Datasets:

siacus

/

cap_pe_v2

like 0

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In 2016, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) found that a serious violation of the principle of freedom of association was occurring in Bangladesh, particularly in the textiles industry and special export processing zones. This failure to comply with international labour law is a breach both of the Sustainability Pact and of the conditions applicable under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) between the European Union and Bangladesh. The European Parliament already called on the Commission in its resolution of 29April2015 to ascertain whether Bangladesh was complying with agreements on human rights, employment and the environment in connection with the GSP, and to report to Parliament on the matter. 1.What steps has the Commission taken to assess Bangladesh’s compliance with agreements on human rights, employment and the environment in connection with the GSP? 2.What action will the Commission take in response to the violation by Bangladesh of the conditions applicable under the Sustainability Pact and the GSP which has been noted by the ILO?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-001344-17

Labour, employment and pensions

In 2016, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) found that a serious violation of the principle of freedom of association was occurring in Bangladesh, particularly in the textiles industry and special export processing zones. This failure to comply with international labour law is a breach both of the Sustainability Pact and of the conditions applicable under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) between the European Union and Bangladesh. The European Parliament already called on the Commission in its resolution of 29April2015 to ascertain whether Bangladesh was complying with agreements on human rights, employment and the environment in connection with the GSP, and to report to Parliament on the matter. 1.What steps has the Commission taken to assess Bangladesh’s compliance with agreements on human rights, employment and the environment in connection with the GSP? 2.What action will the Commission take in response to the violation by Bangladesh of the conditions applicable under the Sustainability Pact and the GSP which has been noted by the ILO?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Is it the Commission’s understanding that Article 1(3) of the minimum wage directive allows Member States in which wage-setting is primarily conducted by way of collective bargaining and where there is no statutory minimum wage to derogate from the purpose of this directive?2.Can the Commission confirm that the purpose and/or expected effect of the directive is to influence wage-setting and/or the level of wages in the Member States? If not, can the Commission then point to what exactly is the purpose of the proposed directive?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-006910/2020

Labour, employment and pensions

1.Is it the Commission’s understanding that Article 1(3) of the minimum wage directive allows Member States in which wage-setting is primarily conducted by way of collective bargaining and where there is no statutory minimum wage to derogate from the purpose of this directive?2.Can the Commission confirm that the purpose and/or expected effect of the directive is to influence wage-setting and/or the level of wages in the Member States? If not, can the Commission then point to what exactly is the purpose of the proposed directive?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission say to what extent Directive2005/36/EC(1) takes precedence over Directive96/71/EC(2) on the posting of workers? (1)OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22. (2)OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 1.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-1906/08

Labour, employment and pensions

Will the Commission say to what extent Directive2005/36/EC(1) takes precedence over Directive96/71/EC(2) on the posting of workers? (1)OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22. (2)OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 1.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Platforms such as Uber, Deliveroo and Takeaway are becoming increasingly prominent in the lives of Europe’s citizens. This brings with it numerous problems, particularly in terms of the fight against undeclared work. In France, for example, minors ‘hire’ the identity of adults to work illegally for these platforms, which effectively do nothing to prevent this from happening.What action will the Commission take to prevent a new kind of child slavery from emerging in the shadow of the alleged opportunities offered by uberisation?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-003982/2019

Labour, employment and pensions

Platforms such as Uber, Deliveroo and Takeaway are becoming increasingly prominent in the lives of Europe’s citizens. This brings with it numerous problems, particularly in terms of the fight against undeclared work. In France, for example, minors ‘hire’ the identity of adults to work illegally for these platforms, which effectively do nothing to prevent this from happening.What action will the Commission take to prevent a new kind of child slavery from emerging in the shadow of the alleged opportunities offered by uberisation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In its judgment C-265/03, the European Court of Justice confirmed the principle according to which clear, precise and unconditional obligations set out in agreements between the European Union and a third country are directly applicable in the Member States. In the case in point, the agreement drawn up between the EU and Russia in 1994 established, among other things, a reciprocal obligation of equality between Russian and European citizens as regards employment conditions. The judgment therefore states that a football player of Russian nationality cannot be discriminated against vis-à-vis other, European, players. It follows that he cannot be counted as a non-Community player in teams that are limited to having three non-European players in their line-ups. This principle is clearly not limited to the football sector or even simply to the sports sector. In fact, it could have major consequences in the Member States by altering the employment conditions and claims of non-Community citizens from certain states that have concluded agreements with the EU. In the light of the above, could the Commission indicate: 1. which other countries the European Union has entered into agreements with involving an obligation on worker non-discrimination that is directly applicable in the EU Member States; 2. whether the contents of those agreements are known to the national parliaments and the European Parliament before the agreements are signed?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-1763/05

Labour, employment and pensions

In its judgment C-265/03, the European Court of Justice confirmed the principle according to which clear, precise and unconditional obligations set out in agreements between the European Union and a third country are directly applicable in the Member States. In the case in point, the agreement drawn up between the EU and Russia in 1994 established, among other things, a reciprocal obligation of equality between Russian and European citizens as regards employment conditions. The judgment therefore states that a football player of Russian nationality cannot be discriminated against vis-à-vis other, European, players. It follows that he cannot be counted as a non-Community player in teams that are limited to having three non-European players in their line-ups. This principle is clearly not limited to the football sector or even simply to the sports sector. In fact, it could have major consequences in the Member States by altering the employment conditions and claims of non-Community citizens from certain states that have concluded agreements with the EU. In the light of the above, could the Commission indicate: 1. which other countries the European Union has entered into agreements with involving an obligation on worker non-discrimination that is directly applicable in the EU Member States; 2. whether the contents of those agreements are known to the national parliaments and the European Parliament before the agreements are signed?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Under Italy's multi-regional Operational Programmes for Objectives 3 and 4, whose administration is the responsibility of the Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare, funding was provided in January 1996 for a course for engineers specializing in the prevention of hydrogeological and seismic hazards and dangers caused by the vulnerability of buildings, monuments and the environment. This course is organized by the Civil Defence Department and is held at the multipurpose centre at Castelnuovo di Porto (near Rome). The course appears to have been given no publicity whatever by either the Ministry of Employment or the Civil Defence Department with the result that none of the 70 volunteers in the Civil Defence Organization Federazione Autonoma Radio Urbe (FARU) (Independent City Radio Federation), many of whom were unemployed, were able to apply for a place on the course, which started last November, despite the fact the FARU frequently holds its own exercises in Castelnuovo. Can the Commission check what measures were taken by the Ministry of Employment to publicise the course in question and can it say whether these measures can be considered sufficient? Can the Commission give an overall assessment of the steps taken by the Ministry to publicise courses funded under the Operational Programmes?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-0639/97

Labour, employment and pensions

Under Italy's multi-regional Operational Programmes for Objectives 3 and 4, whose administration is the responsibility of the Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare, funding was provided in January 1996 for a course for engineers specializing in the prevention of hydrogeological and seismic hazards and dangers caused by the vulnerability of buildings, monuments and the environment. This course is organized by the Civil Defence Department and is held at the multipurpose centre at Castelnuovo di Porto (near Rome). The course appears to have been given no publicity whatever by either the Ministry of Employment or the Civil Defence Department with the result that none of the 70 volunteers in the Civil Defence Organization Federazione Autonoma Radio Urbe (FARU) (Independent City Radio Federation), many of whom were unemployed, were able to apply for a place on the course, which started last November, despite the fact the FARU frequently holds its own exercises in Castelnuovo. Can the Commission check what measures were taken by the Ministry of Employment to publicise the course in question and can it say whether these measures can be considered sufficient? Can the Commission give an overall assessment of the steps taken by the Ministry to publicise courses funded under the Operational Programmes?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Standing Committee on Employment is the only official forum for contact between the Commission, governments and the two sides of industry in this sphere. Does the Commission believe that the Intergovernmental Conference on the reform of the European institutions will have an effect on the Standing Committee on Employment, which has existed since 1975?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-3180/96

Labour, employment and pensions

The Standing Committee on Employment is the only official forum for contact between the Commission, governments and the two sides of industry in this sphere. Does the Commission believe that the Intergovernmental Conference on the reform of the European institutions will have an effect on the Standing Committee on Employment, which has existed since 1975?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Does the Commission have any indication of the average pension in Member States?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2067/06

