://www.eubirod.eu

(233)  http://www.image-project.eu

(234)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:412:0001:0041:IT:PDF

(235)  White Paper on a strategy for Europe on nutrition, overweight and obesity related health issues COM(2007)279.

(236)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:301:0003:0013:EN:PDF

(237)  http://sweet-project.eu/

(238)  http://www.eubirod.eu/

(239)  http://www.image-project.eu/

(240)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:412:0001:0041:EN:PDF

(241)  COM(2012)7 definitivo del 17 gennaio 2012, reperibile all'indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1166&furtherNews=yes.

(242)  COM(2012) 7 final of 17 January 2012, at:

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1166&furtherNews=yes.

(243)  KOM(2011)0635 endelig.

(244)  http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/food/competitiveness/forum_food/index_en.htm

(245)  See e.g. State Aid Handbook for SMEs of 25.2.2009, Section 3.1, p.17,

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/studies_reports/sme_handbook_fr.pdf.

(246)  COM(2011)635 final.

(247)  Commission Work Programme for 2012 :

http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/key-documents/index_en.htm.

(248)  Alternative Dispute Resolution.

(249)  http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/food/competitiveness/forum_food/index_en.htm

(250)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0517:FIN:EN:PDF.

(251)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0517:FIN:EN:PDF.

(252)  Togra le haghaidh Treorach ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle maidir le Forfheidhmiú Threoir 96/71/CE maidir le hoibrithe a phostú i réim soláthair seirbhísí, COM(2012) 131 final an 21.3.2012.

(253)  Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, COM(2012) 131 final of 21.3.2012.

(254)  Convention for the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW).

(255)  (http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2012/2012-ageing-report_en.htm).

(256)  No respeitante ao relatório de 2009 sobre a sustentabilidade, ver o seguinte endereço:

(http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication_summary16273_en.htm).

(257)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2012/2012-ageing-report_en.htm

(258)  For the 2009 Sustainability Report see: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication_summary16273_en.htm

(259)  COM(2011)500 final, p. 25 (quadro).

(260)  COM(2011) 500 final, table on page 25.

(261)  (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/documents/pdf/ags_en.pdf).

Ver, nomeadamente, o relatório macroeconómico no seguinte endereço:

(http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/documents/pdf/annex_2_en.pdf).

(262)  (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/speeches-statements/pdf/20111012communication_roadmap_en.pdf).

(263)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/documents/pdf/ags_en.pdf. See in particular the Macroeconomic report:

http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/documents/pdf/annex_2_en.pdf.

(264)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/news/speeches-statements/pdf/20111012communication_roadmap_en.pdf

(265)  Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2009/104/EF af 16. september 2009 om minimumsforskrifter for sikkerhed og sundhed i forbindelse med arbejdstagernes brug af arbejdsudstyr under arbejdet (andet særdirektiv i henhold til artikel 16, stk. 1, i direktiv 89/391/EØF) (kodificeret udgave) (EUT L 260 af 3.10.2009, s. 5).

(266)  Directive 2009/104/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use of work equipment by workers at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (codified version), OJ L 260, 3.10.2009, p. 5.

(267)  Richtlinie 89/391/EWG des Rates vom 12. Juni 1989 über die Durchführung von Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der Sicherheit und des Gesundheitsschutzes der Arbeitnehmer bei der Arbeit, ABl. L 183 vom 29.6.1989, S. 1.

(268)  Richtlinie 2003/88/EG des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 4. November 2003 über bestimmte Aspekte der Arbeitszeitgestaltung, ABl. L 299 vom 18.11.2003, S. 9.

(269)  EuGH, Urteil vom 14. Oktober 2010, Union syndicale Solidaires Isère/Premier ministre et al., Randnrn. 27 und 28.

(270)  „Überarbeitung der Arbeitszeitrichtlinie“ (KOM(2010)801 endg. vom 21.12.2010), Abschnitt 5.2 Ziffer v.

(271)  Mitteilung der Kommission an das Europäische Parlament, den Rat, den Europäischen Wirtschafts‐ und Sozialausschuss und den Ausschuss der Regionen „Mitteilung zu EU-Politik und Freiwilligentätigkeit: Anerkennung und Förderung grenzüberschreitender Freiwilligenaktivitäten in der EU“ (KOM(2011)568 endg. vom 20.9.2011).

(272)  „Ein moderneres Arbeitsrecht für die Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts“, (KOM(2006)708 vom 22.11.2006).

(273)  Ergebnis der öffentlichen Anhörung zum Grünbuch der Kommission „Ein moderneres Arbeitsrecht für die Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts“ (KOM(2007)627 endg. vom 24.10.2007).

(274)  Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work, OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

(275)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9.

