eurovoc_concepts:
harbour installation
international standard
maritime transport
prevention of pollution
transport safety
working conditions

text: C 212 E/102 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 95/21/EC concerning the enforcement, in respect of shipping using Community ports and sailing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States, of international standards for ship safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working conditions (port State control) (2000/C 212 E/06) (Text with EEA relevance) COM(2000) 142 final (cid:151) 2000/0065(COD) (Submitted by the Commission on 22 March 2000) THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 80(2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of Committee, the Economic and Social Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty, Whereas: (1) Directive 95/21/EC establishes a system of port State control of shipping in the European Community based on uniform inspection and detention procedures. (2) It is necessary to take account of the changes that have been made to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) conventions, protocols, codes and resolutions and of Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). framework of developments in the the (5) The categories of ships listed in Annex V also present a major accident or pollution hazard when they reach a certain age. The broad discretionary power of the inspection authority as to whether to select such ships for expanded inspection prevents the achievement of uniform practices within the Community. It is therefore necessary to make inspection of these ships mandatory. (6) The content of the discretion of the expanded inspections for which guidelines have been laid down in Annex V, section B is likely to vary considerably at the inspection authority. These guidelines must therefore be made mandatory. However, there must be provision for making an exception when the conduct of an inspection of such ships, in particular in view of the state of the ships’ cargo tanks or of operational constraints relating impossible or to loading or unloading activities, would involve excessive risks for the safety of the ship and its crew and for the safety of the port area. is (7) Structural defects in a ship are likely to increase the risk of an accident at sea. In the case of a ship carrying a bulk cargo of oil, such accidents can have disastrous conse- quences for the environment. The inspection authority should carry out a visual examination of the accessible parts of to detect any serious corrosion and take whatever follow-up action may be necessary, classification societies responsible for the structural quality of ships. ship in order particular vis-(cid:224)-vis the the in (3) Some ships pose a manifest risk to maritime safety and the marine environment because of their age, flag and history. They should therefore be refused access to Community ports, unless it can be demonstrated that they can be operated safely in Community waters. Guidelines must be established setting out the procedures applicable in the event of imposition of an access ban and of the lifting of such a ban. The list of ships refused access to Community ports must be published and displayed by the Sirenac information system. (4) Ships with a high target factor present a particularly serious accident or pollution risk, justifying the need to inspect them at every Community port of call. and organisation. The (8) Expanded inspection based on mandatory verification of certain aspects of the ship takes a considerable amount of time task of preparing the inspection should be facilitated, which in turn will improve its effectiveness. To this end, the master or operator of any ship entering a Community port must notify certain information of an operational nature. (9) Given the risks of major pollution caused by oil tankers and in view of the fact that the great majority of defi- ciencies leading to detention concern ships older than 15 years, the expanded inspection regime should be applied to oil tankers from the age of fifteen. 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/103 (10) The growing importance of port State control in the battle against sub-standard practices is resulting in an overall increase in inspectors’ tasks. A particular effort should therefore be made to avoid redundant inspections and to improve the information available to inspectors on the inspections performed in previous ports. content of Consequently, the inspection report produced by the inspector on completion of an inspection, a more detailed inspection or an expanded inspection must also state which parts of the ship have already been inspected. The inspector at the following port of call will thus be able to take this information into account and, where appropriate, decide to refrain from inspecting a part of the ship if no deficiency was detected during the previous inspection. (11) The administration of the flag State of a ship inspected or the classification society concerned must be informed of the result of inspection in order to ensure more effective monitoring of the development and, where appropriate, the deterioration in the state of the ship in order to take the necessary remedial action while there is still time. It is (12) Accidental pollution by oil is likely to cause considerable damage to the environment and the economy of the region concerned. therefore necessary to verify whether oil tankers calling at European Union ports have appropriate cover for such risks. Whenever an oil tanker carrying more than 2 000 tonnes of oil in bulk is inspected, the inspector must check the presence on board of an insurance or other financial guarantee covering in conformity with the 1969 Inter- pollution damage, national Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, as amended by its 1992 Protocol. (13) The the ship’s in the charterer transparency of information relating to ships inspected and detained is a key element of any policy designed to deter the use of ships that fall short of the safety standards. It is necessary in this context to include the identity of list of information published. The public must also be given fuller and clearer information on the inspections and detentions carried out in European Union ports. This information on the more concerns extensive inspections performed on board ships, both by the port State authorities and by the classification societies, and an explanation of the measures taken by the port State authorities or the classification societies concerned following the Directive. a detention order under in particular (14) The detection of cases where the Directive has not been properly applied or of lax practices in certain Community ports is essential in order to avoid the risk of varying levels of safety and distortion of competition between regions of have more the therefore European Union. The and ports Commission must detailed information, particularly on the movements of ships in ports, in order to be able to carry out a detailed exam- ination of the conditions under which the Directive is being applied. Such information must be provided to the Commission on an annual basis to enable it to intervene more rapidly whenever anomalies are found in the application of the Directive. (15) The provisions of Directive 95/21/EC concerning the committee procedure must be amended to take account of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (1). (16) As the measures required to implement this Directive are measures of general scope within the meaning of Article 2 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC, they should be adopted according to the regulatory procedure laid down in Article 5 of that Decision, HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Council Directive 95/21/EC is hereby amended as follows: 1. The title is replaced by the following: (cid:145)Directive 95/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 June 1995 on port State control of shipping(cid:146). 2. Article 2 is amended as follows: (a) point 1 is amended as follows: (i) the following subparagraph is added: (cid:145) (cid:151) the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969, and the 1992 Protocol relating thereto. (cid:146) (ii) the date 1 July 1999 is replaced by the date 1 July 2000; (b) in point 2, the date 1 July 1999 is replaced by the date 1 July 2000. 3. Article 5 is amended as follows: (a) paragraph (1) is replaced by the following: inspections of The total number of (cid:145)1. the ships referred to in Article 5(2), Article 6 and Article 7 to be carried out annually by the competent authority of each Member State shall correspond to at least 25 % of the number of individual ships which entered its ports during the past calendar year. (cid:146); (1) OJ L 184, 17. 7. 1999, p. 23. C 212 E/104 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 (b) paragraph (2) is replaced by the following: A are refused access to all Community ports, except in the situations described in Article 11(6), if these ships: (cid:145)2. The competent authority shall ensure that an inspection in accordance with Article 6 is carried out on any ship not subject to an expanded inspection with a than 50 in the Sirenac information system. factor greater target In selecting other ships for inspection, the competent authorities shall determine the order of priority as follows: (cid:151) have been detained more than twice in the course of the preceding 24 months in a port of a Member State, and (cid:151) fly the flag of a State listed in the table (rolling three-year average) of above-average detentions and delays, published in the annual report of the MOU. (cid:151) absolute priority shall be given to the ships listed in Annex I, Part I, irrespective of their target factor; The refusal of access shall become applicable immediately the ship has been authorised to leave the port where it has been the subject of a third detention. (cid:151) the ships listed in Annex I, Part II shall be selected in decreasing order, depending on the order of their target priority resulting from the value of factor. (cid:146) 4. Article 7 is replaced by the following: (cid:145)Article 7 Mandatory expanded inspection of certain ships 1. Member States shall ensure that the ships classed in one of the categories of Annex V, section A are subject to an expanded inspection in the first port visited after a period of twelve months since the last expanded inspection carried out in a port of a Member State. However, these ships may be subject to the inspection provided for in Article 6(1) and (2) in the period between two expanded inspections. The operator or the master of a ship referred to in 2. all the the preceding paragraph shall information listed in Annex V, to the competent authority of the Member State concerned at least 2 working days before the expected time of arrival in a port of a Member State, or before leaving the port of departure if the voyage is expected to take fewer than 2 working days. communicate section B, Any ship failing to communicate the above information to the competent authority concerned shall be subject to an inspection in conformity with Article 6 on arrival at its port of destination. Annex V, 3. section C shall guidelines on expanded inspection. (cid:146) contain mandatory 5. The following Article 7a is inserted: (cid:145)Article 7a Access subject to expanded inspection refusal measures concerning certain ships 1. Member States shall ensure that ships older than 15 years classed in one of the categories of Annex V, section For the purposes of applying paragraph (1), Member 2. States shall comply with the procedures laid down in Annex V, section D. The Commission shall publish every six months the 3. information relating to ships that have been refused access to Community ports in application of this Article. (cid:146) 6. Article 8 is replaced by the following text: (cid:145)Article 8 Inspection report 1. On completion of an inspection, a more detailed inspection or an expanded inspection, the inspector shall draw up a report containing at least the information listed in Annex X, giving the results of the inspection, the parts or elements of the ship that have been inspected in the case of a more detailed or an expanded inspection, the details of any decisions taken by the inspector and of the corrective action to be taken by the master, owner or operator. 