Labour, employment and pensions

Does the Commission have any indication of the average pension in Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Est-il exact que la Présidence, le Bureau et l'Administration du Comité des Régions cherchent actuellement à """"""""fonctionnariser"""""""" l'ensemble du personnel actuel du Comité, engagé par cooptation, à la suite de contacts personnels, et non par le biais de concours généraux ouverts à tous les citoyens de la Communauté? Une telle procédure est contraire à l'esprit et à la lettre du statut, et difficilement justifiable. Si les restrictions budgétaires dont il est fait état empêchent réellement l'organisation de concours propres au Comité des Régions, pour quelle raison celui-ci n'organise-t-il pas des concours généraux en collaboration avec d'autres institutions de la Communauté? Par ailleurs, pourquoi le Comité des Régions n'a-t-il pas recours aux listes de réserve des autres institutions pour recruter — sans incidences sur son propre budget — du personnel lauréat de concours généraux? Quelle mesure la Commission compte-t-elle prendre pour empêcher une telle manœuvre qui jetterait le discrédit sur l'ensemble des institutions européennes? De façon plus générale, quelles mesures la Commission compte-t-elle prendre pour garantir que le recrutement du personnel de toutes les institutions de la Communauté s'effectue à l'avenir sur la base du seul mérite et non sur celle de relations à caractère personnel?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-3069/95

Labour, employment and pensions

Est-il exact que la Présidence, le Bureau et l'Administration du Comité des Régions cherchent actuellement à """"""""fonctionnariser"""""""" l'ensemble du personnel actuel du Comité, engagé par cooptation, à la suite de contacts personnels, et non par le biais de concours généraux ouverts à tous les citoyens de la Communauté? Une telle procédure est contraire à l'esprit et à la lettre du statut, et difficilement justifiable. Si les restrictions budgétaires dont il est fait état empêchent réellement l'organisation de concours propres au Comité des Régions, pour quelle raison celui-ci n'organise-t-il pas des concours généraux en collaboration avec d'autres institutions de la Communauté? Par ailleurs, pourquoi le Comité des Régions n'a-t-il pas recours aux listes de réserve des autres institutions pour recruter — sans incidences sur son propre budget — du personnel lauréat de concours généraux? Quelle mesure la Commission compte-t-elle prendre pour empêcher une telle manœuvre qui jetterait le discrédit sur l'ensemble des institutions européennes? De façon plus générale, quelles mesures la Commission compte-t-elle prendre pour garantir que le recrutement du personnel de toutes les institutions de la Communauté s'effectue à l'avenir sur la base du seul mérite et non sur celle de relations à caractère personnel?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "At its June2010 part-session the European Parliament voted definitively to reject the Bauer report and with it the proposal to amend Directive2002/15/EC(1) of the European Parliament and the Council on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities, which favoured the exclusion of self-employed drivers from the scope of the directive. Can the Commission say what costs (in terms of bureaucracy, administrative procedures, recruitment,etc.) will have to be borne by Germany's public administration in applying the directive to self-employed drivers within national territory? Has Germany already transposed the directive in question and, if not, how much is the penalty for this infringement likely to be? (1)OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 35.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-5439/2010

Labour, employment and pensions

At its June2010 part-session the European Parliament voted definitively to reject the Bauer report and with it the proposal to amend Directive2002/15/EC(1) of the European Parliament and the Council on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities, which favoured the exclusion of self-employed drivers from the scope of the directive. Can the Commission say what costs (in terms of bureaucracy, administrative procedures, recruitment,etc.) will have to be borne by Germany's public administration in applying the directive to self-employed drivers within national territory? Has Germany already transposed the directive in question and, if not, how much is the penalty for this infringement likely to be? (1)OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 35.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Erik Leth case concerns a Danish national resident in Flensburg, Germany, who found himself caught between the differing rules in Denmark and Germany. In particular it looks as though the Danish authorities will not recognise his place of residence and the rights a citizen enjoys under EU rules. Iknow the Commission does not normally discuss individual cases, but this case raises a number of general rules and rules of principle, which I would like it to address. What is the Commission doing to ensure that the Member States actually comply with the rules on equal treatment of citizens in the EU? What is the Commission doing to ensure that decisions by the competent authorities concerning a citizen in one country also apply to the citizen if he moves to another country within the Community? Erik Leth was declared unfit to work in Germany, but Danish doctors refused to recognise this assessment. Can it be lawful for the Danish authorities not to recognise an assessment by German doctors of a patient’s fitness for work, with the result that he is unable to obtain a pension in Denmark? Should this not be regarded as a form of discrimination which hinders the freedom of movement of workers? The Danish authorities also chose to de-register Erik Leth’s residence [in Germany] and register him in Denmark, without contacting the German authorities or MrLeth himself in the process. This meant, for example, that he received polling cards for the 2004European elections in two places. Are the Danish authorities required to notify the authorities of a country to or from which a citizen moves of personal information which may affect the citizen’s rights in the country in question?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-4579/09

Labour, employment and pensions

The Erik Leth case concerns a Danish national resident in Flensburg, Germany, who found himself caught between the differing rules in Denmark and Germany. In particular it looks as though the Danish authorities will not recognise his place of residence and the rights a citizen enjoys under EU rules. Iknow the Commission does not normally discuss individual cases, but this case raises a number of general rules and rules of principle, which I would like it to address. What is the Commission doing to ensure that the Member States actually comply with the rules on equal treatment of citizens in the EU? What is the Commission doing to ensure that decisions by the competent authorities concerning a citizen in one country also apply to the citizen if he moves to another country within the Community? Erik Leth was declared unfit to work in Germany, but Danish doctors refused to recognise this assessment. Can it be lawful for the Danish authorities not to recognise an assessment by German doctors of a patient’s fitness for work, with the result that he is unable to obtain a pension in Denmark? Should this not be regarded as a form of discrimination which hinders the freedom of movement of workers? The Danish authorities also chose to de-register Erik Leth’s residence [in Germany] and register him in Denmark, without contacting the German authorities or MrLeth himself in the process. This meant, for example, that he received polling cards for the 2004European elections in two places. Are the Danish authorities required to notify the authorities of a country to or from which a citizen moves of personal information which may affect the citizen’s rights in the country in question?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The European social model guarantees a certain minimum level of social rights. European provisions do not, however, prevent individual Member States from taking steps to maintain or introduce a higher level of protection in respect of working conditions. Several cases referred to the European Court of Justice and relating to minimum provisions based on Article 118a (new Article 138) of the EC Treaty give cause for concern. Case C-2/97 ('società italiana petroli SpA') involves the admissibility of stricter Italian limit values for carcinogenic substances in benzene; in case C-49/98, by decision of 10February 1998 the Wiesbaden industrial tribunal referred to the European Court of Justice the question of the application of more favourable German holiday entitlements to workers posted abroad. In both instances the referring courts - and, in the 'società italiana petroli SpA' case, the Advocate-General - took the view that the Community's minimum provisions prevent or make it more difficult for the Member States to adopt stricter protective measures for employees or goods from abroad, than provided for by EC legislation. Is the Commission aware of this threat to higher levels of protection? If the European Court of Justice were to confirm this trend in its case law, how would it affect the Commission's policy on legislative initiatives on minimum social standards?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-3809/98

Labour, employment and pensions

The European social model guarantees a certain minimum level of social rights. European provisions do not, however, prevent individual Member States from taking steps to maintain or introduce a higher level of protection in respect of working conditions. Several cases referred to the European Court of Justice and relating to minimum provisions based on Article 118a (new Article 138) of the EC Treaty give cause for concern. Case C-2/97 ('società italiana petroli SpA') involves the admissibility of stricter Italian limit values for carcinogenic substances in benzene; in case C-49/98, by decision of 10February 1998 the Wiesbaden industrial tribunal referred to the European Court of Justice the question of the application of more favourable German holiday entitlements to workers posted abroad. In both instances the referring courts - and, in the 'società italiana petroli SpA' case, the Advocate-General - took the view that the Community's minimum provisions prevent or make it more difficult for the Member States to adopt stricter protective measures for employees or goods from abroad, than provided for by EC legislation. Is the Commission aware of this threat to higher levels of protection? If the European Court of Justice were to confirm this trend in its case law, how would it affect the Commission's policy on legislative initiatives on minimum social standards?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Riding helmets currently available are not totally safe. On the basis of a petition forwarded to the European Parliament's Committee on Petitions (Petition No1030/96 of 28 April 1996), the Commission has asked CEN to draw up a high-specification safety standard for safety helmets. If the work of Working Group 5 (L-TC 158 WG 5) is to progress smoothly, funding will be required to cover the cost of developing a prototype helmet. Now that a proposal, based on quotations submitted by Limerick University, Ireland, for testing and by DERA for manufacture of a new high-technology prototype, has been drawn up, will the Commission please indicate the reason for the delay in the allocation of funds and when those funds will be made available?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-0249/02

