title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 3036/97 van Amedeo AMADEO aan de Commissie. Belastingheffing op zware motorvoertuigen

eurovoc_concepts:
Treasury
axle tax
commercial vehicle
energy policy
environmental policy
excise duty
motor fuel
tax system
toll
transport policy

formats: html pdf print

text: 30. 4. 98 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 134/63 (98/C 134/78) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-3036/97 van Amedeo Amadeo (NI) aan de Commissie (1 oktober 1997) Betreft: Belastingheffing op zware motorvoertuigen In verband met het voorstel voor een richtlijn van de Raad betreffende de belastingheffing op zware motorvoertuigen die zijn aangepast voor het goederenvervoer over de weg voor het gebruik van sommige infrastructuren (COM(96)0331 def. › 96/0182 SYN) (1), wordt de aandacht gevestigd op het feit dat in de Europese Unie momenteel de volgende aanpak overheerst: fiscale heffing op de brandstoffen is meer een kwestie van belastingbeleid dan van vervoersbeleid, zolang de accijnzen op brandstoffen een belangrijke bron van inkomsten blijven. Het verzoek luidt om een ree¤le coherentie tot stand te brengen tussen indirecte belastingen, die de vrucht zijn van fiscaal beleid, en directe belastingen op het gebruik van infrastructurele voorzieningen en de dekking van externe kosten die onder het vervoersbeleid valt. (1) PB C 59 van 26. 2. 1997, blz. 9. Antwoord van de heer Kinnock namens de Commissie (12 november 1997) De Commissie is het ermee eens dat brandstofaccijnzen in de lidstaten hoofdzakelijk worden geheven om meer inkomsten te verwerven. In haar voorstel voor een richtlijn van de Raad tot herstructurering van de communautaire regeling voor de belasting van energieproducten (1) heeft de Commissie evenwel erkend dat de heffing door de lidstaten van accijnzen op motorbrandstoffen tevens de verwezenlijking van andere nationale milieu-, vervoers- en energiedoelstellingen dient. Ook ziet de Commissie in dat directe en indirecte heffingen op het gebruik van infrastructuurvoorzieningen die de individuele weggebruiker moet betalen, deel moeten uitmaken van een samenhangend heffingssysteem. In het recente voorstel van de Commissie voor een richtlijn van de Raad betreffende een regeling voor de belasting van energieproducten is dientengevolge een speciale herstructureringsbepaling opgenomen die de lidstaten in staat stelt motorbrandstoffen onder het in deze richtlijn aangegeven minimum te belasten, in combinatie met de invoering of wijziging van specifieke heffingssystemen voor het wegvervoer voor het verhalen van bijvoorbeeld de infrastructuur-, filevormings- en milieukosten. (1) PB C 139 van 6. 5. 1997. (98/C 134/79) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-3042/97 van Amedeo Amadeo (NI) aan de Commissie (1 oktober 1997) Betreft: Witboek spoorwegen Advies van het Economisch en Sociaal Comite· over het Witboek (cid:132)Strategie om de communautaire spoorlijnen een nieuw elan te geven(cid:148) (COM(96)0421 def. ) (1). Vooruitgang, sanering van de financie¤le situatie en infrastructurele maatregelen. Een essentie¤le strategische factor voor de liberalisering van de spoorwegen, zoals nagestreefd door het Witboek, is autonomie van de bedrijfsvoering. Een randvoorwaarde om dit doel te bereiken is dat de schuldenlast wordt verminderd door het uitvoeren van richtlijn 91/440/EEG (2) voor de ontwikkeling van de communautaire spoorwegen. De vraag luidt of het waar is dat deze vermindering in de verschillende lidstaten onvolledig en ongelijk is verlopen. Bovendien is hierbij de grootst mogelijke omzichtigheid geboden. (1) PB C 206 van 7. 7. 1997, blz. 23. (2) PB L 237 van 24. 8. 1991, blz. 25


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 3005/97 do Deputado Roberta ANGELILLI à Comissão. Legislação europeia sobre a redução da poluição atmosférica e a protecção da qualidade de vida urbana

eurovoc_concepts:
air quality
motor fuel
motor vehicle pollution
pollution control
public health
quality of life
quality of the environment
technical standard
urban area

text: C 134/54 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 30. 4. 98 Resposta dada por M. Monti em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (18 de Novembro de 1997) A Comissa(cid:152)o na(cid:152)o recebeu nenhuma queixa relativa a‘ aquisi(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de autocarros pela COTRAL. Solicita-se a‘ Senhora Deputada que comunique a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o os elementos de que dispo(cid:152)e e que podera(cid:152)o indiciar a existe(cid:136)ncia de uma infrac(cid:231)a(cid:152)o ao direito comunita·rio dos contratos de direito pu·blico. A eventual diverge(cid:136)ncia entre o pre(cid:231)o de mercado e o pre(cid:231)o praticado para o fornecimento no caso vertente, na(cid:152)o constitui, em si mesma, uma infrac(cid:231)a(cid:152)o ao direito comunita·rio que rege os contratos de direito pu·blico. Na situa(cid:231)a(cid:152)o actual e tendo por base as considera(cid:231)o(cid:152)es precedentes, a Comissa(cid:152)o considera que os factos assinalados na(cid:152)o devem ser objecto de um parecer por ela emitido. (98/C 134/66) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3005/97 apresentada por Roberta Angelilli (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Legisla(cid:231)a(cid:152)o europeia sobre a redu(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da polui(cid:231)a(cid:152)o atmosfe·rica e a protec(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da qualidade de vida urbana Na resposta a‘ pergunta E-1673/97 (1), a Comissa(cid:152)o afirmava que, com base a Directiva 96/62/CE (2), iria elaborar novas propostas relativas a‘ qualidade do ar e da vida nas zonas urbanas. Referia, ale·m disso, uma nova estrate·gia, adoptada em 18 de Junho de 1996, para reduzir a polui(cid:231)a(cid:152)o causada pelos ve(cid:14)·culos. Pode a Comissa(cid:152)o indicar que modalidades e prazos adoptara·para formular as suas propostas baseadas na 1. Directiva 96/62/CE? Pode indicar, de uma forma sucinta, quais as linhas de orienta(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da nova estrate·gia adoptada em Junho de 2. 1996 e que documentos oficiais fazem refere(cid:136)ncia a este assunto? (1) (2) JO C 45 de 10. 2. 1998, p. 78. JO L 296 de 21. 11. 1996, p. 55. Resposta dada pela Comissa·ria Bjerregaard em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (7 de Novembro de 1997) Foi adoptada em 8 de Outubro de 1997 (1) uma proposta de directiva do Conselho relativa aos 1. valores-limite aplica·veis ao dio·xido de enxofre, o·xidos de azoto, part(cid:14)·culas em suspensa(cid:152)o e chumbo no ar ambiente. 2. A estrate·gia de controlo das emisso(cid:152)es atmosfe·ricas provocadas pelos transportes rodovia·rios adoptada em 18 de Junho de 1996 pela Comissa(cid:152)o (2) tem origem nos resultados do Programa Auto-Oil. A estrate·gia destina-se a melhorar a qualidade do ar na Comunidade no horizonte 2010 gra(cid:231)as a uma redu(cid:231)a(cid:152)o das emisso(cid:152)es de poluentes entre 60 e 70% em rela(cid:231)a(cid:152)o ao n(cid:14)·vel de 1996 por meio de uma abordagem integrada, equilibrada e caracterizada por uma boa rela(cid:231)a(cid:152)o entre custos e efica·cia. Neste contexto e no a(cid:136)mbito desta estrate·gia, foram adoptadas duas propostas legislativas destinadas, por um lado, a melhorar os combust(cid:14)·veis gasolina e diesel (3) e, por outro lado, a fixar normas mais severas para os ve(cid:14)·culos privados (2) (e igualmente para os ve(cid:14)·culos utilita·rios ligeiros), a atingir ate· ao ano 2000. Tais propostas legislativas foram objecto de uma primeira leitura no Parlamento (10 de Abril de 1997) e de uma posi(cid:231)a(cid:152)o comum no Conselho (7 de Outubro de 1997). (1) (2) (3) doc. COM(97) 500. doc. COM(96) 248. doc. COM(97) 271


title: ΚΑΝΟΝΙΣΜΟΣ (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1919/97 ΤΗΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗΣ της 1ης Οκτωβρίου 1997 για τον καθορισμό των δασμών κατά την εισαγωγή στον τομέα του ρυζιού

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
import
rice
third country


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 3033/97 do Deputado Amedeo AMADEO à Comissão. Projectos italianos no âmbito do programa URBAN

eurovoc_concepts:
EU financing
EU programme
Italy
distribution of aid
municipality
regional and local authorities
reserves
town
urban area

text: 16. 4. 98 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 117/127 Resposta comum a‘s perguntas escritas E-3013/97 e E-3033/97 dada pelo Comissa·ria Monika Wulf-Mathies em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (24 de Outubro de 1997) Em 8 de Maio de 1996, a Comissa(cid:152)o decidiu da dota(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da reserva financeira das iniciativas comunita·rias. A dota(cid:231)a(cid:152)o indicativa atribu(cid:14)·da a‘ iniciativa URBAN em Ita·lia ascende, em rela(cid:231)a(cid:152)o ao per(cid:14)·odo 1997-1999, a 11,81 milho(cid:152)es de ecus no objectivo no 1 e 6, 40 milho(cid:152)es de ecus extra-objectivo no 1 (pre(cid:231)os indexados de 1995). Na sua comunica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o aos Estados-membros (1), designadamente no ponto 20, a Comissa(cid:152)o convidava-os a apresentar programas operacionais no a(cid:136)mbito da iniciativa URBAN. Na(cid:152)o estava prevista pela Comissa(cid:152)o qualquer outra atribui(cid:231)a(cid:152)o geogra·fica no interior de cada Estado-membro, com excep(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da reparti(cid:231)a(cid:152)o entre zonas do objectivo no 1 e extra-objectivo no 1. As autoridades italianas apresentaram uma proposta relativa a programas nas cidades de Trieste, Lecce e Catanzaro. (1) JO C 200 de 10. 7. 1996 (98/C 117/164) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3014/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Projectos FEDER Em 30 de Novembro de 1995, a Comissa(cid:152)o publicou um aviso de concurso para a apresenta(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de projectos-piloto urbanos, no a(cid:136)mbito das medidas inovadoras previsto no artigo 10o do FEDER. Pode a Comissa(cid:152)o Europeia indicar quantos projectos foram apresentados por Ita·lia? Resposta da Comissa·ria Monika Wulf-Mathies em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (23 de Outubro de 1997) No a(cid:136)mbito do convite a‘ apresenta(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de propostas (1) a t(cid:14)·tulo do artigo 10o do regulamento do Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (2), foram apresentados 503 projectos, dos quais 119 por Ita·lia. Perante tal manifesta(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de interesse, a selec(cid:231)a(cid:152)o final foi alvo de um rigoroso processo de avalia(cid:231)a(cid:152)o. Tendo em conta os crite·rios estabelecidos, a Comissa(cid:152)o adoptou, num total de 26 projectos seleccionados, 4 projectos para Ita·lia, para as cidades de Brindisi, Mila(cid:152)o, Na·poles e Turim. (1) (2) JO C 319 de 30. 11. 1995. JO L 193 de 31. 7. 1993. (98/C 117/165) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3016/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Programa Indicativo Nuclear da Comunidade (PINC) Tendo em conta a Comunica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o da Comissa(cid:152)o sobre as indu·strias nucleares na Unia(cid:152)o Europeia (Programa Indicativo Nuclear nos termos do artigo 40o do Tratado Euratom) (PINC) (doc. COM(96)339 final) (doc. CES 470/97), Considerando que, face aos perigos potenciais das instala(cid:231)o(cid:152)es nucleares dos PECO e da CSI, na(cid:152)o deveria haver du·vidas quanto aos efeitos profundamente negativos que teria na opinia(cid:152)o pu·blica outro acidente nuclear em larga escala, Considerando que os programas PHARE e TACIS, que se revelaram preciosos, continuam a ser objecto de cr(cid:14)·ticas, Atendendo a que estes programas tratam de seguran(cid:231)a nuclear, Podera· a Comissa(cid:152)o reexamina·-los urgentemente e publicar em seguida as concluso(cid:152)es dessa aprecia(cid:231)a(cid:152)o?