2. A copy of the inspection report shall be provided to the ship’s master, the flag State administration and the organisation responsible for ship surveys and for the issue of class certificates or certificates issued on behalf the flag State in accordance with the international of In the case of deficiencies warranting the conventions. to be given to the the document detention of a ship, master include in accordance with paragraph 1 shall information about the future publication of the detention order in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. (cid:146) 7. In Article 9(5) the words (cid:145)or recognised organisations the ship’s certificates shall responsible for the issue of also be notified where relevant(cid:146) are replaced by the words (cid:145)or the issue of class certificates or certificates issued on behalf of the flag State in accordance with the international conventions shall also be notified where relevant. (cid:146) recognised organisations responsible for 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/105 8. In Article 10(1) the words (cid:145)or refusal of access(cid:146) are inserted 14. In Annex II, the following item 35 is added: after the words (cid:145)against a detention decision(cid:146). 9. Article 14(2) is amended as follows: (a) the words (cid:145)Sirenac E(cid:146) are replaced by the word (cid:145)Sirenac(cid:146), (b) the following subparagraph is added: (cid:145)For the purposes of carrying out the inspections referred to in Articles 6 and 7, inspectors shall consult the public and private databases relating to ship inspection accessible through the EQUASIS information system, as soon as it becomes operational(cid:146). 10. Article 15(2) is replaced by the following: (cid:145)2. The information listed in Annex VIII, Parts I and II, and the information on changes, suspensions and with- drawals of class referred to in Article 15(3) of Directive 94/57/EC, shall be available in the Sirenac system. It shall be made public through the EQUASIS information system, when the latter becomes operational, as soon as possible after the inspection has been completed or the detention has been lifted. (cid:146) 11. Articles 17 and 18 are replaced by the following: (cid:145)Article 17 Data to monitor implementation Member States shall provide the Commission with the information listed in Annex X at the intervals stated in that Annex. (cid:146) (cid:145)Article 18 Regulatory Committee The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee 1. set up pursuant to Article 12 of Directive 93/75/EEC. (cid:145)35. International insurance certificate or any other financial guarantee relating to the cover of pollution damage (for oil tankers covered by the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969, relating thereto). (cid:146) and the 1992 Protocol 15. In Annex III, item 1, the words (cid:145)II-8 and II-11(cid:146) are replaced by the words (cid:145)and II-8. (cid:146) 16. Annex V is replaced by the text in Annex II to this Directive. 17. Annex VI is amended as follows: (a) In item 3. 1 the words (cid:145)The lack of valid certificates(cid:146) are replaced by the words (cid:145)The lack of valid certificates and documents(cid:146). (b) The following is added to item 3. 2: (cid:145)15. Failure to carry out survey programme in accordance with IMO resolution A. 744(18). (cid:146) enhanced the (c) The following is added to item 3. 6: (cid:145)5. Survey report file missing or not in conformity with Regulation 13G(3)(b) of the MARPOL Convention. (cid:146) 18. Annex VIII is replaced by the text in Annex III to this Directive. 19. Annexes IX and X are added, the text of which is in Annex IV to this Directive. Article 2 2. Where reference is made to this provision, the regu- latory procedure laid down in Article 5 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall in conformity with the provisions of Article 8 of the Decision. apply, Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive no later than [. ]. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. The period stipulated in Article 5(6) of Decision 3. 1999/468/EC shall be three months. (cid:146) 12. Article 19(a) is replaced by the following: (cid:145)(a) adapt the obligations referred to in Article 5, except the figure of 25 % referred to in paragraph 1 thereof, in Articles 6, 7, 8, 15 and 17, and in the Annexes to the refer, on the basis of which these Articles experience gained from the implementation of this Directive and taking into account developments in the MOU;(cid:146) 13. Annex I, Part II is replaced by the text in Annex I to this When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made. Article 3 This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Article 4 Directive. This Directive is addressed to the Member States. C 212 E/106 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 ANNEX I Annex I, Part II is replaced by the following: (cid:145)II. Overall targeting factor The following ships shall be considered as priority for inspection. 1. Ships visiting a port of a Member State for the first time or after an absence of twelve months or more. In applying these criteria Member States shall also take into account those inspections which have been carried out by members of the MOU. In the absence of appropriate data for this purpose, Member States shall rely upon the available Sirenac data and inspect those ships which have not been registered in the Sirenac following the entry into force of that database on 1 January 1993. 2. Ships not inspected by any Member State within the previous six months. 3. Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship’s construction and equipment, issued in accordance with the conventions, and the classification certificates, have been issued by organisations which are not recognised under the terms of Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations. 4. Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the three-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and delays published in the annual report of the MOU. 5. Ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a Member State on certain conditions, such as: (a) deficiencies to be rectified before departure; (b) deficiencies to be rectified at the next port; (c) deficiencies to be rectified within 14 days; (d) deficiencies for which other conditions have been specified. If appropriate action has been taken and all deficiencies have been rectified, this is taken into account. 6. Ships for which deficiencies have been recorded during a previous inspection, according to the number of defi- ciencies. 7. Ships which have been detained in a previous port. 8. Ships flying the flag of a country which has not ratified all relevant international conventions referred to in Article 2 of this Directive. 9. Ships flying the flag of a country with a deficiency ratio above average. 10. Ships flying the flag of a country with class deficiency above average. 11. Ships above 13 years old. In determining the order of priority for the inspection of the ships listed above, the competent authority shall take into account the overall target factor displayed on the Sirenac information system, according to Annex I, Section 1 of the MOU. A higher target factor is indicative of a higher priority. The overall target factor is the sum of the applicable target factor values as defined within the framework of the MOU. Items 5, 6 and 7 shall only apply to inspections carried out in the last 12 months. The overall target factor shall not be less than the sum of the values established for items 3, 4, 8, 9, 10 and 11. If, within three months from the introduction in the framework of factor values, the Commission is of the view that these values are inappropriate, it may decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 19 of Directive 95/21/EC, that these values shall not apply for the purposes of this Directive. (cid:146) the MOU of new target 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/107 ANNEX II Annex V is replaced by the following: (cid:145)ANNEX V A. CATEGORIES OF SHIPS SUBJECT TO EXPANDED INSPECTION (as referred to in Article 7(1)) 1. Gas and chemical tankers older than 10 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates. 2. Bulk carriers older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates. 3. Single hull oil tankers older than 15 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates. 4. Passenger ships older than 15 years of age other than the passenger ships referred to in Article 2(a) and (b) of Directive 1999/35/EC. B. INFORMATION TO BE NOTIFIED TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY (as referred to in Article 7(2)) (cid:151) A. name, (cid:151) B. flag, (cid:151) C. IMO identification number, if any, (cid:151) D. deadweight tonnage, (cid:151) E. date of construction of the ship, (cid:151) F. for tankers: (cid:151) F. a. configuration: single hull, single hull with SBT, double hull, (cid:151) F. b. condition of the cargo and ballast tanks: full, empty, inerted, (cid:151) F. c. volume and nature of the cargo, (cid:151) G. probable time of arrival at the port of destination or pilot station, as required by the competent authority, (cid:151) H. planned duration of the call, (cid:151) I. planned operations at the port of destination (loading, unloading, other), (cid:151) J. date and place of the last inspection carried out in the framework of port State control. C. PROCEDURES RELATING TO EXPANDED INSPECTION OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF SHIPS (as referred to in Article 7(3)) Subject to their practical feasibility or any constraints relating to the safety of persons, the ship or the port, the following items at least must be part of an expanded inspection. Inspectors must be aware that it may jeopardise the safe execution of certain on-board operations, e. g. cargo handling, if tests having a direct effect thereon are required to be carried out during such operations. 1. SHIPS IN GENERAL (Categories in section A) (cid:151) Black-out and start of emergency generator, (cid:151) Inspection of emergency lighting, C 212 E/108 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 (cid:151) Operation of emergency fire-pump with two fire hoses connected to the fire main-line, (cid:151) Operation of bilge pumps, (cid:151) Closing of watertight doors, (cid:151) Lowering of one lifeboat to the water, (cid:151) Test of remote emergency stop for, e. g. , boilers, ventilation and fuel pumps, (cid:151) Testing of steering gear including auxiliary steering gear, (cid:151) Inspection of emergency source of power to radio installations, (cid:151) Inspection and, to the extent possible, test of engine room separator. 2. GAS AND CHEMICAL TANKERS In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be considered as part of the expanded inspection for gas and chemical tankers: (cid:151) Cargo tank monitoring and safety devices relating to temperature, pressure and ullage, (cid:151) Oxygen analysing and explosimeter devices, including their calibration. Availability of chemical detection equipment (bellows) with an appropriate number of suitable gas detection tubes for the specific cargo being carried, (cid:151) Cabin escape sets giving suitable respiratory and eye protection for every person on board (if required by the products listed on the International Certificate of Fitness or Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk, as applicable), (cid:151) Check that the product being carried is listed in the International Certificate of Fitness or Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk, as applicable, (cid:151) The fixed fire-fighting installations on deck, whether they be foam or dry chemical or other as required by the product carried. 