Labour, employment and pensions

Riding helmets currently available are not totally safe. On the basis of a petition forwarded to the European Parliament's Committee on Petitions (Petition No1030/96 of 28 April 1996), the Commission has asked CEN to draw up a high-specification safety standard for safety helmets. If the work of Working Group 5 (L-TC 158 WG 5) is to progress smoothly, funding will be required to cover the cost of developing a prototype helmet. Now that a proposal, based on quotations submitted by Limerick University, Ireland, for testing and by DERA for manufacture of a new high-technology prototype, has been drawn up, will the Commission please indicate the reason for the delay in the allocation of funds and when those funds will be made available?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.What policy does theEU have in place internally for violence in the workplace? 2.What security training and seminars are available for employees of theEU institutions? 3.Is this service open to external competition, and if not, why not?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-011083-15

Labour, employment and pensions

1.What policy does theEU have in place internally for violence in the workplace? 2.What security training and seminars are available for employees of theEU institutions? 3.Is this service open to external competition, and if not, why not?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In 1997 the European Parliament adopted the report by MrsAstrid Lulling (A4-0005/97)(1) on """"""""thesituation of spouses assisting self-employed workers"""""""", in which, while giving due regard to the subsidiarity principle, it proposed the adoption of some useful measures aimed at improving the situation of women working with their husbands in agriculture, crafts, commerce and the professions. The report proposed remedies for the inadequacies of the 1986 Directive, which had fallen far short of its declared objective of """"""""giving assisting spouses a clearly defined professional status and establishing their social security entitlements"""""""". The French association that represents spouses of self-employed workers estimates the number of people concerned at 8,2 million in the whole of the European Union. The Commission's estimate in 1995 was 3,3 million. Does the Commission have recent studies on the social situation of spouses of self-employed workers in the European Union? Does it envisage recommending to the Member States that they adopt the measures, particularly those of a fiscal nature, needed to give spouses of self-employed workers a stable social status? (1)OJ C 85, 17.3.1997, p. 186.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-3401/00

Labour, employment and pensions

In 1997 the European Parliament adopted the report by MrsAstrid Lulling (A4-0005/97)(1) on """"""""thesituation of spouses assisting self-employed workers"""""""", in which, while giving due regard to the subsidiarity principle, it proposed the adoption of some useful measures aimed at improving the situation of women working with their husbands in agriculture, crafts, commerce and the professions. The report proposed remedies for the inadequacies of the 1986 Directive, which had fallen far short of its declared objective of """"""""giving assisting spouses a clearly defined professional status and establishing their social security entitlements"""""""". The French association that represents spouses of self-employed workers estimates the number of people concerned at 8,2 million in the whole of the European Union. The Commission's estimate in 1995 was 3,3 million. Does the Commission have recent studies on the social situation of spouses of self-employed workers in the European Union? Does it envisage recommending to the Member States that they adopt the measures, particularly those of a fiscal nature, needed to give spouses of self-employed workers a stable social status? (1)OJ C 85, 17.3.1997, p. 186.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Asbestos, which has been widely used in the Member States, is a noxious substance posing a danger not just to those who have come into close contact with it in the course of their work, but also to people who have lived near factories where it was processed. It is known to be associated with respiratory diseases and several types of cancer, especially pleural mesothelioma. In Italy there are approximately 32million tonnes of asbestos cement (trade name Eternit) still to be disposed of; 3000 people a year fall victim to asbestos-related diseases, and, according to studies by the ISPESL (Institute for Prevention and Safety at Work), the figure is destined to rise. In the Netherlands 1000 cases are diagnosed annually, and in France the toll stands at 3000 a year. The EU has responded by adopting Directive2009/148/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work. Bearing the above points in mind, will the Commission take further steps to protect those who have been in contact with, and affected by, asbestos, including the families of persons who have died as a result of their exposure? Will it seek to finance the remediation of all sites where asbestos has been extracted or processed?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-9217/2010

Labour, employment and pensions

Asbestos, which has been widely used in the Member States, is a noxious substance posing a danger not just to those who have come into close contact with it in the course of their work, but also to people who have lived near factories where it was processed. It is known to be associated with respiratory diseases and several types of cancer, especially pleural mesothelioma. In Italy there are approximately 32million tonnes of asbestos cement (trade name Eternit) still to be disposed of; 3000 people a year fall victim to asbestos-related diseases, and, according to studies by the ISPESL (Institute for Prevention and Safety at Work), the figure is destined to rise. In the Netherlands 1000 cases are diagnosed annually, and in France the toll stands at 3000 a year. The EU has responded by adopting Directive2009/148/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work. Bearing the above points in mind, will the Commission take further steps to protect those who have been in contact with, and affected by, asbestos, including the families of persons who have died as a result of their exposure? Will it seek to finance the remediation of all sites where asbestos has been extracted or processed?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The directive on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities applies only to persons whose primary occupation is to perform mobile transport activities. There is a large group of workers who perform occupations, which include mobile road transport activities but not as the main occupation, and who are therefore not covered by the directive or the rules on driving times and rest periods.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2586/10

Labour, employment and pensions

The directive on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities applies only to persons whose primary occupation is to perform mobile transport activities. There is a large group of workers who perform occupations, which include mobile road transport activities but not as the main occupation, and who are therefore not covered by the directive or the rules on driving times and rest periods.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In Belgium the Socialist trade union ABVV is promoting ‘Jobconsult’, free advice on employment and careers, using the logos of the ESF and theEU. The associated website, www.abvvjobconsult.be, states that ‘35job advisers are available to assist members’, and also that ‘the members’ receive advice by telephone, i.e.only members of the trade union. This union does allow Flemish nationalists to join, so that people with Flemish nationalist convictions have no access to free advice paid for from European funds. 1.If ESF funds are used to finance free advice on work and careers, why are these advisers working for a private association and not for an authority? 2.Is it acceptable and compatible with freedom of association that these private associations should inform the public that this free advice is available only if they join the association? 3.If this free advice, paid for with European money, is available only via membership of a private association, is it acceptable for the private association to exclude individuals from membership on account of their political convictions? 4.Are measures taken to ensure that, in Flanders, exactly the same free advice is available to people who do not wish to join a private association? If so, how? 5.How much is being spent on this ESF project ‘Jobconsult’ in Belgium in 2011? How much of the funding is being paid to the ABVV, and how much to other associations or authorities? 6.What body decides on, and supervises, the way in which ESF projects are implemented in Belgium? Who belongs to the body?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-003539/2011

Labour, employment and pensions

In Belgium the Socialist trade union ABVV is promoting ‘Jobconsult’, free advice on employment and careers, using the logos of the ESF and theEU. The associated website, www.abvvjobconsult.be, states that ‘35job advisers are available to assist members’, and also that ‘the members’ receive advice by telephone, i.e.only members of the trade union. This union does allow Flemish nationalists to join, so that people with Flemish nationalist convictions have no access to free advice paid for from European funds. 1.If ESF funds are used to finance free advice on work and careers, why are these advisers working for a private association and not for an authority? 2.Is it acceptable and compatible with freedom of association that these private associations should inform the public that this free advice is available only if they join the association? 3.If this free advice, paid for with European money, is available only via membership of a private association, is it acceptable for the private association to exclude individuals from membership on account of their political convictions? 4.Are measures taken to ensure that, in Flanders, exactly the same free advice is available to people who do not wish to join a private association? If so, how? 5.How much is being spent on this ESF project ‘Jobconsult’ in Belgium in 2011? How much of the funding is being paid to the ABVV, and how much to other associations or authorities? 6.What body decides on, and supervises, the way in which ESF projects are implemented in Belgium? Who belongs to the body?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.The campaign ‘Stop Child Labour — School is the best place to work’ recently published the ‘Action Plan for Companies to Combat Child Labour’. Is the Commission willing to support and promote this Action Plan in all relevant economic programmes, political dialogues and development programmes? 2.To strengthen the fight against child labour, citizens, employers and organisations should be able to use a hotline to report on child labour. Is the European Commission willing to open and support a Child Labour Hotline to enable them to submit information on child labour in the direct operations or the supply chain of EU‑based companies? 3.As more in-depth information on child labour used by EU‑based companies is needed for effective EU policies against child labour, is the Commission willing to back up the Child Labour Hotline with substantial research capacity? 4.The Parliament has, in its resolution on CSR, requested an annual report on CSR to be submitted by the European Commission. Is the Commission willing to publish such a report every year and therein include the findings of the Child Labour Hotline and the research done by the Hotline in such a report? 5.The complete Dutch Parliament has decided that any support (e.g.participation in trade missions, subsidies) can only be given if a company makes clear that it either does not use child labour in its operations or supply-chain or, alternatively, provides a public time-bound action plan to combat any such child labour. Is the Commission willing to implement a similar policy for its support to companies as well?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-3220/08