title: Det Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalgs udtalelse om »Kommissionens forslag til Rådets beslutning om indførelse af en konsultationsprocedure vedrørende forbindelserne mellem medlemsstater og tredjelande på søtransportområdet og vedrørende aktioner på dette område i de internationale organisationer samt en bemyndigelsesprocedure for aftaler vedrørende søtransport«

eurovoc_concepts:
maritime transport
market access
member country
restriction on competition
third country

formats: html pdfa1b print


title: SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE Nr. 3033/97 von Amedeo AMADEO an die Kommission. Italienische Vorhaben im Rahmen des URBAN- Programms

text: 16. 4. 98 DE Amtsblatt der Europa¤ischen Gemeinschaften C 117/127 Gemeinsame Antwort von Frau Wulf-Mathies im Namen der Kommission auf die Schriftlichen Anfragen E-3013/97 und E-3033/97 (24. Oktober 1997) Am 8. Mai 1996 hat die Kommission beschlossen, die finanzielle Reserve fu¤r die Gemeinschaftsinitiativen aufzuteilen. Nach der indikativen Mittelzuweisung fu¤r die Initiative URBAN in Italien stehen im Zeitraum 1997-1999 11,81 Mio. Ecu in den Ziel-1-Gebieten und 6,40 Mio. Ecu au(cid:223)erhalb der Ziel-1-Gebiete (zu indexierten Preisen von 1995) zur Verfu¤gung. In ihrer Mitteilung an die Mitgliedstaaten (1), insbesondere in Ziffer 20, hat die Kommission die Mitgliedstaaten aufgefordert, Operationelle Programme im Rahmen der Initiative URBAN einzureichen. Abgesehen von der Aufteilung auf die Ziel-1-Gebiete und die anderen Gebiete hat die Kommission keine weitere geographische Zuweisung innerhalb der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten vorgesehen. Die italienischen Beho¤rden haben einen Vorschlag fu¤r Programme in den Sta¤dten Triest, Lecce und Catanzaro unterbreitet. (1) ABl. C 200 vom 10. 7. 1996. (98/C 117/164) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-3014/97 von Amedeo Amadeo (NI) an die Kommission (1. Oktober 1997) Betrifft: EFRE-Projekte Am 30. November 1995 vero¤ffentlichte die Kommission die Ausschreibung eines Auswahlverfahrens fu¤r die Einreichung von sta¤dteplanerischen Pilotprojekten im Rahmen der innovativen Ma(cid:223)nahmen gema¤(cid:223) Artikel 10 des Europa¤ischen Fonds fu¤r Regionale Entwicklung EFRE. Kann die Kommission angeben, wieviele derartige Projekte von Italien eingereicht worden sind? Antwort von Frau Wulf-Mathies im Namen der Kommission (23. Oktober 1997) Im Rahmen der Ausschreibung (1) gema¤(cid:223) Artikel 10 der Verordnung des Europa¤ischen Fonds fu¤r regionale Entwicklung (2) sind 503 Projekte bei der Kommission eingegangen, davon 119 aus Italien. Angesichts dieses lebhaften Interesses wurden die Projekte bei der endgu¤ltigen Auswahl einem strengen Bewertungsverfahren unterzogen. Unter Zugrundelegung der aufgestellten Kriterien hat die Kommission von insgesamt 26 ausgewa¤hlten Projekten vier Projekte in Italien fu¤r die Sta¤dte Brindisi, Mailand, Neapel und Turin angenommen. (1) ABl. C 319 vom 30. 11. 1995. (2) ABl. L 193 vom 31. 7. 1993. (98/C 117/165) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-3016/97 von Amedeo Amadeo (NI) an die Kommission (1. Oktober 1997) Betrifft: Hinweisendes Nuklearprogramm fu¤r die Europa¤ische Union (PINC) Die Kommission hat eine (cid:132)Mitteilung u¤ber die Kernindustrie in der Europa¤ischen Union › hinweisendes Nuklearprogramm nach Artikel 40 Euratom-Vertrag (PINC)(cid:147) vorgelegt (KOM(96)339 end) (Dok. CES 470/97). Bezu¤glich der potentiellen Gefahren im Zusammenhang mit den Kernkraftwerken in den MOEL und der GUS sollten keine Zweifel u¤ber die ausgesprochen scha¤dlichen Auswirkungen bestehen, die ein weiterer nuklearer Zwischenfall gro¤(cid:223)eren Ausma(cid:223)es in der O¤ ffentlichkeit ha¤tte. Die Programme PHARE und TACIS haben sich zwar als wertvoll erwiesen, stehen aber mittlerweile mehr und mehr im Kreuzfeuer der Kritik. Ist die Kommission bereit, diese Programme in bezug auf die nukleare Sicherheit unverzu¤glich zu pru¤fen und die Ergebnisse dieser Pru¤fung anschlie(cid:223)end zu vero¤ffentlichen?


title: Parecer do Comité Económico e Social sobre a «Comunicação da Comissão ao Conselho, ao Parlamento Europeu, ao Comité Económico e Social e ao Comité das Regiões - Plano de Acção da União Europeia: As comunicações via satélite na sociedade da informação»

eurovoc_concepts:
action programme
harmonisation of standards
research and development
satellite communications
single market


title: Stellungnahme der Kommission gemäß Artikel 189 B Absatz 2 Buchstabe d) des EG-Vertrages zu den Abänderungen des Europäischen Parlaments des gemeinsamen Standpunkts des Rates betreffend den Vorschlag für einen Beschluß des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über die Überprüfung des Programms der Europäischen Gemeinschaft für Umweltpolitik und Maßnahmen im Hinblick auf eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung - "Für eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung"

eurovoc_concepts:
EU programme
environmental policy
environmental protection
sustainable development

