WRITTEN QUESTION E-0975/00 by Christel Fiebiger (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Savings to be made in Subsection B1 ‐ Agriculture of the 2001 budget and modification of the financial planning for 2000-2006.
C 26 E/136 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 different types of mobile phone. The other projects are aiming to provide greater understanding of the biological mechanisms by which electromagnetic radiation might affect human health. One of them will also be examining the combined effect of electromagnetic radiation and chemical carcinogens. (2001/C 26 E/169) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0973/00 by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Council (30 March 2000) Subject: Relations between the European Union and Iran The election results in the recent parliamentary elections in Iran have demonstrated the strong desire of the Iranian electorate that Iran should emerge from the international isolation in which it has been for years. However, the European Unionís response to the changes taking place in Iran has so far been limited. Will the Council say whether it intends to take advantage of current favourable circumstances to improve relations with Iran, thus supporting the opening which Iranian society is seeking with the West? Reply (26 June 2000) The EU is encouraged by developments in Iran, including the results of the first round of the Parliamentary elections in February. Following these elections, the European Union has recalled its long-standing interest in consolidating and expanding the Comprehensive Dialogue it leads with Iran and reiterated its willingness to promote the establishment of closer ties with the Iranian Government. (2001/C 26 E/170) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0975/00 by Christel Fiebiger (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (31 March 2000) Subject: Savings to be made in Subsection B1 ü Agriculture of the 2001 budget and modification of the financial planning for 2000-2006 Numerous Commission proposals concerning savings in the 2001 budget for Subsection B1 ü Agriculture have recently been made public. Are these savings intended primarily to help achieve the funding required in the foreign policy area (reconstruction measures in Kosovo of the order of € 300 million a year)? Is the Commission also planning changes in relation to the financial framework in Agenda 2000 adopted by the European Council in Berlin? What savings in financial resources would the Commission like to make, following measures: in particular through the ü changes to the common organisations of the market (COM), inter alia for sugar, hops, rice, olives, flax and hemp; ü new legislation, e. g. creation of a regulatory fund applicable to the pig sector; ü reform of the Financial Regulation, inter alia by changing the allocation of the negative expenditure of Subsection B1-Agriculture; 26. 1. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/137 ü decisions in the management committees, e. g. reduction of subsidies by modification of the quality requirements for cereals; ü fixing of prices for agricultural products? Does the Commission intend not to adhere to the financial planning adopted by the Berlin European Council for the budget years 2000-2006 for Subsection B1-Agriculture and are the press reports, indicating that the Directorate General for the Budget considers that these are áin no way inviolableí, correct? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (15 May 2000) The Commission is proposing a reduction in the ceiling for subheading 1. a. of € 300 million in each of the years 2001 and 2002. The latest estimates on expenditure under subheading 1. a. are for a non-utilised margin of € 400 million for 2001. These are based on current legislation and the proposals already submitted by the Commission. For 2002 the changes envisaged in the ásugarí market organisation should yield a saving of the same amount. (2001/C 26 E/171) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0987/00 by Jo Leinen (PSE) to the Commission (22 March 2000) Subject: List of provisions for which unanimity is still required (reference: annex to the Commissionís opinion of 26 January 2000 concerning the Intergovernmental Conference) The co-rapporteur on the Intergovernmental Conference for the European Parliamentís Committee on Constitutional Affairs asks the Commission 1. 2. to justify its proposal for the long list of provisions on which unanimous votes would continue to be taken, and especially Parts 2 (institutional decisions) and 4 (parallel internal and external decisions) and to explain the arguments in relation to the fundamental question of how this proposal for the perpetuation of unanimity in many areas is to be reconciled with the concept of the ágovernanceí of a European Union of 28 or more Member States if each Member State is to continue to have a right of veto even where details are concerned. Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (25 April 2000) In its opinion of 26 January 2000 on the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) (1), the Commission 1. proposes that qualified majority be the general rule for decision-making. It has identified five categories of provisions for which serious and lasting reasons warrant making an exception to the rule and maintaining institutional decisions and decisions affecting the unanimity. The second category is that of essential institutional balance, that is, important decisions relating to the organisation and functioning of the Institutions. The fourth category comprises provisions enabling the Community to take external action in areas where unanimity is maintained for internal action: this is the logic underlying parallelism, on which Article 300 of the EC Treaty is based. The Commission is prepared to examine in detail, together with the Honourable Member, the precise reasons for which the provisions given in Annex 1 to the opinion have been placed in these categories. However, it does not regard this as a long list. 2. The Commission recalls that the provisions listed in Annex 1 of the opinion ( List of provisions on which unanimous votes would continue to be taken, by way of derogation from the principle of qualified- majority votingí) are essentially institutional provisions and that it has proposed that almost all the legal