3. BULK CARRIERS In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be considered as part of the expanded inspection for bulk carriers: (cid:151) Possible corrosion of deck machinery mountings, (cid:151) Possible deformation and/or corrosion of hatch covers, (cid:151) Possible cracks or local corrosion in transverse bulkheads, (cid:151) Access to cargo holds, (cid:151) Assessment of the safety of the structure on the basis of the reports of structural surveys, the condition evaluation reports, the thickness measurement reports and the descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A. 744(18). 4. OIL TANKERS In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be considered as part of an expanded inspection of oil tankers: (cid:151) Fixed deck foam system, (cid:151) Fire-fighting equipment in general, 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/109 (cid:151) Inspection of fire dampers in engine room, pump room and accommodation, (cid:151) Control of pressure of inert gas and oxygen content thereof, (cid:151) Examination of the appearance of and any signs of corrosion of at least one of the ballast tanks, (cid:151) Assessment of the safety of the structure on the basis of the reports of structural surveys, the condition evaluation reports, the thickness measurement reports and the descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A. 744(18). 5. PASSENGER SHIPS NOT COVERED BY DIRECTIVE 1999/35/EC In addition to the items listed under section C 1, the following items may also be considered as part of the expanded inspection for passenger ships: (cid:151) Testing of fire detection and alarm system, (cid:151) Testing of proper closing of fire doors, (cid:151) Test of public address system, (cid:151) Fire drill where, as a minimum, all sets of firemen’s outfits must be demonstrated and part of the catering crew take part, (cid:151) Demonstration that key crew members are acquainted with the damage control plan. If deemed appropriate, the inspection may be continued while the ship is on passage to or from the port in the Member State, with the consent of the ship’s master or the operator. Inspectors must not obstruct the operation of the ship, nor must they induce situations that, in the master’s judgement, could endanger the safety of the passengers, the crew and the ship. D. MANDATORY GUIDELINES RELATING TO REFUSAL OF ACCESS TO COMMUNITY PORTS (as referred to in Article 7a(2)) 1. If the conditions described in Article 7a are met, the competent authority of the port in which the ship is detained for the third time must inform the captain and the owner or the operator of the ship in writing of the access refusal order served on the ship. The competent authority must also inform the flag State administration, the classification society concerned, the other Member States, the European Commission, the Centre Administratif des Affaires Maritimes and the MOU Secretariat. The access refusal order will take effect as soon as the ship has been authorised to leave the port after remediation of the deficiencies leading to the detention. 2. The access refusal order may be lifted if the owner or the operator of the ship is able to show to the satisfaction of the competent authority of the port of destination that the ship can be operated without danger to the safety of passengers or crew, or without risk to other ships, or without presenting an unreasonable threat to the marine environment. 3. To this end, the owner or the operator must address a formal request for the lifting of the access refusal order to the Member State of the Community port of destination. This request must be accompanied by a certificate from the flag State administration or from the classification society acting on its behalf, showing that the ship fully conforms to the applicable provisions of the international conventions and satisfies the conditions mentioned in paragraph 2. The request for the lifting of the access refusal order must also be accompanied, where appropriate, by a certificate from the classification society which has the ship in class showing that the ship conforms to the class standards stipulated by that society. 4. If the request for a lifting of the access refusal order is presented in accordance with paragraph 3, the Member State of the port of destination must, on the basis of the information provided by the owner or the operator of the ship, authorise the ship to proceed to the port of destination in question, for the sole purpose of verifying that the ship meets the conditions specified in paragraph 2. C 212 E/110 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 On arrival at the port of destination, the ship must be subjected to an expanded inspection, the cost of which will be borne by the owner or the operator. The expanded inspection must cover at least the relevant items of Annex V, section C, and the items that were inspected in the course of the last detention in a port of a Member State. The expanded inspection referred to in the previous subparagraph must be performed by the inspectors of the Member State of the port of destination, assisted by inspectors of a recognised organisation within the meaning of Directive 94/57/EC, who have no commercial interest in the ship inspected. 5. If the results of the expanded inspection satisfy the Member State in accordance with paragraph 2, the access refusal order must be lifted. The owner or the operator of the ship must be informed thereof in writing. The competent authority must also notify its decision in writing to the flag State administration, the classification society concerned, the other Member States, the European Commission, the Centre Administratif des Affaires Maritimes and the MOU Secretariat. 6. Information relating to ships that have been refused access to Community ports must be made available in the Sirenac system and published in conformity with the provisions of Article 15 and of Annex VIII. (cid:146) ANNEX III Annex VIII is replaced by the following: (cid:145)ANNEX VIII Publication of information related to detentions and inspections in ports of Member States (As referred to in Article 15) I. Information published in accordance with Article 15(1) must include the following: (cid:151) name of the ship, (cid:151) IMO number, (cid:151) type of ship, (cid:151) tonnage (gt), (cid:151) year of construction, (cid:151) name and address of the shipowner or operator of the ship, (cid:151) in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and address of the charterer and the type of charter (voyage charter or time charter), (cid:151) flag State, (cid:151) the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any, (cid:151) the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates delivered, 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/111 (cid:151) port and date of the last expanded inspection stating, where appropriate, whether a detention was ordered, (cid:151) port and date of the last special survey and the name of the organisation which carried out the survey, (cid:151) number of detentions during the 24 previous months, (cid:151) country and port of detention, (cid:151) date when the detention was lifted, (cid:151) duration of detention, in days, (cid:151) number of deficiencies found and the reasons for detention, in clear and explicit terms, (cid:151) description of the measures taken by the competent authority and, where relevant, by the classification society as a follow-up to detention, (cid:151) if the ship has been refused access to any port within the Community, the reasons for such measure in clear and explicit terms, (cid:151) indication, where relevant, of whether the classification society or any other private body that carried out the led to detention, survey has a responsibility in relation to the deficiencies which, alone or in combination, (cid:151) description of the measures taken in the case of a ship which has been allowed to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard, or which has been refused access to a Community port. II. Information concerning ships inspected made public in accordance with Article 15(2) must include the following: (cid:151) name of the ship, (cid:151) IMO number, (cid:151) type of ship, (cid:151) tonnage (gt), (cid:151) year of construction, (cid:151) name and address of shipowner or operator of the ship, (cid:151) in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and address of the charterer and the type of charter (voyage charter or time charter), (cid:151) flag State, (cid:151) the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any, (cid:151) the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates delivered, (cid:151) country, port and date of inspection, (cid:151) number of deficiencies, by category of deficiency. (cid:146) C 212 E/112 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 7. 2000 ANNEX IV The following Annexes IX and X are added: (cid:145)ANNEX IX Inspection report drawn up in accordance with Article 8 The inspection report must contain at least the following items. I. General 1. Competent authority that wrote the report 2. Date and place of inspection 3. Name of the ship inspected 4. Flag 5. Type of ship 6. IMO number 7. Call sign 8. Tonnage (gt) 9. Deadweight tonnage (where relevant) 10. Year of construction 11. The classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any 12. The classification society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State 13. Name and address of the ship’s owner or the operator 14. Name and address of the charterer and type of charter (voyage charter or time charter) in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk 15. Final date of writing the inspection report. II. Information relating to inspection 1. Certificates issued in application of the relevant international conventions, authority or organisation that issued the certificate(s) in question, including the date of issue and expiry 2. Parts or elements of the ship that were inspected (in the case of more detailed or expanded inspection) 3. Type of inspection (inspection, more detailed inspection, expanded inspection) 4. Nature of the deficiencies 5. Measures taken. 25. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 212 E/113 III. Additional information in the event of detention 1. Date of the detention order 2. Date of lifting the detention order 3. Nature of the deficiencies warranting the detention order 4. Information on the last intermediate or annual survey 5. Indication, where relevant, of whether the classification society or any other private body that carried out the led to detention survey has a responsibility in relation to the deficiencies which, alone or in combination, 6. Measures taken. ANNEX X Data to be provided in the context of monitoring implementation Member States must communicate the following information to the Commission in application of Article 17, using the model tables below. 1. Data to be provided annually Every year Member States must provide the Commission with the following data for the preceding year by 1 April at the latest. 1. 1. Number of inspectors acting on their behalf in the framework of port State control of shipping. This information must be communicated to the Commission using the following model table. Port/Area Number of full-time inspectors Number of part-time inspectors (1) Conversion to full time Port X. Port Y. Total (1) Where the inspections carried out in the context of port State control represent only part of the inspectors’ work, the total number of inspectors must be converted to a number equivalent to full-time inspectors. This information must be provided at national level and for each port of the Member State concerned. For the purposes of this Annex, a port is taken to mean an individual port and the geographical area covered by an inspector or team of inspectors, comprising several individual ports where appropriate. The same inspector may work in more than one port/geographical area. 1. 2. Total number of individual ships that entered their ports at national level. 2. Data to be provided on a quarterly basis Member States must provide the Commission every three months with a detailed list of movements of individual ships that entered their ports, using the following model. Date of arrival. /. /2. /. /2. IMO No Name Flag Type GT Year of construction Classification society Date of departure Port X. /. /2. /. /2. (cid:146)