text: KOMMISSION DER EUROPÄISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFTEN Brüssel, den 01. 10. 1997 KOM(97) 471 endg. 96/0027 (COD) STELLUNGNAHME DER KOMMISSION gemäß Artikel 189 b, Absatz 2, Buchstabe d) des EG-Vertrages, zu den Abänderungen des Europäischen Parlaments des gemeinsamen Standpunkts des Rates betreffend den Vorschlag für einen BESCHLUSS DES EUROPÄISCHEN PARLAMENTS UND DES RATES ÜBER DIE ÜBERPRÜFUNG DES PROGRAMMS DER EUROPÄISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFT FÜR UMWELTPOLITIK UND MASSNAHMEN IM HINBLICK AUF EINE DAUERHAFTE UND UMWELTGERECHTE ENTWICKLUNG - "FÜR EINE DAUERHAFTE UND UMWELTGERECHTE ENTWICKLUNG" - ZUR ÄNDERUNG DES VORSCHLAGS DER KOMMISSION gemäß Artikel 189 a, Absatz 2 des EG-Vertrages 1. Bisheriges Verfahren Am 29. Februar 1996 legte die Kommission dem Parlament und dem Rat auf der Grundlage von Artikel 130 s Absatz 3 Unterabsatz 1 des Vertrags einen Vorschlag für einen Beschluß des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über die Überprüfung des Programms der Europäischen Gemeinschaft fiir Umweltpolitik und Maßnahmen im Hinblick auf eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung - "Für eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung" - [KOM(95) 647 endg. - 96/0027 (COD) vom 24. Januar 1996] vor1. Der Wirtschafts- und Sozialausschuß gab seine Stellungnahme am 29730. Mai 1996 ab2. Der Ausschuß der Regionen gab seine Stellungnahme am 18/19. September 1996 ab3. Das Europäische Parlament nahm in erster Lesung 13. November 1996 Stellung4. Im Anschluß an die Stellungnahme des Parlaments übermittelte die Kommission dem Rat am 4. Dezember 1996 einen geänderten Vorschlag [KOM(96) 648 endg. ]5. Am 17. April 1997 legte der Rat gemäß Artikel 189 b des Vertrags seinen gemeinsamen Standpunkt zu diesem Vorschlag fest6. Am 17. Juli 1997 beschloß das Europäische Parlament in zweiter Lesung, den gemeinsamen Standpunkt des Rates zu ändern7. 2. Zielsetzung und Inhalt des geplanten Beschlusses Am 18. März 1992 nahm die Kommission das Programm der Europäischen Gemeinschaft fur Umweltpolitik und Maßnahmen im Hinblick auf eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung - "Für eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung" - an. In seiner Entschließung vom 17. November 1992 begrüßte das Europäische Parlament die darin enthaltenen Leitlinien, und der Rat und die im Rat vereinigten Vertreter der Mitgliedstaaten billigten die allgemeinen Ansätze und Konzepte des Programms in ihrer Entschließung vom 1. Februar 1993. Obwohl es prinzipiell auf das Jahr 2000 ausgerichtet ist, enthält das Programm bereits Bestimmungen, wonach sein allgemeines Konzept vor Ende 1995 einer gründlichen 1 ABl. Nr. C 140 vom 11. 5. 1996. 2 ABl. Nr. C 212 vom 22. 7. 1996. 3 ABl. Nr. C 34 vom 3. 2. 1997. 4 ABl. Nr. C 362 vom 2. 12. 19%. 5 ABl. Nr. C 28 vom 29. 1. 1997. 6 ABl. Nr. 157 vom 24. 5. 1997. 7 Noch nicht veröffentlicht. Überprüfung zu unterziehen ist. In den Entschließungen des Parlaments und des Rates wurde eine derartige Überprüfung ausdrücklich gefordert. Die Überprüfung ist im Laufe des Jahres 1995 durchgeführt worden. Die zentralen Komponenten dieses Prozesses sind der umfassende Bericht über die Fortschritte bei der Umsetzung des Programms, der von der Kommission am 10. Januar 1996 genehmigt wurde [KOM(95) 624 endg], sowie ein aktualisierter Bericht über den Zustand der Umwelt, der von der Europäischen Umweltagentur am 10. November 1995 vorgelegt wurde. Mit dem vorgeschlagenen Beschluß soll die Umsetzung des Fünften Programms zuallererst einen neuen politischen Impuls erhalten. Des weiteren soll auch das Bemühen um eine wirklich nachhaltige Entwicklung intensiviert werden. Ziel ist die Neuausrichtung der im Programm vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen auf Schlüsselbereiche, in denen die Gemeinschaft die Initiative ergreifen sollte, um die im Fortschrittsbericht aufgezeigten Probleme bei der Umsetzung des Programms zu lösen. Stellungnahme der Kommission 3. Europäischen Parlaments zu den Änderungsanträgen des 3. 1 Allgemeine Bemerkungen Von den 28 Änderungsanträgen, die das Europäische Parlament in zweiter Lesung verabschiedet hat, kann die Kommission 13 uneingeschränkt, teilweise oder grundsätzlich akzeptieren. Die anderen 15 Änderungen können nicht übernommen werden. Vier der 13 angenommenen Änderungen hatte die Kommission bereits im Anschluß an die erste in ihrem geänderten Vorschlag vom Dezember 1996 Lesung übernommen und berücksichtigt. 3. 2 Besondere Bemerkungen Angenommene Änderungen Die Änderungen 15 und 23 sind uneingeschränkt annehmbar und waren bereits in den geänderten Vorschlag vom Dezember 1996 [KOM(96) 648 endg] aufgenommen worden. Die Änderungen 32. 33 und 35 können ebenfalls uneingeschränkt akzeptiert werden, da sie den ursprünglichen Wortlaut des Kommissionsvorschlags wiederaufgreifen. Im Zusammenhang mit den Änderungen bezüglich der Einbeziehung von Umweltaspekten in andere Politikbereiche kann die Kommission Teil aa) von Änderung 7 (zur Landwirtschaft) sowie Teil ca) von Änderung 14 (zum Tourismus) mit geändertem Wortlaut akzeptieren. Die übrigen Vorschläge in Änderung 7 sind nicht akzeptabel, da sie die im Kommissionsvorschlag enthaltenen Vorschläge abschwächen würden. Der andere Teil von Änderung 14 kann ebenfalls nicht angenommen werden, da" das Verursacherprinzip bereits im Vertrag verankert und das sogenannte Verbraucherprinzip ("wer die natürlichen Ressourcen verbraucht, zahlt") nicht bekannt ist. eines Verweises auf die ferner die Aufnahme Die Kommission akzeptiert Entschädigungspflicht in den Beschlußentwurf (Änderung 12). hält es in Anbetracht ihres in der Vorbereitung befindlichen Weißbuchs zu diesem Thema jedoch fiir angemessener, den in Artikel 3 ihres ursprünglichen Vorschlags enthaltenen allgemeinen Verweis beizubehalten. Änderung 13 zu persistenten organischen Schadstoffen kann weitestgehend zugestimmt werden; sie ist in Artikel 11 Absatz 7 des geänderten Vorschlags vom Dezember 1996 bereits berücksichtigt. Hinsichtlich der Erweiterung der Palette von Instrumenten kann die Kommission Änderung 17 mit geändertem Wortlaut akzeptieren. Im Dezember 1996 hat sie einen Vorschlag über die strategische Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung vorgelegt. Änderung 25 wurde von der Kommission bereits in ihrem geänderten Vorschlag vom Dezember 1996 durch einen Verweis auf die technische, administrative und finanzielle Unterstützung der assoziierten Staaten Mittel- und Osteuropas, die einen Beitritt beantragen, berücksichtigt. Die Änderungen 34 und 37 zu bestimmten Umweltthemen (Artikel 11) können insoweit akzeptiert werden, als sie wieder Teile des ursprünglichen Kommissionsvorschlags einfuhren. Andere Teile dieser Änderungen sind jedoch aus institutionellen Gründen nicht in künftige annehmbar. Einige der vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen dürften jedoch Arbeitsprogramme der Kommission aufgenommen werden Nicht angenommene Änderungen Änderung 1 kann von der Kommission nicht angenommen werden, da ein Verweis auf Artikel 130 r nicht von besonderem Nutzen ist. Die Kommission kann die Änderung 2 (und damit zusammenhängend einen Teil der Änderung 37) ebenfalls nicht annehmen; hierdurch soll eine Verpflichtung eingeführt werden, wonach zum 1. Januar 1999 in der Union das höchste Umweltschutzniveau zu erreichen ist. Dieser Punkt steht in keiner direkten Beziehung zum Vorschlag fur die Überprüfung des Fünften Aktionsprogramms. Die Kommission hat sich auf der Grundlage der gemeinsamen Erklärung über Normen für den Umweltschutz, das Gesundheitswesen und die Produktsicherheit verpflichtet, den "gemeinschaftlichen Besitzstand" zu überprüfen und gegebenenfalls Vorschläge für Entscheidungen auszuarbeiten, die vor Ablauf des Übergangszeitraums - d. h. vor dem 1. Januar 1999 - zu fassen sind. Die Änderung 3 enthält einen detaillierten Verweis auf die Inhalte des von der Europäischen Umweltagentur vorzulegenden aktualisierten Bericht über den Zustand der Umwelt. Die Kommission hält einen einfachen Hinweis auf den Bericht der Agentur, wie in ihrem ursprünglichen Vorschlag vorgesehen, fur ausreichend. Im Zusammenhang mit den Änderungen 4. 6. 16. 21 und 36 sowie bestimmten Passagen der Änderungen 17 und 37. in denen Fristen oder Ziele vorgeschlagen werden, ist darauf hinzuweisen, daß durch die Festlegung derartiger Fristen und Ziele angesichts der derzeitigen Struktur des Beschlußentwurfs feste Termine vorgegeben würden, zu denen die Gemeinschaft einen Beschluß über die Maßnahme fassen muß, Dies würde verfahrensspeziflsche Schwierigkeiten verursachen. In der Änderung 5 wird vorgeschlagen, den Passus "Prioritäten sind" durch "die Gemeinschaft wird" zu ersetzen. Die Kommission hält diese Änderung nicht für angemessen. Im Beschlußentwurf sind die Prioritätsgebiete sowie in groben Zügen die Maßnahmen angegeben, die zur Verwirklichung der Ziele des Programmes beitragen könnten. Der Ausdruck "die Gemeinschaft wird. " würde eine strengere rechtliche Verbindlichkeit darstellen, da die zu ergreifenden Maßnahmen genau vorgeschrieben und andere Maßnahmen ausgeschlossen wären. In zahlreichen Änderungen im ganzen Text (z. B. Nr. 6. 7. 12. 16. 17. 20. 21. 22. 24. 36 sowie bestimmte Teile der Änderungen 34 und 37) wird die Kommission explizit oder implizit aufgefordert, vor Ablauf des Programms Vorschläge zu unterbreiten oder andere Maßnahmen zu ergreifen. In bestimmten Fällen ist sogar bereits der genaue Umfang und Inhalt der Maßnahmen angegeben. Die Kommission kann diese Änderungen nicht annehmen, da sie entweder das im Vertrag festgelegte Initiativrecht der Kommission einschränken, den Umfang des Kommissionsvorschlags einschränken oder aber im Vergleich mit dem Beschlußentwurf zu detailliert oder spezifisch sind. Der Beschluß kann nicht zu einem detaillierten Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission werden. Einige der vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen könnten in das Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission aufgenommen werden. jedoch durchaus in Zukunft Durch die Änderung 26 soll das Thema "Handel und Umwelt" allein auf die WTO begrenzt werden. Die Kommission kann jedoch nicht gewährleisten, daß die WTO- Regelungen der Notwendigkeit Rechnung tragen, an einem hohen Umweltschutzniveau festzuhalten. Die Änderung 27 über das grüne BSP ist nicht annehmbar. Im Fünften Aktionsprogramm ist ein grünes BSP der EU bis 1999 nicht vorgesehen. Im Fünften Aktionsprogramm steht, daß wirtschaftliche Indikatoren wie das Bruttosozialprodukt einer Änderung und Anpassung auf Initiative der Mitgliedstaaten mit Unterstützung der EG bedürfen. In der Mitteilung von 1994 über Indikatoren und Ökobilanzen wird daraufhingewiesen, daß ein "grünes BSP" gemäß den Ergebnissen späterer Forschungen schwieriger zu erarbeiten ist als ursprünglich angenommen wurde. Infolgedessen arbeiten die Kommission und andere internationale Stellen sowie die Behörden der Mitgliedstaaten zur Zeit Satellitenkonten aus, die einen ersten Schritt in diese Richtung bilden sollen. Die Änderungen 36 und 40 sowie Teile der Änderung 34 über besondere Umweltthemen (Artikel 11) sind für die Kommission aus institutionellen Gründen nicht annehmbar. Einige dieser Anregungen könnten jedoch in künftigen Arbeitsprogrammen der Kommission berücksichtigt werden. 4. Geänderter Vorschlag Nach dem in zweiter Lesung gefaßten Beschluß des Europäischen Parlaments vom 17. Juli 1997 ändert die Kommission hiermit ihren Vorschlag durch die Einfügung von drei Änderungen. Vier weitere Änderungen waren bereits in den geänderten Vorschlag vom Dezember 19% eingeflossen. Die übrigen von der Kommission akzeptierten Änderungen erfordern keine Änderungen am Wortlaut des Kommissionsvorschlags. Vergüchen mit dem gemeinsamen Standpunkt greifen sie erneut den Wortlaut des ursprünglichen Kommissionsvorschlags auf. Geänderter Vorschlag für einen BESCHLUSS DES EUROPÄISCHEN PARLAMENTS UND DES RATES über die Überprüfung zur Überarbeitung des Programms der Europäischen Gemeinschaft für Umweltpolitik und Maßnahmen im Hinbhck auf eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung - "Für eine dauerhafte und umweltgerechte Entwicklung" GEMEINSAMER STANDPUNKT GEÄNDERTER VORSCHLAG Artikel 2 Absatz 1 Buchstabe f (neu) f) Einleitung der Vorarbeiten für eine schrittweise Reform der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik, die des zum Zeitpunkt spätestens Beitritts neuer Mitgliedstaaten zu realisieren ist: durch die Reform soll daß sichergestellt Fördermittel künftig in erster Linie an nachhaltige Betriebsverfahren geknüpft werden: werden. Artikel 2 Absatz 5 Buchstabe d (neu) zur daß und Sicherstellung. die d) der Strukturfonds Köhasionsfonds Förderung umweltvertraglicher Formen des Tourismus eingesetzt werden und in die so finanzierten Projekte den Übereinstimmung die Verordnungen den Strukturfonds Köhasionsfonds der geänderten Richtlinie 85/337/EWG des einer Rates Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung unterzogen werden: mit über une] sowie Artikel 3 Absatz 2 Buchstabe a Ausarbeitung von Konzepten a) die Umweltverträglichkeits- für prüfung (UVP) bei Plänen und Programmen sowie Förderung der Entwicklung von Methoden und von Ausbildungs- und Informationsmaterial sowohl für die UVP von Projekten als auch von Plänen und Programmen; Festlegung a) eines gemeinschaftlichen Konzepts für die Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung (UVP) bei Plänen und Programmen und Förderung der Entwicklung von Methoden sowie von Ausbildungs- und Informationsmaterial für die UVP sowohl von Projekten als auch von Plänen und Programmen; ISSN 0254-1467 KOM(97) 471 endg. DOKUMENTE DE 11 14 17 Katalognummer : CB-CO-97-483-DE-C ISBN 92-78-24972-6 Amt für amtliche Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L-2985 Luxemburg