Labour, employment and pensions

1.The campaign ‘Stop Child Labour — School is the best place to work’ recently published the ‘Action Plan for Companies to Combat Child Labour’. Is the Commission willing to support and promote this Action Plan in all relevant economic programmes, political dialogues and development programmes? 2.To strengthen the fight against child labour, citizens, employers and organisations should be able to use a hotline to report on child labour. Is the European Commission willing to open and support a Child Labour Hotline to enable them to submit information on child labour in the direct operations or the supply chain of EU‑based companies? 3.As more in-depth information on child labour used by EU‑based companies is needed for effective EU policies against child labour, is the Commission willing to back up the Child Labour Hotline with substantial research capacity? 4.The Parliament has, in its resolution on CSR, requested an annual report on CSR to be submitted by the European Commission. Is the Commission willing to publish such a report every year and therein include the findings of the Child Labour Hotline and the research done by the Hotline in such a report? 5.The complete Dutch Parliament has decided that any support (e.g.participation in trade missions, subsidies) can only be given if a company makes clear that it either does not use child labour in its operations or supply-chain or, alternatively, provides a public time-bound action plan to combat any such child labour. Is the Commission willing to implement a similar policy for its support to companies as well?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In a recent judgment by the European Court of Justice it was ruled that journeys made by workers without fixed or habitual places of work between their homes and the first and last customer of the day constitute working time, because excluding those journeys from working time would be contrary to the objective of protecting the health and safety of the workers pursued in European Union Law. Can the Commission give statistics on the number of workers who are employed in this way, where their decision to begin and finish their work-related journey at home — or otherwise — is in fact determined by their employer and not themselves?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-013559-15

Labour, employment and pensions

In a recent judgment by the European Court of Justice it was ruled that journeys made by workers without fixed or habitual places of work between their homes and the first and last customer of the day constitute working time, because excluding those journeys from working time would be contrary to the objective of protecting the health and safety of the workers pursued in European Union Law. Can the Commission give statistics on the number of workers who are employed in this way, where their decision to begin and finish their work-related journey at home — or otherwise — is in fact determined by their employer and not themselves?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In Denmark, 2000 cases of work-related eczema are reported each year. The eczema may be a result of work with allergenic substances, such as the preservative methylisothiazolinone, which is used in various products, including paints and cosmetic products. The eczema may also be irritative and as such be caused by the frequent use of machining oils, for example. In many cases, the workers who work with chemical substances or chemical preparations that can cause eczema, among other things, are not properly informed of this fact. With the entry into force of the REACH Regulation (EC) No1907/2006, a number of requirements are laid down, pursuant to TitleIV of said Regulation, concerning the chemical substances and chemical preparations for which safety data sheets are to be produced. Can the Commission say whether it is in accordance with Regulation (EC) No1907/2006 for the supplier of a substance or chemical preparation not to provide the substance or preparation in question with a safety data sheet, even though it consistently gives rise to work-related eczema, but at the same time does not fall under the provisions of Article31(1) to (4) of Regulation No1907/2006? Can it say whether it is the intention of the relevant EU legislation, which aims to protect workers against risks to their health, for chemical substances or chemical preparations which expose workers to a significant health risk, e.g.in the form of the risk of asthma, eczema or allergies, to be provided with a safety data sheet or accompanied by other relevant information which describes this risk, irrespective of the concentration of the chemical substance or preparation?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-012219-13

Labour, employment and pensions

In Denmark, 2000 cases of work-related eczema are reported each year. The eczema may be a result of work with allergenic substances, such as the preservative methylisothiazolinone, which is used in various products, including paints and cosmetic products. The eczema may also be irritative and as such be caused by the frequent use of machining oils, for example. In many cases, the workers who work with chemical substances or chemical preparations that can cause eczema, among other things, are not properly informed of this fact. With the entry into force of the REACH Regulation (EC) No1907/2006, a number of requirements are laid down, pursuant to TitleIV of said Regulation, concerning the chemical substances and chemical preparations for which safety data sheets are to be produced. Can the Commission say whether it is in accordance with Regulation (EC) No1907/2006 for the supplier of a substance or chemical preparation not to provide the substance or preparation in question with a safety data sheet, even though it consistently gives rise to work-related eczema, but at the same time does not fall under the provisions of Article31(1) to (4) of Regulation No1907/2006? Can it say whether it is the intention of the relevant EU legislation, which aims to protect workers against risks to their health, for chemical substances or chemical preparations which expose workers to a significant health risk, e.g.in the form of the risk of asthma, eczema or allergies, to be provided with a safety data sheet or accompanied by other relevant information which describes this risk, irrespective of the concentration of the chemical substance or preparation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Local staff employed at Commission offices in the Member States complain that, from the legal and economic point of view, they are not treated in the same way as Commission officials, even though they perform the same tasks and have the same qualifications. Local staff do the same work for the same time and under the same arrangements as officials. That notwithstanding, salary levels, treatment for social security purposes, and terms of contract are subject to two different systems of rules (one example being the rules governing the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme, which covers officials only). Such distinctions enable the Commission to cut costs but manifestly violate the principle of equal treatment within the Community's institutional machinery. Bearing in mind that standard contracts for local staff are in the process of being revised, does not the Commission believe that such staff at least need to be paid the same emoluments and salary as officials performing the same tasks, so as to avert the kind of discrimination referred to above?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2587/96

Labour, employment and pensions

Local staff employed at Commission offices in the Member States complain that, from the legal and economic point of view, they are not treated in the same way as Commission officials, even though they perform the same tasks and have the same qualifications. Local staff do the same work for the same time and under the same arrangements as officials. That notwithstanding, salary levels, treatment for social security purposes, and terms of contract are subject to two different systems of rules (one example being the rules governing the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme, which covers officials only). Such distinctions enable the Commission to cut costs but manifestly violate the principle of equal treatment within the Community's institutional machinery. Bearing in mind that standard contracts for local staff are in the process of being revised, does not the Commission believe that such staff at least need to be paid the same emoluments and salary as officials performing the same tasks, so as to avert the kind of discrimination referred to above?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Cypriot farmers who carry out hard and back-breaking work over many decades do not receive a commensurate pension when they retire. It is a huge social injustice that although everyone recognises the harshness and difficulty of our farmers’ way of life, no measures are taken to support them.I believe that the EU, recognising the difficult rural lives led by our farmers, the problems they face and the huge debts they bear, must consider the possibility of additional support for the pensions of Cypriot farmers.I believe that our farmers are entitled to and deserve better treatment in their old age.In view of the above, will the Commission say how it intends to intervene and strengthen the agricultural world of Cyprus, which is constantly shrinking?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-004245/2020

Labour, employment and pensions

Cypriot farmers who carry out hard and back-breaking work over many decades do not receive a commensurate pension when they retire. It is a huge social injustice that although everyone recognises the harshness and difficulty of our farmers’ way of life, no measures are taken to support them.I believe that the EU, recognising the difficult rural lives led by our farmers, the problems they face and the huge debts they bear, must consider the possibility of additional support for the pensions of Cypriot farmers.I believe that our farmers are entitled to and deserve better treatment in their old age.In view of the above, will the Commission say how it intends to intervene and strengthen the agricultural world of Cyprus, which is constantly shrinking?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to recent information published by the Labour Inspectorate, there has been an increase in the number of industrial accidents in Greece. Does the Commission have any information about the number of industrial accidents in each Member State of the European Union? Is it satisfied with the policy of prevention of industrial accidents in Greece?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2791/02

