Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2


1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/61

3. When is an anti-dumping tariff on the products referred to above likely to be introduced?

4. Does the measure only concern steel screws, or will other steel products also be affected?

5. Will all steel producers in the Far East be affected by the tariff policy?

6. If not, to which producers is this anti-dumping arrangement to apply?

7. If the Commission sets different tariff rates, how will it calculate them?

8. How long is the Commission planning to maintain such an arrangement?

9. Through what channel and when at the earliest can the enterprises affected by the measure obtain
information on the Commission’s thoughts in this matter?

(1) OJ C 50, 22.2.1999, p. 54.

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 1998)

1. The Commission generally does not open anti-dumping proceedings on its own initiative, but
analyses a complaint lodged by Community producers injured by dumped imports.

2. No statement about the potential amount and type of duties can be made before the end of an

3. Pursuant to Article 7(1) of the basic anti-dumping regulation (Council Regulation (EC) 384/96 of
22 December 1995 (1)) provisional duties are imposed no earlier than 60 days from the initiation of
proceedings, but no later than nine months from the initiation of proceedings if the preconditions for
measures are met.

4. The definition of the product concerned in proceedings depends on the complaint. The Community
industry may lodge a complaint with regard to other products.

5. and 6. The definition of the countries and the exporting producers against which proceedings are
initiated depends on the complaint and can be changed by the Commission on its own initiative.

7. The duties imposed on the co-operating producers depend on the calculation of their individual
dumping and injury margins.

8. Definitive duties generally remain in force for five years, unless a review shows that the expiry of
measures would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

9. Under Article 5(5) of the basic anti-dumping regulation, the Commission cannot provide any
information concerning complaints unless a decision has been made to open an investigation.

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996.

(1999/C 135/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2471/98

by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: The European Parliament and Parkinson’s disease

What initiatives have been undertaken and how much funding has been made available by the European
Union for the purpose of studying, combating and relieving the suffering caused by Parkinson’s disease?
C 135/62 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 14.5.1999

Has the Commission any plans for a programme to meet the needs arising from the treatment and the
effects of Parkinson’s disease?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 1998)

The Commission has supported activities on neurodegenerative disorders and informal carers since 1995.
However, so far no project presented on Parkinson’s disease has met the criteria required for financial
support. The European Parkinson’s Disease Association has received financial support from the
programme on integration of disabled people into the labour market, in order to analyse the needs of
people and their families living with this disease and to find the appropriate response.

The new ‘paving’ communication on the development of public health policy (1) proposes a move away
from the disease-specific approach towards a more horizontal approach to public health. However, Article
152 of the Treaty of Amsterdam states clearly that the way the Member States organise and deliver their
health care systems is the responsibility of the Member States.

Research into Parkinson’s disease has always had a place in the Community¢s biomedical research
programmes (Biomed). It received funding under Biomed 1 and there are now four Biomed 2 projects
specifically on the subject. These range from the genetic and molecular approach to treatment by cellular
grafting or functional neurosurgery. Some of these projects have already yielded significant results. The
disease is also covered partially or indirectly by many other projects.

It should be given at least as much priority under topic 1 of the future fifth framework programme, and is
in fact one of the few diseases expressly mentioned in the programme, in the key action on ‘ageing’. It also
ties in perfectly with at least two general actions: chronic and degenerative diseases, and neurosciences.

(1) COM(98) 230 final.

(1999/C 135/072) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2485/98

by Johann Kronberger (NI) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: ‘Corridoio Adriatico’ project

1. What is the situation regarding the ‘Corridoio Adriatico’ project, i.e. the waterway leading from the
port of Trieste which is intended to link the Adriatic with other States bordering the Mediterranean and
with the Suez region?

2. How important does the Commission consider this project to be?

3. What is the current state of negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 1998)

1. The ‘Adriatic corridor’ project represents an alternative route to link the central regions of the Union
and Italy to Greece and the eastern part of the Mediterranean basin, avoiding the inland route through
former Yugoslavia. It integrates rail and road infrastructure, ports, links to ports and combined transport
along the Adriatic-Ionian coasts in Italy and Greece. In the framework of the TEN-T co-financing (Council
Regulation 2236/95 (1)) the Commission has allocated financial support to two feasibility studies
concerning the ‘Adriatic-Ionian Corridor’, one in Greece (financial support of ECU 0,34 million in
1996) and one in Italy (financial support of ECU 1 million in 1995). According to information provided by
the authorities neither study has yet been completed.