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 3037/97 do Deputado Amedeo AMADEO à Comissão. Discriminações com base na altura

eurovoc_concepts:
Italy
anti-discriminatory measure
competence of the Member States
fundamental rights
national service
recruitment

text: C 117/132 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 16. 4. 98 (98/C 117/176) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3035/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Imposi(cid:231)a(cid:152)o dos ve(cid:14)·culos pesados Tendo em conta a proposta de directiva do Conselho relativa a‘ imposi(cid:231)a(cid:152)o dos ve(cid:14)·culos de mercadorias pela utiliza(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de certas infra-estruturas rodovia·rias (doc. COM(96)0331 final › 96/0182 SYN) (1); Considerando que, apesar de as portagens resultarem da aplica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o do princ(cid:14)·pio da territorialidade, a sua combina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o com as taxas sobre os ve(cid:14)·culos e os impostos sobre consumos espec(cid:14)·ficos constitu(cid:14)·rem uma dupla tributa(cid:231)a(cid:152)o; Pode a Comissa(cid:152)o proceder a‘ elimina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o a longo prazo das portagens, uma vez que as inova(cid:231)o(cid:152)es tecnolo·gicas, em particular a cobran(cid:231)a electro·nica, devera(cid:152)o permitir evitar a dupla tributa(cid:231)a(cid:152)o e conferir simultaneamente maior fluidez ao tra·fego? (1) JO C 59 de 26. 2. 1997, p. 9. Resposta dada pelo Comissa·rio Kinnock em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (7 de Novembro de 1997) A Comissa(cid:152)o considera que a natureza e os objectivos dos impostos especiais sobre o consumo de combust(cid:14)·veis, dos impostos sobre os ve(cid:14)·culos e das portagens sa(cid:152)o diferentes. Por este motivo, a Comissa(cid:152)o na(cid:152)o concorda com a afirma(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de que a sua aplica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o simulta(cid:136)nea constitui uma dupla tributa(cid:231)a(cid:152)o. Ale·m disso, a Comissa(cid:152)o e· de opinia(cid:152)o de que as portagens, que esta(cid:152)o directamente relacionadas com os custos ocasionados pelos ve(cid:14)·culos no momento e no local onde efectivamente circulam, sa(cid:152)o um instrumento de imposi(cid:231)a(cid:152)o adequado no contexto da procura de um sistema de transportes eficiente. Preve(cid:136)-se que a aplica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de tecnologias avan(cid:231)adas, que permite o pagamento de portagens sem que para tal os ve(cid:14)·culos tenham de abrandar ou parar e a diferencia(cid:231)a(cid:152)o das taxas em fun(cid:231)a(cid:152)o dos custos subjacentes, contribua para o melhoramento global do sistema de transportes. (98/C 117/177) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3037/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Discrimina(cid:231)o(cid:152)es com base na altura E· absurdo que na Europa do ano 2000, onde ha· cinquenta anos a Comunidade Europeia luta contra as discrimina(cid:231)o(cid:152)es baseadas no sexo, ra(cid:231)a, origem e·tnica e social, invalidez, prefere(cid:136)ncias sexuais, credo religioso, etc. , se verifiquem feno·menos de discrimina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o com base na altura. Em Ita·lia, um rece·m-licenciado em Medicina solicitou pelas vias devidas a admissa(cid:152)o a‘ Scuola degli Allievi Ufficiali di Complemento (escola de oficiais do quadro de complemento) para cumprir o servi(cid:231)o militar. A sua candidatura foi recusada por a sua altura (1,63 m) na(cid:152)o atingir o m(cid:14)·nimo estabelecido (1,65 m). A testemunhar a conduta perfeita do futuro recruta esta· o facto de ter sido incorporado no corpo de pa·ra-quedistas como soldado raso. Pode a Comissa(cid:152)o intervir junto dos Estados-membros para que deixem de praticar atitudes deste tipo, que constituem graves nega(cid:231)o(cid:152)es ao direito a‘ igualdade de oportunidades dos cidada(cid:152)os (o me·dico em questa(cid:152)o e· o Dr. Andrea Pomesano de Be·rgamo)? Resposta dada por P. Flynn em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (10 de Novembro de 1997) A Comissa(cid:152)o na(cid:152)o tem compete(cid:136)ncia para tratar a questa(cid:152)o suscitada pelo Senhor Deputado. Com efeito, no estado actual do direito comunita·rio, as questo(cid:152)es relativas ao servi(cid:231)o militar sa(cid:152)o da compete(cid:136)ncia exclusiva dos Estados-membros


eurovoc_concepts:
application of EU law
approximation of laws
consumer protection
defective product
product safety

