WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1860/97 by Doeke EISMA to the Commission. Narcolepsy
C 60/60 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 2. 98 In the absence of additional information from the Honourable Member, the Commission considers that the said administrative office of Alitalia, the party that has concluded the contract, is not an entity required to comply with Directive 93/38/EEC. Nor is Alitalia S. p. A a body governed by public law within the meaning of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (2). In accordance with Article 1(b) of the said Directive, a body governed by public law must be any body established for the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial or commercial character, which is not a characteristic of Alitalia S. p. A. The Commission therefore considers that neither Alitalia’s agreement with the taxi co-operative 3570í nor its contract with RAMP fall within the scope of Directives 93/38/EEC and 92/50/EEC. (1) OJ L 199, 9. 8. 1993. (2) OJ L 209, 24. 7. 1992. (98/C 60/91) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1860/97 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission (30 May 1997) Subject: Narcolepsy 1. Is it true that consideration is being given at European level to deprive all people suffering from sleeping disturbances, including people with narcolepsy, of the right to take part in motorized transport? 2. What is the situation in the various Member States? Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (26 June 1997) The Commission would point out that this question is exactly the same as the Honourable Memberís Written Question E-1742/97. The Commission would therefore refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has already given to that question (1). (1) See page 40. (98/C 60/92) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1868/97 by Fernando Ferna·ndez Mart ·n (PPE) to the Commission (30 May 1997) Subject: Basis of the Commissionís appeal against the final report on a common organization of the market Ever since it came into being, the COM in bananas established under Regulation 404/93 (1) has been attacked on all sides by all kinds of manoeuvres. The aim of the COM was to devise a Community system for the banana market which would be compatible with the needs of the single market as well as existing agreements with the ACP states. The final report of the panel affects rights and interests of vital economic and social importance for the ACP states. What measures does the Commission plan to take to defend the existing agreements with the ACP states? (1) OJ L 47, 25. 2. 1993, p. 1