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-0845/00 υποβολή: Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) προς την Επιτροπή. Η εναρμόνιση των όρων παραγωγής από οικογενειακές εκμεταλλεύσεις οπωροκαλλιέργειας και παραγωγής φυσικών οινοπνευματωδών αποσταγμάτων.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU regional policy
common organisation of markets
countryside conservation
fruit-growing
orchard
smallholding
spirits

formats: html pdf print

text: 13. 2. 2001 EL Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da tvn Eyrvpai¤kv·n Koinoth·tvn C 46 E/59 Kata· thn emfa·nish· toy env·pion thw Epitroph·w Gevrgi·aw kai Ana·ptyjhw thw Ypai·uroy stiw 25 Ianoyari·oy 2000, o Epi·tropow Fischler, apantv·ntaw stiw ervth·seiw diafo·rvn ispanv·n boyleytv·n sxetika· me thn apo·syrsh toy en lo·gv kanonismoy·, dieykri·nise o·ti h apo·syrsh toy kanonismoy· ofei·letai sto gegono·w o·ti to Basi·leio toy Maro·koy e·xei para·sxei sygkekrime·new eggyh·seiw gia na ele·gxetai o·ti oi synolike·w ejagvge·w toma·taw den ua yperbai·noyn tiw egkriuei·sew poso·thtew. Ua mporoy·se na prosdiori·sei h Epitroph· tiw ne·ew kai sygkekrime·new ayte·w eggyh·seiw poy e·xei para·sxei to Basi·leio toy Maro·koy gia na apotrapei·, pra·gma poy den e·xei epiteyxuei· e·vw tv·ra, h ype·rbash tvn egkekrime·nvn posoth·tvn ejagvgh·w toma·taw; Ti me·tra skopey·ei na la·bei h Epitroph· gia na mhn eisa·gontai perisso·terew apo· tiw egkriuei·sew poso·thtew toma·taw; Apa·nthsh toy k. Fischler ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (3 Mai(cid:138)oy 2000) H ue·spish kauestv·tow adeiv·n kata· thn eisagvgh· toma·taw katagvgh·w Maro·koy sthn Koino·thta ba·sei toy kanonismoy· (EK) ariu. 2767/1999 thw Epitroph·w thw 23hw Dekembri·oy 1999 (1), proka·lese epiple·on diamar- tyri·ew kai epi·shma diabh·mata tvn marokinv·n arxv·n, kataggeli·ew eisagvge·vn kai koinotikv·n emporikv·n fore·vn. Oi marokine·w arxe·w zh·thsan apo· thn Epitroph· diaboyley·seiw epi· toy ue·matow prokeime·noy na dieykrinistei· h sxetikh· kata·stash stiw yperba·seiw posoth·tvn poy ei·xan symfvnhuei· kata· thn eisagvgh· sthn Koino·thta. Apo· tiw en lo·gv diaboyley·seiw to Maro·ko ane·labe de·smeysh na sebastei· gia thn tre·xoysa peri·odo empori·aw tiw poso·thtew poy ei·xan symfvnhuei· sto plai·sio tvn symfvniv·n ana·mesa sto Maro·ko kai sthn Koino·thta epi· toy ue·matow dhladh· 145. 676 to·noyw gia thn peri·odo apo· ton Noe·mbrio 1999 e·vw ton Ma·rtio toy 2000. Epiple·on, h Epitroph· zh·thse a·mesew kai taktike·w koinopoih·seiw tvn eisagvgv·n poy pragmatopoioy·ntai. Epi· toy prokeime·noy ta kra·th me·lh diabiba·zoyn sthn Epitroph· ka·ue bdoma·da tiw poso·thtew toma·tew poy e·xoyn eisaxuei· apo· to Maro·ko stiw agore·w kata· thn prohgoy·menh bdoma·da. Ypo· ayte·w tiw synuh·kew h Epitroph· h·tan se ue·sh na epane·luei sthn kata·stash poy ei·xe problefuei· apo· th symfvni·a kai na katargh·sei to kauestv·w adeiv·n kata· thn eisagvgh·. (1) EE L 333 thw 24. 12. 1999. (2001/C 46 E/065) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0845/00 ypobolh·: Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) prow thn Epitroph· (21 Marti·oy 2000) Ue·ma: H enarmo·nish tvn o·rvn paragvgh·w apo· oikogeneiake·w ekmetalley·seiw opvrokallie·rgeiaw kai paragvgh·w fysikv·n oinopneymatvdv·n apostagma·tvn Sta kra·th me·lh thw Eyrvpai¤kh·w (cid:201)nvshw, oinopneymatvdv·n apostagma·tvn. isxy·oyn dia·forew nomouesi·ew o·son afora· thn paragvgh· fysikv·n Se orisme·na kra·th me·lh xorhgei·tai xrhmatodotikh· eni·sxysh stiw oikogeneiake·w ekmetalley·seiw paragvgh·w oinopneymatvdv·n apostagma·tvn, epeidh· merimnoy·n gia th synth·rhsh palaiv·n opvrv·nvn kai gia th metabi·bash thw texnognvsi·aw toyw stoyw ne·oyw, kai epeidh· toyw pare·xetai kat(cid:146) ayto·n ton tro·po ki·nhtro prokeime·noy na synexi·soyn tiw dendrokomike·w toyw drasthrio·thtew kai na diafyla·joyn toyw xv·royw pra·sinoy me opvrofo·ra de·ntra stiw agrotike·w perioxe·w. Se a·llew xv·rew, o·pvw p. x. sth Galli·a, to dikai·vma eley·uerhw apo·stajhw 10 li·trvn kauaroy· oinopney·matow ethsi·vw den mporei· na metabibasuei· apo· toyw gonei·w sta te·kna, me apote·lesma na apotre·pontai oi ne·oi apo· to na synexi·soyn thn ekmeta·lleysh, gegono·w poy synepa·getai katastrofike·w epiptv·seiw sth synth·rhsh tvn opvrv·nvn kai kyri·vw sth diath·rhsh tvn palaiv·n poikiliv·n opvrofo·rvn de·ntrvn kai, kat(cid:146) epe·ktash, sto topi·o. C 46 E/60 Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da tvn Eyrvpai¤kv·n Koinoth·tvn EL 13. 2. 2001 Prokeime·noy na diafylaxuei· o politistiko·w kai oikonomiko·w ploy·tow tvn topi·vn kai h paragvgh· sthn Koino·thta fysikv·n oinopneymatvdv·n apostagma·tvn, ta opoi·a den antiprosvpey·oyn para· mo·no to 0,1 % thw katana·lvshw oinopney·matow, kai prow apofygh· tvn ka·ue ei·doyw diakri·sevn metajy· paragvgv·n kai oiasdh·pote stre·blvshw toy antagvnismoy· sthn eniai·a agora·, den kri·nei h Epitroph· o·ti ua h·tan sko·pimo na provuh·sei ka·poia enarmo·nish tvn nomouesiv·n poy aforoy·n toyw paragvgoy·w; Poiew dynato·thtew ua mporoy·se na proble·cei h Epitroph· sto plai·sio thw politikh·w gia thn ana·ptyjh thw ypai·uroy, me sto·xo th sth·rijh tvn dra·sevn gia th diath·rhsh tvn opvrv·nvn kai tvn palaiv·n poikiliv·n opvrofo·rvn de·ntrvn, oi karpoi· tvn opoi·vn xrhsimey·oyn gia thn paragvgh· xymv·n, marmela·daw kai thn apo·stajh karpv·n poy yfi·stantai zy·mvsh se bare·lia; Apa·nthsh toy k. Fischler ej ono·matow thw Epitroph·w (19 Aprili·oy 2000) H Epitroph· e·xei epi·gnvsh o·ti den ypa·rxoyn koinoi· kano·new ston tome·a thw alkoo·lhw, symperilambanome·nhw thw paragvgh·w aposta·gmatow apo· toyw mikroy·w paragvgoy·w. H Epitroph· pro·teine, kata· ta 30 teleytai·a e·th dia·fora sxe·dia koinh·w orga·nvshw agora·w ston tome·a thw alkoo·lhw gevrgikh·w proe·leyshw, alla· to Symboy·lio den kate·lhje pote· se symfvni·a, dedome·noy o·ti ta kra·th me·lh h·uelan pa·nta na diathrh·soyn ta dika· toyw systh·mata. Dedome·noy o·ti ta en lo·gv systh·mata eje·leican syn tv xro·nv h· e·xoyn ypostei· rizike·w tropopoi- h·seiw, o i·diow o tome·aw kai orisme·na kra·th me·lh e·deijan endiafe·ron gia th dhmioyrgi·a eno·w plaisi·oy koinv·n kano·nvn gia ton tome·a. H Epitroph· syzhta· prow to paro·n me toyw eunikoy·w empeirognv·monew thn ana·gkh pro·blechw eno·w te·toioy plaisi·oy. S(cid:146) ayto· to plai·sio, ua mporoy·san na symperilhfuoy·n dia·fora ue·mata antagvnismoy·. Apo· forologikh· a·poch, h odhgi·a 92/83/EOK toy Symboyli·oy thw 19hw Oktvbri·oy 1992 gia thn enarmo·nish tvn diarurv·sevn tvn eidikv·n fo·rvn katana·lvshw poy epiba·llontai sthn alkoo·lh kai ta alkooloy·xa pota· (1) enarmoni·zei toyw kano·new o·son afora· toyw eidikoy·w fo·royw katana·lvshw kai proble·pei sto a·ruro 22 th dynato·thta gia ta kra·th me·lh na efarmo·zoyn e·na meivme·no pososto· sthn alkoo·lh poy para·getai apo· ta mikra· oinopneymatopoii·a. Oi sygkekrime·new leptome·reiew efarmogh·w thw dynato·thtaw ayth·w empi·ptoyn sthn armodio·thta tv kratv·n melv·n. Sto plai·sio thw politikh·w agrotikh·w ana·ptyjhw, me nomikh· ba·sh ton kanonismo· (EK) ariu. 1257/99 toy Symboyli·oy thw 17hw Mai(cid:138)oy 1999 gia th sth·rijh thw agrotikh·w ana·ptyjhw apo· to Eyrvpai¤ko· Gevrgiko· Tamei·o Prosanatolismoy· kai Eggyh·sevn (EGTPE) kai gia thn tropopoi·hsh kai kata·rghsh orisme·nvn kanonismv·n (2), ta kra·th me·lh mporoy·n na protei·noyn progra·mmata pare·xontaw sth·rijh se dia·forew gevrgike·w drasthrio·thtew kai sth metatroph· toyw. Metajy· tvn diafo·rvn me·trvn poy mporoy·n na xrhsimey·soyn gia th diath·rhsh tvn ty·pvn idiai·tero ro·lo ekmeta·lleyshw kai paragvgh·w poy anafe·rontai apo· to Ajio·timo Me·low toy Koinoboyli·oy, mporoy·n na diadramati·soyn ta gevrgoperiballontika· me·tra. Ta me·tra ayta· pare·xoyn sth·rijh stiw meuo·doyw gevrgikh·w paragvgh·w poy aposkopoy·n sthn prostasi·a toy periba·llontow kai th diath·rhsh toy fysikoy· xv·roy. (cid:211)pvw e·xei dieykrinisuei· apo· to a·ruro 13 toy kanonismoy· efarmogh·w (EK) ariu. 1750/99 thw Epitroph·w, thw 23hw Ioyli·oy 1999 gia th ue·spish leptomerv·n kano·nvn efarmogh·w toy proanaferue·ntow kanonismoy· toy Symboyli·oy (3), h sth·rijh mporei· na afora· thn ypoxre·vsh diath·rhshw tvn fytikv·n genetikv·n po·rvn, oi opoi·oi ei·nai ek fy·sevw prosarmosme·noi stiw topike·w kai perifereiake·w synuh·kew kai oi opoi·oi epapeiloy·ntai apo· genetikh· dia·brvsh. H sth·rijh ayth· mporei· na perilamba·nei kyri·vw thn enua·rrynsh gia th diath·rhsh palaiv·n poikiliv·n froy·tvn kai paradosiakv·n opvrv·nvn. (1) (2) (3) EE L 316 thw 31. 10. 1992. EE L 160 thw 26. 6. 1999. EE L 214 thw 13. 8. 1999. (2001/C 46 E/066) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0848/00 ypobolh·: Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) prow to Symboy·lio (20 Marti·oy 2000) Ue·ma: H dra·sh thw Eyrvpai¤kh·w (cid:201)nvshw kata· tvn narkv·n H Eyrvpai¤kh· (cid:201)nvsh bri·sketai sthn aixmh· toy agv·na enanti·on thw xrh·shw narkv·n kata· prosvpikoy·, e·xontaw egkri·nei dy·o koine·w dra·seiw (1995 kai 1997). Apo· thn pleyra· toy, to Eyrvpai¤ko· Koinoboy·lio symmete·xei epi·shw apofasistika· ston agv·na ayto· me·sv polyarri·umvn chfisma·tvn kai me·sv thw diorga·nvshw dhmo·siaw akro·ashw, toy·to de apo· to 1995


title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-0821/00 från Roberta Angelilli (UEN) till kommissionen. Artikel 211 i den amerikanska lagen Omnibus Appropriation Act.

eurovoc_concepts:
Cuba
TRIPS
United States
trade agreement (EU)
trade dispute
trademark law