formats: html pdf pdfa1b print

text: COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 01. 10. 1997 COM(97) 478 final 97/0244 (COD) Proposal for a EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE amending Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products (presented by the Commission) EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM I. GENERAL COMMENTS Context A. Consumer health within the single market 1. The events surrounding the BSE crisis1 have proved a challenge to the European Union, that of meeting consumers' legitimate expectation that their health will be protected within the single market. This expectation, which is primarily reflected in a strong concern regarding food safety,2 is particularly legitimate in the single market. The free movement of goods, one of the basic objectives on which the completion and proper functioning of the single market rests, must not, under the terms of the Treaty, be to the detriment of consumer health protection. Article 36 explicitly refers to the protection of health as a concern which justifies measures derogating from the principle of the free movement of goods. This protection is therefore not sacrificed to the fundamental principle of this freedom. 2. In order to meet this expectation, the Commission has at its disposal a number of legal instruments concerned with general product safety (Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992) and compensation of victims of defective products (Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985). These instruments require all producers to place on the market only such products as are safe and makes them liable for repairing any damage caused by their defective products. B. Council Directive of 25 July 1985 on liability for defective products (85/374/EEC) in Directive 85/374/EEC. 3. Any modern society demands to be protected by means of a mechanism of compensation for damage resulting from the risks of industrial production, such as is provided for the Member States' laws concerning the producer's liability for damage caused by safety defects in his products. This legislation has been implemented in all Member States except France. The system of liability without fault introduced by the Directive means that producers are liable for the damage caused by a defect in their product where the victim provides evidence of the existence of the damage, the This Directive approximated On 20 March 1996, the UK authorities announced the possible existence of a link between the variant of Creutzfeld-Jacob disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). This sparked an unprecedented crisis of consumer confidence in beef and beef products. 35% of EU citizens consider that food is not safe. Food safety tops the list of concerns of 68% of interviewees (90% in France and 39% in Finland), followed by the safety of pharmaceutical products, with 64% of those questioned considering that safety is not guaranteed beyond international borders. Source: Eurobarometer 47. 0, 21 May 1997. 2 defect and the causal relationship between defect and damage. The Community thus struck a reasonable balance between the various interests involved: - that of consumers to face up to the risks of a modern industrial society with a high degree of technicality for their health and physical and material safety; - that of producers * * to avoid distortions of competition resulting from the differences liability (liability with/without between existing systems of civil limited/unlimited fault), and to reduce the impact which these different systems have on investment initiatives in the field of innovation and development. 4. Despite the Commission's efforts during discussions within the Council, the harmonisation resulting from the 1985 Directive is not total. The unanimity required for the adoption of legislation on the basis of Article 100 of the Treaty led to compromises on several points of the Commission's proposal. These took the form of general rules from which Member States may derogate for a transitional period (Articles 15 and 16) at the end of which the Member State should, on a proposal from the Commission, adopt the permanent solution. 5. Thus, as a general rule, primary agricultural products (i. e. products of the soil, stock-farming and of fisheries) and game are not covered by the Directive's provisions. However, products which have undergone initial processing are covered (Article 2). Nevertheless, Member States may, under Article 15(l)(a), provide for liability on the part of agricultural producers for defective primary products. This derogation has been used by Greece, Luxembourg, Sweden and Finland. 3 6. In 1995, the Commission adopted its first report on the application of the Directive and its effects on the proper functioning of the single market and consumer protection (COM(95) 617 final, 13. 12. 1995). It describes the Directive as being an important piece of legislation which has contributed towards an increased awareness of and emphasis on product safety and has eased the burden of the plaintiff in proving his case (since the producer's fault does not have to be proved). With regard to the information obtained regarding the application of the Directive, the Commission did not consider it necessary, at that stage, to submit any proposals for its amendment. Nevertheless, it indicated that certain aspects concerning the protection of consumers and the functioning of the internal market required continued monitoring, including the exclusion of primary agricultural products. C. The European Parliament's recommendation that Directive 85/374/EEC be amended 3 In France, draft Law No 469 on liability for defective products, adopted (first reading) by the National Assembly on 13 March 1997, also includes primary products within its scope. National Assembly, Report No 3411 of the Committer on constitutional laws, legislation and general administration of the Republic on draft Law (No 469) by Mrs Nicole Catala, 6 March 1997: "As the "mad cow disease" incident clearly shows, this type of product should he covered by the system of objective liability resulting from the Directive in order to offer the same protection to the consumer irrespective of the defective product in question". 3 7. Further to the deliberations of the Temporary Committee of Inquiry into BSE (MEDINA Report, doc. 220. 544), the European Parliament recommended that Directive 85/374/EEC be amended by September 1997 at the latest in such a way as It called on the Commission, the to extend it to primary agricultural products. Council and the Member States to take appropriate measures to follow up and implement this recommendation. 4 The recommendation is not a resolution adopted pursuant to Article 138b of the Treaty (legislative initiative) but rather a suggestion made by the Committee of Inquiry under Article 138c of the Treaty. Commission proposal to amend Directive 85/374/EEC to agricultural products within its scope include primary 8. The Commission considers that including primary agricultural products within the scope of Directive 85/374/EEC would be an important step towards improving consumer protection under Community law even if such a measure obviously cannot itself solve the problems likely to arise in this area. 5 Including primary agricultural products within the scope of Directive 85/374/EEC would be of benefit to all the initiatives launched in an attempt to win back consumer confidence in agricultural products. The Commission takes the view that all agricultural products, whether consumed in their natural form or after processing, must be covered by the system of liability without fault laid down in the Directive. Consequently, it proposes to the European Parliament and to the Council that the Directive be amended in such a way as to restore its original proposal from 1976 on this point (COM(76) 372). Nevertheless, the Commission considers that extending the Directive's scope in this way will not dispense with the need for appropriate rules concerning product safety it would constitute a and efficient official control mechanisms but complementary measure. that 9. The European Parliament was originally opposed, in the face of strong pressure from the agricultural sector, to including agricultural products within the scope of the Directive. It was argued at that time that objective liability for defective agricultural products might be too great a burden if these products were not (CALEWAERT Report, doc. 71/79, OJNoC127, industrially manufactured 21. 5. 1979, p. 61). In presenting its amended proposal (COM(79)415), the Commission considered it justified, in line with Parliament's suggestion, to exclude natural agricultural products (as opposed to agricultural products manufactured industrially) from the scope of the Directive. Finally, the solution adopted (see point 5 above) was the result of a compromise between Member States opposed to excluding these products, which saw it as an unjustified restriction of consumer protection, and those which were in favour of excluding them. 10. In deciding to revive its previous proposal, the Commission has taken the following factors into account, over and above Parliament's recommendation : (a) Public expectations of greater protection of health: Harmonisation of standards designed to protect consumers are at the heart of demands by 4 Resolution on the results of the Temporary Committee of Inquiry into BSE, doc. PE 257. 005, OJ NoC85, 17. 3. 1997. 5 Green Paper on the general principles of food law in the European Union (COM(97) 176, 30. 4. 1997). European citizens. The Commission noted when drawing up its Green Paper on the general principles of food law in the European Union that requests for primary agricultural products to be included in the Directive's scope were being made with increasing frequency. They have become even more urgent in view of the fears raised by BSE. 6 Parliament's recommendation merely echoes the great concern among the European public for greater food safety in general, and in particular with regard to primary agricultural products. laws on the liability of agriculture The existence of national producers: The Commission shares with several Member States the concern that consumers' health should be protected with regard to agricultural products and that the system of compensation for damage should be more efficient. This is the reason for the various national provisions which lay down liability without fault on the part of agricultural producers, in accordance with the option provided for in Article 15 of the Directive. 7 In this respect, the only Member State which has not yet transposed the Directive plans, largely as a result of the BSE crisis, to include these products within the scope of its implementing legislation. 8 The lack of irreversible effects on agricultural economies: In the same way that no irreversible effects were observed for industries and insurers in general when the first report on Directive 85/374/EEC was drawn up (as was suggested would be the case when the Directive was adopted), there is nothing to indicate a priori that including agricultural products within its scope will have an irreversible negative impact on agricultural economies. Experience in those countries which have made use of the derogation provided for in Article 15 has revealed no evidence of any particular effects on agricultural economies. Uncertainty as to the scope of the exclusion resulting from the concept of "processing": Directive 85/374/EEC covers products of the soil, stock-farming and of fisheries which have undergone "initial processing". This concept9 constitutes the dividing line between excluded agricultural products (primary products) and those which the Directive covers (processed product). It is obvious that agricultural production does not (b) (c) (d) H 6 See also the recommendation of the Consumers Committee of 9 October 1996 supporting inclusion. 7 Greece (Article 6. 1. of Law No 2251/94), Luxembourg (Article 1. 2. 1. of the Law of 21. 4. 1989), Finland (Section 1, subparagraph 2, of Law No 694 of 17. 8. 1990), Sweden (Section 2 of Law 1992:18 of 31. 1. 1992). I'rance. See footnote 3. In addition, this proposal is consistent with legislation on liability for defective products in other countries where agricultural producers are considered liable without fault (the United States, Norway). Judgment of the Court of Justice of 29. 5. 1974 in Case 185/73 Kônig, LCR 11974] 619; "the concept of 'products of first-stage processing directly related' to the basic products, must be interpreted as implying a clear economic interdependence between basic products and products resulting from a productive process, irrespective of the number of operations involved therein. Processed products which have undergone a productive process, the cost of which is such that the price of the basic agricultural raw materials becomes a completely marginal cost, are there/ore excluded. " l) escape the effects of industrialisation (e. g. the use of preserving techniques, deep-freezing, etc. , which might involve risks), but the extent of such industrialisation is not apparent: the question is at what point the use of a technique on a primary agricultural product involves "initial processing". Aware as it is of doubts on this subject, the Commission considers that any uncertainty regarding this concept might discourage consumers from pursuing claims. Including primary products will put an end to these uncertainties. (e) Imperfect harmonisation: Directive 85/374/EEC has not led to complete harmonisation. Consequently, there is no uniform rule governing the liability of farmers, and this means that competition is distorted and the free movement of agricultural products is impeded. Producers are subject to different arrangements depending on where their product is placed on the market. Thus, free movement is affected in the sense that the decision to place one Member State's products on the market of another Member State might depend on whether or not there is a system of liability without fault for the products in question. The flow of trade in agricultural products is thus affected by conditions relating to the producer's liability. Legal basis 11. Directive 85/374/EEC is based on Article 100 of the EEC Treaty. The Commission proposes that it be amended on the basis of Article 100a of the EC Treaty, as a derogation from Article 100. It considers that the proposal has an impact on the functioning of the single market to the extent that trade in agricultural products should not be affected by differences in rules governing the liability of producers. The amendment takes the form of a directive. 12. The Commission has taken due account of Article 7c of the EC Treaty and there is no need to envisage special provisions or exceptions for the time being. Likewise, it has examined the question of the high level of protection required in the area of health, safety, environmental protection and consumer protection under Article 100a(3) of the EC Treaty. In this respect, including agricultural products within the Directive's scope provides a high level of protection for consumers, as already exists in several Member States. 13. Directive 85/374/EEC relates to a field covered by the EEA Agreement (see Article 23(c) and Annex III "Product liability" of the EEA Agreement, OJ No L 1, 3. 1,1994, pp. 11 and 321 ). 10 Consequently, the amendment contained in this document should be extended to the EEA in accordance with that Agreement, in particular Articles 97 et seq. thereof. Simplification and consistency with other Community policies 10 The HFTA states party to the Agreement (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) have notified their national implementing measures for Directive 85/374/EEC. Source: EFTA Surveillance Authority, Interim Report on Transposition Status of Directives, 4 June 1997, p. 41. 6 14. The proposed amendment will simplify the provisions of Directive 85/374/EEC by eliminating the derogation provided for in Article 15(l)(a). Thus, the system of responsibility for defects will be extended throughout the single market to all types of product, without exception. 15. This proposal is consistent with the aims of all Community policies, in particular the protection of consumer health and the common agricultural policy. Amending Directive 85/374/EEC will help to achieve a higher degree of consumer protection, which is a Community objective pursuant to Article 129a of the EC Treaty. Moreover, trade in agricultural products will be made easier by the elimination of the legal differences which exist between Member States with regard to the civil liability of producers. II. JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROPOSAL IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY What are the objectives of the proposed measure, and how do they relate to the Community's obligations? 16. The measure's objectives are to increase the level of consumer protection against damage caused to their health and property by a defective product and to further the approximation of national laws with regard to liability for defective products started by Directive 85/374/EEC. These objectives form part of the strategic target of delivering a single market for the benefit of all citizens, as set out by the Commission in its Action Plan for the Single Market (CSE(97)1, 4. 1. 1997). This means enhancing the advantages of the single market by strengthening the guarantees offered to consumers on the basis of a high level of protection in the fields of health and safety. Is the measure in an area where the Community has exclusive competence or where it shares competence with the Member States? 17. The measure falls within the exclusive competence of the Community: the establishment and functioning of the single market. In addition, since Directive 85/374/EEC was adopted on the basis of Article 100 of the EEC Treaty, the Community has exclusive competence in the field of liability for defective products for all the aspects covered by the Directive. Are the means of Community action proportionate to the objectives? 