title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-1329/00 van Marielle De Sarnez (PPE-DE) aan de Commissie. Steun voor Franse departementen die door het stormweer getroffen zijn.

eurovoc_concepts:
EU aid
France
aid to disaster victims
eligible region

formats: html pdf print

text: C 89 E/26 Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen NL 20. 3. 2001 Weet de Commissie dat 22 Canadese wetenschappers de Canadese regering ernstig hebben ontraden om deze grootste slachting ter wereld onder de zeezoogdieren door te laten voeren? Weet de Commissie dat door het vroegtijdige smelten van het ijs in Oost-Canada veel pups niet op tijd geboren konden worden en konden worden gezoogd waardoor de jongezeehondenpopulatie veel kleiner is dan was verwacht? Weet de Commissie dat door het te vroeg smeltende ijs jagers vanuit hun boten op de jonge zeehonden hebben geschoten waardoor veel aangeschoten zeehonden zijn verdronken zodat het aantal van 275 000 dode zeehonden veel groter is dan toegestaan? Wat kan de Commissie doen om een dergelijke slachting volgend jaar te voorkomen? Antwoord van mevrouw Wallstr(cid:246)m namens de Commissie (15 juni 2000) Zoals verklaard in het antwoord van de Commissie op schriftelijke vraag P-0395/00 van mevrouw Corbey (1) zijn de quota voor de jacht op zadelrobben en klapmutsen sinds 1996 onveranderd gebleven. De besluiten van een vergadering van de nationale beoordelingscommissie voor zeezoogdieren van 11 en 12 april 2000 betreffende het bestand van zadelrobben stelden dat de zadelrobbenpopulatie sinds 1996 stabiel is gebleven op het hoogste niveau sinds er ramingen beschikbaar zijn (1960), dat de populatie voor 2000 op 5,2 miljoen dieren wordt geraamd (er is 95 % kans dat dit aantal tussen 4,0 en 6,4 miljoen zal liggen) en dat uit luchtinspecties blijkt dat het totale aantal jongen van zadelrobben in het noordwestelijke deel van de Atlantische Oceaan op ongeveer 1 miljoen dieren (tussen 200 000 en 1 200 000) kan worden geraamd. Het aantal jongen is sinds het begin van de jaren (cid:146)80 redelijk constant gebleven. Verder heeft de Commissie er nota van genomen dat het Ministerie van visserij en oceanen het opzetten van een onafhankelijk panel van wetenschappers heeft aangekondigd teneinde de wetenschappelijke kennis over de robbenpopulatie in het Atlantische deel van Canada te evalueren en advies te geven over een beheerstrategie op lange termijn. Hoewel de door het geachte parlementslid genoemde feiten betreffende de toestand van het ijs dit jaar te betreuren zijn, lijken zij geen bedreiging voor de instandhouding van de soort in te houden. Derhalve is de Commissie van oordeel dat er, behalve een strikte toepassing van Richtlijn 83/129/EEG van de Raad van 28 maart 1983 betreffende de invoer in de lidstaten van huiden van bepaalde zeehondenjongen en daarvan vervaardigde producten (2), geen grond is voor inmenging van de Gemeenschap in deze kwestie. (1) PB C 330 E van 21. 11. 2000, blz. 150. (2) PB L 91 van 9. 4. 1983. (2001/C 89 E/024) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-1329/00 van Marielle De Sarnez (PPE-DE) aan de Commissie (27 april 2000) Betreft: Steun voor Franse departementen die door het stormweer getroffen zijn Na de hevige stormen die eind december van vorig jaar in Frankrijk huisgehouden hebben, hebben meerdere departementen in het rampgebied omvangrijke bedragen moeten uitgeven om de beschadigde infrastructuur te laten herstellen, ook al was een groot deel van de schade door verzekeringen gedekt. Kan de Europese Commissie aandacht schenken aan de departementen en gebieden die door de ramp getroffen zijn wanneer ze de volgende keer de Franse zones vastlegt die in aanmerking komen voor de structuurfondsen? Zou het ook niet mogelijk zijn om de begrotingslijn voor hulpverlening aan slachtoffers van natuurrampen opnieuw in te voeren? 20. 3. 2001 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 89 E/27 Antwoord door de heer Barnier namens de Commissie (15 juni 2000) De lijst met Franse zones die in aanmerking komen voor doelstelling 2 van de Structuurfondsen voor de programmeringsperiode 2000-2006 is door de Commissie op 7 maart 2000 vastgesteld aan de hand van het voorstel dat de Franse autoriteiten hebben ingediend. Krachtens artikel 4 van Verordening (EG) nr. 1260/1999 van de Raad van 21 juni 1999 houdende algemene bepalingen inzake de Structuurfondsen (1), kan deze lijst pas in 2003 op voorstel van een lidstaat worden gewijzigd in geval van een ernstige crisis in een regio en zonder dat daarbij het deel van de bevolking dat in elk van de onderscheiden regio(cid:146)s binnen de werkingssfeer van doelstelling 2 valt, wordt verhoogd. Er zij op gewezen dat 70 % van de bevolking die is getroffen door het stormweer van eind 1999 woont in de zones die in aanmerking komen voor doelstelling 2 voor de periode 2000-2006. Deze zones zijn vastgesteld bij besluit van de Commissie van 7 maart 2000. Zones die schade hebben geleden, maar niet in aanmerking komen voor doelstelling 2 kunnen toch profiteren van andere communautaire steunmaatregelen. In een nota (2) is een overzicht gegeven van de communautaire instrumenten die daarvoor kunnen worden aangewend. Anderzijds is de Commissie in dit stadium niet voornemens om de begrotingslijn voor hulpverlening aan slachtoffers van natuurrampen opnieuw in te voeren. Als gevolg van de beperkte bedragen die hiervoor tot 1997 in de begroting waren opgenomen, was de financiºle hulp van de Gemeenschap slechts symbolisch en is het communautaire optreden op dit gebied maar al te vaak gekenmerkt door een versnippering van steunmaatregelen van relatief bescheiden betekenis. De Commissie wil nu prioriteit geven aan economisch herstel van de getroffen zones via de structurele instrumenten van de Gemeenschap. (1) PB L 161 van 26. 6. 1999. (2) SEC(2000) 40. (2001/C 89 E/025) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-1330/00 van Marielle De Sarnez (PPE-DE) aan de Commissie (27 april 2000) Betreft: Lozing van koolwaterstoffen in zee Na de ondergang van het tankschip Erika voor de Bretoense kust hebben verschillende andere tankers gebruik gemaakt van de vervuiling van de zee om hun tanks in volle zee clandestien te reinigen. Overweegt de Europese Commissie, gezien de gevaren van het ongecontroleerd spoelen van olietanks voor het milieu, om een richtlijn op te stellen die schepen verplicht om hun tanks schoon te maken voordat ze de haven verlaten, aan de hand van een certificaat dat voorgelegd moet worden voordat een schip toestemming krijgt om uit te varen? Antwoord van mevrouw de Palacio namens de Commissie (9 juni 2000) De Commissie is zeer bezorgd over operationele verontreiniging, onder meer door tankreiniging in de communautaire wateren, die een groter aandeel van de totale verontreiniging van de zee door olie vertegenwoordigt dan die welke door ongevallen wordt veroorzaakt. Diverse internationale maatregelen betreffende de bouw en het gebruik van olietankers (hoofdzakelijk het Marpol-Verdrag 73/78) hebben de behoefte aan en de voordelen van het lozen van ladingresiduen op zee tijdens de laatste decennia aanzienlijk verminderd. De toepassing van deze internationale voorschriften wordt in de communautaire havens door de havenstaatcontrole gecontroleerd uit hoofde van Richtlijn 95/21/EG van de Raad van 29 juni 1995 betreffende de naleving, met betrekking tot de schepen die gebruik maken van havens in de Gemeenschap en varen in de onder de jurisdictie van de lidstaten vallende wateren, van internationale normen op het gebied van de veiligheid van schepen, voorkoming van


title: Parere del Comitato economico e sociale in merito alla «Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo alla ripartizione tra gli Stati membri delle autorizzazioni ricevute in virtù dell'accordo tra la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Bulgaria e la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Ungheria che istituisce talune condizioni relative al trasporto delle merci su strada e alla promozione del trasporto combinato»

eurovoc_concepts:
Bulgaria
European Community
Hungary
carriage of goods
combined transport
road transport

