WRITTEN QUESTION P-2606/99 by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Early retirement pension scheme.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/183 units concerned, so that it penalises people living alone and businesses which produce little waste but are placed on wide surface areas. In accordance with the original version of the Decree No 22 of 5 February 1997, new criteria, better approaching the proportion of the tax amount to the quantity of waste produced, should have been adopted as from 1 January 1999. The circumstance to which the Honourable Member makes reference could be relevant to Article 15 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as modified by Directive 91/156/EEC (hereinafter the Directive). This Article states that, in accordance with the ápolluter paysí principle, the cost of disposing of waste must be borne by: the holder who has waste handled by a waste collector or by an undertaking as referred to in Article 9, and/or the previous holders or the producer of the product from which the waste came. The Commission considers that, under the present Italian legislation, the cost of disposing of waste is borne by the holders who have waste handled by a waste collector. This is in line with Article 15 of the Directive. In addition, the Commission recognizes that the above mentioned criterion may result in disproportion among the polluters as regards the amount to be paid in comparison with the quantity of waste produced. In particular, the Commission recognizes that the way Italy makes citizens pay for their waste is not an incentive to bring about waste prevention and therefore it is not in line with the 1996 review of the Community strategy for waste management (3). Making citizens pay for waste according to the quantities of waste produced is an effective way to contribute to waste minimization. However, on the basis of the elements given by the Honourable Member, it is not evident that any disproportion resulting from the current Italian approach is of a gravity that would infringe Article 15 of the Directive. Infringement proceedings currently open against Italy for non conformity with the Directives mentioned by the Honourable Member concern the obligation to report under Article 8. 3 of Directive 91/689/EEC and Article 12 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC, the obligation to draw up waste management plans (under Directives 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by 91/156/EEC, 91/689/ EEC on hazardous waste, and 94/62/EC on packaging), the application of the waste regulation system to food waste at regional level (under Directives 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by 91/156/EEC), and the requirements for the exemption from the permit for undertakings which carry out hazardous waste recovery (under Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste). (1) OJ L 194, 25. 7. 1975. (2) OJ L 377, 31. 12. 1991. (3) COM(96) 399 final. (2000/C 225 E/203) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2606/99 by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission (22 December 1999) Subject: Early retirement pension scheme Can the Commission confirm if there is going to be an increase in payment in the new early retirement pension scheme next year? If so, will those already receiving this pension through the old scheme, qualify for this increase? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 January 2000) The new Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (1) allows an increase of the maximum amounts eligible for Community support under the measure of early retirement which may be integrated in the framework of the rural development plans proposed by the Member States for the period 2000-2006. The increased aid amounts for early retirement would also only apply to new applicants to the scheme. Nevertheless, given that commitments under the existing scheme Council Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for early retirement from farming (2), should be integrated into the new rural development programming, it is not entirely excluded that the aid amounts C 225 E/184 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 for existing beneficiaries be raised to any increased amounts for new beneficiaries. However, such raise must be duly justified by the circumstances of the Member State concerned. The increase of maximum amounts eligible for Community support in the new Council Regulation does not as such justify an increase in payments under existing commitments. (1) OJ L 160, 26. 6. 1999. (2) OJ L 215, 30. 7. 1992. (2000/C 225 E/204) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2607/99 by Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE) to the Commission (22 December 1999) Subject: Telecom Italia S. p. Aís Audiotel services Telecom S. p. A has the monopoly in Italy on Audiotel services which provide subscribers with useful services such as advice by telephone, information on various subjects and counselling. Does the Commission intend to allow Telecom to abuse its monopoly by paying the bills of the companies providing these services if and when it pleases, even postponing indefinitely the payment of large sums of money on the ground of general irregularities? One wanders who will benefit in cases like this where the service companies adversely affected do not even have the opportunity to vindicate themselves and are likely to go bankrupt, thus leading to the loss of jobs. Does the Commission intend to look into the fact that, by letter of 21 October 1999 (Reference No 0028084-01), Telecom Italia S. p. A. of Via Dalmazzo 15, Turin stopped the payment of the sum owed since 1 August 1999 to the undertaking Publiline S. r. l. of Via Antiche Fornaci 66, Cremona, Italy? Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (20 January 2000) Audiotel services (audiotex) were deregulated in Italy by General Decree on Authorisations No 420/95. However, the provision of restricted access services must be subject to special conditions. The Commission has stepped in on several occasions to urge the Italian authorities to make such conditions public promptly, in order to enable audiotel companies to provide their services, and it is continuing to monitor the situation. However, a number of companies are currently providing audiotel services via the Telecom Italia network (numbers starting with 166 and 144). Telecom Italia bills the customers and pays part of the amount charged to the service provider. Publiline is one such service provider. According to the Commissionís information, Telecom Italia did indeed suspend payment to Publiline of sums charged to its subscribers in accordance with one of the conditions laid down in the contract between the two companies. It seems that the telecommunications company brought this case before the Italian courts. In principle, the Commission does not intervene in cases pending before national courts. However, national courts can consult the Commission on points of law relating to the application of competition rules the Commission notice of 13 February 1993 on cooperation between national courts and the Commission in applying competition rules (1). in cases brought before them, as stated in paragraph 38 of (1) OJ C 39, 13. 2. 1993