WRITTEN QUESTION E-0995/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. White Paper on Food Safety.
C 374 E/198 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 28. 12. 2000 (2000/C 374 E/234) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0990/00 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission (31 March 2000) Subject: MEDIA II: share-out of appropriations to participating countries Since my Written Question E-0104/00 (1) has regrettably failed to elicit a proper answer, will the Commission now say how MEDIA II funding has been allocated to participating countries since the programme was launched? What amounts have the different Member States received in absolute and percentage terms, and why have those amounts been granted? (1) OJ C 280 E, 3. 10. 2000, p. 178. Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission (15 May 2000) A table setting out the financial aid granted to each country in the first four years of the MEDIA II programme (1996 ü 1999) has been sent directly to the Honourable Member and the Secretariat-General of Parliament. The table is accompanied by statistics relating to the share of the European market of each Member State and participating State in the MEDIA II programme. The statistics for the years 1998-1999 are provided by way of illustration and do not represent the final figures. Theyare expectedto be confirmed during the programmeís final evaluation. These data show how the funds are allocated under the MEDIA II programme in relation to the actual situation on the market. Example: The Netherlands represents 1,8 % of total investment in film production in Europe, and 2,7 % of the European market in terms of cinema box office receipts. Between 1996 and 1999, this Member State including 3,5 % of the funds received 5,45 % of the funds granted under the MEDIA II programme, allocated to producers and 4,9 % of the support given to distributors. The proportion of funds allocated to Netherlands professionals was therefore higher than their actual representation on the European market, in terms of both production and market share. the Commission selects the beneficiaries in accordance with the Under the MEDIA II programme, arrangements set out in Council Decisions 95/564/EC of 22 December 1995 on the implementation of a training programme for professionals in the European audiovisual programme industry (MEDIA II ü Training) (1) and 95/563/EC of 10 July 1995 on the implementation of a programme encouraging the development and distribution of European audiovisual works (MEDIA II ü Development and distribution) (1996- 2000) (1). The projects which are co-financed by the Commission are chosen on the basis of quality and European added value, irrespective of their nationality or country of origin. The Commission and the MEDIA Committee lay down guidelines setting out the various eligibility and selection criteria that apply. Lastly, a final report on the evaluation of the MEDIA II programme will be sent to Parliament once the programme finishes at the end of the year 2000. (1) OJ L 321, 30. 12. 1995. (2000/C 374 E/235) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0995/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission (31 March 2000) Subject: White Paper on Food Safety In the annex to its White Paper on food safety (COM(1999) 719 final), the Commission indicates that it will present a proposal for a directive on fortified foods. 28. 12. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 E/199 Could the Commission explain: 1. On what basis the Scientific Committee for Food will define upper safe limits for vitamin and mineral intakes, and how the Commission will utilise these in defining maximum limits for food fortification in the Directive? 2. Whether the Directive will allow the use of those vitamins and minerals, which it has listed in the Directive on Dietary Foods for Special Medical Purposes (1999/21)? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (16 May 2000) The Commission has given a mandate to the scientific committee for food (SCF) to review the upper 1. levels of daily intakes of vitamins and minerals that are unlikely to pose a risk of adverse health effects. The SCF is responsible for ensuring that its review is consistent with the principles of scientific risk assessment. The Commission intends to include in its proposal for a directive on fortified foods the principles and criteria to be taken into consideration for defining maximum limits for added vitamins and minerals. In view of the early stage of the preparation of the above proposal the Commission is not in a position to give details on these principles and criteria. One of these principles, for example, will be the basic principle of food law, namely that the products resulting from the addition of vitamins and minerals should be safe. Potential intakes from all food sources will also be one of the criteria that will have to be considered. On the basis of the upper safe levels derived through scientific risk assessment by the SCF and applying the defined criteria and principles as part of risk management assessment, maximum limits of vitamins and minerals in the fortified foods will then be set. 2. Commission Directive 1999/21/EC of 25 March 1999 on dietary foods for special medical purposes (1) does indeed include a list of vitamins and minerals that should be present in these products. The SCF adopted on 12 May 1999 an opinion on nutritional substances that may be added to foods for particular nutritional uses. That report includes a list of vitamins and minerals similar to that included in Directive 1999/21/EC. These lists will serve as the basis for establishing the list of vitamins and minerals that may be added to fortified foods. (1) OJ L 91, 7. 4. 1999. (2000/C 374 E/236) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1004/00 by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission Subject: Unlawful restriction of free movement of labour (31 March 2000) In order to be approved as an authorised tourist guide in Italy, the following conditions must be satisfied: ü Would-be guides must pass an Italian examination, which is not held on a regular basis; it may be up to 10-15 years before the next examination. ü Part of the examination consists of a test in written Italian. The standards are very strict and many of the foreign guides fail this part of the examination. The guides speak fluent Italian but often do not write as well as the national guides. The written Italian requirement does not seem relevant as the guides often guide in their native language. ü A passed examination only entitles the holder to practise in the town or region in which the examination was passed, which makes it impossible for guides to accompany groups on tours throughout the country. Is it the Commissionís view that this form of examination and issuing of authorisations is consistent with Community rules on the free movement of labour?