text: 16. 6. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 168/13 Parere del Comitato economico e sociale in merito alla «Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo alla ripartizione tra gli Stati membri delle autorizzazioni ricevute in virtù dell’accordo tra la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Bulgaria e la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Ungheria che istituisce talune condizioni relative al trasporto delle merci su strada e alla promozione del trasporto combinato» (2000/C 168/04) Il Consiglio, in data 10 aprile 2000, ha deciso, conformemente al disposto dell’articolo 71 del Trattato, di consultare il Comitato economico e sociale in merito alla proposta di cui sopra. La Sezione «Trasporti, energia, infrastrutture, società dell’informazione», incaricata di preparare i lavori del Comitato in materia, ha formulato il parere sulla base del rapporto introduttivo del relatore Kielman, in data 6 aprile 2000. Il Comitato economico e sociale ha adottato il 27 aprile 2000 , nel corso della 372a sessione plenaria, con 111 voti favorevoli, 1 contrario e 1 astensione, il seguente parere. 1. Introduzione Il 7 dicembre 1995, 1. 1. il Consiglio ha conferito alla Commissione il mandato di negoziare uno o più accordi sul transito su strada con Ungheria, Romania e Bulgaria al fine di risolvere il problema dei collegamenti per il trasporto stradale di merci fra la Grecia e gli altri Stati membri, problema che potrebbe essere risolto in particolare mediante lo scambio reciproco di autorizzazioni al transito. 1. 2. La Commissione aveva tentato in una prima fase di concludere un accordo multilaterale, ma i tre Stati hanno preferito la conclusione di accordi separati. Tali accordi avranno termine automaticamente al momento dell’adesione di questi Stati all’Unione europea. 1. 3. La proposta della Commissione è basata sulla «Proposta di decisione del Consiglio relativa alla firma dell’accordo tra la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Bulgaria che istituisce talune condizioni relative al trasporto delle merci su strada e alla promozione del trasporto combinato» (COM(1999) 666 def. ). Il parere del Comitato si limita tuttavia alla «Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo alla ripartizione tra gli Stati membri delle autorizzazioni ricevute in virtù dell’accordo tra la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Bulgaria e la Comunità europea e la Repubblica di Ungheria che istituisce talune condizioni relative al trasporto delle merci su strada e alla promozione del trasporto combina- to» (COM(1999) 667 def. ). 1. 5. Poiché in passato le operazioni di trasporto nell’Europa dell’Est sono state regolarmente soggette a oneri fiscali e parafiscali elevati e discriminatori, gli accordi stabiliscono che possono essere imposti soltanto oneri e tributi di tipo non discriminatorio, e collegati all’uso delle infrastrutture. Le operazioni di trasporto in quanto tali non possono invece essere soggette a tasse o tributi speciali. 1. 6. Gli accordi stipulano espressamente che solo i veicoli conformi almeno alle norme Euro I possono fruire delle autorizzazioni da parte della Bulgaria e dell’Ungheria. La proposta di decisione del Consiglio relativa alla 1. 7. conclusione degli accordi con la Bulgaria e l’Ungheria precisa che le 13 000 autorizzazioni ricevute annualmente dalla Bulgaria e le 12 500 ricevute annualmente dall’Ungheria saranno ripartite tra gli Stati membri sulla base di un regola- mento specifico del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio. La proposta in esame ha quindi lo scopo di ripartire tra gli Stati membri le autorizzazioni in questione. 2. Osservazioni generali 2. 1. Per calcolare la ripartizione delle autorizzazioni al transito fra gli Stati membri, la Commissione si è basata sulle statistiche ungheresi riguardanti i transiti. 1. 4. La Commissione ha concluso un accordo con la Repubblica di Bulgaria e con la Repubblica di Ungheria, ma non ancora con la Repubblica di Romania. Per tale motivo, la proposta in esame si riferisce unicamente alla decisione del Consiglio relativa alla conclusione degli accordi con la Bulgaria e l’Ungheria. La Commissione è decisamente intenzionata a concludere a breve termine un accordo anche con la Romania, poiché altrimenti il valore pratico dell’accordo con l’Ungheria e la Bulgaria risulterebbe molto limitato. 2. 2. Poiché l’obiettivo dei negoziati intrapresi dall’Unione è quello di agevolare il transito su strada tra la Grecia e gli altri Stati membri nel corridoio che attraversa Bulgaria, Romania e le statistiche ungheresi sui transiti sono le più Ungheria, rilevanti. In ogni caso, da tali statistiche dovrebbe risultare che i viaggi con destinazione «gli altri Stati membri» abbiano percorso tutto il corridoio che attraversa Bulgaria, Romania e Ungheria. Meritano particolare attenzione i transiti effettuati attraverso l’ex Repubblica iugoslava di Macedonia e la Repub- blica federale di Yugoslavia. C 168/14 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 16. 6. 2000 2. 3. Le statistiche ungheresi disponibili distinguono fra: — il paese in cui è iniziato il viaggio e — il paese di immatricolazione del veicolo. 3. 3. La Commissione propone inoltre di attribuire ad ogni Stato membro 100 autorizzazioni su base «forfettaria», pari a poco meno dell’1 % delle autorizzazioni disponibili, e di ripartire le rimanenti autorizzazioni tra gli Stati membri in proporzione al numero di transiti realmente effettuati attraver- so l’Ungheria nei primi nove mesi del 1998. Sulla base di questi dati è possibile selezionare le seguenti variabili: — viaggi con inizio in Grecia e — viaggi effettuati da veicoli immatricolati in ciascuno Stato membro. 3. 3. 1. Il Comitato ritiene che, poiché quattro Stati membri non hanno effettuato alcun transito nei primi nove mesi del 1998, e sei Stati membri ne hanno effettuati meno di cinque, il totale di 100 autorizzazioni «forfettarie» proposto dalla Commissione sia decisamente troppo elevato, e propone di ridurlo a 50. Rimarrebbero dunque 750 autorizzazioni, che potrebbero essere ripartite in proporzione al numero di transiti effettuati nei primi nove mesi del 1998. 2. 3. 1. Poiché le statistiche ungheresi disponibili sono relati- ve ai primi nove mesi del 1998 e sono appropriate allo scopo prefisso, la Commissione propone di utilizzarle come base per la ripartizione fra gli Stati membri. Il Comitato è dell’avviso che tale ripartizione sia più equa e rispecchi meglio la realtà. Vista la mancanza di dati statistici affidabili relativa- 2. 3. 2. mente al transito su strada, il Comitato ritiene che la scelta di ricorrere alle statistiche ungheresi disponibili, relative ai primi nove mesi del 1998, consenta di disporre delle informazioni più rilevanti. 2. 3. 3. Il Comitato sottolinea inoltre che la partecipazione della Romania è essenziale per il buon funzionamento del corridoio che collega la Grecia agli altri Stati membri. In tale contesto esorta altresı` la Commissione a proseguire con decisione le trattative con la Romania, e ad impegnarsi a concluderle a breve termine. 3. Osservazioni specifiche 3. 1. Sulla base delle statistiche ungheresi, la Commissione conclude che nei primi nove mesi del 1998 i transiti totali attraverso l’Ungheria in provenienza dalla Grecia da parte di immatricolati negli Stati membri sono stati pari a veicoli 6 723, di cui 6 646 sono stati effettuati da veicoli immatricolati in Grecia, pari a quasi il 99 %. Nel caso di quattro Stati membri, ovvero Spagna, Irlanda, Lussemburgo e Portogallo non si è registrato alcun transito (cfr. Allegato). Da questi dati provvisori 3. 2. la Commissione crede di dover desumere che «non si ritiene opportuno attribuire il 99 % dei permessi alla Grecia». Secondo il Comitato, occorre adottare criteri obiettivi che rispecchino la realtà. Chiede dunque che la Commissione raccolga il più rapidamente possibile informazioni più precise che consentano di fornire un quadro realistico della situazione, in modo da assicurare che la Grecia venga trattata alla stregua di qualunque altro Stato membro. Tutto cio` 3. 4. implica che il numero delle autorizzazioni «forfettarie» ammonti a 750, invece delle 1 500 proposte dalla Commissione, e che la Grecia riceva inoltre 12 109 permessi per la Bulgaria invece di 11 368, e 11 614 permessi per l’Ungheria invece di 10 874. 3. 4. 1. Questo sistema di calcolo, secondo il Comitato, ricalca maggiormente le considerazioni formulate dalla stessa Commissione nella proposta di regolamento, in particolare quella secondo cui «l’attribuzione delle autorizzazioni deve essere fondata su criteri che tengano pienamente conto degli effettivi flussi di traffico commerciale tra la Grecia e gli altri Stati membri». 3. 5. Il Comitato sostiene l’idea della Commissione espressa all’articolo 4 della proposta di regolamento, per cui entro il 15 settembre di ogni anno gli Stati membri devono restituire alla Commissione le autorizzazioni che non saranno utilizzate entro la fine di quell’anno al fine di poterle riassegnare agli altri Stati membri. 3. 6. Se la Commissione accoglie il suggerimento del Comi- tato di pervenire ad un metodo di distribuzione più equo, l’allegato della proposta di regolamento contenente la riparti- zione delle autorizzazioni dovrà essere adeguato di conse- guenza. 4. Sintesi e conclusioni Il Comitato ritiene che, con la scelta delle statistiche 4. 1. ungheresi sui transiti, la Commissione disponga di una buona base per proporre la ripartizione delle autorizzazioni. 16. 6. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 168/15 4. 2. Il Comitato giudica estremamente importante giungere rapidamente ad un accordo con la Romania per poter sfruttare efficacemente le autorizzazioni. Per quanto riguarda la proposta di ripartizione, 4. 3. il Comitato sottolinea che, qualora dalle statistiche utilizzate risulti che uno Stato membro abbia diritto ad un’elevata percentuale di autorizzazioni, queste vanno effettivamente attribuite a detto Stato. 4. 4. Il Comitato non ritiene inoltre auspicabile, anche considerato il numero limitato di autorizzazioni, attribuire ad ogni Stato membro 100 autorizzazioni su base «forfettaria». Dai dati disponibili risulta infatti che molti Stati membri non effettuano affatto, o quasi, transiti su strada fra la Grecia e gli altri Stati membri. Il Comitato giudica sufficiente una base di 50 autorizzazioni «forfettarie» per ogni Stato membro. Il Comitato concorda con la proposta della Commis- 4. 5. sione secondo cui entro il 15 settembre di ogni anno le autorizzazioni non utilizzate devono essere restituite alla Commissione in modo da poter essere utilizzate dagli Stati che ne hanno bisogno. Bruxelles, 27 aprile 2000. La Presidente del Comitato economico e sociale Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI ALLEGATO al parere del Comitato economico e sociale Ripartizione delle autorizzazioni tra gli Stati membri Le più recenti statistiche ungheresi disponibili sono relative ai primi nove mesi del 1998. I transiti attraverso l’Ungheria in provenienza dalla Grecia da parte di veicoli immatricolati negli Stati membri nei primi nove mesi del 1998 si suddividono come segue: Paesi di immatricolazione Numero di transiti Belgio Danimarca Germania Grecia Spagna Francia Irlanda Italia Lussemburgo Paesi Bassi Austria Portogallo Finlandia Svezia Regno Unito 2 6 20 6 646 0 1 0 1 0 29 11 0 1 4 2 Totale 6 723


title: Verordnung (EG) Nr. 847/2000 der Kommission vom 27. April 2000 zur Festlegung von Bestimmungen für die Anwendung der Kriterien für die Ausweisung eines Arzneimittels als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden und von Definitionen für die Begriffe "ähnliches Arzneimittel" und "klinische Überlegenheit"

eurovoc_concepts:
drugs classification
market approval
medicinal product
pharmaceutical legislation