Labour, employment and pensions

According to recent information published by the Labour Inspectorate, there has been an increase in the number of industrial accidents in Greece. Does the Commission have any information about the number of industrial accidents in each Member State of the European Union? Is it satisfied with the policy of prevention of industrial accidents in Greece?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Is the European Commission aware of the problems that continue to exist with transfrontier working despite virtual completion of the internal market? 2.Is the European Commission aware that Netherlands legislation only allows pension rights built up abroad to be transferred to a Netherlands insurance company if the country of origin of the pension applies the same rules as the Netherlands? 3.Is the Commission also aware that in general the Member States have very different rules on pensions and that in practice it is therefore virtually impossible for workers to take their pension rights with them to another Member State? 4.Does the Commission share my view that practices of this kind are a serious obstacle to the mobility of labour in Europe? 5.Does the Commission intend to do anything to tackle these problems?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2228/03

Labour, employment and pensions

1.Is the European Commission aware of the problems that continue to exist with transfrontier working despite virtual completion of the internal market? 2.Is the European Commission aware that Netherlands legislation only allows pension rights built up abroad to be transferred to a Netherlands insurance company if the country of origin of the pension applies the same rules as the Netherlands? 3.Is the Commission also aware that in general the Member States have very different rules on pensions and that in practice it is therefore virtually impossible for workers to take their pension rights with them to another Member State? 4.Does the Commission share my view that practices of this kind are a serious obstacle to the mobility of labour in Europe? 5.Does the Commission intend to do anything to tackle these problems?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Many seasonal farmworkers may be unable to leave their countries of origin because of the pandemic, leaving EU farms facing critical labour shortages and crops lying unharvested.The free movement of seasonal and other farmworkers would, however, raise a number of concerns, not least regarding the possibility of them being infected and becoming a major source of transmission of a new virus to both humans and farm produce.Nevertheless, the fact remains that the free movement of workers is a fundamental right of European citizens. In view of expert advice regarding the new COVID-19 virus, for which no vaccine has yet been found and which could return in the autumn causing a fresh wave of infections, how does the Commission propose to contain the cross-border spread thereof?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-002649/2020

Labour, employment and pensions

Many seasonal farmworkers may be unable to leave their countries of origin because of the pandemic, leaving EU farms facing critical labour shortages and crops lying unharvested.The free movement of seasonal and other farmworkers would, however, raise a number of concerns, not least regarding the possibility of them being infected and becoming a major source of transmission of a new virus to both humans and farm produce.Nevertheless, the fact remains that the free movement of workers is a fundamental right of European citizens. In view of expert advice regarding the new COVID-19 virus, for which no vaccine has yet been found and which could return in the autumn causing a fresh wave of infections, how does the Commission propose to contain the cross-border spread thereof?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "For the purposes of career advancement of EC officials, the Staff Regulations provide for internal and external competitions for the purpose of assessing aptitude levels and drawing up lists accordingly. However, officials frequently take leave on personal grounds and subsequently return to their institution as temporary staff with a higher grade than before, thereby circumventing provisions of the Staff Regulations where they provide for competitions for the purposes of career advancement. Will the Commission ensure compliance with the provisions of the Staff Regulations and take prompt action to prevent recourse to such practices with a view to filling available posts for example, the post of Director in DG IX (Commission) which is currently vacant?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-548/95

Labour, employment and pensions

For the purposes of career advancement of EC officials, the Staff Regulations provide for internal and external competitions for the purpose of assessing aptitude levels and drawing up lists accordingly. However, officials frequently take leave on personal grounds and subsequently return to their institution as temporary staff with a higher grade than before, thereby circumventing provisions of the Staff Regulations where they provide for competitions for the purposes of career advancement. Will the Commission ensure compliance with the provisions of the Staff Regulations and take prompt action to prevent recourse to such practices with a view to filling available posts for example, the post of Director in DG IX (Commission) which is currently vacant?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Is Subpart Q of Commission Regulation (EC) No859/2008(1) of 20August 2008 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No3922/91 as regards common technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to commercial transportation by aeroplane to be regarded as minimum provisions? If so, does the Commission find it consistent with the underlying intention that legislation which was conceived as an absolute minimum requirement for countries in the eurozone should end up lowering health and safety standards for personnel in countries which already had better regulations? (1)OJ L 254, 20.9.2008, p. 1.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-6840/08

Labour, employment and pensions

Is Subpart Q of Commission Regulation (EC) No859/2008(1) of 20August 2008 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No3922/91 as regards common technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to commercial transportation by aeroplane to be regarded as minimum provisions? If so, does the Commission find it consistent with the underlying intention that legislation which was conceived as an absolute minimum requirement for countries in the eurozone should end up lowering health and safety standards for personnel in countries which already had better regulations? (1)OJ L 254, 20.9.2008, p. 1.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The quest to maintain a competitive edge and increase capitalist profits and redefine employment relationships and safety precautions has caused yet another work-related tragedy at the refineries of Hellenic Petroleum SA, an immensely profitable commercial group in Greece, resulting in the hospitalisation of 6 employees who are now fighting for their lives. The accident was due solely to the application of the anti-labour arsenal provided for under euro‐unifying and Greek legislation, with employment relationships and working hours being redefined, permanent trained workers (cut from 2700 to 1600 since 2003) being replaced by contract workers for a few days at a time, working exhausting 12‐ and 16-hour shifts and hundreds of thousands of hours’ overtime for a miserly EUR3.8 an hour, and work being intensified beyond all limits. The safety measures taken to protect workers’ lives and health are seen as ‘stranded’ costs and thousands of workers in Greece and throughout theEU are being cut to pieces as a result of ‘accidents at work’ (or rather employers’ criminal action). At the same time, hospital infrastructures are underfunded and are being downgraded and are unable to cope with such cases and government inspectorates have practically been shut down due to staff shortage. In view of the above, will the Commission say: What is its position on the increase in the number of accidents at work in Greece and throughout theEU, the intensification and increased outsourcing of work, the cutbacks in spending and safety measures and the need to comply with the working hours and remuneration provided for under collective agreements?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-007631-15

Labour, employment and pensions

The quest to maintain a competitive edge and increase capitalist profits and redefine employment relationships and safety precautions has caused yet another work-related tragedy at the refineries of Hellenic Petroleum SA, an immensely profitable commercial group in Greece, resulting in the hospitalisation of 6 employees who are now fighting for their lives. The accident was due solely to the application of the anti-labour arsenal provided for under euro‐unifying and Greek legislation, with employment relationships and working hours being redefined, permanent trained workers (cut from 2700 to 1600 since 2003) being replaced by contract workers for a few days at a time, working exhausting 12‐ and 16-hour shifts and hundreds of thousands of hours’ overtime for a miserly EUR3.8 an hour, and work being intensified beyond all limits. The safety measures taken to protect workers’ lives and health are seen as ‘stranded’ costs and thousands of workers in Greece and throughout theEU are being cut to pieces as a result of ‘accidents at work’ (or rather employers’ criminal action). At the same time, hospital infrastructures are underfunded and are being downgraded and are unable to cope with such cases and government inspectorates have practically been shut down due to staff shortage. In view of the above, will the Commission say: What is its position on the increase in the number of accidents at work in Greece and throughout theEU, the intensification and increased outsourcing of work, the cutbacks in spending and safety measures and the need to comply with the working hours and remuneration provided for under collective agreements?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 8February 2009 Switzerland will hold a referendum on approval of the renewal for an unlimited period of the basic agreement between Switzerland and the European Community and its Member States on free movement of persons, an agreement which was concluded for a trial period that will end in May 2009, and on approval and implementation of the protocol concerning the extension of the agreement on free movement of persons to Romania and Bulgaria. As the European Parliament’s rapporteur on the Protocol concerning the extension of the agreement on the free movement of persons to Romania and Bulgaria, Ihave followed events in Switzerland in this context closely, before and after the approval given by the European Parliament in the form of its resolution under the assent procedure of 9October 2008 (P6_TA(2008)0464). Iappreciate the fact that the referendum is being held shortly after the approval by the European Parliament, thus allowing the Protocol to come into force as quickly as possible. Ihave followed the events leading up to the referendum in Switzerland and have noted with concern that there has been a negative side to the campaign, directed against the Romanians and Bulgarians. Ibelieve that such a campaign can only succeed if citizens do not have all the necessary information or are misinformed. This is why it is imperative that the Swiss people be informed of the positive effects that free movement of workers within the Union has had on Member States’ economies and told that these positive effects will have the same impact on the Swiss economy. Citizens must also understand the political effects of a possible Swiss ‘no’, which would trigger the guillotine clause and, automatically, the cancelling of six other agreements with the European Union. What has the Commission done to ensure that the Swiss people have this information?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-0748/09