text: 13. 2. 2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 46 E/51 (cid:129) Hade kommissionen innan den beslutade att h(cid:228)nskjuta fallet till WTO:s panel genomf(cid:246)rt de djup- g(cid:229)ende unders(cid:246)kningar som beh(cid:246)vdes f(cid:246)r att avg(cid:246)ra om artikel 211, sett utifr(cid:229)n de (cid:246)vriga ameri- kanska lagarna om expropriation av egendom utan ers(cid:228)ttning, verkligen diskriminerar kubanska medborgare i f(cid:246)rh(cid:229)llande till medborgare fr(cid:229)n (cid:246)vriga l(cid:228)nder? (cid:129) B(cid:246)r inte diskussionen med USA (cid:229)terupptas i syfte att komma fram till en formulering av artikel 211 f(cid:246)r att inte ge intryck av att man genom att h(cid:228)nskjuta fallet till panelen i sj(cid:228)lva verket taktikerar f(cid:246)r att fr(cid:228)mja en enskild person eller en tredje stat? Denna formulering b(cid:246)r leda till att den r(cid:228)ttsliga princip som artikeln grundas p(cid:229) bibeh(cid:229)lls samtidigt som kommissionens tolkning av Trips-avtalen tillfreds- st(cid:228)lls. (2001/C 46 E/056) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0821/00 fr(cid:229)n Roberta Angelilli (UEN) till kommissionen (21 mars 2000) ˜mne: Artikel 211 i den amerikanska lagen Omnibus Appropriation Act Kan kommissionen besvara f(cid:246)ljande fr(cid:229)gor ang(cid:229)ende tvisten mellan EU och USA om artikel 211 i den amerikanska lagen Omnibus Appropriation Act fr(cid:229)n 1998. 1. Vilka allm(cid:228)nna europeiska intressen (cid:228)r det man f(cid:246)rsvarar i denna tvist? 2. Ett pressmeddelande av den 7 februari f(cid:246)retag (Pernod Ricard) ang(cid:229)ende den amerikanska appellationsdomstolens motstridiga beslut av den 4 februari, ger anledning att tro att f(cid:246)retaget p(cid:229) n(cid:229)got s(cid:228)tt f(cid:246)rutser kommissionens beslut. Detta tycks vara ett f(cid:246)rs(cid:246)k att manipulera kommissionens tj(cid:228)nstegrenar. fr(cid:229)n ett franskt Kan det garanteras att kommissionen verkligen f(cid:246)rsvarar allm(cid:228)nna intressen och inte intressena hos en enskild ekonomisk grupp? Det (cid:228)r ju k(cid:228)nt att kommissionsordf(cid:246)rande Prodi (cid:229)tagit sig att l(cid:229)ta inf(cid:246)ra (cid:246)ppenhetsprincipen i kommissionens och dess tj(cid:228)nstem(cid:228)ns verksamhet. 3. Allm(cid:228)nt intresse inneb(cid:228)r att konfiskering utan ers(cid:228)ttning till de r(cid:228)ttm(cid:228)tiga (cid:228)garna inte f(cid:229)r n(cid:229)gon internationell effekt. Detta (cid:228)r en allm(cid:228)nt erk(cid:228)nd princip i de europeiska f(cid:246)rfattningarna och har ett flertal g(cid:229)nger till(cid:228)mpats av domstolar. Artikel 211 i den amerikanska lagen Omnibus Appropriation Act bekr(cid:228)ftar bara denna princip. Skulle inte en tvist mellan Europa och USA inf(cid:246)r WTO-panelen i syfte att f(cid:246)rs(cid:246)ka avskaffa artikel 211 kunna framst(cid:229) som en kamp d(cid:228)r man i grund och botten vill se f(cid:246)rtryckarens r(cid:228)tt segra (cid:246)ver den f(cid:246)rtrycktas och v(cid:229)ldet segra (cid:246)ver r(cid:228)ttvisan? Gemensamt svar p(cid:229) de skriftliga fr(cid:229)gorna E-0820/00 och E-0821/00 ingivet av Pascal Lamy f(cid:246)r kommissionen (14 april 2000) Ledamoten h(cid:228)nvisar till flera aspekter avseende tvisten med F(cid:246)renta staterna om artikel 211 i F(cid:246)renta staternas (cid:148)Omnibus Appropriations Act(cid:148) fr(cid:229)n 1998 (cid:228)r f(cid:246)renlig med best(cid:228)mmelserna i V(cid:228)rldshandels- organisationens (WTO:s) avtal om handelsrelaterade aspekter av immaterialr(cid:228)tter (TRIPs). Vad betr(cid:228)ffar l(cid:228)nders erk(cid:228)nnande av utl(cid:228)ndska expropriationer utan ers(cid:228)ttning r(cid:246)r den aktuella WTO- tvisten inte fr(cid:229)gan om huruvida utl(cid:228)ndska expropriationer utan ers(cid:228)ttning skall erk(cid:228)nnas av andra tredje l(cid:228)nder. I sj(cid:228)lva verket kunde inte amerikanska varum(cid:228)rken exproprieras av den kubanska regeringen, och s(cid:229) skedde inte heller. Privatpersoner och f(cid:246)retag vars egendom hade exproprierats av den kubanska regeringen f(cid:246)rblev (cid:228)gare av egendom utanf(cid:246)r Kuba. S(cid:228)rskilt deras r(cid:228)ttigheter till varum(cid:228)rken som registrerats i F(cid:246)renta staterna l(cid:228)mnades op(cid:229)verkade av den kubanska revolutionen. C 46 E/52 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 13. 2. 2001 WTO-tvisten h(cid:228)nger snarare samman med behandlingen av amerikanska varum(cid:228)rken som (cid:246)vergavs av sina tidigare kubanska (cid:228)gare och vilka endast p(cid:229) vissa villkor kan registreras, f(cid:246)rnyas och g(cid:246)ras g(cid:228)llande i F(cid:246)renta staterna av de nya (cid:228)garna. Dessa villkor anges i artikel 211 som F(cid:246)renta staterna antog n(cid:228)stan 40 (cid:229)r efter den kubanska revolutionen. Artikel 211 varken inneh(cid:229)ller eller f(cid:246)rst(cid:228)rker principen om icke- erk(cid:228)nnande av utl(cid:228)ndska expropriationer, vilken ledamoten h(cid:228)nvisar till. Efter en ing(cid:229)ende analys av artikel 211 drog kommissionen slutsatsen att artikeln strider mot vissa best(cid:228)mmelser i WTO:s TRIPs-avtal, i synnerhet dess best(cid:228)mmelser om nationell behandling, varum(cid:228)rken och kontroll av efterlevnaden av immateriella r(cid:228)ttigheter. Denna slutsats delades av alla medlemsstater. Betr(cid:228)ffande fr(cid:229)gan om artikel 211 har en diskriminerande verkan skulle kommissionen p(cid:229) nytt vilja framh(cid:229)lla att WTO-tvisten inte r(cid:246)r fr(cid:229)gan om expropriationer av varum(cid:228)rken utan ers(cid:228)ttning. Gemen- skapen och dess medlemsstater (cid:228)r av den (cid:229)sikten att villkoren i artikel 211 n(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller registrering och kontroll av efterlevnaden av varum(cid:228)rken strider mot TRIPs-avtalet, i synnerhet s(cid:229)tillvida som artikel 211 endast r(cid:246)r s(cid:229) kallade (cid:148)utvalda medborgare(cid:148), d(cid:228)ribland kubaner och kubanska f(cid:246)retag. F(cid:246)renta staterna visade inte under de WTO-samr(cid:229)d som h(cid:246)lls i september och december 1999 att liknande villkor st(cid:228)lls p(cid:229) medborgare fr(cid:229)n F(cid:246)renta staterna eller andra tredje l(cid:228)nder (cid:228)n Kuba. Med tanke p(cid:229) att artikel 211 skulle kunna p(cid:229)verka alla europeiska f(cid:246)retag som har aff(cid:228)rer med Kuba (cid:228)r kommissionens fr(cid:228)msta m(cid:229)ls(cid:228)ttning i WTO-tvisten alltj(cid:228)mt att F(cid:246)renta staterna genomf(cid:246)r och till(cid:228)mpar WTO:s TRIPs-avtal korrekt. Det borde ligga i gemenskapens och dess medlemsstaters intresse att se till att best(cid:228)mmelserna i WTO:s TRIPs-avtal efterlevs av samtliga WTO-medlemmar. Gemenskapen och dess medlemsstater har vid flera tillf(cid:228)llen tagit upp fr(cid:229)gan om att artikel 211 (cid:228)r of(cid:246)renlig med WTO:s TRIPs-avtal med F(cid:246)renta staterna, bland annat vid de tre tidigare toppm(cid:246)tena mellan EU och F(cid:246)renta staterna och i WTO:s TRIPs-r(cid:229)d i syfte att f(cid:246)rs(cid:246)ka n(cid:229) fram till en uppg(cid:246)relse i godo betr(cid:228)ffande fr(cid:229)gan. Den amerikanska f(cid:246)rvaltningen v(cid:228)grade emellertid konsekvent att inleda n(cid:229)gon verklig diskussion. I juli 1999 kr(cid:228)vde gemenskapen och dess medlemsstater samr(cid:229)d enligt WTO-(cid:246)verenskommel- sen om regler och f(cid:246)rfaranden f(cid:246)r tvistl(cid:246)sning. Tv(cid:229) samr(cid:229)dsrundor h(cid:246)lls i september och december 1999 men F(cid:246)renta staterna stod fast vid sin uppfattning att artikel 211 (cid:228)r f(cid:246)renlig med landets internationella (cid:229)taganden. Efter att ha utv(cid:228)rderat resultaten av WTO-samr(cid:229)den och de ekonomiska och politiska intressen som ber(cid:246)rs drog kommissionen slutsatsen att gemenskapens och dess medlemsstaters enda s(cid:228)tt att se till att WTO:s TRIPs-avtal till(cid:228)mpas korrekt av F(cid:246)renta staterna (cid:228)r att ans(cid:246)ka om att (cid:228)rendet tas upp av en WTO-panel. Med h(cid:228)nvisning till ett europeiskt f(cid:246)retags uttalade intresse av tvisten, vilket p(cid:229)st(cid:229)s p(cid:229)verka kommissionens beslutsprocess, skulle kommissionen vilja upprepa att den fortfarande (cid:228)r oroad (cid:246)ver att F(cid:246)renta staterna inte genomf(cid:246)r och till(cid:228)mpar WTO:s TRIPs-avtal korrekt. ˜ven om artikel 211 hittills endast har till(cid:228)mpats en g(cid:229)ng, kan den p(cid:229)verka alla europeiska f(cid:246)retag som har aff(cid:228)rer med Kuba. Kommissionen f(cid:246)rs(cid:228)krar ledamoten om att den forts(cid:228)tter att st(cid:229) emot alla f(cid:246)rs(cid:246)k fr(cid:229)n en ber(cid:246)rd parts sida att manipulera dess st(cid:229)ndpunkt. (2001/C 46 E/057) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA P-0829/00 fr(cid:229)n Graham Watson (ELDR) till kommissionen (10 mars 2000) ˜mne: ¯kerrenbest(cid:228)mmelser som leder till milj(cid:246)skador (cid:214)ver 50 procent av (cid:229)kerrenarna i min valkrets (sydv(cid:228)stra England) (cid:246)verstiger tv(cid:229) meter. Kommissionen och revisionsr(cid:228)tten har nyligen gett anvisningar till jordbruks-, fiskeri- och livsmedelsdepartementet om en


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0854/00 af Glyn Ford (PSE) til Kommissionen. Forskelsbehandling af EU-borgere i italienske banker.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU national
Italy
bank charges
equal treatment
infringement of EU law
residence