text: 28. 4. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 103/5 VERORDNUNG (EG) Nr. 847/2000 DER KOMMISSION vom 27. April 2000 zur Festlegung von Bestimmungen für die Anwendung der Kriterien für die Ausweisung eines Arzneimittels als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden und von Definitionen für die Begriffe „ähnliches Arzneimittel“ und „klinische Überlegenheit“ DIE KOMMISSION DER EUROPÄISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFTEN — gestützt auf den Vertrag zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, gestützt auf die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 des Europä- ischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 16. Dezember 1999 über Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden (1), insbesondere auf Artikel 3 und Artikel 8, in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 enthält die Auffor- derung an die Kommission, Bestimmungen zur Durch- führung des Artikels 3 zu erlassen und Definitionen für die Begriffe „ähnliches Arzneimittel“ und „klinische Überlegenheit“ zu verabschieden. Zur Durchführung des Artikels 3 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 können zusätzliche Einzelheiten über Faktoren, die bei der Feststellung der Prävalenz, des wahrscheinlichen Investitionsertrags und der Annehm- barkeit alternativer Diagnose-, Verhütungs- und Behand- für die lungsmethoden berücksichtigt werden sollten, Investoren und den Ausschuß für Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden nützlich sein. Diese Informationen sollten im Einklang mit den von der Kommission gemäß Artikel 5 Absatz 3 der Verord- nung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 verfaßten Leitlinien vorgelegt werden. In Anbetracht der Art der betreffenden Arzneimittel und der Wahrscheinlichkeit, daß es sich bei den zu behan- delnden Erkrankungen um seltene Leiden handelt, sind allzu detaillierte Vorschriften und Anforderungen für den Nachweis, daß den Kriterien entsprochen wurde, nicht angemessen. Die Beurteilung der Kriterien gemäß Artikel 3 sollte auf der Grundlage von möglichst objektiven Informationen erfolgen. Sonstige Gemeinschaftsmaßnahmen auf dem Gebiet seltener Krankheiten sind zu berücksichtigen. Um die angemessene Einhaltung der Bestimmungen über das Marktexklusivitätsrecht gemäß Artikel 8 der Verord- nung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 zu gewährleisten, sind Defini- tionen für die Begriffe „ähnliches Arzneimittel“ und „klinische Überlegenheit“ erforderlich. Diese Definitionen sollten die Arbeit und Erfahrung des Ausschusses für Arzneispezialitäten bei der Bewertung bestehender Arzneimittel und die einschlägigen Stellungnahmen des Wissenschaftlichen Ausschusses für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte berücksichtigen. Die Definitionen sollten ferner durch die in Artikel 8 Absatz 5 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 vorgese- henen Leitlinien gestützt werden. Diese Bestimmungen sollten im Lichte wissenschaftlicher und technischer Erkenntnisse und Erfahrungen im Zusammenhang mit der Ausweisung und Regelung von (1) ABl. L 18 vom 22. 1. 2000, S. 1. Arzneimitteln für schrieben werden. seltene Leiden regelmäßig fortge- (10) Die in dieser Verordnung vorgesehenen Maßnahmen Ständigen entsprechen Ausschusses für Humanarzneimittel — Stellungnahme des der HAT FOLGENDE VERORDNUNG ERLASSEN: Artikel 1 Zweck Diese Verordnung legt die Faktoren fest, die bei der Durchfüh- rung des Artikels 3 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 über Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden zu berücksichtigen sind, und definiert die Begriffe „ähnliches Arzneimittel“ und „klinische Überlegenheit“ für die Zwecke der Durchführung des Artikels 8 der obengenannten Verordnung. Diese Verordnung soll poten- tiellen Investoren, dem Ausschuß für Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden und den zuständigen Behörden die Auslegung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 erleichtern. Artikel 2 Kriterien der Ausweisung 1. Prävalenz eines Leidens in der Gemeinschaft Für den Nachweis gemäß Artikel 3 Absatz 1 Buchstabe a) der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000, daß ein Arzneimittel für die Diagnose, Verhütung oder Behandlung eines Leidens bestimmt ist, das lebensbedrohend ist oder eine chronische Invalidität nach sich zieht und von dem in der Gemeinschaft nicht mehr als fünf von zehntausend Personen betroffen sind, gelten folgende spezielle Regelungen und sind die im folgenden aufge- listeten Unterlagen im Einklang mit den Leitlinien gemäß Artikel 5 Absatz 3 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 vorzu- legen: a) Den Unterlagen sind, sofern vorhanden, gesicherte Belege beizufügen, mit denen nachgewiesen wird, daß die von der Krankheit oder dem Leiden, für die das Arzneimittel verab- reicht werden würde, zum Zeitpunkt der Antragstellung auf Ausweisung als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden nicht mehr als fünf von zehntausend Personen in der Gemeinschaft betroffen sind. b) Die Angaben sollen geeignete Einzelheiten über das zu behandelnde Leiden enthalten und anhand von wissen- schaftlichen oder medizinischen Verweisen den Nachweis erbringen, daß das Leiden lebensbedrohend ist oder eine chronische Invalidität nach sich zieht. c) Die vom Investor vorgelegten Unterlagen sollen einen Über- blick über die einschlägige wissenschaftliche Fachliteratur oder einen Verweis hierauf enthalten und Informationen aus einschlägigen Datenbasen in der Gemeinschaft umfassen, sofern diese vorliegen. Stehen in der Gemeinschaft keine Datenbasen zur Verfügung, so kann auf Datenbasen in Drittländern verwiesen werden, wenn angemessene Extrapo- lationen vorgenommen werden. L 103/6 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 28. 4. 2000 d) Werden eine Krankheit oder ein Leiden im Rahmen anderer Gemeinschaftsaktionen über seltene Krankheiten berück- sichtigt, ist dies anzugeben. Bei Krankheiten oder Leiden, die in von der Gemeinschaft finanziell unterstützten Vorhaben berücksichtigt werden, um die Informationen über seltene Informationen Krankheiten zu verbessern, auszugsweise, insbesondere mit Einzelheiten über die Präva- lenz der betreffenden Krankheit oder des betreffenden Leidens, vorzulegen. sind diese 2. Mögliche Erträge von Investitionen schweren chronischen Leidens Für den Nachweis gemäß Artikel 3 Absatz 1 Buchstabe a) zweiter Unterabsatz der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000, daß ein Arzneimittel für die Diagnose, Verhütung oder Behandlung eines lebensbedrohenden, zu schwerer Invalidität führenden oder in der Gemeinschaft bestimmt ist, und daß das Inverkehrbringen des Arzneimittels in der Gemeinschaft ohne Anreize vermutlich nicht genügend Gewinn bringen würde, um die notwendigen Investitionen zu rechtfertigen, gelten folgende Regelungen und sind folgende Unterlagen im Einklang mit dem Leitfaden gemäß Artikel 5 Absatz 3 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 vorzulegen: a) Die Angaben sollen geeignete Einzelheiten über das zu behandelnde Leiden enthalten und anhand von wissen- schaftlichen oder medizinischen Verweisen den Nachweis erbringen, daß das Leiden lebensbedrohend ist oder eine schwerwiegende Invalidität nach sich zieht oder aber schwerwiegend und chronischer Art ist. b) Die vom Investor vorgelegten Unterlagen sollen Angaben über alle Kosten enthalten, die dem Investor im Laufe der Entwicklung des Arzneimittels entstanden sind. c) Die vorgelegten Unterlagen sollen Einzelheiten über etwaige in der Gemeinschaft oder in Drittländern gewährte Zuschüsse, steuerliche Anreize oder sonstige Kostendek- kungsklauseln enthalten. d) Wurde das Arzneimittel bereits für ein Anwendungsgebiet zugelassen oder ist es bereits Gegenstand einer Prüfung für ein oder mehrere weitere therapeutische Anwendungsge- biete, ist die zur anteilmäßigen Aufteilung der Entwicklungs- kosten auf die verschiedenen Anwendungsgebiete ange- wandte Methode genau zu erläutern und zu begründen. e) Alle Entwicklungskosten, mit denen der Investor nach Vorlage des Antrags auf Ausweisung zu rechnen hat, sind anzugeben und zu begründen. f) Alle Kosten im Zusammenhang mit der Herstellung und dem Inverkehrbringen, die dem Investor bisher entstanden sind und mit denen er in den ersten zehn Jahren nach Zulassung des Arzneimittels zu rechnen hat, sind anzu- geben und zu begründen. g) Die zu erwartenden Einnahmen vom Umsatz des Arzneimit- tels in der Gemeinschaft in den ersten zehn Jahren nach seiner Zulassung sind zu veranschlagen und zu begründen. h) Sämtliche Angaben über Kosten und Einnahmen sind im Einklang mit der allgemein anerkannten Praxis des Rech- nungswesens festzulegen und von einem in der Gemein- schaft eingetragenen Rechnungsprüfer zu bescheinigen. i) Die vorgelegten Unterlagen sollen Informationen über Prävalenz und Inzidenz des Leidens in der Gemeinschaft enthalten, Antragstellung auf Ausweisung verabreicht würde. für das das Arzneimittel zum Zeitpunkt der Sonstige bestehende Diagnose, Verhütungs- oder Behandlungs- 3. methoden Ein Antrag auf Ausweisung eines Arzeimittels als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden kann entweder gemäß Absatz 1 oder Absatz 2 dieses Artikels vorgelegt werden. Ungeachtet dessen, ob ein Antrag auf Ausweisung gemäß Absatz 1 oder Absatz 2 vorge- legt wird, muß der Investor ferner nachweisen, daß keine zufriedenstellende Diagnose-, Verhütungs-, oder Behandlungs- methode für das betreffende Leiden besteht oder, sofern eine solche Methode besteht, daß das Arzneimittel dem von dem Leiden Betroffenen erheblichen Nutzen bringen kann. Für den Nachweis gemäß Artikel 3 Absatz 1 Buchstabe b) der Verord- nung (EG) Nr. 141/2000, daß es keine zufriedenstellende Diagnose-, Verhütungs- und Behandlungsmethode für das betreffende Leiden gibt, oder, sofern eine solche Methode besteht, daß das Arzneimittel dem von dem Leiden Betroffenen erheblichen Nutzen bringen kann, gilt folgende Regelung: a) Einzelheiten über alle bestehenden und in der Gemeinschaft zugelassenen Diagnose-, Verhütungs- oder Behandlungsme- thoden für das betreffende Leiden sind unter Verweis auf die Fachliteratur oder wissenschaftliche und medizinische vorzulegen. Diese andere Informationen Methoden können in der Gemeinschaft zugelassenen Arzneimittel, Medizinprodukte oder sonstige in der Gemein- schaft gängige Diagnose-, Verhütungs- oder Behandlungs- methoden umfassen; einschlägige b) entweder eine Begründung, weshalb die in Buchstabe a) genannten Methoden als nicht zufriedenstellend gelten, oder c) eine Begründung für die Annahme, daß das Arzneimittel, für das eine Ausweisung beantragt wird, den von diesem Leiden Betroffenen erheblichen Nutzen bringen kann. 4. Allgemeine Bestimmungen a) Ein Investor, der einen Antrag auf Ausweisung eines Arznei- mittels als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden stellen möchte, muß diese Ausweisung in welchem Stadium der Entwick- lung sich das Arzneimittel auch befindet, beantragen, bevor er den Antrag auf Zulassung des Arzneimittels stellt. Ein Antrag auf Ausweisung kann jedoch für ein neues therapeu- tisches Anwendungsgebiet zugelassenen Arzneimittel gestellt werden. In diesem Fall muß der Zulas- sungsinhaber eine getrennte Zulassung beantragen, die sich lediglich auf das (die) Anwendungsgebiet(e) des Arzneimit- tels für seltene Krankheiten bezieht. bereits eines b) Die Ausweisung als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden kann mehr als einem Investor für dasselbe Arzneimittel zur Verhütung, Behandlung oder Diagnose derselben Krankheit oder desselben Leidens gewährt werden, sofern in jedem einzelnen Fall ein vollständiger Antrag auf Ausweisung gemäß den in Artikel 5 Absatz 3 genannten Leitlinien gestellt wird. c) Wird ein Arzneimittel vom Ausschuß für Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden als Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden ausge- wiesen, so wird entweder auf die Ausweisungskriterien gemäß dem ersten oder zweiten Absatz Bezug genommen. 28. 4. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 103/7 Artikel 3 Definitionen 2. 2. Polysaccharide mit identischen sich wiederholenden Saccharid-Einheiten, auch wenn die Zahl der Einheiten variiert und Post-Polymerisationsmodifi- kationen (einschließlich Konjugation) bestehen; Für die Zwecke dieser Verordnung gelten die Defini- (1) tionen gemäß Artikel 2 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000: — „Stoff“ ist eine Substanz, die zur Herstellung eines Humanarzneimittels gemäß Artikel 1 der Richtlinie 65/ 65/EWG verwendet wird. (2) Für die Durchführung des Artikels 3 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 141/2000 über Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden gilt folgende Begriffsbestimmung: — „Erheblicher Nutzen“ ist ein klinisch relevanter Vorteil oder ein bedeutender Beitrag zur Behandlung von Patienten. Für die Durchführung des Artikels 8 der Verordnung (3) (EG) Nr. 141/2000 über Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden gelten folgende Begriffsbestimmungen: a) „Wirkstoff“ ist ein Stoff mit physiologischer oder pharmako- logischer Wirkung; b) „ähnliches Arzneimittel“ ist ein Arzneimittel, das einen oder mehrere ähnliche Wirkstoffe enthält wie ein derzeit zugelas- senes Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden, das für dasselbe thera- peutische Anwendungsgebiet bestimmt ist; c) „ähnlicher Wirkstoff“ ist ein identischer Wirkstoff oder ein Wirkstoff mit denselben Hauptmerkmalen der Molekül- struktur (dies betrifft jedoch nicht notwendigerweise alle Strukturmerkmale) mit demselben Wirkungsmechanismus, wie: 1. Isomere, Isomergemische, Komplexe, Ester, Salze und nicht-kovalente Derivate des ursprünglichen Wirkstoffs oder eines Wirkstoffs, der sich von dem ursprünglichen Wirkstoff nur durch kleine Änderungen der Molekül- struktur, wie ein Strukturanalogon, unterscheidet, oder 2. dasselbe Makromolekül oder ein Makromolekül, das sich von dem ursprünglichen Makromolekül nur durch klei- nere Änderungen der Molekülstruktur unterscheidet, wie: 2. 1. proteinartige Stoffe, wenn: — der Unterschied auf Transkriptions- oder Trans- lationsabweichungen beruht; — der strukturelle Unterschied zwischen ihnen auf posttranslationale Mechanismen (wie unter- schiedliche Glykolisierungsmuster) oder unter- schiedliche Tertiärstrukturen zurückgeht; — kein großer Unterschied in der Aminosäurese- quenz besteht. Daher würden zwei pharmakolo- gisch verwandte Proteine derselben Gruppe (z. B. biologische Verbindungen mit demselben INN-Unterstamm (INN = internatio- naler Freiname)) normalerweise ähnlich betrachtet werden; zwei als — die monoklonalen Antikörper eine Bindung an dasselbe Zielepitop aufweisen. Diese würden normalerweise als ähnlich betrachtet werden; 2. 3. Polynukleotide und „Antisense“-Wirkstoffen), oder mehreren unterschiedlichen Nukleotiden bestehen, wenn (einschließlich Gentransfer zwei aus die für — kein großer Unterschied in der Nukleotidse- quenz der Purin- und Pyrimidinbasen oder ihrer Derivate besteht. Daher würde „Anti- sense“-Wirkstoffe die Hinzufügung oder Zerstö- rung von Nukleotiden ohne signifikante Auswir- kung auf die Hybridisierungskinetik an das Target Für Gentransfersubstanzen würden die Substanzen, außer wenn die Unterschiede in den Sequenzen signifikant ähnlich sind, normalerweise betrachtet werden; ähnlich betrachtet werden. als als — sich der Strukturunterschied zwischen ihnen auf Modifikationen des Ribose- oder Deoxyribose- Zuckergerüsts oder auf den Ersatz des Gerüsts durch synthetische Analoge bezieht; — der Unterschied im Vektor- oder Transfersystem liegt; 2. 4. eng verwandte, komplexe teilweise definierbare Stoffe (wie zwei verwandte virale Impfstoffe oder zwei verwandte Zelltherapie-Produkte) oder 3. derselbe radiopharmazeutische Wirkstoff oder ein Wirk- stoff, der sich von dem ursprünglichen Wirkstoff durch Radionuklid, Ligand, Markierungsort oder Molekül- Radionuklid-Kopplungsmechanismus, der das Molekül und das Radionuklid verbindet, unterscheidet, sofern der Wirkungsmechanismus derselbe ist; d) „klinisch überlegen“ bedeutet, daß ein Arzneimittel im Vergleich zu einem zugelassenen Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden nachweislich zusätzlich einen oder mehrere der im folgenden genannten erheblichen therapeutischen Vorteile aufweist: 1. größere Wirksamkeit als ein zugelassenes Arzneimittel für seltene Leiden (die Wirkung ist an einem klinisch bedeutungsvollen Endpunkt in geeigneten und ordnungs- gemäß kontrollierten klinischen Prüfungen zu bewerten). Generell handelt es sich dabei um dieselbe Art von Nach- weis, der bei einem vergleichenden Wirksamkeitsan- spruch für zwei verschiedene Arzneimittel gefordert wird. Generell sind direkte vergleichende klinische Prüfungen notwendig, jedoch können Vergleiche auf der so auch von Grundlage von anderen Endpunkten, Surrogatendpunkten, verwendet werden; die Methode sollte in jedem Fall begründet werden; oder L 103/8 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 28. 4. 2000 2. größere Sicherheit bei einem erheblichen Teil der Zielpopulation(en). In einigen Fällen werden direkte vergleichende klinische Prüfungen notwendig sein; oder 3. in außergewöhnlichen Fällen, in denen weder größere Sicherheit noch größere Wirksamkeit nachge- wiesen wurde. Hier ist der Nachweis zu erbringen, daß das Arzneimittel einen bedeutenden Beitrag zur Diagnose oder Behandlung von Patienten leistet. Diese Verordnung tritt am Tag nach ihrem Erlaß durch die Kommission in Kraft und gilt ab demselben Tag. Artikel 4 Inkrafttreten Diese Verordnung ist in allen ihren Teilen verbindlich und gilt unmittelbar in jedem Mitglied- staat. Brüssel, den 27. April 2000 Für die Kommission Erkki LIIKANEN Mitglied der Kommission


