Commission Question – Subject: Review of golden handshakes In light of the press coverage of Herman Van Rompuy’s severance package, can the Council confirm whether any review is scheduled to take place to ensure that such astronomical sums of taxpayers’ money are not used in this way again?

Question for written answer E-010450/2014

to the Council

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Review of golden handshakes

In light of the press coverage of Herman Van Rompuy’s severance package, can the Council confirm whether any review is scheduled to take place to ensure that such astronomical sums of taxpayers’ money are not used in this way again?

EN

E-010450/2014

Reply

(4.3.2015)

The conditions of employment of the President of the European Council are laid down in Council Decision 2009/909/EU (OJ L 322, 9.12.2009, p. 35).

No revision of this Decision is foreseen in the Council at present.

 

Commission Question – Subject: Norway’s access to the single market Could the Commission please provide details of the circumstances in which Norway enjoys any derogations from full compliance with the single market legislation?

Question for written answer E-010449/2014

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Norway’s access to the single market

Could the Commission please provide details of the circumstances in which Norway enjoys any derogations from full compliance with the single market legislation?

 

 

EN

E-010449/2014

Answer given by Vice-President Mogherini

on behalf of the Commission

(5.3.2015) 

 

 

Norway is a contracting party to the EEA Agreement. As far as the scope of this Agreement is concerned, it covers the four freedoms and other related policies, however it does not cover the following areas: Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies; Customs Union, Common Trade Policy, Common Foreign and Security Policy, Justice and Home Affairs (even though the EFTA countries are part of the Schengen area), or Monetary Union (EMU).

 

In principle, all EU acquis related to the internal market has to be incorporated and applied by the EFTA States as such. Exceptionally, they may be granted derogation, however this has to be agreed by both parties in a Joint Committee Decision.

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: Switzerland and the single market It is my understanding that Switzerland’s relationship with the EU includes access to the single market on a sector-by-sector basis. Could the Commission please provide details of which sectors are included and which are excluded from Switzerland’s arrangement with the EU?

Question for written answer E-010451/2014

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Switzerland and the single market

It is my understanding that Switzerland’s relationship with the EU includes access to the single market on a sector-by-sector basis.

Could the Commission please provide details of which sectors are included and which are excluded from Switzerland’s arrangement with the EU?

EN

E-010451/2014

Answer given by Vice-President Mogherini

on behalf of the Commission

(5.3.2015) 

 

 

Switzerland is participating in a number of areas of the internal market. This participation is governed by twenty major and more than hundred further bilateral cooperation and technical agreements concluded since the Swiss electorate’s rejection of accession to the European Economic Area in 1992.

 

Switzerland currently participates in the free movement of people. Main further agreements concern:

 

Air and road transport, the mutual recognition of conformity assessments, trade in agricultural and processed agricultural products, public procurement, research cooperation, statistics, cooperation in fraud pursuits, participation in the Schengen and the Dublin system.

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: Ebola aid Could the Commission please provide figures for the amount of money provided by the EU in 2014 to support each of the countries affected by Ebola

Question for written answer E-000249/2015

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Ebola aid

Could the Commission please provide figures for the amount of money provided by the EU in 2014 to support each of the countries affected by Ebola

EN

E-000249/2015

Answer given by Mr Stylianides

on behalf of the Commission

(4.3.2015)

 

 

The EU is using all available resources to help fighting Ebola and has, together with its Member states, made available since the beginning of the epidemic more than EUR 1.2 billion for humanitarian and development aid, as well as for preparedness actions in the neighbouring countries and for medical research aiming to develop a vaccine. Moreover, numerous Member States are also supporting the fight against Ebola through in-kind assistance and the Commission has managed non-financial tools providing transport and coordination for aid through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, deploying experts and mobile laboratories to help with faster diagnosis and enabling medical evacuation for humanitarian workers who have contracted the disease.

 

Out of the above mentioned total pledges, an amount of about EUR 696 million has been committed as of 4 February 2015 and the EU is fully engaged in committing the remaining funding at the earliest. The breakdown per country of the present commitments includes EUR 247 million for Sierra Leone, EUR 129 million for Guinea and EUR 76 million for Liberia. An amount of EUR 244 million has been committed for regional actions including the three most affected countries and the neighbouring countries. The highest amount allocated for Sierra Leone is justified by the high number of Ebola cases in this country.

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: London air ambulance It has been reported in the British press1 that London was without its air ambulance service for three weeks owing to new EU rules. Could the Commission shed any light on this situation, and refer to the relevant regulation or directive?

