WRITTEN QUESTION E-0684/00 by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission. Daytime running lights.
21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/205 In contrast to what has been observed by the Honourable Member, the Commissionís regular reports on car prices have not revealed that car prices before tax in Ireland are particularly high in comparison with other Member States, and in particular with the United Kingdom (2). In this respect, the Commission has found that in Member States with a high taxation on car purchase, such as Ireland, prices before tax are relatively low. With regard to prices after tax, it has to be noted that taxation on car purchase has remained an issue on which the Member States decide, as they have so far excluded this issue from Community actions concerning tax harmonization in the internal market. As far as the query of the Honourable Member about the future legal framework for car distribution is concerned, the decision is still open. The Commission is currently preparing a report on the evaluation of the regulation, which is expected to provide more evidence on the causes of price differentials and on the impact of the exempted distribution system on car prices. The impact of this regulation on consumers will be one of the key elements in the evaluation. This report will however provide an essential basis for the forthcoming discussion about the future legal framework for car distribution, after expiry of the current regulation on 30 September 2002. (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1475/95 of 28 June 1995 on the application of Article 85(3) of the EC Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements ü OJ L 145, 29. 6. 1995. (2) See for example the most recent press release IP/00/121 of 7 February 2000 on the Report. (2000/C 330 E/237) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0684/00 by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission (9 March 2000) Subject: Daytime running lights Could the Commission please give an indication of the current state of play in terms of the Commission High Level Group for Road Safetyís deliberations on the issue of daytime running lights and the possible introduction of EU legislation on this matter? Is the Commission in a position to apply further pressure in order to resolve the current apparent stalemate between Member States on this issue? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (7 April 2000) The Commission has been reviewing the available research evidence concerning the effectiveness of daytime running lights as an accident reduction measure. The results of the considerable amount of research in this field are not conclusive, but they do indicate that for all road users daytime running lights would be a positive road safety measure and that the effects are directly proportional to ambient daylight levels. Estimates of the accident reduction effect vary widely and are still the subject of unresolved academic debate. The Commission concludes that while daytime running lights are likely to be a cost-effective road safety measure they will not be as significant, for example, as the benefits to be obtained from speed reduction, less drinking and driving or increased seat belt wearing. The Commission view on the significance of these measures is described in greater detail in the road safety communication which it adopted on 18 March 2000 (1). The Commission has also estimated that the maximum additional fuel consumption, and consequent carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, arising from daytime running lights is between 1,5 % and 2,0 % although this depends to some extent upon the technical specification for daytime running lights. C 330 E/206 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 At the last meeting of the high level group for road safety it was clear that Member States still had different views about the effectiveness of daytime running lights. In particular, there were different views about whether the consequent additional fuel consumption and CO2 emissions were a significant social cost which counteracted the estimated benefits of the measure. Consequently the Commission reported to the group that it would consider developing Community legislation for daytime running lights when there was broader support from Member States. (1) COM(2000) 125. (2000/C 330 E/238) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0692/00 by Francesco Speroni (TDI) to the Commission (29 February 2000) Subject: Fixed-term contracts for the Fifth Framework programme Following the Commissionís decision of 19 January 1996 concerning the new staff policy (NPPR), notices of vacancy with internal selection procedure were published. The contracts, which were concluded for two years from 15 February 1997 and extended for a further two years, expired on 15 February 2000. The extension occurred during the Fifth Framework programme which ends in 2002. As a result, some researchers whose contracts were renewed were assigned to projects longer than the duration of their contracts (for example, the four-year COCO project due to end in 2002). Does the Commission not consider that this forced interruption of research projects caused by the expiry of researchersí contracts is economically damaging and puts a brake on research work, highlighting the fact that the flexibility demanded of fixed-term contract workers is being applied in an inappropriate manner and with the wrong timescale, without taking into account the need for successful completion of the Fifth Framework programme? Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission (20 March 2000) The contracts referred to by the Honourable Member are contracts for fixed-term staff for a maximum duration of three years, as provided for by the new staff policy under the research budget adopted by the Commission in 1996. Their aim is to enable a certain flexibility to be achieved in appointing specialist staff, more particularly in the areas for which the Commission does not have any recruitment reserves. Their numbers may exceed the research payroll by 25 %. These fixed-term staff members are selected from a database set up after a call for applications that has been widely disseminated outside the Commission (more particularly on the Cordis website). It must also be stressed, in this connection, that those fixed-term staff members are informed of the maximum three- year duration of their contracts at the point when they make their application, and also when the contract is signed. In addition, such contracts may be entered into at any time of the year. Thus they do not all expire on 15 February 2000. It should also be stressed that these contracts are not intended to span the duration of a framework contract, nor even that of a specific project. They correspond to a form of recruitment that supplements that for fixed-term staff appointed via selection procedures that can be treated on the same basis as open competitions, who are covered by renewable five-year contracts or contracts of unspecified length, depending upon whether they are employed as research-staff members for scientific or technical purposes or for administrative purposes. In any case the Commission may point out to the Honourable Member that no research contract has been interrupted by the expiry of fixed-term staff contracts