18. The proposed amendment is limited to revising the system of liability without fault laid down in Directive 85/374/EEC to the extent which is strictly necessary to increase consumer confidence in all types of products in circulation in the single market. It merely includes primary agricultural products within the scope of the Directive by eliminating any possibility of derogation. III. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSAL Article 1 19. This Article deletes the exception regarding "primary agricultural products and game" from Article 2 of Directive 85/374/EEC. This means that agricultural products and game must be deemed to constitute "products" for the purposes of the Directive. The term "agricultural products" is taken from Article 38(1) of the EC Treaty and covers those products listed in Annex II to the Treaty (see Annex A to this document). Technically speaking, the proposal transforms the option granted to Member States under Article I5(l)(a) into a general rule. 20. Any consumer affected by one of these products supplied via the distribution network will be able to claim liability on the part of the producer as defined in Article 3, i. e. as the manufacturer of a finished product, the producer of any raw material, the manufacturer of a component part, - - - - any person who, by putting his name, trade mark or other distinguishing feature on the product presents himself as its producer, - any person who imports into the Community a product for sale, hire, leasing or - any form of distribution, or the supplier, in accordance with the conditions of Article 3(3) (where the producer or the person who supplied him with the product cannot be identified). 21. All of the rules of Directive 95/374/EEC apply to agricultural producers: the injured person's burden of proof,11 joint and several liability where more that one person is liable, the notion of safety defect, the reasons for exemption under Article 7, the damage covered, the time limits for proceedings for recovery of damages, the fact that liability may not voluntarily be limited or excluded, and the fact that other rules of the law of contractual or non-contractual liability are not affected. Article 2 22. This Article deals with the implementation by the Member States of provisions to comply with the Directive. The deadline for implementation will be added subsequently. This provision states that the new rules will apply to primary agricultural products and game put into circulation from the date on which the Directive enters into force, i. e. 1 January 1999. The directive will not have in the beef sector, the burden of proof should be made easier by the application of the system for identification and registration of bovine animals and labelling of beef and beef products established by Council Regulation (RC) No 820/97 of 2 i April 1997 (OJ No L 1 17, 7. 5. 1997. p. 1), which has been in force since I July 1997. retroactive effect, which means that any primary agricultural products and game placed on the market before that date will not be covered by it, even if damage is discovered after that date. The Commission would point out, however, that this rule does not prevent other rules of law on contractual or non-contractual liability from being applicable to such products put into circulation before the date in question. This interpretation is consistent with Article 13 of the Directive, which preserves the rights of injured persons under other such rules. Articles 3 and 4 23. These indicate the date on which the Directive enters into force, in accordance with Article 191 of the Treaty, and the fact that it is addressed to the Member States. Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 100a thereof, I laving regard to the proposal from the Commission,1 Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee,2 Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189b of the Treaty3, Whereas the safety of products and compensation for damage caused by defective products are overriding social needs which must be met within the internal market, an area in which products move freely; whereas the Community has responded to these requirements by means of Council Directive 85/374/EEC4 and Council Directive 92/59/EEC5 of 29 June 1992 on general product safety; Whereas Directive 85/374/EEC established a fair apportionment of the risks inherent in a modern society in which there is a high degree of technicality; whereas the said Directive has thus struck a reasonable balance between the interests involved, in particular the protection of the health of consumers, the incentive for innovation and scientific and technological development, the guarantee of undistorted competition, and the easing of trade by means of a system of harmonised civil liability; whereas the said Directive has thus helped to raise awareness among traders of the issue of product safety and the importance accorded to it; Whereas the degree of harmonisation between Member States' laws achieved by the Directive is not total in view of the derogations laid down, in particular with regard to its scope, from which unprocessed agricultural products are excluded; Whereas the Commission monitors the implementation and effects of Directive 85/374/EEC and in particular its aspects relating to consumer protection and the functioning of the internal market;6 whereas, in this context, the Commission must, in accordance with Article 21, present a second report on the application of the Directive; ()J NoC xxx, x. x. xxxx, p. x. 1 - OJ No C xxx, x. x. xxxx, p. x. 3 Kuropean Parliament readings and Council common position. 4 ( ) J N o L 2 ! 0, 7. 8. 1985, p. 29. 5 OJ No L 228, I 1. 8. 1992, p. 24. () First report on the application of the Directive, COM(95) 617, 13. 12. 1995. 10 Whereas including primary agricultural products within the scope of Directive 85/374/EEC would help restore consumer confidence in the safety of agricultural products; where such a measure would meet the requirements of a high level of consumer protection; Whereas circumstances call for Directive 85/374/EEC to be amended in order to facilitate the payment of legitimate compensation for any damage to health caused by defective agricultural products, to the benefit of consumers; Whereas this Directive has an impact on the functioning of the internal market in that trade in agricultural products will no longer be affected by differences between rules on producer liability; Where the principle of liability without fault laid down in Directive 85/274/EEC must be extended to all types of product, including agricultural products as defined by the second sentence of Article 38(1) of the Treaty and listed in Annex II to the said Treaty; Whereas, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, it is necessary and appropriate in order to achieve the fundamental objectives of increased protection for all consumers and the proper functioning of the internal market to include agricultural products within the scope of Directive 85/374/EEC; whereas this Directive is limited to what is necessary to achieve the objectives pursued in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 3b of the Treaty; HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Directive 85/374/EEC is hereby amended as follows: 1 ) Article 2 is replaced by the following text: "Article 2 For the purpose of this Directive "product" means all movables even though incorporated into another movable or into an immovable. "Product" includes electricity. " 2) In Article 15, paragraph 1(a) is deleted. Arikk 2 \. Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 January 1999. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. They shall apply these provisions with effect from 1 January 1999. When the Member States adopt these provisions, the latter shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference when they are published officially. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by the Member Stales. 11 Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the provisions of 2. national law which they subsequently adopt in the field governed by this Directive. Article 3 This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Article 4 Done at Brussels, For the European Parliament For the Council The President The President 12 Annex A : List referred to in Article 38 of the EC Treaty Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Live animals Meat and edible meat offal Fish, crustaceans and molluscs Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey 05. 04 Guts, bladders and stomachs of animals (other than fish), whole and pieces thereof 05. 15 Animal products not elsewhere specified or included; dead animals of Chapter 1 or Chapter 3, unfit for human consumption Live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and Chapter 6 ornamental foliage Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 industrial and medical plants; straw and fodder Chapter 13 Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers Edible fruit and nuts; peel of melons or citrus fruit Coffee, tea and spices, excluding maté (heading No 09. 03) Cereals Products of the milling industry; malt and starches; gluten; inulin Oil seeds and oleaginous fruit; miscellaneous grains, seeds and fruit; ex 13. 03 Pectin Chapter 15 15. 01 Lard and other rendered pig fat; rendered poultry fat 15. 02 Unrendered fats of bovine cattle, sheep or goats; tallow (including "premier jus") produced from those fats 15. 03 Lard stearin, oleostearin and tallow stearin; lard oil, oleo-oil and tallow oil, not emulsified or mixed or prepared in any way 15. 04 Fats and oil, offish and marine mammals, whether or not refined 15. 07 vegetable oils, fluid or solid, crude, refined or purified 15. 12 Animal or vegetable fats and oils, hydrogenated, whether or not refined, but not further prepared 15. 13 Margarine, imitation lard and other prepared edible fats 15. 17 Residues resulting from the treatment of fatty substances or animal or vegetable waxes Chapter 16 Chapter 17 Preparations of meat, offish, of crustaceans or molluscs 17. 01 Beet sugar and cane sugar, solid 17. 02 Other sugars; sugar syrups; artificial honey (whether or not mixed with natural honey); caramel 17. 03 Molasses, whether or not decolourised 17. 05 Flavoured or coloured sugars, syrups and molasses, but not including fruit juices containing added sugar in any proportion Chapter 18 18. 01 Cocoa beans, whole or broken, raw or roasted 18. 02 Cocoa shells, husks, skins and waste Chapter 20 Chapter 22 Preparations of vegetables, fruit or other parts of plants 22. 04 Grape must, in fermentation or with fermentation arrested otherwise than by the addition of alcohol 13 22. 05 Wine of fresh grapes; grape must with fermentation arrested by the addition of alcohol 22. 07 Other fermented beverages (for example, cider, perry and mead) ex 22. 08 and ex 22. 09 Ethyl alcohol or neutral spirits, whether or not denatured, of any strength, obtained from agricultural products listed in Annex II to the Treaty, excluding liqueurs and other spirituous beverages and compound alcoholic preparations (known as "concentrated extracts") for the manufacture of beverages 22. 10 Vinegar and substitutes for vinegar Chapter 23 Chapter 24 Residues and waste from the food industries; prepared animal fodder 24. 01 Unmanufactured tobacco ; tobacco refuse Chapter 45 45. 01 Natural cork, unworked, crushed, granulated or ground; waste cork Chapter 54 54. 01 Flax, raw or processed but not spun; flax tow and waste (including pulled or garnetted rags) Chapter 57 57. 01 True hemp (Cannabis sativa), raw or processed but not spun; tow and waste of true hemp (including pulled or garnetted rags or ropes) 14 IMPACT ASSESSMENT THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON BUSINESS. WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMEs) Title of proposal: Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products The proposal: 1. Taking account of the principle of subsidiarity, why is Community legislation necessary in this area and what are its main aims? It is necessary for the purposes of harmonising at Community level civil liability for all types of agricultural product, without exception. It pursues the following objectives: - - to increase the level of consumer protection against any damage to their health and property caused by a defective product; to improve the functioning of the internal market by raising the degree of approximation between national laws on product liability started by Directive 85/374/EEC. These objectives cannot be met satisfactorily by the Member States and may, in view of the dimension and effects of the proposed measure, therefore be better achieved at Community level on the basis of a directive. In addition, these objectives form part of the strategic target of delivering a single market for the benefit of all citizens, as envisaged by the Commission in its Action Plan for the Single Market (CSE(97)1, 4. 1. 1997). This involves enhancing the advantages of the single market by strengthening the guarantees offered to consumers on the basis of a high level of protection in the fields of health and safety. The impact on business 2. Who will be affected by the proposal? (a) The sector directly affected by the proposal is that of the production of products of the soil, of stock-farming and of fisheries, and that of game and game products: this sector comprises 7 814 800 farms and accounted for 5. 3% of civilian employment in the fifteen Member States in 1995. 7 The distributive trades will also be affected in that Directive 85/374/EEC provides for liability on the part of the supplier if he fails to indicate the identity of the In addition, any importer of producer to the injured person (Article 3(3)). Source: Kurostat, data included in The Agricultural Situation statistical annex, DG VI. A. 2. in the European Union, 1996 Report, 15 agricultural products from third countries will be affected 85/374/EEC considers him liable as a producer. in that Directive (b) The size of businesses affected will obviously vary: large agricultural enterprises exist alongside small and medium-sized farms which produce, supply and distribute agricultural products in their natural state. (c) As for its geographical scope, the proposal will not have any impact whatsoever in those countries in which agricultural producers are already subject to liability without fault under Directive 85/374/EEC (Greece, Luxembourg, Finland and Sweden). 3. What measures will business have to take to comply with the proposal? The businesses concerned will not have to take any particular measures to comply with the proposed provisions. Since this proposal supplements the existing rules in force concerning safety and official control systems, it does not add any new constraint in this regard. This is because businesses are already subject to Community safety and quality standards. The proposal merely penalises any ignorance as to these rules in terms of civil liability for damage caused to third parties resulting from a safety defect. In this respect, the proposal does not require businesses to be insured, which means that it falls within the competence of each Member State to determine whether or not this requirement should be laid down. 4. What economic effects is the proposal likely to have? (a) on employment: experience in those Member States which already lay down liability without fault on the part of agricultural producers shows that there is no negative effect (e. g. bankruptcies, redundancies, etc. ) directly attributable to the existence of a system of liability without fault. (b) on investment and the creation of new businesses: the proposal does not impose any new safety standards on businesses which would require them to adapt their production and be costly in terms of investment. While the Directive does not require them to take out insurance, it is highly likely that many of them will do so. This is why the proposal will probably give rise to indirect costs for businesses. Nevertheless, in view of the need to ensure the safety of agricultural products on the market for reasons of public health, the Commission considers that the advantages of this proposal significantly outweigh any costs. (c) on the competitive position of businesses: the measure will have a beneficial effect on the competitive position of businesses. It will help boost consumer confidence in agricultural production and to enhance undistorted conditions of competition within the internal market. The proposal means that all businesses in the sectors concerned will be subject to the same level of liability, irrespective of the national market on which products arc introduced. At present, products placed on the Greek, Luxembourg, Finnish and Swedish markets are covered by liability without fault, and this fact gives rise to unequal conditions of competition within the European Union. 16 5. Does the proposal contain measures to take account of the specific situation of small and medium-sized firms (reduced or different requirements, etc. )? The proposal is not particularly aimed at small and medium-sized firms. However, Directive 85/374/EEC takes account of the impact which a system of liability without fault has for businesses in general, including SMEs, by establishing a fair distribution of risks between the producer and the injured person. This means, for example, that the financial impact of including primary products is in any case reduced by the deduction of ECU 500 in the case of material damage and the fact that the burden of proof rests with the injured person, who must assess whether it is worth initiating legal proceedings against the business. 6. Consultation this proposal, the In preparing recommendation of the European Parliament that Community product liability legislation be amended in order to extend its scope to primary agricultural products. the Commission has taken account of The Commission has adopted this proposal in time to meet the deadline laid down by Parliament (September 1997), which does not allow prior consultation to take place. 17 ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 478 final DOCUMENTS EN 10 06 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-490-EN-C ISBN 92-78-25051-1 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 1. -2985 Luxembourg IS