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-1378/00 van Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) aan de Commissie. Snelweg tussen Asti en Cuneo.

eurovoc_concepts:
Italy
Piedmont
environmental impact
infringement of EU law
invitation to tender
road building

text: C 374 E/218 Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen NL 28. 12. 2000 Antwoord van de heer Byrne namens de Commissie (26 mei 2000) In punt 105 van het Witboek over voedselveiligheid, dat op 8 mei 2000 door de Commissie is goedgekeurd, is een voorstel voor een richtlijn van het Parlement en de Raad inzake voedingssupplementen aangekondigd. Dit zal binnenkort aan de Raad en het Parlement worden voorgelegd en in Het Publicatie- blad bekend worden gemaakt. (2000/C 374 E/259) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-1378/00 van Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) aan de Commissie (27 april 2000) Betreft: Snelweg tussen Asti en Cuneo Naar verluidt is de Italiaanse regering van plan om zonder openbare aanbesteding te beginnen met de aanleg van een snelweg tussen Asti en Cuneo en een nieuwe concessie voor het traject Asti-Cuneo toe te kennen aan de SATAP, de maatschappij die ook al het snelwegtraject Turijn-Piacenza exploiteert. De regering heeft negentien ministeriºle besluiten aangenomen betreffende evenveel overeenkomsten met snelwegexploitatiemaatschappijen. De Italiaanse Rekenkamer heeft zeven van de negentien overeenkomsten tussen de ANAS en de exploitatiemaatschappijen gedeblokkeerd maar heeft zich nog niet uitgesproken over de aan de SATAP verleende concessie. De commissaris van de Rekenkamer die belast is met het toezicht op de ANAS heeft er echter in september 1999 in een brief aan de Italiaanse regering op gewezen dat de concessie die de regering in 1991 aan de SATAP heeft toegekend, onwettig is omdat zij tot stand is gekomen via onderhandse gunning, hoewel op dat moment de Europese Richtlijn 89/440 (1), die in een verplichte Europese openbare aanbesteding voorziet, al van kracht was. Hier komt nog bij dat de commissie Milieueffectbeoordeling van het Italiaanse Ministerie van Milieu in 1993 voor het snelwegproject Asti-Cuneo een negatief advies had verstrekt, waar de regering in 1994 en 1999 een oplossing voor had uitgewerkt, met gewijzigde plannen maar zonder een nieuwe milieu- effectbeoordeling uit te voeren en zonder de plannen opnieuw openbaar te maken, zodat de betrokken bevolking niet de mogelijkheid kreeg bezwaar aan te tekenen. Wat het snelwegtraject Asti-Cuneo betreft, is bij de administratieve rechtbank van de regio Lazio een bezwaar ingediend tegen de plannen voor het traject Massimini-Cuneo en een verzoek om een gerechtelijk onderzoek naar de boekhouding van de SATAP, tezamen met 33 aanklachten wegens vervalsing van de boekhouding door de bestuurders van de SATAP. Is de Commissie in het licht van deze feiten niet van mening dat de verlenging van de concessie van de SATAP door de Italiaanse regering zonder openbare aanbesteding indruist tegen de communautaire wetgeving, inzonderheid de Richtlijnen 92/50/EEG (2), 93/36/EEG (3) en 93/37/EEG (4), en bovendien niet zeer opportuun is gezien de verscheidene aanklachten tegen de exploitatiemaatschappij in kwestie? Meent de Commissie niet dat de nieuwe plannen onderworpen moeten worden aan een milieueffectbeoordeling? (1) PB L 210 van 21. 7. 1989, blz. 1. (2) PB L 209 van 24. 7. 1992, blz. 1. (3) PB L 199 van 9. 8. 1993, blz. 1. (4) PB L 199 van 9. 8. 1993, blz. 54. Antwoord van de heer Bolkestein namens de Commissie (29 mei 2000) De Commissie is van plan om bij de Italiaanse autoriteiten alle informatie op te vragen die nodig is om te kunnen beoordelen of de aanleg van het nieuwe stuk snelweg tussen Asti en Cuneo evenals de aan de SATAP-maatschappij verleende concessie, waarvan het geachte parlementslid gewag maakt, met het Gemeenschapsrecht betreffende overheidsopdrachten verenigbaar is. Mocht na bestudering van deze informatie blijken dat de gevolgde procedures niet met het Gemeenschapsrecht verenigbaar zijn, kan de Commissie overeenkomstig artikel 226 (ex artikel 169) van het EG-Verdrag een inbreukprocedure starten. 28. 12. 2000 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 374 E/219 In dit verband dient echter te worden opgemerkt dat deze kwestie en ook de andere door het geachte parlementslid vermelde concessiezaken in een breder kader moeten worden geplaatst, namelijk dat van het lopende onderzoek van de Commissie naar concessies voor autosnelwegen in de lidstaten. De Italiaanse autoriteiten hebben al aan de Commissie informatie verstrekt over het wettelijk kader waarin de verlenging van de bestaande concessies is geregeld. Op grond van ministeriºle richtlijn nr. 283 van 20 oktober 1998 kunnen de bestaande concessies alleen worden verlengd, indien een schikking wordt getroffen in het geschil naar aanleiding van de bevriezing van tolgelden waarbij de huidige concessie- houders recht op een schadeloosstelling hebben. Verder is iedere houder van een concessie voor een autosnelweg op grond van deze richtlijn wettelijk en door ieder afzonderlijk contract verplicht om zich bij de plaatsing van opdrachten voor de uitvoering van werken aan de communautaire aanbestedingsregels te houden en ten minste veertig procent hiervan aan derden te gunnen. Deze gegevens en ook die uit andere lidstaten worden momenteel door de Commissie bestudeerd om wat de concessies voor autosnelwegen betreft tot een consistente aanpak te komen die met de belangrijke economische en sociale gevolgen ervan rekening houdt. Wat de milieueffectbeoordeling betreft, is de Commissie op grond van de door het geachte parlementslid verstrekte informatie niet bij machte om een oordeel hierover te geven. Als het gewijzigde autosnelweg- project Asti-Cuneo in belangrijke mate aan de kritiek in de eerste milieueffectrapportage (EIA) tegemoet komt, is het niet per se noodzakelijk dat opnieuw een dergelijke rapportage wordt uitgevoerd. Het geachte parlementslid wordt verzocht om meer informatie te verstrekken zodat de Commissie de zaak kan bekijken. (2000/C 374 E/260) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG P-1415/00 van Marie-Noºlle Lienemann (PSE) aan de Commissie Betreft: Onderzoek naar overheidsteun aan het CrØdit Mutuel (3 mei 2000) In hoeverre is er sprake van overheidssteun in het geval van de Franse co(cid:246)peratieve bank (cid:132)CrØdit Mutuel(cid:148), wanneer men bedenkt dat met het blauwe spaarboekje het sparen door de kleine spaarder wordt georganiseerd en gesteund, en dat de ingelegde bedragen worden gebruikt voor zaken van algemeen belang, zoals vastgelegd door de overheid, te weten plaatselijke ontwikkeling en sociale woningbouw? Bovendien moet het spaarnetwerk CrØdit Mutuel als tegenprestatie aan bepaalde specifieke en aanvullende vereisten voldoen (met name beperking van zijn netwerk en actieradius). In de zeldzame geschillen naar aanleiding van sparen die door de Commissie zijn onderzocht, zijn de hiervoor gevonden oplossingen nooit uitgedraaid op geldboetes. Is de Commissie niet ook van mening dat in dergelijke gevallen de voorkeur moet worden gegeven aan het zoeken naar een billijke en op de toekomst gerichte oplossing van een eventueel geschil, aangezien de ondersteuning van het sparen en meer nog van het sparen door de kleine spaarder, in Europa een belangrijke plaats dient in te nemen, te meer daar deze vorm van sparen in feite in de meeste lidstaten wordt erkend? Antwoord van de heer Monti namens de Commissie (24 mei 2000) Het geachte parlementslid wordt verwezen naar het antwoord dat de Commissie heeft gegeven op zijn mondelinge vraag H-0386/00 tijdens het vragenuur in de vergaderperiode van het Parlement van Mai II 2000 (1). (1) Handelingen van het Europees Parlement (Mei II 2000)