text: C 26 E/120 De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende DA 26. 1. 2001 Svar (8. juni 2000) R(cid:229)det drłftede situationen i Mozambique den 20. marts. Det havde nłje og med stor bekymring fulgt situationen i Mozambique (samt i andre dele af omr(cid:229)det), hvor oversvłmmelserne har v(cid:230)ret en af de alvorligste katastrofer i de seneste (cid:229)r. Det udtrykte sin solidaritet med Mozambiques befolkning og regering og de łvrige lande i omr(cid:229)det, som k(cid:230)mper med de łdel(cid:230)ggende konsekvenser af oversvłmmelserne, samt sin sympati med dem, som nu er i gang med at genopbygge deres łdelagte tilv(cid:230)relse. Det noterede sig konklusionerne af den mission til Mozambique fra den 2. -4. marts, kort efter at Mozambiques regering bad om hj(cid:230)lp, som blev foretaget af formanden for R(cid:229)det (udviklingssamarbejde), den portugisiske statssekret(cid:230)r for udviklingssamarbejde, Luis AMADO, og af kommiss(cid:230)r for udvikling og humanit(cid:230)r bistand, Poul NIELSON, for at vurdere skadernes omfang og identificere de prioriterede behov. R(cid:229)det erkendte ogs(cid:229) den bredere indvirkning, denne katastrofe ventes at f(cid:229) p(cid:229) Mozambiques łkonomi og udvikling. Det har tilsluttet sig Mozambiques regerings todelte tilgang med henblik p(cid:229) at imłdekomme de łjeblikkelige behov for hj(cid:230)lp, samtidig med at den arbejder p(cid:229) at rehabilitere ramte omr(cid:229)der og p(cid:229) at sikre b(cid:229)de makrołkonomisk stabilitet og opretholdelse af de igangv(cid:230)rende programmer for udviklingsbistand. Med hensyn til fłrstn(cid:230)vnte noterede R(cid:229)det, at medlemsstaterne og F(cid:230)llesskabet til dato har givet tilsagn om 85 mio. EUR i humanit(cid:230)r nłdhj(cid:230)lp samt yderligere hj(cid:230)lp i form af naturalier. R(cid:229)det understregede, at dette repr(cid:230)senterer den stłrste andel af internationale bidrag, der er rapporteret af FN (OCHA), og som belłb sig til mere end 120 mio. EUR. R(cid:229)det noterede sig desuden med tilfredshed den solidaritet, EU(cid:146)s borgere har vist i deres gavmilde reaktion p(cid:229) appellerne om bistand. Med hensyn til sidstn(cid:230)vnte har flere medlemsstater og F(cid:230)llesskabet allerede bebudet et samlet belłb p(cid:229) 66,5 mio. EUR til stłtte til rehabilitering og budgetstłtte og yderligere 156 mio. EUR i g(cid:230)ldsslettelse. R(cid:229)det noterede, at ud over denne stłtte blev 100 mio. EUR udbetalt i 1999 i Mozambique i henhold til F(cid:230)llesskabets samarbejdsprogram, og op til 150 mio. EUR ventes udbetalt i 2000. Medlemsstaterne og F(cid:230)llesskabet vil fortsat deltage aktivt i Maputo i koordinationen af rehabiliteringen, der ledes af Mozambiques regering, og ser frem til at yde et positivt bidrag til donorkonferencen i Rom i slutningen af april/begyndelsen af maj. Fłrst p(cid:229) dette tidspunkt vil behovene v(cid:230)re helt gjort op og fłrst da vil man have et klart billede af, hvilke ressourcer medlemsstaterne og F(cid:230)llesskabet vil stille til r(cid:229)dighed i genopbygningsperioden. R(cid:229)det vil fortsat fłlge situationen i Mozambique nłje. (2001/C 26 E/149) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0854/00 af Glyn Ford (PSE) til Kommissionen (21. marts 2000) Om: Forskelsbehandling af EU-borgere i italienske banker Er Kommissionen klar over, at italienske banker opkr(cid:230)ver gebyr for pengeoverfłrsler til italienske banker fra andre steder inden for eurozonen, og for indbetalinger, hvis overfłrslen eller indbetalingen foretages af en EU-borger, som ikke er bosiddende i Italien? Dette gebyr opkr(cid:230)ves ikke hos EU-borgere, som er bosiddende i Italien. Mener Kommissionen ikke, at dette er et brud p(cid:229) f(cid:230)llesskabsretten, der garanterer ligebehandling af EU-borgere? 26. 1. 2001 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende C 26 E/121 Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Frederik Bolkestein (2. maj 2000) Med direktivet om gr(cid:230)nseoverskridende pengeoverfłrsler (1), der blev vedtaget i januar 1997 og tr(cid:229)dte i kraft den 14. august 1999, blev der indfłrt regler om, hvordan gr(cid:230)nseoverskridende pengeoverfłrsler skal udfłres. Det er bl. a. fastlagt, hvordan gebyrer skal fordeles, s(cid:229)ledes at dobbeltgebyrer undg(cid:229)s. Hvis der ikke foreligger nogen anden aftale mellem kunden og afsenderinstitutionen, anses overfłrslen for at v(cid:230)re en »OUR-overfłrsel«: dvs. , at alle omkostninger i forbindelse med overfłrslen p(cid:229)hviler afsenderen, og mod- tageren s(cid:229)ledes intet skal betale. Gebyrer, der opkr(cid:230)ves i modstrid med direktivet, kan af kunden genopkr(cid:230)ves direkte hos banken. Kommissionen har for indev(cid:230)rende ingen oplysninger om, at italienske banker generelt opkr(cid:230)ver gebyr for gr(cid:230)nseoverskridende pengeoverfłrsler til konti i Italien, der indehaves af EU-borgere, der ikke er bosat i Italien. Hvis det (cid:230)rede medlem har oplysninger om en s(cid:229)dan praksis, vil Kommissionen v(cid:230)re parat til at igangs(cid:230)tte en n(cid:230)rmere undersłgelse og eventuelt foretage yderligere skridt. Kommissionen er imidlertid klar over, at der p(cid:229) trods af bestemmelserne i direktivet om gr(cid:230)nseover- skridende pengeoverfłrsler i Italien stadig kan findes eksempler p(cid:229) anvendelse af dobbeltgebyrer i s(cid:229)danne tilf(cid:230)lde (cid:129) uanset om afsenderen eller modtageren er bosiddende i Italien. Denne praksis er i modstrid med f(cid:230)llesskabslovgivningen, og s(cid:229)danne sager forfłlges, n(cid:229)r de kommer for dagens lys. At Italien endnu ikke har opfyldt sine forpligtelser m. h. t. gennemfłrelse af direktivet om gr(cid:230)nseover- skridende pengeoverfłrsler betyder ikke, at direktivets bestemmelser ikke skal overholdes. I henhold til EF- Domstolens domme kan sagsłgere ved nationale domstole p(cid:229)ber(cid:229)be sig et direktiv, der ikke er gennemfłrt i en national lovgivning inden for den fastsatte frist, hvis dette er tilstr(cid:230)kkeligt pr(cid:230)cist i sit indhold. (1) Europa-Parlamentets og R(cid:229)dets direktiv 97/5/EF af 27. januar 1997, EFT L 43 af 14. 2. 1997. (2001/C 26 E/150) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0855/00 af Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) til Kommissionen (21. marts 2000) Om: Britisk kort over strukturfondenes m(cid:229)l nr. 2 Hvorn(cid:229)r i 2000 har Det Forenede Kongeriges regering i en skrivelse til Kommissionen anmodet om, at godkendelsesproceduren for kortet over m(cid:229)l nr. 2 for de europ(cid:230)iske strukturfonde 2000-2006 blev indstillet? Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Michel Barnier (19. april 2000) De britiske myndigheder anmodede i en skrivelse af 2. februar 2000 om at f(cid:229) suspenderet proceduren, mens de overvejede (cid:230)ndringer af listen. Kommissionen svarede den 4. februar 2000 og bad om at f(cid:229) (cid:230)ndringerne tilsendt hurtigt med henblik p(cid:229) opstilling af den endelige liste, s(cid:229)ledes at programmeringen af foranstaltningerne ude i marken kunne s(cid:230)ttes i gang. Efter at Kommissionen i yderligere et brev, dateret 24. februar, igen havde understreget, at det hastede med at f(cid:229) truffet en beslutning, svarede Det Forenede Kongerige ved formelt at oph(cid:230)ve suspensionen den 2. marts 2000 og annullerede anmodningen om (cid:230)ndringer


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0847/00 af Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) til Kommissionen. Oprettelse af en repræsentation i Havana og samarbejdet med Cuba.

eurovoc_concepts:
ACP-EU Convention
Commission Delegation
Cuba
EU relations
negotiation of an agreement (EU)