(276)  Judgment of 14 October 2010 in Case C‐428/09 Union syndicale Solidaires Isère v Premier ministre and Others, paragraphs 27 and 28.

(277)  ‘Reviewing the Working Time Directive’ (COM(2010) 801 final of 21 December 2010), Section 5.2.(v).

(278)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic And Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on ‘EU Policies and Volunteering: Recognising and Promoting Crossborder Voluntary Activities in the EU’, COM(2011) 568 final, 20 September 2011.

(279)  ‘Modernising labour law to meet the challenges of the 21st century’ (COM(2006) 708 final of 22 November 2006).

(280)  ‘Outcome of the Public Consultation on the Commission’s Green Paper Modernising labour law to meet the challenges of the 21st century’ (COM(2007) 627 final of 24 October 2007).

(281)  Parere del CPMP adottato il 17 luglio 1996.

(282)  Parere del CPMP adottato il 31 agosto 1999.

(283)  Cause riunite T-74/00, T-76/00, T-83/00, T-84/00, T-85/00; T-123/00, T-137/00 e T141/00 nonché causa C-39/03.

(284)  Direttiva 2010/84/UE (GU L 348 del 31.12.2010, pag. 74) e regolamento (UE) n. 1235/2010 (GU L 348 del 31.12.2010, pag. 1).

(285)  CPMP opinion adopted on 17 July 1996.

(286)  CPMP opinion adopted on 31 August 1999.

(287)  Joint Cases T-74/00, T-76/00, T-83/00, T-84/00, T-85/00; T-123/00, T-137/00 and T-141/00 and the Case C‐39/03.

(288)  Directive 2010/84/EU (OJ L 348, 31.12.2010, p. 74) and Regulation (EU) No 1235/2010 (OJ L 348, 31.12.2010, p. 1).

(289)  Recomandarea nr. 2007/331/CE a Comisiei din 3 mai 2007 și Recomandarea nr. 2010/307/UE a Comisiei din 2 iunie 2010.

(290)  Raportul intitulat „Rezultatele monitorizării nivelurilor de acrilamidă în produsele alimentare în urma monitorizării efectuate în perioada 2007 — 2009 și evaluarea expunerii” (Results of acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007 — 2009 and exposure assessment), publicat la data de 22 martie 2011, EFSA Journal 2011; 9(4):2133.

(291)  Recomandarea Comisiei privind analizele nivelurilor de acrilamidă din alimente [documentul C(2010) 9681 final din 10.1.2011].

(292)  Codul de practici Codex pentru reducerea nivelurilor de acrilamidă din alimente (CAC/RCP 67-2009).

(293)  Setul de instrumente poate fi consultat la următoarea pagină de internet: http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/ciaa_acrylamide_toolbox09.pdf

(294)  Commission Recommendation 2007/331/EC of 3 May 2007 and Commission Recommendation 2010/307/EU of 2 June 2010.

(295)  Report on ‘Results of acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007-2009 and exposure assessment’, issued on 22 March 2011, EFSA Journal 2011;9(4):2133.

(296)  Commission Recommendation on investigations into the levels of acrylamide in food (Document C(2010)9681 final of 10.1.2011).

(297)  Codex Code of Practice for the reduction of acrylamide in foods (CAC/RCP 67-2009).

(298)  The toolbox can be found at the following link: http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/ciaa_acrylamide_toolbox09.pdf

(299)  Direttiva 2009/147/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 30 novembre 2009, concernente la conservazione degli uccelli selvatici, GU L 20 del 26.1.2010, pag. 7.

(300)  Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20/7, 26.1.2010.

(301)  Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals (OJ L 146, 13.6.2003, p. 1),.

(302)  Council Directive 92/65/EEC laying down the animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC (OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54).

(303)  Autorità d'Ambito Territoriale Ottimale.

(304)  Autorità di Ambito Territoriale Ottimale [Optimal Local Environment Authority Consortium].

(305)  KOM(2011)244 endg.

(306)  http://www.alpconv.org/en/convention/agreements/EULevel/Documents/ln0212.pdf

(307)  Europäischer Fond für regionale Entwicklung.

(308)  Europäischer Landwirtschaftsfonds für die Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums.

(309)  www.climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu

(310)  COM(2011) 244 final.

(311)  http://www.alpconv.org/en/convention/agreements/EULevel/Documents/ln0212.pdf

(312)  European Regional Development Fund.

(313)  European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development.

(314)  www.climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu

(315)  Véase http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/implementation_report_en.htm

(316)  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2011/audiovisual_en.htm

(317)  Available at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/implementation_report_en.htm

(318)  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2011/audiovisual_en.htm

(319)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=CS

(320)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

---