title: Règlement (CE) n° 864/2000 de la Commission, du 27 avril 2000, fixant l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation de maïs dans le cadre de l'adjudication visée au règlement (CE) n° 756/2000

eurovoc_concepts:
Portugal
award of contract
import
maize
tariff quota
tariff reduction

formats: pdf print

text: 28. 4. 2000 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 103/63 RÈGLEMENT (CE) No 864/2000 DE LA COMMISSION du 27 avril 2000 fixant l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation de maïs dans le cadre de l'adjudication visée au règlement (CE) no 756/2000 LA COMMISSION DES COMMUNAUTÉS EUROPÉENNES, vu le traité instituant la Communauté européenne, vu le règlement (CEE) no 1766/92 du Conseil du 30 juin 1992 portant organisation commune des marchés dans le secteur des céréales (1), modifié en dernier lieu par le règlement (CE) no 1253/1999 (2), et notamment son article 12, paragraphe 1, considérant ce qui suit: (1) (2) Une adjudication de l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation de maïs en Espagne a été ouverte par le règlement (CE) no 756/2000 de la Commission (3). Conformément à l'article 5 du règlement (CE) no 1839/ 95 de la Commission (4), modifié par le règlement (CE) no 1963/95 (5), la Commission peut, selon la procédure prévue à l'article 23 du règlement (CEE) no 1766/92, décider de la fixation d'un abattement maximal du droit à l'importation; pour cette fixation, il doit être tenu compte notamment des critères prévus aux articles 6 et 7 du règlement (CE) no 1839/95. L'adjudication est attri- buée à tout soumissionnaire dont l'offre se situe au niveau de l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation ou à un niveau inférieur. (3) (4) L'application des critères visés ci-dessus à la situation actuelle des marchés de la céréale en cause conduit à fixer l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation au montant repris à l'article 1er. Le comité de gestion des céréales n'a pas émis d'avis imparti par son président, dans le délai A ARRÊTÉ LE PRÉSENT RÈGLEMENT: Article premier Pour les offres communiquées du 21 au 27 avril 2000 dans le cadre de l'adjudication visée au règlement (CE) no 756/2000, l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation de maïs est fixé à 57,87 EUR/t pour une de 130 740 t. quantité maximale globale Le présent règlement entre en vigueur le 28 avril 2000. Article 2 Le présent règlement est obligatoire dans tous ses éléments et directement applicable dans tout État membre. Fait à Bruxelles, le 27 avril 2000. Par la Commission Franz FISCHLER Membre de la Commission (1) JO L 181 du 1. 7. 1992, p. 21. (2) JO L 160 du 26. 6. 1999, p. 18. (3) JO L 92 du 13. 4. 2000, p. 8. (4) JO L 177 du 28. 7. 1995, p. 4. (5) JO L 189 du 10. 8. 1995, p. 22


title: SKRIFTLIG FRÅGA E-1288/00 från Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca (PPE-DE) till rådet. Den nya europeiska försvarspolitiken.

eurovoc_concepts:
common security and defence policy
competence of the Member States

