C 182/28 (1999/C 182/035

)

Official Journal of the European Communities WRITTEN QUESTION E-2877/98 by Christian Rovsing (PPE) to the Commission (28 September 1998) Subject: Subsidised school milk

EN

28.6.1999

Does the Commission think that the present distinction between milk products eligible for subsidies and those not as part of the EU’s aid for the sale of school milk is in keeping with the times and with prevailing health policy thinking in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 November 1998) The Commission has reason to believe that the operation of the Community school milk scheme in general, and the range of eligible products in particular, are indeed compatible with Member States’ options on health policy. The Commission would also refer to its reply to Written Question No 2731/98 by Mr Bonde on the same subject.

(1999/C 182/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2893/98 by Wilmya Zimmermann (PSE) to the Council (28 September 1998)

Subject: Problems in implementing Article 8 ff. of the EU Treaty (citizenship of the Union, free movement) The restrictive laws on foreign nationals of many of the Member States often run counter to the objectives of Article 8 of the EU Treaty. Foreigners are often discriminated against in relation to citizens of the country in question when it comes to rules on residence and social and labour law. What is the Council doing to eliminate the obstacles to freedom of movement represented by the Member States’ laws on foreign nationals?

Reply (8 February 1999) Under Article 8 of the EC Treaty, every person holding the nationality of a Member State is a citizen of the Union and, as such, enjoys the rights conferred by the Treaty and is subject to the duties imposed thereby. Over a period of some years the Council has adopted a large number of acts concerning the free movement of persons and the right of establishment. These have covered the right of residence of Member States’ nationals and their families, social legislation and the rights of employees and self-employed persons. In the light of the recommendations of the High Level Panel on the Free Movement of Persons, chaired by Ms Simone Veil, the Commission adopted a plan of action in which it said it would submit legislative proposals for improving the conditions under which the freedom of movement is exercised.

28.6.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 182/29

The Council recently received a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EEC) 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, a proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 68/360/EEC on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers of Member States and their families and a proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an advisory committee on freedom of movement and social security for Community workers and amending Council Regulations (EEC) 1612/68 and (EEC) 1408/71. The Council will make every endeavour to ensure that the discussions on these proposals are brought to a successful conclusion as soon as possible. As regards third-country nationals, the future Articles 62, point 1, and 63, point 4, of the EC Treaty as introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty will enable appropriate measures to be taken to facilitate the free movement of third-country nationals within the Community and the right of residence in the Member States for third-country nationals who are legally resident in one of the Member States.

(1999/C 182/037)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2901/98 by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission (2 October 1998)

Subject: Proposal for common rules for direct support schemes under the CAP Article 8 of this proposal would require the Member States to restrict payments to certain producers who did not comply with certain conditions, including their income-related activities. However, this could result in those people whose off-farm income contributes to the overall household income being penalised and this would appear to contradict the Commission’s approach to date, which has been supportive of agricultural diversification and has emphasised the important interrelationship between agriculture and rural areas. Would the Commission please clarify the thrust of this proposal and how it envisages its implementation, since rules should not be drawn up which place at a disadvantage those members of the farming community who engage in multiple activities?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (27 October 1998) Article 8 of the proposal for a Council regulation establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy (1) deals with the restriction of payments. As explained in the penultimate recital of the proposal, this provision was designed to give Member States the power to deal with so-called ‘premium hunters’, i.e. those individuals who do not exercise genuine and serious farming activities but merely carry out activities solely or predominantly to obtain Community agricultural support. It was not intended to penalise those who also have off-farm incomes provided that they do at the same time pursue genuine and serious farming activities. As the draft makes clear, implementation would fall to the Member States. The proposal is now before the Council, where negotiations on the whole Agenda 2000 (2) package are continuing. The Parliament’s opinion on the proposal is also awaited.
(1) (2) COM(98) 158 final. COM(97) 2000 final.