title: Dictamen de la Comisión con arreglo a la letra d) del apartado 2 del artículo 189 B del Tratado CE, sobre las enmiendas del Parlamento Europeo a la posición común del Consejo sobre la propuesta de decisión del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo relativa a la revisión del programa comunitario de política y actuación en materia de medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible «Hacia un desarrollo sostenible»

text: COMISIÓN DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS Bruselas, 01. 10. 1997 COM(97) 471 final 96/0027 (COD) DICTAMEN DE LA COMISIÓN con arreglo a la letra d) del apartado 2 del artículo 189 B del Tratado CE, sobre las enmiendas del Parlamento europeo a la posición común del Consejo sobre la propuesta de DECISIÓN DEL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO Y DEL CONSEJO RELATIVA A LA REVISIÓN DEL PROGRAMA COMUNITARIO DE POLÍTICA Y ACTUACIÓN EN MATERIA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y DESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE "HACIA UN DESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE" POR EL QUE SE MODIFICA LA PROPUESTA DE LA COMISIÓN con arreglo al apartado 2 del artículo 189 A del Tratado CE) Î. Antecedentes El 29 de febrero de 1996, la Comisión presentó al Parlamento Europeo y al Consejo una propuesta de Decisión del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo relativa a la revisión del programa comunitario de política y actuación en materia de medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible "Hacia un desarrollo sostenible", sobre la base del primer párrafo del apartado 3 del artículo 130 S del Tratado1 (COM(95) 647 final -96/0027 (COD) de 24 de enero de 1996). El Comité Económico y Social emitió su dictamen los días 29 y 30 de mayo de 19962. El Comité de las Regiones emitió su dictamen los días 18 y 19 de septiembre de 19963. El Parlamento Europeo emitió su dictamen en primera lectura el 13 de noviembre de 19964. El 4 de diciembre de 1996, a raíz del dictamen del Parlamento, la Comisión presentó al Consejo su propuesta modificada5 (COM(96) 648 final de 4 de diciembre de 1996). El 17 de abril de 1997, el Consejo aprobó su posición común de conformidad con el artículo 189 B del Tratado6. El 17 de julio de 1997, el Parlamento Europeo aprobó en segunda lectura su decisión de enmendar la posición común del Consejo7. 2. Objetivo y contenido de la Decisión propuesta El 18 de marzo de 1992, la Comisión aprobó el programa comunitario de política y actuación en materia de medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible "Hacia un desarrollo sostenible". La Resolución del Parlamento de 17 de noviembre de 1992 acogió favorablemente las directrices definidas en el programa. El Consejo y los representantes de los gobiernos de los Estados miembros, en su Resolución de 1 de febrero de 1993, aprobaron el planteamiento general y la estrategia establecidos en el programa. El programa se orienta principalmente al año 2000; no obstante, se dispuso en él la realización de una revisión general de su estrategia antes de finales de 1995. En las Resoluciones del Parlamento y del Consejo se requería de forma explícita una revisión, que se llevó a cabo durante 1995. Los elementos concretos de este proceso de revisión son: un Informe sobre la evolución de la aplicación del programa, adoptado por la Comisión el 10 de enero de 1996 (COM(95) 624 final), 1 1 3 6 DOn°C 140 de 11. 5. 1996. DO n°C 212 de 22. 7. 1996. DO n°C 34 de 3. 2. 1997. DO n° C 362 de 2. 12. 1996. DO n°C 28 de 29. 1. 1997. IX) n°C 157 de 24. 5. 1997. Pendiente de publicación. y un informe actualizado sobre el estado del medio ambiente, presentado por la Agencia Europea del Medio Ambiente el 10 de noviembre de 1995. El objetivo principal de esta propuesta de Decisión es proporcionar un impulso político renovado a escala comunitaria a la aplicación del Quinto Programa y al progreso global en materia de desarrollo sostenible. Pretende una reorientación en la dirección de las acciones prioritarias, dentro del programa existente, hacia sectores esenciales en los que la Comunidad deberá tomar la iniciativa para superar los obstáculos a la realización de este programa citados en el Informe. 3. Dictamen de la Comisión sobre las enmiendas del Parlamento Europeo 3. 1 Observaciones generales De las 28 enmiendas adoptadas por el Parlamento Europeo en segunda lectura, la Comisión puede aceptar 13 enmiendas en su totalidad, en parte o en principio. No puede respaldar 15 enmiendas. De las 13 enmiendas mencionadas, 4 fueron aceptadas previamente por la Comisión en primera lectura e incluidas en la propuesta modificada de diciembre de 1996. 3. 2 Observaciones específicas Enmiendas aceptadas Las enmiendas 15 y 23 son aceptables en su totalidad y ya se incluyeron en la propuesta modificada de diciembre de 1996 (COM(96) 648 final). Las enmiendas 32, 33 y 35 también son aceptables en su totalidad, ya que restablecen el texto original de la Comisión. En cuanto a las enmiendas relacionadas con la integración de consideraciones ambientales en las demás políticas, la Comisión puede aceptar la nueva formulación de la parte a) bis de la enmienda 7 (sobre agricultura) y de la parte c) bis de la enmienda 14 (sobre turismo). El resto de la enmienda 7 no es aceptable, ya que debilita la propuesta de la Comisión. El resto de la enmienda 14 no puede aceptarse pues propone la inclusión del principio "quien contamina paga", que ya figura en el Tratado, y la inclusión de un principio desconocido ("quien usa los recursos naturales paga"). La Comisión acepta una referencia a la responsabilidad, tal como se menciona en la enmienda 12 del proyecto de Decisión, pero dado que está elaborando un Libro Blanco al respecto, considera razonable mantener la referencia general incluida en el artículo 3 de su propuesta original. La Comisión puede aceptar en gran parte la enmienda 13 sobre los contaminantes orgánicos persistentes y de hecho la incluyó en el apartado 7 del artículo 11 de su propuesta modificada de diciembre de 1996. J¿n cuanto a la ampliación de los instrumentos, la Comisión pued> aceptar que se vuelva a fprmular la enmienda 17. La Comisión presentó en diciembre de 1996 una propuesta sobre la evaluación estratégica del impacto ambiental. En lo que se refiere a la enmienda 25. la Comisión incluyó en su propuesta modificada de diciembre de 1996 una referencia al apoyo técnico, administrativo y financiero a los países asociados de Europa Central y Oriental que solicitan la adhesión. En relación con las enmiendas 34 y 37 sobre temas medioambientales específicos (artículo 11), la Comisión puede aceptarlas en la medida en que vuelven a introducir partes de la propuesta original de la Comisión. No puede aceptar otras partes de dichas enmiendas por motivos institucionales. Ahora bien, es posible que algunas de las sugerencias formen parte de próximos Programas de Trabajo de la Comisión. Enmiendas no aceptadas La Comisión no puede aceptar que la enmienda 1 se refiera específicamente al artículo 130 R del Tratado, ya que ello no constituye ningún valor añadido. La Comisión no puede admitir la inserción de la enmienda 2 (ni de la parte correspondiente de la enmienda 37V que pretende incluir la obligación de alcanzar el mayor nivel de protección del medio ambiente en la Unión antes del 1 de enero de 1999. Esta cuestión no está directamente relacionada con la propuesta de revisión del Quinto Programa. Sobre la base de la declaración común relativa a las normas de protección del medio ambiente, de la salud y de la seguridad de los productos, la Comisión ha iniciado una revisión del acervo comunitario y, en su caso, ha presentado propuestas que deberán ser objeto de decisión antes del final del período transitorio, es decir, antes del 1 de enero de 1999. La enmienda 3 incluye referencias detalladas a las conclusiones que la Agencia Europea de Medio Ambiente presentó en su Informe actualizado sobre el estado del medio ambiente. La Comisión considera suficiente una simple referencia al Informe de la Agencia, tal como figura en la propuesta inicial de la Comisión. En lo que se refiere a las enmiendas 4. 6. 16. 21 y 36. así como a determinadas partes de las enmiendas 17 y 37 en las que figuran plazos y objetivos, cabe subrayar que, dada la estructura del proyecto de Decisión, estos plazos y objetivos indicarían fechas límite en las que la Comunidad debería adoptar decisiones sobre las distintas medidas, lo que podría causar dificultades de procedimiento. En la enmienda 5. se sugiere la sustitución de las palabras "las prioridades son" por "la Comunidad deberá". La Comisión no considera adecuada esta enmienda. El proyecto de Decisión indica los ámbitos prioritarios mencionando ampliamente el conjunto de medidas que permitirán alcanzar los objetivos del programa. La fórmula "la Comunidad deberá" sería más vinculante, dado que prescribiría con exactitud las medidas indicadas, sin dar la posibilidad de desarrollar otras medidas. En varias enmiendas del texto (por ejemplo en los números 6. 7. 12. 16. 17. 20. 21. 22. 24. 36 y en determinadas partes de las enmiendas 34 y 37\ se solicita implícita o explícitamente de la Comisión que presente propuestas antes de la expiración del programa o que adopte otras medidas. En algunos casos, se indica el ámbito de aplicación y el contenido detallado de la medida. La Comisión no puede aceptar estas enmiendas ya que vulneran el derecho de iniciativa de la Comisión, tal como se describe en el Tratado, limitan el alcance de la propuesta de la Comisión o son demasiado detalladas o específicas en relación con el ámbito de aplicación del proyecto de Decisión. Además, esta Decisión no debe ser un programa de trabajo detallado para la Comisión. No obstante, algunas de las acciones propuestas podrán incluirse en los próximos Programas de Trabajo anuales de la Comisión. La enmienda 26 limita el problema del comercio y el medio ambiente al único contexto de la OMC. Además, la Comunidad no puede garantizar que las normas de la OMC se ajusten plenamente a la necesidad de mantener un nivel elevado de protección del medio ambiente. La enmienda 27 sobre el PNB verde no puede ser aceptada. El Quinto Programa no establece la creación de un PNB verde para la Unión Europea antes de 1999, sino que apunta que los indicadores económicos de tipo PNB deben ser modificados y adaptados a iniciativa de los Estados miembros y respaldados por la CE. En la Comunicación de 1994 sobre indicadores y contabilidad ambiental se mencionaba que, de acuerdo con otros estudios, la creación de un "PNB verde" es más complicada de lo previsto en un principio. Por consiguiente, la Comisión, junto con otras organizaciones internacionales y con los Estados miembros, está elaborando unas cuentas satélite a modo de primer paso en esta dirección. En lo que se refiere a las enmiendas 36 y 40 y a determinadas partes de la enmienda 34 relativas a temas ambientales específicos (artículo 11), la Comisión no puede aceptarlas por motivos institucionales. No obstante, algunas de las propuestas podrán incluirse en los próximos Programas de Trabajo de la Comisión. 4. Propuesta modificada Tras la segunda lectura del proyecto de Decisión aprobada por el Parlamento Europeo el 17 de julio de 1997, la Comisión modifica su propuesta incluyendo en parte 3 enmiendas. Otras 4 enmiendas ya fueron incluidas en la propuesta modificada de diciembre de 1996. El resto de las enmiendas aceptables para la Comisión no requieren modificaciones del texto de la propuesta de la Comisión. Comparadas con la posición común del Consejo, dichas enmiendas restablecen el texto original de la propuesta de la Comisión. Propuesta modificada de DECISIÓN DEL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO Y DEL CONSEJO relativa a la revisión del programa comunitario de política y actuación en materia de medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible "Hacia un desarrollo sostenible" POSICIÓN COMÚN PROPUESTA MODIFICADA Artículo 2 (letra f) del apartado 1 del artículo 2) (nuevo) fl realice los trabajos preparativos para una reforma de la Política Agrícola Común, que deberá ponerse en práctica antes de la adhesión de nuevos Estados miembros. La reforma deberá garantizar que, en el futuro, las ayudas estarán ligadas en primer término a métodos de explotación sostenibles. Artículo 2 (letra d) del apartado 5 del artículo 2) (nuevo) d) garantizar que los Fondos estructurales y el Fondo de cohesión apoyen las formas sostenibles de turismo y que los provectos que se financien mediante estos Foádos se someten a una evaluación del impacto ambiental, de conformidad con los requisitos de los Fondos estructurales y sobre el Fondo de cohesión v de la Directiva revisada 85/337/CEE del Consejo, los Reglamentos sobre Artículo 3 (letra a) del apartado 2 del artículo 3) a) crear métodos de evaluación de las repercusiones medioambientales para los planes y programas y potenciar el desarrollo de metodologías, formación y material de orientación para la evaluación tanto de los proyectos como de los planes y programas; las a) la Comunidad establecerá un método de repercusiones evaluación de medioambientales y planes para programas y fomentará el desarrollo de formación y material de metodologías, orientación para la evaluación tanto de ios proyectos como de los planes y programas; los ISSN 0257-9545 COM(97) 471 final DOCUMENTOS ES 11 14 17 N° de catálogo : CB-CO-97-483-ES-C ISBN 92-78-24970-X Oficina de Publicaciones Oficiales de las Comunidades Europeas L-2985 Luxemburgo


title: Advies van het Economisch en Sociaal Comité over "De rol van de sociaal-economische kringen in Interreg-programma's en in het Eures-netwerk"

eurovoc_concepts:
EU action
Structural Funds
cross-border cooperation
free movement of workers
frontier region


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL nr. 3008/97 af Gerhard HAGER til Kommissionen. Den retlige kvalitet af protokoller og erklæringer

eurovoc_concepts:
EAEC Treaty
ECSC Treaty
EU law
Protocol (EU)
drafting of EU law
international law
legal status
revision of the Treaty (EU)
secondary legislation