text: C 89 E/22 Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning SV 20. 3. 2001 D(cid:228)remot har kommissionen m(cid:246)jlighet att f(cid:246)lja utvecklingen av olika delar av den inre marknaden, t. ex. elmarknaden. F(cid:246)r att fr(cid:228)mja (cid:246)ppenhet och insyn offentligg(cid:246)r kommissionen ocks(cid:229) sina beslut om statligt st(cid:246)d via Internet och i Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning. Kommissionen offentligg(cid:246)r ocks(cid:229) regelbundet rapporter om behoven av harmonisering av den inre elmarknaden. (1) EGT L 60, 9. 3. 1999. (2) Statligt st(cid:246)d 2000/C101/03, EGT C 101, 8. 4. 2000. (3) EGT L 329, 30. 12. 1993. (2001/C 89 E/019) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-1288/00 fr(cid:229)n Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca (PPE-DE) till r(cid:229)det (27 april 2000) ˜mne: Den nya europeiska f(cid:246)rsvarspolitiken Enligt den rapport som utarbetats av den grupp som p(cid:229) kommissionens uppdrag gjort en tj(cid:228)nsteresa i F(cid:246)renta staterna i f(cid:246)rekommer ett stort misstroende i nordamerikanska organ (cid:129) nationella s(cid:228)kerhetsr(cid:229)det, Pentagon, utrikesministeriet och motsvarande utskott i representanthuset och senaten (cid:129) med avseende p(cid:229) den s(cid:229) kallade europeiska s(cid:228)kerhets- och f(cid:246)rsvarsidentiteten (ESFI). januari, Denna kritiska inst(cid:228)llning som uttrycktes inf(cid:246)r deltagarna i tj(cid:228)nsteresan av deras amerikanska motparter g(cid:229)r i korthet ut p(cid:229) f(cid:246)ljande: a) b) c) d) EU:s medlemsstater avs(cid:228)tter alldeles f(cid:246)r lite av sin budget till f(cid:246)rsvaret, det f(cid:246)religger en risk f(cid:246)r att ESFI kan f(cid:246)rsvaga enigheten i fr(cid:229)ga om bed(cid:246)mningsgrunder och beslut inom NATO, det f(cid:246)religger oro f(cid:246)r att EU ensidigt och utan f(cid:246)reg(cid:229)ende samr(cid:229)d kan vidta (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder inom ramen f(cid:246)r NATO f(cid:246)r krisl(cid:246)sning och krishantering, det f(cid:246)religger skepsis inf(cid:246)r ESFI:s faktiska f(cid:246)rm(cid:229)ga; i st(cid:228)llet f(cid:246)r att vara ett operativt organ skulle denna uppfattas som en byr(cid:229)kratisk konstruktion som (cid:228)r skadlig f(cid:246)r NATO:s f(cid:246)rm(cid:229)ga till snabba insatser och f(cid:246)r beslutsmekanismernas funktion. Vad anser den h(cid:246)ge f(cid:246)retr(cid:228)daren f(cid:246)r den gemensamma utrikes- och s(cid:228)kerhetspolitiken om var och en av dessa fr(cid:229)gor, som de nordamerikanska instanserna uttryckte farh(cid:229)gor kring vid sina kontakter med kommissionen under den tj(cid:228)nsteresa som gjordes i F(cid:246)renta staterna i januarif(cid:246)r att diskutera f(cid:246)rsvars- politik? Svar (23 oktober 2000) 1. F(cid:246)rst(cid:228)rkningen av den europeiska pelaren i Atlantpakten l(cid:246)per parallellt med utvecklingen av en europeisk s(cid:228)kerhets- och f(cid:246)rsvarspolitik och kommer att f(cid:246)rb(cid:228)ttra den politiken och den europeiska f(cid:246)rm(cid:229)gan att reagera p(cid:229) kriser b(cid:229)de genom bidrag till aktioner som leds av NATO eller andra inter- nationella organisationer (FN, OSSE) och genom sj(cid:228)lvst(cid:228)ndiga aktioner. 2. Detta kan endast ses som en positiv utveckling. Det finns ingen risk f(cid:246)r att Natos beslutsprocess blir l(cid:229)ngsammare eller f(cid:246)rs(cid:228)mras och inte heller finns n(cid:229)gon risk f(cid:246)r att EU ensidigt och utan f(cid:246)reg(cid:229)ende samordning med Nato s(cid:228)tter ig(cid:229)ng krishanteringoperationer. Europeiska r(cid:229)det har faktiskt i Helsingfors enats om att mekanismer f(cid:246)r fullst(cid:228)ndigt samr(cid:229)d, samarbete och insyn mellan EU och Nato skall utvecklas. Arbetet med att inr(cid:228)tta ovan n(cid:228)mnda mekanismer har kommit v(cid:228)l ig(cid:229)ng i de l(cid:228)mpliga EU-organen, och det portugisiska ordf(cid:246)randeskapet har rapporterat till Europeiska r(cid:229)det i Feira om vilka framsteg som har gjorts, bland annat f(cid:246)rslag till principer f(cid:246)r samr(cid:229)d med Nato om milit(cid:228)ra fr(cid:229)gor och rekommendationer 20. 3. 2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 89 E/23 om utveckling av f(cid:246)rbindelserna mellan EU och Nato f(cid:246)r att m(cid:246)jligg(cid:246)ra samarbete om l(cid:228)mpliga milit(cid:228)ra (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rder med anledning av en kris, s(cid:229)som det fastst(cid:228)lldes i Washington och K(cid:246)ln. 3. N(cid:228)r det g(cid:228)ller de budgetm(cid:228)ssiga f(cid:246)ljderna m(cid:229)ste det betonas att allt dubbelarbete m(cid:229)ste undvikas, och d(cid:228)rf(cid:246)r kommer de medlemsstater som bidrar till Natos initiativ f(cid:246)r f(cid:246)rsvarsresurser ocks(cid:229) att dra f(cid:246)rdel av att det huvudm(cid:229)l som fastst(cid:228)llts i Helsingfors uppn(cid:229)s. Det (cid:228)r medlemsstaternas uppgift att unders(cid:246)ka om resursm(cid:229)let kan uppn(cid:229)s endast genom omf(cid:246)rdelning av resurser eller om det beh(cid:246)vs ytterligare tillskott via budgeten. I vilket fall som helst kommer helt s(cid:228)kert den konferens om utf(cid:228)stelser om resurser som skall h(cid:229)llas p(cid:229) EU-niv(cid:229) f(cid:246)re (cid:229)rets slut att bevisa att EU:s medlemsstater menar allvar med att fullg(cid:246)ra sina nya (cid:229)taganden. (2001/C 89 E/020) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-1291/00 fr(cid:229)n Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) till kommissionen (19 april 2000) ˜mne: F(cid:246)rslag om uppf(cid:246)rande av en reningsanl(cid:228)ggning i distriktet Gondomar inom ramen f(cid:246)r projektet f(cid:246)r rening av hela Ria de Vigo som finansieras av Sammanh(cid:229)llningsfonden I kommissionens beslut om att ge st(cid:246)d fr(cid:229)n Sammanh(cid:229)llningsfonden till flera projekt f(cid:246)r att rena Ria de Vigo i Galicien (kommissionens beslut 95/11/61/035) sl(cid:229)s det bland annat fast en s(cid:228)rskild (cid:229)tg(cid:228)rd f(cid:246)r en totalsanering av Gondomar och floden Minor. Utgifterna f(cid:246)r detta specifika projekt uppg(cid:229)r totalt till 4 836 036 ecu. Den f(cid:246)rsta etappen av saneringen av Gondomar best(cid:229)r i att det byggs en reningsanl(cid:228)ggning med olika uppsamlingsbeh(cid:229)llare. Anl(cid:228)ggningen (cid:228)r redan uppf(cid:246)rd, men har (cid:228)nnu inte satts i drift officiellt. Projektet har gett upphov till omfattande diskussioner och (cid:228)rendet har blivit f(cid:246)relagt den galiciske ombudsmannen (Valedor do Povo) p(cid:229) grund av att reningsanl(cid:228)ggningen skulle uppf(cid:246)ras p(cid:229) privat(cid:228)gd mark med en enda (cid:228)gare, som s(cid:229)lde omr(cid:229)det enligt en hemlig (cid:246)verenskommelse som inte respekterar g(cid:228)llande regler och som gav (cid:246)verdrivna ekonomiska f(cid:246)rdelar f(cid:246)r (cid:228)garen. ˜garen har dessutom ans(cid:246)kt om att omr(cid:229)det skall omfattas av stadsplanen, f(cid:246)r att m(cid:246)jligg(cid:246)ra att omr(cid:229)det bebyggs. Dessutom ligger infartsv(cid:228)gen till reningsanl(cid:228)ggningen p(cid:229) samma persons (cid:228)gor (v(cid:228)gen f(cid:246)rbinder Ramallosa-Gondomar med Dorna kommun i Gondomardistriktet). Denna v(cid:228)g (cid:228)r (cid:228)nnu inte f(cid:228)rdiganlagd, vilket inneb(cid:228)r att det inte g(cid:229)r att ta sig till reningsanl(cid:228)ggningen. Kan kommissionen se till att det g(cid:246)rs en unders(cid:246)kning av dessa f(cid:246)rh(cid:229)llanden och en bed(cid:246)mning av hur man b(cid:246)r g(cid:229) vidare med projektet, som f(cid:246)r n(cid:228)rvarande ligger nere och som har omfattats av oegentligheter? Kompletterande svar fr(cid:229)n David Barnier p(cid:229) kommissionens v(cid:228)gnar (26 juli 2000) Enligt information som tillhandah(cid:229)llits av de spanska myndigheterna avslutades byggnadsarbetet med reningsanl(cid:228)ggningen i Gondomar i februari 2000 och f(cid:246)r n(cid:228)rvarande p(cid:229)g(cid:229)r f(cid:246)rs(cid:246)ks- och genomf(cid:246)rande- arbeten. Anl(cid:228)ggningens placering valdes efter det att tekniska unders(cid:246)kningar hade genomf(cid:246)rts. Marken st(cid:228)lldes till det oberoende organet (cid:148)Augas de Galicias(cid:148) f(cid:246)rfogande av kommunalf(cid:246)rvaltningen i Gondomar. Kommissionen avser inte f(cid:246)r n(cid:228)rvarande att inleda en s(cid:228)rskild utredning av detta projekt. Kommissionen vill dock p(cid:229)minna parlamentsledamoten om att (cid:246)vervakningen av de projekt som finansieras genom Sammanh(cid:229)llningsfonden s(cid:228)kerst(cid:228)lls av en (cid:246)vervakningskommittØ som sammantr(cid:228)der tv(cid:229) g(cid:229)nger per (cid:229)r. Kommissionen kommer att kontrollera projektet i fr(cid:229)ga inom ramen f(cid:246)r denna kommittØ


title: Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Follow-up of the World Summit of Social Development'

eurovoc_concepts:
International Labour Organisation
labour law
social development
summit meeting
the EU's international role