Labour, employment and pensions

On 8February 2009 Switzerland will hold a referendum on approval of the renewal for an unlimited period of the basic agreement between Switzerland and the European Community and its Member States on free movement of persons, an agreement which was concluded for a trial period that will end in May 2009, and on approval and implementation of the protocol concerning the extension of the agreement on free movement of persons to Romania and Bulgaria. As the European Parliament’s rapporteur on the Protocol concerning the extension of the agreement on the free movement of persons to Romania and Bulgaria, Ihave followed events in Switzerland in this context closely, before and after the approval given by the European Parliament in the form of its resolution under the assent procedure of 9October 2008 (P6_TA(2008)0464). Iappreciate the fact that the referendum is being held shortly after the approval by the European Parliament, thus allowing the Protocol to come into force as quickly as possible. Ihave followed the events leading up to the referendum in Switzerland and have noted with concern that there has been a negative side to the campaign, directed against the Romanians and Bulgarians. Ibelieve that such a campaign can only succeed if citizens do not have all the necessary information or are misinformed. This is why it is imperative that the Swiss people be informed of the positive effects that free movement of workers within the Union has had on Member States’ economies and told that these positive effects will have the same impact on the Swiss economy. Citizens must also understand the political effects of a possible Swiss ‘no’, which would trigger the guillotine clause and, automatically, the cancelling of six other agreements with the European Union. What has the Commission done to ensure that the Swiss people have this information?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Three years ago, the Commission emphatically put forward proposals to the Greek authorities concerning ways of resolving the question of the 200000 employees working under contract in the public sector in general and local authority organisations in Greece, considering the matter to fall within its sphere of competence. Why has the Commission not responded in exactly the same way to the numerous complaints concerning the conduct of ASEP (Supreme Council for Personnel Selection) in Greece and the details of allegedly non-transparent competitions for appointments to the public sector, and injustices against European citizens? Why has the Commission not intervened at least in the last 10years — as it did in the abovementioned case of the 200000 contract employees — when the scandal of unlawful appointments in the public sector (which began in 1981) continued and reached its peak in Greece, causing unprecedented injustice to individuals with a wealth of academic qualifications and professional experience who, however, have been kept out of the Greek public sector, as opposed to hundreds of thousands of others who gained entry without passing a competition, their sole ‘qualification’ being their party affiliation?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-3049/06

Labour, employment and pensions

Three years ago, the Commission emphatically put forward proposals to the Greek authorities concerning ways of resolving the question of the 200000 employees working under contract in the public sector in general and local authority organisations in Greece, considering the matter to fall within its sphere of competence. Why has the Commission not responded in exactly the same way to the numerous complaints concerning the conduct of ASEP (Supreme Council for Personnel Selection) in Greece and the details of allegedly non-transparent competitions for appointments to the public sector, and injustices against European citizens? Why has the Commission not intervened at least in the last 10years — as it did in the abovementioned case of the 200000 contract employees — when the scandal of unlawful appointments in the public sector (which began in 1981) continued and reached its peak in Greece, causing unprecedented injustice to individuals with a wealth of academic qualifications and professional experience who, however, have been kept out of the Greek public sector, as opposed to hundreds of thousands of others who gained entry without passing a competition, their sole ‘qualification’ being their party affiliation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Are EU citizens who are cross-border workers entitled to access the labour market of the state of employment even though they receive unemployment benefits in their state of residence during temporary periods of unemployment, and does this also apply to third‑country nationals, e.g.Moroccans, who have been long-term residents of, and last held employment in, the state where they were insured? Do Moroccan nationals lawfully employed and resident in a Member State have to be issued with residence permits valid for the whole of the territory of a Member State or can they be confined to the part of the Member State in which they work?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-5433/06

Labour, employment and pensions

Are EU citizens who are cross-border workers entitled to access the labour market of the state of employment even though they receive unemployment benefits in their state of residence during temporary periods of unemployment, and does this also apply to third‑country nationals, e.g.Moroccans, who have been long-term residents of, and last held employment in, the state where they were insured? Do Moroccan nationals lawfully employed and resident in a Member State have to be issued with residence permits valid for the whole of the territory of a Member State or can they be confined to the part of the Member State in which they work?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Am I to conclude from the European Commission’s answers to my Question E‑3105/07 that external psychiatrists can ask vulgar questions because that is part of their job; there are no safeguards for staff who may be asked by external psychiatrists whatever they consider professionally necessary; no healthy staff were asked to opt for invalidity between 2004 and 2006; the invalidity procedure which encouraged absence has been suspended for unknown reasons; and a Parliament resolution containing a paragraph about invalidity pensions received no attention from the Commission? When preparing its answer to my first question did the Commission ask staff who had been invalided out after periods of ‘encouraged absence’ for their views? If so, what credence was given to the responses? Since former staff have declared under oath that they were made to sign up for their invalidity pension, having been encouraged to stay at home for 12months, does the Commission deny using this technique to remove dissenters and other difficult people from the staff?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-0366/08

Labour, employment and pensions

Am I to conclude from the European Commission’s answers to my Question E‑3105/07 that external psychiatrists can ask vulgar questions because that is part of their job; there are no safeguards for staff who may be asked by external psychiatrists whatever they consider professionally necessary; no healthy staff were asked to opt for invalidity between 2004 and 2006; the invalidity procedure which encouraged absence has been suspended for unknown reasons; and a Parliament resolution containing a paragraph about invalidity pensions received no attention from the Commission? When preparing its answer to my first question did the Commission ask staff who had been invalided out after periods of ‘encouraged absence’ for their views? If so, what credence was given to the responses? Since former staff have declared under oath that they were made to sign up for their invalidity pension, having been encouraged to stay at home for 12months, does the Commission deny using this technique to remove dissenters and other difficult people from the staff?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian ministry of the economy presented its statement on the expenditure of funding made available by the European Union. Its research showed that some local authorities were worryingly slow and inefficient in awarding projects. The European Commission has also emphasised concern on various occasions at the under-utilisation of European funding by local authorities. Considering that, in particular, some local municipalities such as Florence are in great need of European funding for vocational training and employment, equal opportunities and social integration, Can the Commission indicate: 1. whether the municipality of Florence has submitted any projects under EQUAL, the ESF or the Fourth action programme on equal opportunities for women and men; 2. whether the municipality of Florence has received funding for those projects; 3. whether that funding has been utilised?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-0950/03

Labour, employment and pensions

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian ministry of the economy presented its statement on the expenditure of funding made available by the European Union. Its research showed that some local authorities were worryingly slow and inefficient in awarding projects. The European Commission has also emphasised concern on various occasions at the under-utilisation of European funding by local authorities. Considering that, in particular, some local municipalities such as Florence are in great need of European funding for vocational training and employment, equal opportunities and social integration, Can the Commission indicate: 1. whether the municipality of Florence has submitted any projects under EQUAL, the ESF or the Fourth action programme on equal opportunities for women and men; 2. whether the municipality of Florence has received funding for those projects; 3. whether that funding has been utilised?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Many institutions, organizations and associations have long been condemning the increasingly widespread practice of exploiting the labour of children and adolescents, often in difficult and dangerous jobs, in numerous countries all over the world. Children are frequently exploited, directly or indirectly, for European firms operating in third countries. Will the Commission say: 1. What measures it has adopted or intends to adopt to ban these forms of exploitation of child labour in countries which have cooperation agreements with the European Union? 2. Whether it intends to promote positive steps to put an end to these practices? 3. Whether it intends to promote the adoption, at international level, of """"""""social clauses"""""""" banning the exploitation of children in third countries? 4. Whether it intends to promote the adoption of codes of conduct for European firms operating in third countries in order to prevent the exploitation of child labour?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-0642/97