text: C 134/56 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende 30. 4. 98 (98/C 134/68) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-3008/97 af Gerhard Hager (NI) til Kommissionen (1. oktober 1997) Om: Den retlige kvalitet af protokoller og erkl(cid:230)ringer EU-retten opdeles i den prim(cid:230)re ret, der indg(cid:229)s folkeretligt mellem medlemsstaterne og underkastes en ratificeringsproces i de enkelte medlemsstater, og den sekund(cid:230)re ret, der som fłlge af F(cid:230)llesskabernes supranationale karakter udstedes af institutionerne med umiddelbar virkning for retsordenen i medlemsstaterne. Udviklingen i den seneste integrationsfase har imidlertid stadig hyppigere gjort det nłdvendigt, at der i forbindelse med revisionen af traktaterne om oprettelse af F(cid:230)llesskaberne ud over en simpel (cid:230)ndring og udvidelse af traktaterne (den prim(cid:230)re ret) ogs(cid:229) głres brug af protokoller og erkl(cid:230)ringer med henblik p(cid:229) vedtagelse af undtagelsesbestemmelser. Hvad ang(cid:229)r den retlige kvalitet af s(cid:229)danne protokoller og erkl(cid:230)ringer, bedes Kommissionen besvare fłlgende spłrgsm(cid:229)l: 1. Hvilken retlig kvalitet har protokoller, og hvilke kriterier l(cid:230)gges til grund for denne kvalifikation? Hvilken retlig kvalitet har i mods(cid:230)tning hertil en »erkl(cid:230)ring vedtaget af konferencen«, og hvilke kriterier 2. l(cid:230)gges til grund for denne kvalifikation? Hvordan vurderer Kommissionen den retlige kvalitet af en »erkl(cid:230)ring som konferencen har noteret sig« i 3. en slutakt til en prim(cid:230)rretlig traktat? 4. Hvilken virkning f(cid:229)r en s(cid:229)dan erkl(cid:230)ring, hvis der er tale om en ensidig erkl(cid:230)ring fra en medlemsstat? I hvilket omfang kan eller skal De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Domstol i sin retspraksis tage hensyn til 5. protokoller og erkl(cid:230)ringer til den prim(cid:230)re ret? Helt konkret: Hvilken retlig betydning har den »Erkl(cid:230)ring fra (cid:216)strig og Luxembourg om kreditinstitutter«, 6. der er afgivet til Amsterdam-traktaten? Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Jacques Santer (1. december 1997) Af artikel 239 i EF-traktaten og af tilsvarende bestemmelser i EKSF-traktaten og traktaten om Det Europ(cid:230)iske Atomenergif(cid:230)llesskab fremg(cid:229)r det, at de protokoller, der er vedlagt traktaterne, er en integreret del af disse. Protokollerne har s(cid:229)ledes samme retsgyldighed som traktaterne. Allerede i 1956 fastslog Domstolen at »bestemmelserne i alle disse tekster (traktater, bilag og protokoller) har samme bindende virkning. og at de ikke skal modstilles, men sammenholdes, s(cid:229) der bliver tale om en korrekt anvendelse« (dom Groupement des industries luxembourgeoises mod Den Hłje Myndighed › sag 7 og 9/54, sml. 1956-II-s. 91). Til forskel fra protokollerne er erkl(cid:230)ringerne ikke en integreret del af EF-traktaten. Domstolen har endnu ikke udtalt sig om retsgyldigheden af de erkl(cid:230)ringer, der er afgivet ved undertegnelsen af traktaten. Man błr imidlertid v(cid:230)re opm(cid:230)rksom p(cid:229), at Domstolen tager de erkl(cid:230)ringer, der er fłrt til protokols i R(cid:229)det i forbindelse med vedtagelsen af en afledt retsakt i betragtning, i det omfang de giver udtryk for en f(cid:230)lles hensigt fra medlemsstaternes side, og at indholdet kommer til udtryk i g(cid:230)ldende f(cid:230)llesskabsret. Med andre ord, kan en erkl(cid:230)ring hverken fłje noget til teksterne eller v(cid:230)re i modstrid med (cid:229)nd og bogstav heri (se dom Antonissen C-292/89, sml. 1991, s. I-773, punkt 17 og 18 i forbindelse med en erkl(cid:230)ring, der er fłrt til protokols i R(cid:229)det i forbindelse med vedtagelsen af forordning nr. 1612/68. Til geng(cid:230)ld tages en erkl(cid:230)ring i betragtning, n(cid:229)r den kan belyse et dokuments r(cid:230)kkevidde (se dom Grimaldi C-322/88, sml. 1989, s. I-4407, dom Egle, C-310/90, sml. 1992, s. I-177). Ved erkl(cid:230)ringen om kreditinstitutterne i Tyskland tog regeringskonferencen Kommissionens udtalelse ad notam, ifłlge hvilken den g(cid:230)ldende f(cid:230)llesskabsret głr det muligt at tage de tjenesteydelser af almindelig interesse, der varetages af de p(cid:229)g(cid:230)ldende institutter i betragtning. Den opfordrede endvidere Kommissionen til at undersłge, om der findes lignende tilf(cid:230)lde i andre medlemsstater og eventuelt at lade de samme f(cid:230)llesskabs- bestemmelser g(cid:230)lde for disse. Den ensidige erkl(cid:230)ring fra (cid:216)strig og Luxembourg, som regeringskonferencen tog ad notam, falder i tr(cid:229)d med ovenn(cid:230)vnte opfordring, som Kommissionen błr fłlge


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 3040/97 do Deputado Amedeo AMADEO à Comissão. Programa PHARE

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern European Countries
EU financing
EU programme
contract
invitation to tender
operating cost
services contract
supplies contract
technical cooperation
works contract

text: 16. 4. 98 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias C 117/133 (98/C 117/178) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3038/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Discrimina(cid:231)o(cid:152)es com base na idade A CIG deveria ter tomado medidas contra a discrimina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o com base na idade e inserir um artigo a este propo·sito (6o bis) no novo Tratado. Segundo os documentos de que disponho, tal na(cid:152)o tera· acontecido. Trata-se, contudo, de um problema real e confrontamo-nos diariamente com pra·ticas de discrimina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o. Na(cid:152)o esque(cid:231)amos, sobretudo, que estamos a viver uma e·poca em que continua a aumentar, de forma quase exponencial, a idade me·dia dos cidada(cid:152)os europeus. Pode a Comissa(cid:152)o intervir neste sentido, prevendo em particular uma harmoniza(cid:231)a(cid:152)o das normas de base dos concursos e o seu respeito? Reposta dada por P. Flynn em nome da Comissa(cid:152)o (24 de Novembro de 1997) A Comissa(cid:152)o informa o Senhor Deputado de que o Tratado de Amesterda(cid:152)o introduziu uma nova base jur(cid:14)·dica (novo artigo 6o-A do Tratado CE) para a adop(cid:231)a(cid:152)o das medidas necessa·rias para combater, entre outras, a discrimina(cid:231)a(cid:152)o em raza(cid:152)o da idade. A Comissa(cid:152)o examinara· as eventuais ac(cid:231)o(cid:152)es apropriadas neste dom(cid:14)·nio apo·s a ratifica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o do Tratado de Amesterda(cid:152)o. (98/C 117/179) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3039/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Incumprimentos por parte da Comissa(cid:152)o › programa PHARE O Tribunal de Contas da UE redigiu um relato·rio especial relativo ao sistema descentralizado de execu(cid:231)a(cid:152)o do programa PHARE (per(cid:14)·odo 1990-1995) a favor dos pa(cid:14)·ses da Europa Central e Oriental (PECO) (1). A Comissa(cid:152)o criou uma estrutura de gesta(cid:152)o e execu(cid:231)a(cid:152)o descentralizada para permitir a ra·pida execu(cid:231)a(cid:152)o dos programas e uma mobiliza(cid:231)a(cid:152)o acelerada dos recurso financeiros. As unidades de gesta(cid:152)o dos programas (UGP) que, nas administra(cid:231)o(cid:152)es nacionais dos pa(cid:14)·ses beneficia·rios, esta(cid:152)o incumbidas da gesta(cid:152)o dos fundos PHARE, te(cid:136)m care(cid:136)ncias de pessoal e de forma(cid:231)a(cid:152)o. A Comissa(cid:152)o contribuiu para o financiamento dos custos relativos ao pessoal e das despesas de funcionamento das UGP mas na(cid:152)o definiu os princ(cid:14)·pios aplica·veis aos referidos financiamentos, bem como a‘ sua contabiliza(cid:231)a(cid:152)o e controlo. O Tribunal de Contas confirma tambe·m que o recurso intensivo a‘ assiste(cid:136)ncia te·cnica a‘s UGP em termos administrativos e operativos foi oneroso devido, sobretudo, a‘ concorre(cid:136)ncia cerrada na atribui(cid:231)a(cid:152)o dos contratos (que primou frequentemente pela falta de transpare(cid:136)ncia). A alguns gabinetes de consultores foi atribu(cid:14)·do um nu·mero desproporcionado de contratos. Ale·m disso, a Comissa(cid:152)o tardou em criar um sistema de controlo das despesas das UGP e na(cid:152)o assegurou uma avalia(cid:231)a(cid:152)o adequada dos programas executados. Como justifica a Comissa(cid:152)o esta grav(cid:14)·ssima acusa(cid:231)a(cid:152)o? (1) JO C 175 de 9. 6. 1997, p. 4. (98/C 117/180) PERGUNTA ESCRITA E-3040/97 apresentada por Amedeo Amadeo (NI) a‘ Comissa(cid:152)o (1 de Outubro de 1997) Objecto: Programa PHARE O Tribunal de Contas critica o modo como a Comissa(cid:152)o aplicou as regras em mate·ria de adjudica(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de contratos. Cerca de 80% dos fundos PHARE de gesta(cid:152)o descentralizada destinam-se a contratos de presta(cid:231)a(cid:152)o de servi(cid:231)os


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL nr. 3026/97 af Amedeo AMADEO til Kommissionen. Fremtidens støjpolitik (grønbog)

eurovoc_concepts:
EU publication
European Commission
fine
noise pollution
polluter pays principle
prevention of pollution
proposal (EU)
resolution of parliament
tax system

text: C 117/130 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende 16. 4. 98 (98/C 117/170) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-3023/97 af Amedeo Amadeo (NI) til Kommissionen (1. oktober 1997) Om: Fremtidens stłjpolitik (grłnbog) Med hensyn til Kommissionens grłnbog om fremtidens stłjpolitik (KOM(96)0540) er forslaget om at udarbejde et rammedirektiv om m(cid:229)lingen og evalueringen af uds(cid:230)ttelsen for stłj et positivt aspekt. P(cid:229) den anden side er Kommissionens udtalelse om, at den fłrst i anden omgang vil fastl(cid:230)gge de objektive v(cid:230)rdier og de foranstaltninger, der skal tr(cid:230)ffes, for at overholde dem, et negativt aspekt. Er Kommissionen › da det ud fra princippet om forebyggelse er vigtigt at fastl(cid:230)gge s(cid:229)danne objektive v(cid:230)rdier for de prioriterede sektorer i forbindelse med begr(cid:230)nsningen af stłjforureningen › rede til ikke at uds(cid:230)tte fastl(cid:230)ggelsen af disse til et senere tidspunkt? (98/C 117/171) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-3024/97 af Amedeo Amadeo (NI) til Kommissionen (1. oktober 1997) Om: Fremtidens stłjpolitik (grłnbog) Vil Kommissionen › idet der henvises til dens grłnbog om fremtidens stłjpolitik (KOM(96)0540), og eftersom stłjforurening er et stort problem i F(cid:230)llesskabet, og den europ(cid:230)iske miljłpolitik ikke hidtil har prioriteret bek(cid:230)mpelsen af denne type forurening hłjt, hvorfor der m(cid:229) till(cid:230)gges den planlagte udarbejdelse af en omfattende handlingsplan for denne bek(cid:230)mpelse stor betydning, og selv om det er muligt principielt at tilslutte sig indholdet i grłnbogen › sikre en ufortłvet og hurtig udarbejdelse af n(cid:230)vnte handlingsplan? mangler (98/C 117/172) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-3025/97 af Amedeo Amadeo (NI) til Kommissionen (1. oktober 1997) Om: Fremtidens stłjpolitik (grłnbog) Vil Kommissionen med hensyn til sin grłnbog om fremtidens stłjpolitik (KOM(96)0540) medtage begr(cid:230)ns- ningen af stłjforureningen blandt de prioriterede aspekter i forbindelse med forskningen og udviklingen i F(cid:230)llesskabet og tr(cid:230)ffe foranstaltninger med henblik p(cid:229) at forbedre koordinationen og łge koncentrationen? (98/C 117/173) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-3026/97 af Amedeo Amadeo (NI) til Kommissionen (1. oktober 1997) Om: Fremtidens stłjpolitik (grłnbog) Med hensyn til Kommissionens grłnbog om fremtidens stłjpolitik (KOM(96)0540) kan Det (cid:216)konomiske og Sociale Udvalg acceptere den af Kommissionen foresl(cid:229)ede anvendelse af łkonomiske virkemidler, men ikke indfłrelsen af afgiftsm(cid:230)ssige foranstaltninger som en slags »straf« for stłjforurenerne eller som indt(cid:230)gtskilde for det offentlige. Vil Kommissionen sikre, at anvendelsen af łkonomiske virkemidler ikke kommer til at erstatte udstedelsen af bestemmelser om emissionsgr(cid:230)nsev(cid:230)rdier?