text: C 168/34 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 6. 2000 Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Follow-up of the World Summit of Social Development’ (2000/C 168/10) In accordance with Rule of Procedure 23(3), the European Economic and Social Committee decided at its Plenary Session on 29 April 1999 to adopt an opinion on the above-mentioned subject. The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the work, adopted its opinion on 14 April 2000. The rapporteur was Mr Etty. At its 372nd plenary session on 27 April 2000, the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 107 votes in favour, one vote against and six abstentions. 1. Introduction 1. 1. From 26-30 June 2000, the General Assembly of the United Nations will, in a Special Session in Geneva, assess the implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen (1995) and discuss further activities. The ‘Social Summit’ of 1995 in Copenhagen discussed 1. 2. three main issues: — the eradication of poverty — the promotion of social integration, and — the promotion of full employment. 1. 3. The result of the Summit was a Declaration on Social Development and a Progress of Action to implement it. The core of this were ten commitments made by the Member States, a large majority of whom represented by their Heads of State and/or Government. These commitments were: Commitment 1: We commit ourselves to creating an econ- omic, political, social, cultural and legal environment that will enable people to achieve social development. Commitment 2: We commit ourselves to the goal of eradicat- ing poverty in the world, through decisive national actions and international co-operation, as an ethical, social, political and economic imperative of humankind. Commitment 3: We commit ourselves to promoting the goal of full employment as a basic priority of our economic and social policies, and to enabling all men and women to attain secure and sustainable livelihoods through freely chosen productive employment and work. Commitment 4: We commit ourselves to promoting social integration by fostering societies that are stable, safe and just and that are based on the promotion and protection of all human rights, as well as on non-discrimination, tolerance, respect for diversity, equality of opportunity, solidarity, secur- ity, and participation of all people, including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups and persons. Commitment 5: We commit ourselves to promoting full respect for human dignity and to achieving equality and equity between women and men, and to recognising and enhancing the participation and leadership roles of women in political, civil, economic, social and cultural life and in development. Commitment 6: We commit ourselves to promoting and attaining the goals of universal and equitable access to quality education, the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and the access of all to primary health care, making particular efforts to rectify inequalities relating to social conditions and without distinction as to race, national origin, gender, age or disability; respecting and promoting our common and particular cultures; striving to strengthen the role of culture in development; preserving the essential bases of people-centred sustainable development; and contributing to the full development of human resources and to social development. The purpose of these activities is to eradicate poverty, promote full and productive employment and foster social integration. Commitment 7: We commit ourselves to accelerating the economic, social and human resource development of Africa and the least developed countries. Commitment 8: We commit ourselves to ensuring that when structural adjustment programmes are agreed to they include social development goals, in particular eradicating poverty, promoting full and productive employment, and enhancing social integration. 16. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 168/35 Commitment 9: We commit ourselves to increasing signifi- cantly and/or utilising more efficiently the resources allocated to social development in order to achieve the goals of the Summit through national action and regional and international co-operation. the Member States has produced an added value to the respective national policies regarding poverty, social inte- gration and employment. This is in particular so as regards the latter. Commitment 10: We commit ourselves to an improved and strengthened framework for international, regional and subregional co-operation for social development, in a spirit of partnership, through the United Nations and other multilateral institutions. 2. 3. The EU Presidency has, in the past few years, expressed itself on a number of occasions on the implementation of the outcome of the ‘Social Summit’, lastly during the 54th Session of the General Assembly of the UN. 1. 4. Preparations for the Special Session on the follow-up of the Copenhagen Declaration and Program of Action started in September 1997 with the establishment of a Preparatory Committee. 3. General remarks Member States of the UN have, in the course of 1999, sent in reports on the effect they have given to the commitments. These reports have been discussed and assessed in a meeting of the Commission on Social Development of the Economic and Social Council of the UN in February of this year. As regards regional preparations, 1. 5. for reasons not totally clear, Europe has been omitted by the UN. The logical UN body to do this is the ECE (which is for instance in charge of the regional preparation of the follow-up of the 1995 Beijing Women’s Summit). The Council of Europe has stepped in and organised a preparatory ‘European Conference on Social Development’ in Dublin on January 18-19 next, which discussed reports of the Member States of the Council and did more in-depth work on the commitments 1, 2 and 4 in working parties. 2. The EU and the Social Summit 2. 1. Implementation of the ten Copenhagen commitments is, of course, primarily a matter for the individual EU Member States. It is important to stress that in the context of this Opinion. However, the EU has taken a strong interest on the Copenhagen Summit in 1994 and 1995. The European Community produced a Communication on the Summit and had extensive consultations with civil society (including the Economic and Social Committee and the economic and social interest groups represented on it). A large EC delegation participated in the ‘Social Summit’, of which the Committee was part. 2. 2. The European Community has not submitted a report on implementation to the UN-Secretariat. The Commission’s Communication on the European Community’s follow-up to the World Summit on Social Development of 1996 is, obviously, not a suitable basis for an assessment at this point of time. The Committee realises that the Commission was not obliged to report. However, taking into account Commitment 10, it thinks that the Commission has missed a chance to show the international community how cooperation between 3. 1. It its February 1995 Opinion on the Copenhagen Summit, the Committee has made a number of observations and recommendations which still seem to be relevant. They include: — an initiative to be taken by the EU to take the lead in a campaign for wider ratification and full application of ILO Convention No 144 on Tripartite Consultation (now, in 2000, the EU could focus on its candidate Member States, its partners in the Barcelona process in the Mercosur and the ACP countries for this campaign); — measures to promote social development through inter- national trade (the Committee has given an elaboration of these early proposals in its 1999 Opinion on the WTO and in recent Opinions on EU trade policy); — measures to combat child labour (in 1999, the ILO has adopted a new Convention on the worst forms of child labour. The EU could make an important gesture to the international community if all 15 Member States would quickly ratify this new Convention. Also, the two Member States which have not yet ratified ILO Convention No 138 on Minimum Age (Austria and the UK) should make an effort to do so in the very near future. Furthermore, at this point of time, the Committee wishes to encourage the EU and all its Member States to support financially the ILO programs to help eradicate child labour); — encouraging Member States to use their influence in the IMF, the World Bank, the OECD and regional development banks to convince these institutions of the urgent need to work more closely together with the ILO (at this point of time, we would add the WTO to this list, and also urge the EU to make a joint effort to help democratise these organisations and increase their transparency); — strengthening the coherence of the EU’s external, security, trade, agriculture and development policies (here, the Committee would add, five years after Copenhagen, that this increased coherence must be used in particular in the fight against poverty in the world, and for the prevention of armed conflicts); C 168/36 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 6. 2000 — making a clearly focused contribution to the follow-up process by selecting for coordinated EU-wide actions: a limited number of initiatives in the field of employment creation, the fight against poverty and social exclusion. 3. 2. is the Although implementation, as earlier stated, prime responsibility of Member States, concerted EU action can have considerable added value. The Committee expressed that belief already in 1995 in the final recommendation of its Opinion (para. 13. 2). In the 1995 Opinion, when addressing regional co-operation, the Committee concentrated on co- operation in the EU. The enlargement process, the develop- ment of Euromediterranean co-operation, and the growth of the relationship with the ACP countries strongly suggest that one should assess, in a realistic way, further geographical areas where an EU input could make a significant difference for the chances of success of the ‘Copenhagen process’. For the success of this, co-ordinated actions of the ILO and other UN agencies, and in particular with the Bretton Woods institutions, OECD and regional organisations is vital, accord- ing to the ILO. In this context, the Committee also notes that recent events have demonstrated an urgent need for reform of UN institutions, in particular with respect to their democratic character and the transparency of their policy-making and implementation. Criticism on and resistance against, in particu- lar, IMF, World Bank and WTO have clearly been motivated by the view that these institutions do not pay enough attention to the negative impact of the globalisation of the world economy. 4. Specific remarks 3. 3. If one looks at the relevant areas of social policy where the EU has made significant progress which might also be relevant to other groups of countries, taking into account the limited resources available and the agenda of the UN where the fight against poverty will figure prominently this year, then employment policy and the way it has been developed springs to mind. That does not mean, of course, that the EU and its Members States should not make an effort to increase their development cooperation efforts and to alleviate the debt burden of the poorest development countries. It means that it is in particular in the field of employment policy that the EU can, through regional cooperation, make a particularly valu- able contribution to the efforts of certain partners. 4. 1. In 1995 already, the Committee wanted the ILO to play a prominent role in the implementation of the result of the Social Summit. It thinks that, indeed, the active promotion of the 1998 ILO Declaration can be most conducive for an effective worldwide employment promotion strategy. It strongly recommends that the EU commits itself to this, politically as well as financially. EU involvement must also include an effort to secure ratification by all the Member States of the fundamental human rights Conventions of the ILO. In addition to the gaps in EU Member States’ ratification of the Minimum Age Convention (No 138), mentioned in para 3. 1, the Committee once more recalls the fact that the ILO’s Convention against Discrimination (Employment and Occu- pation) (No 111) has still not been ratified by Luxembourg. 3. 4. The ILO, which has been given the first responsibility for the promotion of full employment (Commitment 3) in the Copenhagen process by the UN, has done important work in the past five years. It has reached the conclusion that, while in a few industrialised and newly industrialising countries progress with regard to job creation and reduction of unemployment and underemployment has been registered, the employment situation and progress in alleviating poverty in many parts of the world, particularly among developing countries and countries in transition, remained unsatisfactory and in some countries had even worsened (1). The ILO has called for renewed efforts in job creation, improvement of the quality of jobs, training and gender equality in the workplace. It main- tains that an important element in this is the ratification and implementation of the ILO core conventions and the follow- up of the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. It has called for a new employment strategy with global and national dimensions. (1) See 1999 UN’s ‘Human Development Report’ and ‘Poverty Report’. 4. 2. The Committee is concerned that, more and more, economic policy tends to escape from political control. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must press for clear social policy guidelines for IMF and World Bank policies, based on the Copenhagen commitments, including the importance the latter attach to ILO core labour standards. They must also continue their efforts to establish a standing working forum on fundamental labour standards in multilateral trade agreements between the ILO and the WTO. The Committee welcomes — in particular with a view to the developments at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Seattle — all steps which could lead to greater understanding (and, by consequence, also to concrete measures) promoting fundamental labour standards. Multinational companies, in their activities in developing and in transition countries, must respect the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Companies and the ILO’s Tripartite Declaration on Multinational Companies and Social Policy. The Committee hopes that the review of the OECD Guidelines, currently underway will result in the inclusion of references to all the freedom of association, ILO ‘core labour standards’ collective bargaining, forced labour, discrimination in labour and occupation and child labour). (i. e. 16. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 168/37 4. 3. As regards the Candidate Member States in Central and Eastern Europe, the Committee recommends EU-support for the development of an employment strategy along the lines of the ‘Luxembourg process’ by them. This will at the same time help the Governments of these countries to find sustainable solutions for the employment problems in their countries, and help to introduce a major element of the European Social model in the region. to involve employers’ organisations, 4. 4. In its relationship with the neighbouring countries in the Mediterranean area, the EU should encourage partner trade Governments unions and other relevant socio-economic interest groups stronger than before in their employment policies, wherever possible in a regional context. Further development of elements in the social dimension of the Barcelona co-operation (vocational training, social dialogue) should be included. 4. 5. The Committee thinks that in the ACP countries, and in particular those in Sub-Sahara Africa (see Commitment 7), the EU should continue the efforts it has made in the past few years to help create Economic and Social Councils, which potentially are important instruments for socio-economic interest groups to influence and help to implement employ- ment policies of their Governments. 4. 6. In developing the initiatives referred to in para 3. 1, last indent, above, the Committee wants the Commission to target in particular the poorest and socially most excluded groups within the EU. The Secretary General of 4. 7. the UN has called for coherence in the follow-up of the various ‘People’s Summits’ Brussels, 27 April 2000. of the 1990s. Taking that into account, and also referring to the Opinion on the follow-up of the ‘Beijing Women’s Summit’, it is submitting simultaneously with the present one, the Committee recalls that ‘feminisation of poverty’ has been a major point of concern at the 1995 Beijing Conference. The Committee refers to paras 3. 3 and 3. 4 above and wishes to underscore in this context the importance of the gender component in the areas for action, identified by the ILO. The same holds for the proposals for EU-support for the candidate Member States in Central and Eastern Europe, in the Mediter- ranean, and in Sub-Sahara Africa in paras 4. 3, 4. 4 and 4. 5. The social and economic interest groups represented 4. 8. on the Committee have a special role to play in social development. It is surprising that the UN have given NGOs a special role in the preparation of the follow-up of the ‘Social Summit’ of 1995, but apparently does not think it important to give a special place to employers federations, trade unions, consumers, farmers organisations, welfare organisations, etc. In particular, the role of employers organisations and trade unions has been a controversial issue between a large number of developing countries and industrialised countries. The Committee is deeply concerned about this. The European Commission must address this point and clarify in the Geneva Special Session of the General Assembly that these organisations, with their strongly representative character, are very particular NGOs if it comes to social development and that they not only express the views of their members but often participate in national policy-making and implementation. The European Commission must also stimulate that socio- economic interest groups be represented on national del- egations of Member States to the Special Session in Geneva. Also, the Committee urges the Commission to invite it, like in 1995, to be represented in its delegation. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI C 168/38 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 6. 