Labour, employment and pensions

Many institutions, organizations and associations have long been condemning the increasingly widespread practice of exploiting the labour of children and adolescents, often in difficult and dangerous jobs, in numerous countries all over the world. Children are frequently exploited, directly or indirectly, for European firms operating in third countries. Will the Commission say: 1. What measures it has adopted or intends to adopt to ban these forms of exploitation of child labour in countries which have cooperation agreements with the European Union? 2. Whether it intends to promote positive steps to put an end to these practices? 3. Whether it intends to promote the adoption, at international level, of """"""""social clauses"""""""" banning the exploitation of children in third countries? 4. Whether it intends to promote the adoption of codes of conduct for European firms operating in third countries in order to prevent the exploitation of child labour?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to its answer to Written Question E-0941/02(1), the European Commission acknowledges that the phrase """"""""native speaker""""""""""""""""is not acceptable, under any circumstances""""""""; under Community law. On the other hand, the Commission does not want to prohibit the use of the term in job advertisements. Furthermore, it wants to use its powers to fight against any discrimination """"""""caused by a requirement for""""""""native speaker""""""""knowledge in job advertisements"""""""". At the same time, it recommends using a phrase such as """"""""perfect or very good knowledge of a particular language"""""""". 1.Is the Commission aware that the simple replacement of one phrase by another does nothing to resolve the substantive problem? 2.Is it also aware that most employers looking for a native speaker — while not admitting it explicitly — in fact only invite native speakers to apply? 3.Has the Commission already conducted an investigation into this phenomenon? (a) If not, why not? Does it intend to make this form of discrimination into the subject of an investigation? (b) If so, what were the findings of the investigation, and what conclusions may be drawn therefrom with regard to policy proposals? (1)OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002, p. 161.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-2764/02

Labour, employment and pensions

According to its answer to Written Question E-0941/02(1), the European Commission acknowledges that the phrase """"""""native speaker""""""""""""""""is not acceptable, under any circumstances""""""""; under Community law. On the other hand, the Commission does not want to prohibit the use of the term in job advertisements. Furthermore, it wants to use its powers to fight against any discrimination """"""""caused by a requirement for""""""""native speaker""""""""knowledge in job advertisements"""""""". At the same time, it recommends using a phrase such as """"""""perfect or very good knowledge of a particular language"""""""". 1.Is the Commission aware that the simple replacement of one phrase by another does nothing to resolve the substantive problem? 2.Is it also aware that most employers looking for a native speaker — while not admitting it explicitly — in fact only invite native speakers to apply? 3.Has the Commission already conducted an investigation into this phenomenon? (a) If not, why not? Does it intend to make this form of discrimination into the subject of an investigation? (b) If so, what were the findings of the investigation, and what conclusions may be drawn therefrom with regard to policy proposals? (1)OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002, p. 161.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The 1989 Social Charter of workers' fundamental social rights, which forms part of the EC Treaties, clearly states in Article 18 that information, consultation and participation must be implemented in due time in cases where workers are affected by the employment policy pursued by their employer. Moreover, Article 2 of Directive 75/129/EEC (1), as amended, on collective redundancies states that """"""""where an employer is contemplating collective redundancies, he shall begin consultation with the workers"""""""" representatives in good time' and continues in Article 2(3) with """"""""To enable workers"""""""" representatives to make constructive proposals, the employers shall supply them with all relevant information, notify them in writing of the reasons for the redundancies and of the number and categories to be made redundant'. A draft law submitted unexpectedly to the Greek Parliament proposes radical changes affecting the fundamental labour rights of Olympic Airways' workers (such as collective redundancies), the provisions of which are not even known to the management of the company. Will the Commission examine to what extent this procedure and the substance of the draft law are consistent with the letter and the spirit of the Social Charter of workers' rights and the above-mentioned directive? (1)OJ L 48, 22.2.1975, p. 29.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-1267/98

Labour, employment and pensions

The 1989 Social Charter of workers' fundamental social rights, which forms part of the EC Treaties, clearly states in Article 18 that information, consultation and participation must be implemented in due time in cases where workers are affected by the employment policy pursued by their employer. Moreover, Article 2 of Directive 75/129/EEC (1), as amended, on collective redundancies states that """"""""where an employer is contemplating collective redundancies, he shall begin consultation with the workers"""""""" representatives in good time' and continues in Article 2(3) with """"""""To enable workers"""""""" representatives to make constructive proposals, the employers shall supply them with all relevant information, notify them in writing of the reasons for the redundancies and of the number and categories to be made redundant'. A draft law submitted unexpectedly to the Greek Parliament proposes radical changes affecting the fundamental labour rights of Olympic Airways' workers (such as collective redundancies), the provisions of which are not even known to the management of the company. Will the Commission examine to what extent this procedure and the substance of the draft law are consistent with the letter and the spirit of the Social Charter of workers' rights and the above-mentioned directive? (1)OJ L 48, 22.2.1975, p. 29.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission is currently drawing up rules for AOELs (Acceptable Operator Exposure Levels) for work involving the spraying of crops with pesticides. In this connection, can the Commissioner please answer the following questions: How will the AOELs be set, and how is it proposed to ensure that workers are not exposed to unnecessary risks at work when spraying with pesticides? Have the relevant workers’ organisations affected by the rules been consulted in connection with the drafting of Acceptable Operator Exposure Levels? If the relevant employees’ organisations have not been consulted in a series of hearings, why not? Can the Commissioner also please comment on the possibility in future of guaranteeing, during the drafting of rules, a right of consultation for those whose health and safety will be affected by such rules?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-3067/05

Labour, employment and pensions

The Commission is currently drawing up rules for AOELs (Acceptable Operator Exposure Levels) for work involving the spraying of crops with pesticides. In this connection, can the Commissioner please answer the following questions: How will the AOELs be set, and how is it proposed to ensure that workers are not exposed to unnecessary risks at work when spraying with pesticides? Have the relevant workers’ organisations affected by the rules been consulted in connection with the drafting of Acceptable Operator Exposure Levels? If the relevant employees’ organisations have not been consulted in a series of hearings, why not? Can the Commissioner also please comment on the possibility in future of guaranteeing, during the drafting of rules, a right of consultation for those whose health and safety will be affected by such rules?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to the Panhellenic Federation of Labour Inspectors’ Associations (POSEPE), the number of ‘occupational accidents’, including fatalities, in Greece has rocketed since 2010: it has risen steadily by about 10% annually. Through the succession of anti-labour ‘Memoranda’ aimed at boosting the competitiveness of large business conglomerates, the anti-working class policy pursued by theEU, the ECB, the IMF and the Greek Government has led to the abolition of even the minimal remaining legislative State protection of the health and safety of workers at the workplace, while inspections have been entrusted to private companies covering the employers. The lives and health of workers have been sacrificed on the altar of corporate profitability. This makes it clear that the incidents in question are not ‘accidents’, but crimes committed by employers with the connivance of all past governments and the present SYRIZA — ANEL coalition. In view of the above, will the Commission explain its views on: — The urgent demands of the workers’ movement for support for workers who have been injured during working hours and their families and the families of workers who have been killed? — The need to take the necessary measures to ensure that health and safety measures are taken, and that all workers enjoy employment and insurance rights? — The need to strengthen State control mechanisms, to create an exclusively State body of labour inspectors and doctors specialised in occupational medicine?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-000094-18