Question for written answer E-000251/2015

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: London air ambulance

It has been reported in the British press1 that London was without its air ambulance service for three weeks owing to new EU rules.

Could the Commission shed any light on this situation, and refer to the relevant regulation or directive?

 

1  http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/550574/European-Union-EU-regulations-London-Air-Ambulance-missing-helicopter

 

EN

E-000251/2015

Answer given by Ms Bulc

on behalf of the Commission

(3.3.2015) 

On the basis of the information available to the Commission, it appears that London Air Ambulance Service helicopter was out of service for three weeks for planned maintenance. The Service made an operational decision not to use an alternative helicopter during this period.  It would thus not seem the case that this decision was the result of EU legislative or regulatory requirements.

 

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: Middle East and North Africa trade status Which countries in the Middle East and North Africa enjoy Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) status with the EU in terms of trade?

Question for written answer E-000250/2015

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Middle East and North Africa trade status

Which countries in the Middle East and North Africa enjoy Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) status with the EU in terms of trade?

EN

E-000250/2015

Answer given by Ms Malmström

on behalf of the Commission

(3.3.2015) 

 

 

At this stage, there are 13 beneficiaries of the EU Generalised scheme of preferences plus (GSP+) arrangement but none of them are from Middle East or North Africa regions. They are Armenia, Bolivia, Cape Verde, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, Mongolia, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and the Philippines.

 

Commission Question – Subject: Ebola aid first response For each of the Ebola-affected countries, could the Commission please state on which date the first responders funded by the EU arrived at the scene of the outbreak?

Question for written answer E-000252/2015

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: Ebola aid first response

For each of the Ebola-affected countries, could the Commission please state on which date the first responders funded by the EU arrived at the scene of the outbreak?

EN

E-000252/2015

Answer given by Mr Stylianides

on behalf of the Commission

(23.2.2015)

 

 

On 22 March 2014 an outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) was declared in the forest region of Guinea. Within a few weeks, cases were detected in Conakry and in neighbouring Liberia and Sierra Leone.

 

Immediately after the declaration of the first case, on 27 March 2014 the European Commission mobilised funding to support partners that were already present in the three most affected countries (Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone) and therefore able to be immediately operational. Contracts were signed with Médecins sans Frontières, the World Health Organisation and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies for a total amount of EUR 3.9 million. Emergency actions were targeted in the three countries, mainly aiming at treating the first cases of patients infected by the virus and for containing the spread of the epidemic.

 

After these first emergency interventions, the EU has progressively scaled up its humanitarian response to Ebola, and – as of 26 January 2015 – more than EUR 64 million has been allocated by the Commission. Concerning development assistance, the preparedness activities in neighbouring countries and research activities, the EU has pledged globally more than EUR 413 million for Ebola, whilst EUR 807 million has been allocated by the EU Member States. Moreover, numerous Member States are also supporting the fight against Ebola through in-kind assistance and the Commission has managed non-financial tools providing transport and coordination for aid through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, deploying experts and mobile laboratories.

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: European Circular Economy Package Can the Commission please provide an update on the European Circular Economy Package? I understand that the Commission’s own estimates are that this package could create 180 000 jobs by 2030. Can the Commission please provide the independent economic basis for such figures, and confirm whether it has also evaluated the potential job losses as a result of the cost of compliance?

Question for written answer E-009639/2014

to the Commission

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: European Circular Economy Package

Can the Commission please provide an update on the European Circular Economy Package?

I understand that the Commission’s own estimates are that this package could create 180 000 jobs by 2030. Can the Commission please provide the independent economic basis for such figures, and confirm whether it has also evaluated the potential job losses as a result of the cost of compliance?

EN

E-009639/2014

Answer given by Mr Vella

on behalf of the Commission

(13.2.2015)

 

 

The Impact Assessment1 accompanying the proposal to revise recycling and other waste-related targets in the EU Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC2, the Landfill Directive 1999/31/EC3 and the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive 94/62/EC4 estimated that the implementation of the proposal would create more than 180.000 direct jobs by 2030. The Commission Work Programme 20155 proposed to withdraw this proposal and replace it by a more ambitous proposal in 2015 to promote circular economy.

 

The estimates in the Impact Assessment come from the Waste Model which examines employment in waste management, which was developed by the independent consultants Eunomia in cooperation with the Copenhagen Resource Institute. The model was developed on the basis of a review of literature and evidence and through consultation with Member States and experts.

