WRITTEN QUESTION E-2256/99 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission. Horse wrestling.
C 203 E/158 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 18. 7. 2000 How can the Belgian authorities maintain that áthere was nothing to suggest that the members of the panel had been biased in favour of one of the candidatesí, and thereby suggest that non-compliance with certain provisions governing the work of the panel can be justified? Can it explain why, at the second stage of the proceedings, two members of the panel did not sign the final decision of 22 April 1998 and yet that the two signatures subsquently reappeared in the same decision? Can it explain how it was possible for a member of the panel, Mr Henri Montois, to be associated with the winning firm Art & Buildí? Does the Commission agree that Article 12 of Directive 92/50/EEC (2) was not respected in terms of the criteria for assessing projects set out in the rules governing the work of the panel when the first-stage decision was announced, insofar as there was no clear explanation of how points were awarded to each project (the remarks made about the project with the highest score were more negative than those for others!)? Does the Commission not consider that it shares responsibility for management of the competition, given that it was represented by a full member of the panel? In its reply to the same written question, the Commission states that ámeasures would have been taken to involve the various parties involvedí whenever the projects were devised. Will the Commission specify which parties? Was the local population consulted at that stage? (1) OJ C 27 E, 29. 1. 2000, p. 91. (2) OJ L 209, 24. 7. 1992, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (7 December 1999) Following the answer given to the honourable Memberís Written Question P-1486/99 (1), the Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Belgium for a breach of Article 13 (concerning contests) of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (2). A letter of formal notice was sent on 4 November 1999. Inasmuch as the honourable Memberís question contains new facts, further consideration seems to be required. The Commission will not hesitate to take the appropriate action. As already indicated in the answer to Written Question P-1486/99, the only awarding authority in the case in question is the Brussels-Capital Region. The Communityís involvement is restricted to participation in from the Council, one from the the funding. The selection panel apparently included one official Parliament and one from the Commission. This participation in the panel does not, however, imply any responsibility on the part of the institutions with regard to the award of the contract. (1) OJ C 27 E, 29. 1. 2000, p. 91. (2) OJ L 209, 24. 7. 1992. (2000/C 203 E/204) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2256/99 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Horse wrestlingí Would the Commission indicate whether it finds it acceptable that, in Spain, the spectator ásportí of áhorse wrestlingí is allowed to continue? Constituents of mine have been shocked to see images on British television of wild horses being wrestled to the ground in the name of entertainment as they are ábroken iní. Is there any action the Commission is able to take to prevent such cruelty taking place in the Member States? 18. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 203 E/159 Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (10 January 2000) The Commission is very concerned about the welfare of animals and gives it a high priority. Community rules exist in respect of the protection of horses when they are kept for farming purposes, during transport and at the time of slaughtering. In accordance with the new protocol on the protection of animal welfare annexed to the EC Treaty, the Community and Member States shall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals in formulating and implementing the Communityís agriculture, transport, internal market and research policies. On the other hand, and in particular with reference to animal welfare, Community competence does not at present extend to the use of horses in historic and traditional events within a Member State, and as a consequence, this is a matter within the sole jurisdiction of the Member State concerned. (2000/C 203 E/205) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2262/99 by Ward Beysen (ELDR) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Directive 96/92 The liberalisation of energy markets is producing a wave of concentration, and the first international mergers or take-overs have already been announced. What is the Commissionís view of these develop- ments, and to what extent is account being taken of their implications for employment? Directive 96/92 (1) lays down basic principles concerning the liberalisation of the European electricity market, seeking to ensure that, from the point of view of economic operators, this process takes place on equal terms in the various Member States. The Commissionís second harmonisation report summarises aspects which remain to be dealt with in order to ensure such equivalent liberalisation, but does not mention the distortion of competition by the various ownership structures of electricity companies in the European Union. In view of the differences in the capital costs of private companies quoted on stock exchanges and public enterprises, private enterprise increasingly faces unequal competitive conditions, both when acquiring new businesses and when directly offering products and services on the market. How will the Commission correct this distortion? (1) OJ L 27, 30. 1. 1997, p. 20. Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (21 December 1999) As the Honourable Member rightly points out, the Commission has to make sure that liberalisation is carried out whilst taking into account legitimate concerns about employment prospects in the electricity industry. It is clear that restructuring will take place, but it is clear as well, that there is a pressing need to introduce competition into this sector. The liberalisation process increases competitiveness of Community industry, and will thus have a positive impact on employment in energy intensive industries. Furthermore, it provides positive benefits to individual citizens. According to the preliminary results of a study just received by the Commission, electricity prices for households between 1996-1998 fell just as quickly as industrial prices. Member States have the primary responsibility in the field of employment, but the Commission acknowl- edges the need for it to play a leading role in this respect and has launched a study on this subject. The objective of the study is not to measure the quantitative effects on employment in the electricity industry. This is impossible taking account of the growth in employment in the energy intensive industries as a result of lower electricity prices, and would provide a distorted picture. The objective is however to disseminate and learn from experiences in countries where liberalisation of the electricity industry has already taken place and to guide Member States as to retraining of workers, creation of new employment in new sectors within the electricity industry, description of job profiles most at risk and good ways of