WRITTEN QUESTION E-1112/00 by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Reimbursement of non-business expenditure under the 1994 UK VAT Act.
C 26 E/156 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 notified aid package is still pending. It is up to the United Kingdom authorities to inform the Commission whether the changed situation as regards the future ownership of Rover has an impact on the notified aid package. After having received this information from the United Kingdom, the Commission will act accordingly. The provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) No1475/95 of 28 June 1995 on the application of 2. Article 85 (3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements (1) (the block exemption regulation) with regard to dealersí rights and obligations essentially apply to dealersí sales targets, dealersí stock requirements, cross-selling between dealers within the network, and the duration and termination of the dealerís agreement. The obligation of the carmaker to supply his dealers with cars is a matter of contractual law which would not fall within the scope of the block exemption. (1) OJ L 145, 29. 6. 1995. (2001/C 26 E/193) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1112/00 by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission (11 April 2000) Subject: Reimbursement of non-business expenditure under the 1994 UK VAT Act Could the Commission confirm that the arrangements under the 1994 UK VAT Act for reimbursing bodies such as local authorities for their non-business expenditure do not contravene Commission rules? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (12 May 2000) The reimbursement of VAT paid on the expenditure of a body governed by public law which is not a taxable person under the terms of Article 4(5) of the sixth Council Directive of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes ü Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (77/388/EEC) (1) is not incompatible with the said Directive. (1) OJ L 145, 13. 6. 1977. (2001/C 26 E/194) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1120/00 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (11 April 2000) Subject: Imprisonment of Arkin Birdal and the judgment against Necmettin Erkaban in Turkey On Tuesday 28 March 200 the Public Prosecutor in Ankara refused to suspend the prison sentence against Arkin Birdal, a renowned and courageous defender of civil rights in Turkey accused of making ásubversive speechesí. His lawyers had requested a six monthsí suspension of the sentence because he needs intensive medical treatment for injuries sustained as a result of an attempt made on his life. At the beginning of March the former Prime Minister Necmettin Erkaban was sentenced to a yearís imprisonment for similar offences, because of a speech he made in 1994. 1. Does the Commission not consider that these blatant violations of freedom of expression and human rights are at odds with the commitments entered into by the Turkish Government with a view to EU membership and the basic conditions for the accession of new States, such as respect for the founding principles of the Union, sanctioned in Article 6(1) of the TEU, and the political criteria laid down by the Copenhagen European Council in June 1993?