text: C 374 E/170 De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende DA 28. 12. 2000 S(cid:229) snart forordningen er vedtaget, vil der kunne foretages en fler(cid:229)rig programmering af minerydnings- aktiviteterne. Denne vil blive baseret p(cid:229) de generelle politiske retningslinjer og kommer til at omfatte s(cid:229)vel de tv(cid:230)rg(cid:229)ende aktiviteter som dem, der er knyttet sammen med bestemte lande eller regioner. Det fler(cid:229)rige program vil blive offentliggjort og vil dermed v(cid:230)re tilg(cid:230)ngeligt for alle ikke-statslige organisationer. Disse er allerede nu (cid:129) direkte eller indirekte (cid:129) de v(cid:230)sentligste modtagere af f(cid:230)llesskabsmidlerne. Til udfłrelse af de fler(cid:229)rige projekter p(cid:229)regnes der ogs(cid:229) indg(cid:229)et en r(cid:230)kke partnerskabsaftaler. 2. Med hensyn til de kriterier, der skal anvendes ved ydelse af bistand til befolkningsgrupper, der er ofre for personelminer, men som bor i lande, der ikke har undertegnet Ottawa-konventionen, vil Kommissionen słrge for at verificere en r(cid:230)kke faktorer, undertiden en enkelt faktor, undertiden flere sammenh(cid:230)ngende faktorer; som det allerede fremg(cid:229)r af forespłrgslen, vil det prim(cid:230)rt v(cid:230)re oplysninger om forholdene for den berłrte befolkningsgruppe, som et land anmoder om minerydningshj(cid:230)lp til, det p(cid:229)g(cid:230)ldende lands praksis med hensyn til fremstilling, oplagring og salg af miner, hvorvidt det łnsker hj(cid:230)lp til tiltr(cid:230)delse af konventionen og en verificering af, at det ikke forfłlger kommercielle eller videnskabelige m(cid:229)l i forbindelse med formidlingen af en s(cid:229)dan hj(cid:230)lp. I visse tilf(cid:230)lde er det ogs(cid:229) vigtigt at kende den dybereliggende (cid:229)rsag til placeringen af miner (eller andre eksplosive anordninger). Denne liste over v(cid:230)sentlige elementer, der skal undersłges, er ikke udtłmmende, men giver et vist overblik over den fremgangsm(cid:229)de, som Kommissionen foresl(cid:229)r anvendt. 3. Denne fremgangsm(cid:229)de vil naturligvis afspejle sig i diverse politiske dialoger s(cid:229)vel med ansłger- landene som med tredjelande. Forslaget til forordning, som ikke er begr(cid:230)nset til personelminer, men ogs(cid:229) omfatter andre eksplosive anordninger, tager tillige sigte p(cid:229) problemerne omkring oplagring og ophobning af denne form for materiel. Kommissionen vil udnytte enhver mulighed for samarbejde med tredjelande med henblik p(cid:229) at fremskynde udryddelsen af denne svłbe, b(cid:229)de gennem en bedre samordning af de respektive politikker og gennem udviklingen af bedre midler og strategier. (2000/C 374 E/200) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0847/00 af Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) til Kommissionen (21. marts 2000) Om: Oprettelse af en repr(cid:230)sentation i Havana og samarbejdet med Cuba Cuba har for nyligt officielt anmodet om at blive medlem af AVS-EU-samarbejdet. N(cid:229)r et s(cid:229)dant partnerskab indledes p(cid:229) grundlag af dette nye retsgrundlag, błr vi (cid:229)bne dłren for Cuba for at tilskynde landet til at (cid:229)bne sig for os. For łjeblikket er Cuba det eneste land i Latinamerika og Vestindien, som ikke har indg(cid:229)et en ramme- samarbejdsaftale med Den Europ(cid:230)iske Union. Udsigter til en hurtig optagelse i AVS-EU-samarbejdet vil fremskynde indg(cid:229)elsen af en s(cid:229)dan ramme- samarbejdsaftale, s(cid:229)ledes at samarbejdet mellem Cuba og EU kan formaliseres og nydefineres. En hurtig oprettelse af en kommissionsrepr(cid:230)sentation i Havana ville głre det muligt at udbygge dialogen med myndighederne og samtlige samfundsgrupper p(cid:229) Cuba med henblik p(cid:229) at fastl(cid:230)gge grundlaget for det fremtidige samarbejde mellem EU og Cuba. Er Kommissionen i gang med at undersłge disse muligheder? Hvilken tidsplan regnes der med? Hvad vil Kommissionen foresl(cid:229) for at styrke og formalisere samarbejdet med Cuba? Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Poul Nielson (12. maj 2000) Hvad ang(cid:229)r det fłrste spłrgsm(cid:229)l om (cid:229)bning af en delegation p(cid:229) Cuba, henvises det (cid:230)rede medlem til svar p(cid:229) skriftlig forespłrgsel E-0615/00 fra Miranda (1). 28. 12. 2000 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende C 374 E/171 Med hensyn til det andet spłrgsm(cid:229)l om formaliseringen og styrkelsen af samarbejdet med Cuba skal det fłrst og fremmest n(cid:230)vnes, at Cuba den 10. marts sendte AVS/EU-Ministerr(cid:229)det et brev, hvori landet udtrykte interesse for at blive signatar af den nye AVS/EU-partnerskabsaftale. Kommissionen og R(cid:229)det er i f(cid:230)rd med at se n(cid:230)rmere p(cid:229) denne henvendelse. P(cid:229) kortere sigt er Kommissionen uafh(cid:230)ngigt at drłftelserne om den nye AVS/EU-partnerskabsaftale i f(cid:230)rd med at evaluere samarbejdet med Cuba for som led i en f(cid:230)lles EU-holdning at finde frem til en bedre udnyttelse af de forskellige samarbejdsinstrumenter, navnlig at f(cid:229) klarhed over, hvilken plads den humanit(cid:230)re bistand skal indtage. Form(cid:229)let med denne (cid:230)ndring i bistandsstrukturen er at łge gennem- slagskraften af vort samarbejde. (1) Se side 118. (2000/C 374 E/201) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0849/00 af Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE), Pier Casini (PPE-DE), Giorgio Lisi (PPE-DE), Amalia Sartori (PPE-DE), Renato Brunetta (PPE-DE) og Vittorio Sgarbi (PPE-DE) til Kommissionen Om: Beskyttelse af det etniske mindretal i Slovenien og Kroatien (21. marts 2000) Har Kommissionen kendskab til de alvorlige og gentagne kr(cid:230)nkelser af de grundl(cid:230)ggende personlige rettigheder og ejendomsretten, som de italienske statsborgere, der er bosiddende i Slovenien og Kroatien, har v(cid:230)ret og stadig uds(cid:230)ttes for, idet de ikke har f(cid:229)et tilbageleveret de ejendomme, som det kommunistiske styre i Jugoslavien eksproprierede, selv om de er de retm(cid:230)ssige ejere? Hvordan agter Kommissionen at słrge for, at disse landes regeringer tr(cid:230)ffer foranstaltninger til beskyttelse af de 350000 italienske flygtninge, som er berłvet deres retssikkerhed, og som p(cid:229) grund af deres statsborgerskab og deres etniske oprindelse i realiteten er dłmt til evig landflygtighed? Hvilke foranstaltninger agter Kommissionen at tr(cid:230)ffe for at sikre, at lovgivningen i stater som f. eks. Slovenien, som belaver sig p(cid:229) at tr(cid:230)de ind i Den Europ(cid:230)iske Union, og Kroatien overholder de grundl(cid:230)ggende retsstatsprincipper og bek(cid:230)mper enhver form for forskelsbehandling p(cid:229) grund af nationa- litet? Hvordan vil Kommissionen fremme overholdelsen af: 1. menneskerettighedserkl(cid:230)ringen? 2. Amsterdam-traktaten (artikel 6)? 3. FN(cid:146)s konvention om forebyggelse af og straf for folkedrab? 4. Vancouver-konventionen om levesteder FN (cid:129) 31. maj 1976? Svar afgivet p(cid:229) Kommissionens vegne af Christopher Patten (27. april 2000) I forbindelse med Kommissionens kontakter med tredjelande har den altid lagt megen v(cid:230)gt p(cid:229) den fulde overholdelse af menneskerettighederne og de grundl(cid:230)ggende frihedsrettigheder. Specielt hvad ang(cid:229)r Kroatien błr det fremh(cid:230)ves, at Kommissionen altid har v(cid:230)ret meget kritisk i de rapporter, den regelm(cid:230)ssigt har udarbejdet om dette land, samt ved alle kontakter med den tidligere politiske ledelse vedrłrende dette spłrgsm(cid:229)l, idet den fulde overholdelse af menneskerrettighederne og forbindelserne mellem mindretalsrettighederne er en politisk foruds(cid:230)tning for enhver forbedring af F(cid:230)llesskabet og Kroatien. Samme budskab er blevet sendt til den nye kroatiske regering, hvor der blev lagt v(cid:230)gt p(cid:229) en konkret etablering af internationale retlige rammer, der omfatter dette emne. Den altafgłrende betydning af overholdelsen af menneskerettighederne med en s(cid:230)rlig henvisning til mindretallenes rettigheder har f(cid:229)et konkret udtryk i de fłrste henstillinger fra den f(cid:230)lles r(cid:229)dgivende task force Den Europ(cid:230)iske Union/ Kroatien, der opfordrer den kroatiske regering til at g(cid:229) i gang med de nłdvendige (cid:230)ndringer af landets grundlov, s(cid:229) alle mindretallene bliver fuldt og helt anerkendt. Desuden n(cid:230)vnes ogs(cid:229) landets forpligtelse til at indlede arbejdet med vedtagelse af en lov om undervisning i og anvendelse af mindretallenes sprog, i overensstemmelse med Europar(cid:229)dets normer


title: Komission asetus (EY) N:o 608/2000, annettu 21 päivänä maaliskuuta 2000, tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi

eurovoc_concepts:
agri-monetary policy
citrus fruit
fruit vegetable
import price
perennial vegetable
pip fruit

formats: pdf print

text: 22. 3. 2000 FI Euroopan yhteisöjen virallinen lehti L 73/7 KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 608/2000, annettu 21 päivänä maaliskuuta 2000, tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO, joka ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen, (2) Edellä mainittujen perusteiden mukaisesti tuonnin kiin- teät arvot on vahvistettava tämän asetuksen liitteessä esitetylle tasolle, koskevista ottaa huomioon hedelmien ja vihannesten tuontĳärjestelmän soveltamista säännöistä 21 päivänä joulukuuta 1994 annetun komission asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 (1), sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 1498/98 (2), ja erityisesti sen 4 artiklan 1 kohdan, yksityiskohtaisista ON ANTANUT TÄMÄN ASETUKSEN: 1 artikla sekä katsoo seuraavaa: (1) Asetuksessa (EY) N:o 3223/94 säädetään Uruguayn kier- roksen monenvälisten kauppaneuvottelujen tulosten mukaisesti komission vahvistamista kolmansien maiden tuonnin kiinteiden arvojen perusteista liitteissä määritel- tävien tuotteiden ja ajanjaksojen osalta. Asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 4 artiklassa tarkoitetut tuonnin kiinteät arvot vahvistetaan liitteessä olevassa taulukossa merki- tyllä tavalla. 2 artikla Tämä asetus tulee voimaan 22 päivänä maaliskuuta 2000. Tämä asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, ja sitä sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa jäsenval- tioissa. Tehty Brysselissä 21 päivänä maaliskuuta 2000. Komission puolesta Franz FISCHLER Komission jäsen (1) EYVL L 337, 24. 12. 1994, s. 66. (2) EYVL L 198, 15. 7. 1998, s. 4. L 73/8 FI Euroopan yhteisöjen virallinen lehti 22. 3. 2000 tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi annettu 21 päivänä maaliskuuta 2000, komission asetukseen LIITE CN-koodi Kolmannen maan koodi (1) Tuonnin kiinteä arvo (EUR/100 kg) 0702 00 00 0707 00 05 0709 10 00 0709 90 70 0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50 0805 30 10 0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90 0808 20 50 052 204 999 052 068 628 999 220 999 052 204 628 999 052 204 212 220 600 624 999 052 220 600 999 039 388 400 404 508 512 528 720 728 999 052 388 400 512 528 720 999 154,0 109,7 131,8 114,9 130,6 146,6 130,7 309,8 309,8 105,6 40,0 116,0 87,2 61,6 37,0 39,5 31,0 41,1 53,0 43,9 33,7 71,3 60,4 55,1 90,1 102,3 92,5 89,0 81,9 84,4 73,8 55,4 97,0 85,2 77,4 61,0 106,6 68,8 72,5 71,3 76,3 (1) Komission asetuksessa (EY) N:o 2543/1999 (EYVL L 307, 2. 12. 1999, s. 46) vahvistettu maanimikkeistö. Koodi ”999” tarkoittaa ”muuta alkuperää”


title: KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-0845/00 esittäjä(t): Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) komissiolle. Hedelmiä ja luonnollisia hedelmäviinoja tuottavien perheyritysten tuotantoedellytysten yhdenmukaistaminen.