2000 APPENDIX I to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee Preliminary assessment of implementation The UN Secretariat has received reports from a large majority of the Member States (among whom all 15 Member States of the EU), the Regional Commissions of the UN (with the exception of the ECE), the UN funds and programs, the specialised agencies including the Bretton Woods institutions, other intergovernmental institutions such as the regional development banks, and the OECD. Although reports contain positive elements, it is clear that in many respects only limited progress has been made with regard to the three main themes of ‘Copenhagen’. According to the UN Secretariat, several targets specified in the Program of Action will not be met within the period agreed, and in some cases there have been serious setbacks. The severe economic difficulties several countries experienced in the past few years as a result of the financial crisis and related developments have been a major cause. There is also a concern that the recent emphasis on financial and economic policies has often not been development oriented, and that the dominance of a limited set of macroeconomic targets and parameters over the social, political, cultural and environmental aspects has been detrimental. Progress areas include, according to the UN Secretariat: — Greater awareness of and commitment to social development as an overriding goal of government policy and a basis for mobilisation of civil society, — Progress towards poverty eradication, albeit uneven, slow and erratic, — Renewed hope that full employment is an achievable goal, although progress has been timid and threatened by often hidden underemployment, widening informalisation and lack of social protection, — Continued progress in literacy, declining infant mortality and life expectancy, school enrolment and access to basic social services, despite local and at times severe setbacks; and — Equality and equity between men and women has moved closer to reality in major regions of the world, despite the persistent tendency for women to be the first losers in times of crisis and restructuring, — A majority of governments have put their money where their mouth is and increased allocation of domestic resources for social development in relative, and often in absolute, terms. ‘Regression areas’, as identified by the same sources, include: — Local and region conflicts have caused setbacks in social integration in a growing number of regions of the world, — The world overall has become a more unequal place, with increasing inequalities in income, in employment, in access to social services and to opportunities for participation in public and civil society institutions, — Contrary to the commitment made at Copenhagen to strengthen co-operation for social development through the UN, resources allocated for social development in the framework of international co-operation have declined, although there is a renewed commitment of the international community for debt reduction for the poorest countries, — The burden of debt has grown markedly since Copenhagen, further squeezing resources available for social development, — With liberalisation of capital flows, the world has become more vulnerable to sudden financial shocks with severe social consequences where the real victims of such shocks are increasingly powerless to rectify their social situation. 16. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 168/39 The Secretariat had in November 1999 identified the following eleven cross-cutting issues in the reports received, which they wanted to analyse further for an evaluation of progress/regression and for extracting ideas for further initiatives: 1. 2. Inequality: In the face of growing inequality within and between nations, how can the fruits of development be more equitably distributed within and amongst nations? Is inequality the price to pay for economic growth, or is inequality an impediment to growth? Financing of social services: Increasingly social services are being targeted towards the most vulnerable groups of society. However, targeting and means-testing of benefits can lead in some cases to a break-up in social solidarity which in turn provokes a decline in quality of and resources for those services. How can solidarity and sustainability be reconciled with the need for greater efficiency and selectivity in providing social services? 3. Urbanisation: While the majority of the poor still live in rural areas, the world and especially developing countries, is rapidly being transformed into an urban planet. In the face of this transformation, how can scarce resources best be allocated between rural and urban areas? How can social development best take into account the specific needs of each sector of society? 4. The working poor: Although in many areas of the world unemployment has decreased all too often the new jobs are of low quality, associated with low wages and little social protection. Increasingly, employment is not sufficient to bring populations out of poverty. How have countries addressed the growing phenomena of the ‘working poor’ and what can be done to improve wages at the low end of the labour market? 5. Informalisation of employment: In many developing countries, formal sector employment represents a small and declining share of the labour market. Furthermore the informal sector is no longer a monopoly of developing countries, and all over the world, the informal sector is growing in a symbiotic relationship with the formal sector. What can be done to improve revenues and social protection in the informal sector, and this without undercutting the ability of the formal sector to create jobs? 6. Rehabilitating the public sector: The process of economic reforms has in many cases weakened the capacity of the state to promote social development. One of the lessons learned from recent financial crises, is that liberalisation and privation should not take place at the expense of an appropriate regulatory framework. A strong, transparent public sector is required to oversee the process of economic reform, and to create an enabling environment for social development. 7. Decentralisation: There has been a clear trend towards decentralisation and devolution of responsibilities to local government. Decentralisation is often conducive the greater participation and accountability, but not necessarily conducive to equitable distribution of resources across regions and populations groups. How can these conflicting concerns best be reconciled? 8. Declining ODA: Whereas certain countries have increased allocations of ODA, this has taken place in the face of an overall trend of decline, this despite the pledges made at Copenhagen. What strategies can be adopted to reverse this trend? 9. Crisis intervention: Furthermore, scarce development resources are being allocated to an increasing number of crisis interventions which are much more costly, in both human and in financial terms, than crisis prevention and longer-term promotion of human development. Increasing wars, local conflicts and natural disasters have had a negative impact on social development. 10. Need for effective strategies to implement the commitments of the Social Summit. The gap between commitment and implementation remains a major problem. Still more work is required to develop the strategies, tools and capacity required to successfully implement the Copenhagen commitments. 11. Debt servicing has become a cumulative burden which is weighing heavily on social development. How can debt relief be most effectively implemented for a positive impact on increasing social expenditure? C 168/40 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 6. 2000 APPENDIX II to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee Specific comments of the ESC 1995 Opinion on World Summit for Social Development (CES 4/95) — OJ C 110, 2. 5. 1995) 1. Principles The principles laid down in the Commission’s Communication, which it wishes to see reflected in the results 1. 1. of the World Summit for Social Development, are endorsed. The Committee is particularly pleased with the first principle: that respect for human rights and democracy — including dialogue between employers and workers and the participation of civil society — cannot be divorced from social development. It is convinced that these are truly universal fundamental human rights. The Committee hopes that the World Summit will adopt this principle in the explicit terms used by the Commission, and invites those Member States which have not yet done so, to include it in their legislation and in their national and international practices in order to promote real, worldwide social development. An important practical instrument for stimulating dialogue between employers and workers and promoting 1. 2. participation of civil society in social development throughout the world is Convention No 144 of 1976 of the ILO on Tripartite Consultation to promote the Implementation of International Labour Standards. It is a pity that this instrument is not mentioned by the Commission. Application of Convention No 144 promotes both democracy and social peace. The Committee thinks that the European Union should, on the basis of its own first principle, take the lead in a campaign for wider ratification and full application of this Convention by ILO Member States. That campaign should start with consultations with a view to ratification of this convention by all Member States of the EU. 2. Objectives 2. 1. The Committee highlights and supports activities of the European Union aimed at multilateral action which will promote social development through international trade. It agrees that negotiations on this matter must be continued within the World Trade Organization (WTO) and welcomes the EU’s general approach in this matter. The EU must make a real effort to make this a priority issue in the WTO. The Committee considers that priority should be given to encouraging countries to ratify the basic ILO human rights Conventions on Freedom of Association and protection of the right to organise (1948) (for workers and employers), on the right to organise Collective Bargaining (1949) and on Forced Labour (1930) and the abolition of Forced Labour (1957). All EU Member States have ratified the Conventions on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, and the other human rights Conventions, which have also been ratified by an overwhelming majority of ILO Member States, including a large number of developing countries. 2. 2. The Committee regrets that the ILO Convention against Discrimination in Employment and Occupation (1958), which is of exactly the same nature and fundamental importance as the Conventions mentioned earlier and just as widely ratified, is not mentioned by the Commission in this context. This must be an unintended omission. During the meeting of the Third Preparatory Committee of the Social Summit last month in New York, the EU has shown the importance it gives to the principles enshrined in this convention. The Committee therefore strongly recommends that the European Union correct this and include this Anti-Discrimination Convention in the proposed campaign. Logically, this should also be a vehicle for some of the European Union’s views and intentions concerning the eradication of poverty and exclusion, laid down for instance in the second Conclusion of the Commission’s document (equality between men and women). The Committee attaches great importance to raising the status of women through access to income and to 2. 3. education. Education, especially of women and girls, is a key factor in the battle against poverty and overpopulation. Where women are educated, both infant death rates and birth rates fall. 16. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 168/41 2. 4. The substance of the Conventions referred to in points 11. 1. and 11. 2. underpins the approach to the ‘social clause’ — already proposed in various ESC Opinions — an approach which obviously has nothing in common with protectionism. On the contrary, widespread application of these principles would boost trade by ensuring that all workers enjoy equal basic rights and consumers have reasonable guarantees that the goods they purchase have not been produced under inhumane working conditions. In this connection, the Committee also draws the attention to the ongoing analytical work of the OECD on this issue, the results of which might provide valuable arguments for further negotiations. 2. 5. One effective way to encourage governments to comply and ratify with important ILO Conventions is to give priority when granting aid and trade preferences to countries which implement genuine, effective social development strategies. This could be a worthwhile contribution by the European Union to the increase in the resources assigned to social development which will be necessary, even if the Summit succeeds in using existing resources more efficiently. In this context, the Committee welcomes Council Regulation (EC) No 3281/94 of 19 December last year applying a four year scheme of Generalised Tariff Preferences (1995-1998) in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries. 2. 6. The Commission’s proposals can help to create more humane living and working conditions for child workers. Child labour can gradually be stamped out by the introduction of general measures to improve ‘well-being’ (working conditions, opportunities for education, etc. ). 2. 7. Ratification and compliance with ILO Conventions are as much a function of good governance as is the effective development of social policies. The trade and aid policies proposed in the previous paragraph will ensure that existing resources are used more effectively. The developed and developing countries should in parallel introduce measures to reduce corrupt practices in North/South business dealings. These practices are a grave impediment to social and economic progress. 2. 8. If the European Union really wishes to include social development in the policies developed by IMF, World Bank and regional development banks, it must actively use its influence in these institutions to convince them that they must cooperate with the ILO much more intensively than in the past, in particular on structural adjustment operations. The EU must take proper account of the impact of structural adjustment programmes on the poor, for example, in health, education and agricultural policy changes. 2. 9. The Committee reiterates its view, expressed in earlier Opinions, that it is high time to construct the conditions and the instruments which can stimulate economic growth, trade and distribution of wealth and opportunities at the global level and link this to a process of development which is compatible with social progress and protection of the environment. This requires that the EU commits itself to strengthen coherence between its external, security, trade, agriculture and development polices. The Committee urges the EU to make this commitment at the World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen, given the coincidence in time of this Summit meeting and the establishment of the WTO. 3. Means: resources and follow-up The Committee wishes to stress the importance of the Commission’s intention to help developing countries (and in particular the poorest among them) by measures which stimulate gradual integration of the informal sector into the formal economy. including farmers’ In this connection the Committee stresses the important role NGOs, organizations, cooperatives and women’s organizations can play in addition to employers’ and trade union organizations. 4. Conclusions 4. 1. The Committee is pleased with the determination of the European Union, expressed in its Conclusions, to step up its contribution to multilateral negotiations on standards and Conventions. This must be done with a clear division of roles and responsibilities. The Committee refers, in this context, to its Own-initiative Opinion on the Relations between the EU and the International Labour Organization (ILO), adopted last month. C 168/42 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 6. 2000 4. 2. Finally, the Committee strongly recommends that the European Union, involving workers, employers and other relevant socio-economic interest groups, make a clearly focused contribution to the follow-up process of the Social Summit by selecting for coordinated, EU-wide action, a limited number of initiatives in the fields of employment creation, the fight against poverty, and social integration. Implementation of the Summit decisions will be a matter for individual governments. However, the Summit should, and probably will, stress the significance of regional cooperation in the implementation process. It is important for the success of the Social Summit that a major group of countries, such as those united in the European Union, set an example of such cooperation in their own region. The Commission is invited to work out a proposal on the basis of existing European Union policies on employment, poverty, and social exclusion. Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Follow-up to the Fourth World Conference on Women’ (2000/C 168/11) On 27 January 2000, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on the above-mentioned subject. The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 14 April 2000. The rapporteur was Ms Florio. At its 372nd plenary session (meeting of 27 April 2000) the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 116 votes in favour and two abstentions. 1. Introduction 1. 1. The UN Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing on 4-15 September 1995, adopted a Declaration and Platform for Action, defining objectives and strategies for the development, advancement and equal participation of women. 1. 2. Five years after the Fourth Conference, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolutions 52/100 and 52/231, convening a special session on ‘Women 2000: gender equality, develop- ment and peace for the 21st century’, to be held in New York on 5-9 June 2000. The purpose of the special session is to assess the 1. 3. progress made in implementing the Platform for Action adopted in Beijing, identify the main obstacles and recommend future action to combat gender-based discrimination. Vienna in 1993, which were approved at the International Conference on Population and Development, held in Cairo in 1994, and at the World Summit on Social Development, held in Copenhagen in 1995. 1. 5. The Vienna Conference on Human Rights of 14-25 June 1993 reaffirmed clearly that the human rights of women throughout the life cycle are an inalienable, integral and indivisible part of universal human rights. 1. 6. The Cairo Conference of 5-13 September 1994 con- firmed the key role women play in development and popu- lation growth issues. For the first time, the conference high- lighted the need to improve the social and economic status of women, and launch education and training programmes to raise their awareness of their rights. Better access to education, information and healthcare is the sine qua non for an improved demographic policy. 1. 4. In order to assess the extent to which the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action have been implemented, the session will of necessity have to take into account the reports on the World Conference on Human Rights, held in 1. 7. The Copenhagen World Summit (6-12 March 1995) highlighted, for the first time, the ‘feminisation’ of poverty, and asserted the principle that sustainable development can only be launched by means of economic policies which take social factors and, especially gender differences, fully into account