WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3903/98 by Patricia McKENNA to the Commission. Participation of Commissioner Mario Monti in Bilderberg
21. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 207/145 (1999/C 207/200) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3903/98 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (4 January 1999) Subject: Participation of Commissioner Mario Monti in Bilderberg Concerning the Bilderberg meeting attended by Commissioner Monti in Toronto from 30 May to 2 June 1996, could the Commission state: 1. What the items were which made up the total travel and whether the costs were reimbursed at the time, or if not who paid them? 2. Since Bilderberg normally pays the lavish accommodation, should this be declared by the Commissioner? 3. Did the Commissioner receive the specified subsistence allowance for the days of the trip? 4. Did the Commissioner take leave of absence for this trip Does the Commission feel that Commissioner Monti should have declared his membership of the Bilderberg Steering Committee, and if not, why not? Joint answer to Written Questions E-3899/98, E-3900/98, E-3901/98, E-3902/98 and E-3903/98 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (5 February 1999) Travel and accommodation costs were covered in accordance with the provisions currently in force. With respect to Mr Monti’s participation at the Bilderberg Steering Committee meeting, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer to her oral question H-933/98 at question time at the second November part-session (1). (1) Debates of the Parliament (November II 1998). (1999/C 207/201) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3911/98 by Jean-Claude Pasty (UPE) to the Commission (4 January 1999) Subject: Tariff and statistical nomenclature and the common customs tariff in respect of truffles Commission Regulation (EC) 2261/98 (1) amends Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) 2658/87 (2) on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the common customs tariff in respect of truffles. Truffles crop up in several places in that Annex ; under code NC 0709 52 00 ‘Truffles’, which gives an indication of the excise duty, and under code NC 0712 30 00, which covers ‘Mushrooms and truffles’. Despite its immense merit, the nomenclature is not specific enough as regards ‘truffles’. That one word may actually encompass a dozen or so varieties of widely differing quality (and, hence, price), such as tuber melanosporum, tuber magnatum, tuber aestivum and tuber uncinatum, to name but the most widely marketed varieties. Accordingly, with a view to establishing accurate statistics about the numbers being marketed, to setting appropriate tariffs and, not least, to ensuring consumer safety, does not the Commission feel that the ‘truffles’ line should be expanded while it exists and, in particular, while there is no general approach, for example in respect of quotas, to ‘Mushrooms and truffles’? Furthermore, could not the French standard for ‘fresh truffles’, which was adopted two years ago and includes a precise classification of the various varieties marketed, serve as a working basis for this issue? (1) OJ L 292, 30. 10. 1998, p. 1. (2) OJ L 256, 7. 9. 1987, p. 1