 

As well as this legislative proposal related to waste, the wider Circular Economy Package analysed the potential job impacts of stepping up efforts to increase resource efficiency in Europe. Additional measures to improve resource productivity by 30% by 2030 could boost GDP by nearly 1%, while creating 2 million additional jobs (in net terms, so accounting for any job losses)6. These results are based on modelling by independent consultants Cambridge Econometrics as reported in “Study on modelling of the economic and environmental impacts of raw material consumption”.

 

 

1  SWD(2014)207

 

2  OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30

 

3  OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1–19

 

4  OJ L 365, 31.12.1994

 

5  COM(2014) 910

 

6  SWD(2014)211

 

Commission Question – Subject: VP/HR – Support for British ex-soldier Nicholas James Dunn from Northumberland is a 28-year-old former British soldier who was imprisoned in India on 18 October 2013, along with 34 of his colleagues, five of whom are also British ex-soldiers. Fourteen are Estonian, three Ukrainian and twelve Indian. The charges against the men were finally quashed in the High Court in Madurai on 10 July 2014, yet they are still being prevented from leaving India four months after being cleared of any wrongdoing. What, if anything, has the EU done about this clearly unacceptable situation?

Question for written answer P-010438/2014

to the Commission (Vice-President / High Representative)

Rule 130

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: VP/HR – Support for British ex-soldier

Nicholas James Dunn from Northumberland is a 28-year-old former British soldier who was imprisoned in India on 18 October 2013, along with 34 of his colleagues, five of whom are also British ex-soldiers. Fourteen are Estonian, three Ukrainian and twelve Indian. The charges against the men were finally quashed in the High Court in Madurai on 10 July 2014, yet they are still being prevented from leaving India four months after being cleared of any wrongdoing.

What, if anything, has the EU done about this clearly unacceptable situation?

 

EN

P-010438/2014

Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Mogherini

(6.2.2015) 

 

 

The EU is aware of this unfortunate case and has been monitoring developments since its start in October 2013, liasing with the concerned Member States. The EU raised this issue on several occasions with Indian interlocutors.

 

The EU took positive note of the acquittal of the 35 crew members of the MV Seaman Guard Ohio by the Madras High Court in July 2014 and has been following closely the appeal filed before India’s Supreme Court by the Tamil Nadu police. The EU is hopeful that the judiciary process will bring the matter to a satisfactory closure at the earliest.

 

 

Commission Question – Subject: ISIS assets In light of the various humanitarian abuses perpetrated by the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, can the Council please confirm what financial measures are being taken, including the freezing of its assets, at Member State and/or EU level?

Question to the Council for written answer E-009643/2014

Jonathan Arnott (EFDD)

Subject: ISIS assets

In light of the various humanitarian abuses perpetrated by the terrorist organisation known as ISIS, can the Council please confirm what financial measures are being taken, including the freezing of its assets, at Member State and/or EU level?

 

EN

E-009643/2014 Reply (2.2.2015)

 

With respect to financial measures taken at EU level related to ISIS, as referred to by the Honourable Member in his question, the Council can inform the Honourable Member that Council Common Position 2002/402/CFSP1 concerns restrictive measures against members of the Al-Qaida organisation and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them, as referred to in the list drawn up pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) 1267(1999) and 1333(2000), as regularly updated by the committee established pursuant to UNSCR 1267(1999) and 1989(2011).

In particular, UNSCR 2161(2014) reaffirms criteria for listing an individual, group, undertaking or entity associated with Al-Qaida and eligible for inclusion in the Al-Qaida Sanctions List. These criteria include participating in the financing, or otherwise supporting, acts or activities of Al-Qaida or any cell, affiliate, splinter group or derivative thereof. UNSCR 2170(2014) specifically relates to measures regarding ISIL, including against terrorist financing.

“Islamic State of Iraq”, “ISI” and “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant” are listed in Annex 1 to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 as amended, as aliases for “Al-Qaida in Iraq”, and are therefore subject to EU restrictive measures.

These measures:

establish an arms embargo for listed individuals, groups, undertakings and entities;

provide for the freezing of funds and economic resources belonging to, owned, held or controlled by a listed natural or legal person, entity, body or group;

provide that no funds or economic resources are made available, directly or indirectly, to, or for the benefit of, listed, natural or legal persons, entities, bodies or groups; and

prohibit the listed persons from entering, or transiting through, the territory of EU Member States.

The Commission and the Member States inform each other of the measures taken under Regulation (EC) No 881/2002. The Council does not hold that information.

 

1  Council Common Position of 27 May 2002 concerning restrictive measures against members of the Al-Qaida organisation and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them, OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 4.