text: 13. 2. 2001 FI Euroopan yhteis(cid:246)jen virallinen lehti C 46 E/59 tammikuuta 2000 maatalouden ja maaseudun kehitt(cid:228)misen Komission j(cid:228)sen Fischler osallistui 25. valiokunnan kokoukseen. Monet espanjalaiset parlamentin j(cid:228)senet esittiv(cid:228)t h(cid:228)nelle kysymyksi(cid:228) kyseisen asetuksen kumoamisesta. Vastauksessaan komission j(cid:228)sen totesi, ett(cid:228) asetus kumottiin, koska Marokko on antanut selv(cid:228)t takuut valvoa, ett(cid:228) tomaattien kokonaistuonnin sovittuja kiinti(cid:246)it(cid:228) ei ylitet(cid:228). Voisiko komissio kertoa, mitk(cid:228) ovat n(cid:228)m(cid:228) Marokon esitt(cid:228)m(cid:228)t uudet ja konkreettiset takuut, joilla estet(cid:228)(cid:228)n, ett(cid:228) tomaattien tuonti ei ylit(cid:228) sovittuja kiinti(cid:246)it(cid:228), mihin ei kuitenkaan t(cid:228)h(cid:228)n menness(cid:228) ole pystytty? Mihin toimiin komissio aikoo ryhty(cid:228) est(cid:228)(cid:228)kseen, ett(cid:228) tuonti ei ylit(cid:228) sovittuja kiinti(cid:246)it(cid:228)? Franz Fischlerin komission puolesta antama vastaus (3. toukokuuta 2000) Komission asetuksella (EY) N:o 2767/1999 (1), joulukuuta 1999, k(cid:228)ytt(cid:246)(cid:246)n otetun Marokosta per(cid:228)isin olevien ja yhteis(cid:246)(cid:246)n tuotavien tomaattien tuontitodistusj(cid:228)rjestelm(cid:228)n k(cid:228)ytt(cid:246)(cid:246)noton vuoksi Marokon viranomaiset vastustivat asiaa ja esittiv(cid:228)t virallisia vetoomuksia ja sek(cid:228) tuojat ett(cid:228) yhteis(cid:246)n kaupalliset toimijat esittiv(cid:228)t valituksensa. joka annettiin 23. Marokon viranomaiset ovat pyyt(cid:228)neet komissiota neuvottelemaan asiasta selvent(cid:228)m(cid:228)(cid:228)n yhteis(cid:246)(cid:246)n tuonnissa sovittujen m(cid:228)(cid:228)rien ylitt(cid:228)mist(cid:228) koskevaa tilannetta. N(cid:228)iss(cid:228) neuvotteluissa Marokko sitoutui noudattamaan meneill(cid:228)(cid:228)n olevan markkinointivuoden aikana Marokon ja yhteis(cid:246)n kesken tehtyjen sopimusten mukaisia m(cid:228)(cid:228)ri(cid:228), joka on 145 676 tonnia marraskuusta 1999 maaliskuuhun 2000 kest(cid:228)v(cid:228)ll(cid:228) jaksolla. Lis(cid:228)ksi komissio on pyyt(cid:228)nyt toimittamaan nopeasti j(cid:228)senvaltiot tomaattien m(cid:228)(cid:228)r(cid:228)t. ja s(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)llisesti tuonti-ilmoituksia. T(cid:228)m(cid:228)n vuoksi toimittavat komissiolle viikoittain markkinoilleen edellisell(cid:228) viikolla Marokosta tuotujen N(cid:228)in ollen komissio saattoi palata sopimuksessa m(cid:228)(cid:228)r(cid:228)ttyyn tilanteeseen ja poistaa tuontilupaj(cid:228)rjestelm(cid:228)n. (1) EYVL L 333, 24. 12. 1999. (2001/C 46 E/065) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-0845/00 esitt(cid:228)j(cid:228)(t): Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) komissiolle (21. maaliskuuta 2000) Aihe: Hedelmi(cid:228) ja luonnollisia hedelm(cid:228)viinoja tuottavien perheyritysten tuotantoedellytysten yhdenmukais- taminen Luonnollisten hedelm(cid:228)viinojen tuotantoa koskeva lains(cid:228)(cid:228)d(cid:228)nt(cid:246) vaihtelee Euroopan unionin j(cid:228)senvaltioissa. Joissakin j(cid:228)senvaltioissa luonnollisia hedelm(cid:228)viinoja tuottavat perheyritykset saavat taloudellista tukea siksi, ett(cid:228) n(cid:228)in taataan vanhojen hedelm(cid:228)tarhojen yll(cid:228)pito ja tietotaidon siirtyminen nuorille sek(cid:228) rohkaistaan jatkamaan hedelm(cid:228)tarhausta ja n(cid:228)in ollen my(cid:246)s hedelm(cid:228)puuviheralueiden hoitoa maaseudulla. Toisissa maissa, esimerkiksi Ranskassa, oikeutta tislata 10 litraa puhdasta alkoholia vuodessa ei voi siirt(cid:228)(cid:228) nuoremmalle sukupolvelle, mik(cid:228) est(cid:228)(cid:228) nuoria jatkamasta tarhausta. T(cid:228)m(cid:228) vaikuttaa tuhoisasti hedelm(cid:228)tar- hojen hoitoon ja erityisesti vanhojen hedelm(cid:228)lajien sek(cid:228) t(cid:228)m(cid:228)n seurauksena my(cid:246)s maaseutumaiseman s(cid:228)ilymiseen. C 46 E/60 Euroopan yhteis(cid:246)jen virallinen lehti FI 13. 2. 2001 Jotta voitaisiin s(cid:228)ilytt(cid:228)(cid:228) kulttuurillinen ja taloudellinen monimuotoisuus sek(cid:228) yhteis(cid:246)n alueella harjoitettava luonnollisten hedelm(cid:228)viinojen tuotanto, jonka osuus on vain 0,1 % nautitusta alkoholista, ja jotta v(cid:228)ltett(cid:228)i- siin tuottajien syrjint(cid:228) ja kilpailun v(cid:228)(cid:228)ristyminen yhteismarkkinoilla, eik(cid:246) komissionkin mielest(cid:228) olisi tarpeen ryhty(cid:228) tiettyihin toimiin tuottajia koskevan lains(cid:228)(cid:228)d(cid:228)nn(cid:246)n yhdenmukaistamiseksi? Mit(cid:228) mahdollisuuksia komissiolla on ryhty(cid:228) maaseudun kehitt(cid:228)mispolitiikan puitteissa toimiin, jotka olisivat omiaan edist(cid:228)m(cid:228)(cid:228)n hedelm(cid:228)tarhojen sek(cid:228) mehujen ja hillojen valmistukseen ja tynnyreiss(cid:228) k(cid:228)ytt(cid:228)misen j(cid:228)lkeen tislattavaksi tarkoitettujen vanhojen hedelm(cid:228)lajien s(cid:228)ilymist(cid:228)? Franz Fischlerin komission puolesta antama vastaus (19. huhtikuuta 2000) Komissio on tietoinen siit(cid:228), ettei alkoholialalla ole yhteisi(cid:228) s(cid:228)(cid:228)nt(cid:246)j(cid:228). T(cid:228)m(cid:228) koskee my(cid:246)s viinan pientuotta- jien toimintaa. Komissio on viimeisten 30 vuoden aikana esitt(cid:228)nyt useita ehdotuksia alkoholin yhteiseksi markkinaj(cid:228)rjestelyksi maatalousalalla, mutta neuvosto ei ole p(cid:228)(cid:228)ssyt asiasta yksimielisyyteen, koska j(cid:228)sen- valtiot ovat halunneet s(cid:228)ilytt(cid:228)(cid:228) omat j(cid:228)rjestelm(cid:228)ns(cid:228). Nyt kun osa j(cid:228)rjestelmist(cid:228) on poistettu tai niit(cid:228) uudistetaan perusteellisesti, alan toimijat ja jotkut j(cid:228)senvaltiot ovat osoittaneet kiinnostusta alan yhteisten s(cid:228)(cid:228)nt(cid:246)jen laatimiseen. Komissio neuvottelee parhaillaan kansallisten asiantuntijoiden kanssa tarpeesta luoda yhteinen s(cid:228)(cid:228)ntelykehys. Kilpailuasioita voidaan k(cid:228)sitell(cid:228) t(cid:228)ss(cid:228) yhteydess(cid:228). Verotuksen osalta alkoholin ja alkoholijuomien valmisteverojen rakenteiden yhdenmukaistamisesta 19 p(cid:228)iv(cid:228)n(cid:228) lokakuuta 1992 annetussa neuvoston direktiiviss(cid:228) 92/83/EY (1) yhdenmukaistetaan valmisteveros(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)t ja sen 22 artiklassa s(cid:228)(cid:228)det(cid:228)(cid:228)n j(cid:228)senvaltioiden mahdollisuudesta soveltaa alennettua valmisteveroa pieniin tislaamoihin. Mahdollisuuden soveltaminen k(cid:228)yt(cid:228)nn(cid:246)ss(cid:228) kuuluu j(cid:228)senvaltioiden toimivaltaan. Maaseudun kehitt(cid:228)mispolitiikan oikeusperusta on Euroopan maatalouden ohjaus- ja tukirahaston (EMOTR) tuesta maaseudun kehitt(cid:228)miseen ja tiettyjen asetusten muuttamisesta ja kumoamisesta 17 p(cid:228)iv(cid:228)n(cid:228) touko- kuuta 1999 annettu neuvoston asetus (EY) N:o 1257/1999 (2). Sen puitteissa j(cid:228)senvaltiot voivat ehdottaa ohjelmia, joilla tuetaan maataloustoimintaa ja tuotantosuunnan muuttamista. Parlamentin j(cid:228)senen tarkoit- tamaa tilojen ja tuotannon s(cid:228)ilytt(cid:228)mist(cid:228) voidaan tukea erilaisilla toimenpiteill(cid:228). Niit(cid:228) voivat olla etenkin maatalouden ymp(cid:228)rist(cid:246)toimet. Niill(cid:228) tuetaan maatalouden tuotantomenetelmi(cid:228), jotka edist(cid:228)v(cid:228)t ymp(cid:228)rist(cid:246)n suojelua ja luonnonymp(cid:228)rist(cid:246)n s(cid:228)ilymist(cid:228). Kuten edell(cid:228) mainitun neuvoston asetuksen soveltamiss(cid:228)(cid:228)nn(cid:246)ist(cid:228) 23 p(cid:228)iv(cid:228)n(cid:228) hein(cid:228)kuuta 1999 annetun komission asetuksen (EY) N:o 1750/1999 (3) 13 artiklassa t(cid:228)smen- net(cid:228)(cid:228)n, tuella voidaan s(cid:228)ilytt(cid:228)(cid:228) sellaisten kasvien geenivaroja, jotka ovat luonnostaan sopeutuneet paikalli- siin ja alueellisiin olosuhteisiin ja joita uhkaa geneettinen k(cid:246)yhtyminen. T(cid:228)h(cid:228)n voivat sis(cid:228)lty(cid:228) my(cid:246)s vanhojen hedelm(cid:228)lajikkeiden ja perinteisten hedelm(cid:228)tarhojen s(cid:228)ilytt(cid:228)mist(cid:228) edist(cid:228)v(cid:228)t toimenpiteet. (1) EYVL L 316, 31. 10. 1992. (2) EYVL L 160, 26. 6. 1999. (3) EYVL L 214, 13. 8. 1999. (2001/C 46 E/066) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-0848/00 esitt(cid:228)j(cid:228)(t): Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) neuvostolle (20. maaliskuuta 2000) Aihe: Euroopan unionin toiminta miinoja vastaan Euroopan unioni on ryhtynyt jalkav(cid:228)kimiinojen vastaiseen taisteluun hyv(cid:228)ksym(cid:228)ll(cid:228) kaksi asiaan liittyv(cid:228)(cid:228) yhteist(cid:228) toimintaa (1995 ja 1997). My(cid:246)s Euroopan parlamentti on p(cid:228)(cid:228)tt(cid:228)v(cid:228)isesti jo vuodesta 1995 sitoutunut mukaan t(cid:228)h(cid:228)n taisteluun omistaen asialle useita p(cid:228)(cid:228)t(cid:246)slauselmia ja yhden julkisen kuulemistilai- suuden