Labour, employment and pensions

According to the Panhellenic Federation of Labour Inspectors’ Associations (POSEPE), the number of ‘occupational accidents’, including fatalities, in Greece has rocketed since 2010: it has risen steadily by about 10% annually. Through the succession of anti-labour ‘Memoranda’ aimed at boosting the competitiveness of large business conglomerates, the anti-working class policy pursued by theEU, the ECB, the IMF and the Greek Government has led to the abolition of even the minimal remaining legislative State protection of the health and safety of workers at the workplace, while inspections have been entrusted to private companies covering the employers. The lives and health of workers have been sacrificed on the altar of corporate profitability. This makes it clear that the incidents in question are not ‘accidents’, but crimes committed by employers with the connivance of all past governments and the present SYRIZA — ANEL coalition. In view of the above, will the Commission explain its views on: — The urgent demands of the workers’ movement for support for workers who have been injured during working hours and their families and the families of workers who have been killed? — The need to take the necessary measures to ensure that health and safety measures are taken, and that all workers enjoy employment and insurance rights? — The need to strengthen State control mechanisms, to create an exclusively State body of labour inspectors and doctors specialised in occupational medicine?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Euroteam group of companies associated with entrepreneur Lukas Stuhlpfarrer(1) is the subject, in its capacity as arecipient of assistance, of acommittee of inquiry in the Austrian lower house of Parliament, the Nationalrat. It is being investigated by the committee in connection with use of assistance(2) which is not in accordance with the intended use. Is the Commission acquainted with the Euroteam group connected with Lukas Stuhlpfarrer or is it acquainted with individual companies in the group? If so, in what way? What assistance has been paid, or what payments have been made in respect of contracts, by the European Commission from Community funds or under EU programmes, to companies in the Euroteam group either directly or indirectly through Austrian bodies (listed according to providers, recipients, projects, period and project cost)? What has been the nature of the correspondence with project sponsors and recipients and providers of assistance? In what way has the conduct of individual projects involving EU funds been checked? Do the Commission or the Commissioner responsible have financial reports or audit reports from the project managers or recipients of assistance? Have penalties been called for by the Commission or the Commissioner responsible? If so, on what scale, against whom and when? (1)Euroteam Beteiligungsverwaltungs-AG (formerly L.S.-Beratungsgesellschaft für europäische Integrationsfragen GesmbH) and Verein Euroteam Vienna. These comprise: Verein Euroteam Burgenland; BFI (Berufsförderungsinstitut) Wien-Euroteam Fachhochschulstudiengangsbetriebsgesellschaft mbH.; Euroteam Viennagemeinnützige Forschungsprojekt GesmbH.; Euro-Team B (Burgenland) gemeinnützige Forschungsprojekt GesmbH; Euroteam Beratungsgesellschaft, Consulting Group Euroteam-Europe SPRL; tbk-Euro-team Call Center GmbH; Vienna Immobilienverwertungsgesellschaft m.b.H.; Projektzentrum 15. (2)Euroteam and its companies have received inter aliaassistance under the Employment - Youthstart Community Initiative - """"""""Professionet"""""""", the Adapt Community Initiative - """"""""European teleworking market"""""""", the Employment - Now Community Initiative- """"""""Employment Anticipated"""""""", the Employment - IntegraCommunity Initiative, Professions for Roma- """"""""Pro-roma"""""""" and the Adapt Community Initiative project """"""""Euro Adaption Programme"""""""". In addition, independent contracts in respect of assistance have been concluded with the above companies under the European Social Fund (ESF) on acofinancing basis, e.g. for the project """"""""Betriebsberatung 1"""""""" and """"""""Entwicklung eines Fachhochschulstudienganges für Exportwirtschaft"""""""".". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-0392/01

Labour, employment and pensions

The Euroteam group of companies associated with entrepreneur Lukas Stuhlpfarrer(1) is the subject, in its capacity as arecipient of assistance, of acommittee of inquiry in the Austrian lower house of Parliament, the Nationalrat. It is being investigated by the committee in connection with use of assistance(2) which is not in accordance with the intended use. Is the Commission acquainted with the Euroteam group connected with Lukas Stuhlpfarrer or is it acquainted with individual companies in the group? If so, in what way? What assistance has been paid, or what payments have been made in respect of contracts, by the European Commission from Community funds or under EU programmes, to companies in the Euroteam group either directly or indirectly through Austrian bodies (listed according to providers, recipients, projects, period and project cost)? What has been the nature of the correspondence with project sponsors and recipients and providers of assistance? In what way has the conduct of individual projects involving EU funds been checked? Do the Commission or the Commissioner responsible have financial reports or audit reports from the project managers or recipients of assistance? Have penalties been called for by the Commission or the Commissioner responsible? If so, on what scale, against whom and when? (1)Euroteam Beteiligungsverwaltungs-AG (formerly L.S.-Beratungsgesellschaft für europäische Integrationsfragen GesmbH) and Verein Euroteam Vienna. These comprise: Verein Euroteam Burgenland; BFI (Berufsförderungsinstitut) Wien-Euroteam Fachhochschulstudiengangsbetriebsgesellschaft mbH.; Euroteam Viennagemeinnützige Forschungsprojekt GesmbH.; Euro-Team B (Burgenland) gemeinnützige Forschungsprojekt GesmbH; Euroteam Beratungsgesellschaft, Consulting Group Euroteam-Europe SPRL; tbk-Euro-team Call Center GmbH; Vienna Immobilienverwertungsgesellschaft m.b.H.; Projektzentrum 15. (2)Euroteam and its companies have received inter aliaassistance under the Employment - Youthstart Community Initiative - """"""""Professionet"""""""", the Adapt Community Initiative - """"""""European teleworking market"""""""", the Employment - Now Community Initiative- """"""""Employment Anticipated"""""""", the Employment - IntegraCommunity Initiative, Professions for Roma- """"""""Pro-roma"""""""" and the Adapt Community Initiative project """"""""Euro Adaption Programme"""""""". In addition, independent contracts in respect of assistance have been concluded with the above companies under the European Social Fund (ESF) on acofinancing basis, e.g. for the project """"""""Betriebsberatung 1"""""""" and """"""""Entwicklung eines Fachhochschulstudienganges für Exportwirtschaft"""""""".

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Following parliamentary questions E‑2530/07 and E‑3498/07, can the Commission report any developments regarding whether Legal Notice51 of 2007 is in conformity with Directive1999/70/EC as it excludes certain categories of workers from the benefits of this directive? Particularly, in its reply to parliamentary Question E‑2530/07 the Commission had said that, ‘Following a preliminary evaluation of the new regulations, the Commission noted that these included exemptions which seem to raise concerns regarding conformity with Directive1999/70/EC’. Can the Commission confirm its position and how does the Commission intend to proceed with regards to this pending issue?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-5910/07

Labour, employment and pensions

Following parliamentary questions E‑2530/07 and E‑3498/07, can the Commission report any developments regarding whether Legal Notice51 of 2007 is in conformity with Directive1999/70/EC as it excludes certain categories of workers from the benefits of this directive? Particularly, in its reply to parliamentary Question E‑2530/07 the Commission had said that, ‘Following a preliminary evaluation of the new regulations, the Commission noted that these included exemptions which seem to raise concerns regarding conformity with Directive1999/70/EC’. Can the Commission confirm its position and how does the Commission intend to proceed with regards to this pending issue?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "SMA, the highly regarded Swiss rail timetabling company, has issued an opinion stating that the Stuttgart21 project is inefficient. In its issue No28 of 2010 the magazine Stern reports that this opinion is being withheld by the German Ministry of Transport. In this connection, the Ministry also seems to want to keep the recalculation of costs for the new Wendlingen–Ulm line under wraps until demolition work at the current main station in Stuttgart is complete, thus creating a fait accompli. According to the abovementioned source, this new line is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the previous EUR2billion estimate. Is the Commission aware that — as reported by radio broadcaster Hessischer Rundfunk as long ago as 25July2007 — Wolff & Müller, the company contracted to demolish the current main station in Stuttgart, is not paying the standard minimum wage for the construction industry in Baden-Württemberg? Further evidence for this is the fact that on 4February2006 this company had to pay 19 Romanian construction workers an additional EUR21000 under pressure from the German trade union IGBAU.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-6554/2010

Labour, employment and pensions

SMA, the highly regarded Swiss rail timetabling company, has issued an opinion stating that the Stuttgart21 project is inefficient. In its issue No28 of 2010 the magazine Stern reports that this opinion is being withheld by the German Ministry of Transport. In this connection, the Ministry also seems to want to keep the recalculation of costs for the new Wendlingen–Ulm line under wraps until demolition work at the current main station in Stuttgart is complete, thus creating a fait accompli. According to the abovementioned source, this new line is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the previous EUR2billion estimate. Is the Commission aware that — as reported by radio broadcaster Hessischer Rundfunk as long ago as 25July2007 — Wolff & Müller, the company contracted to demolish the current main station in Stuttgart, is not paying the standard minimum wage for the construction industry in Baden-Württemberg? Further evidence for this is the fact that on 4February2006 this company had to pay 19 Romanian construction workers an additional EUR21000 under pressure from the German trade union IGBAU.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "At the beginning of the year, the Commission intervened on behalf of an Estonian shipping company against two Finnish trade unions. The background was that the trade unions, in full compliance with Finnish law, had blockaded an Estonian ship. The trade unions were demanding that the Estonian Shipping Company (Esco) should respect Finnish agreements. How does the Commission justify its intervention and on what legal basis did it act? Does the Commission consider that it has the right to intervene in legal trade union disputes?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

P-1480/02

Labour, employment and pensions

At the beginning of the year, the Commission intervened on behalf of an Estonian shipping company against two Finnish trade unions. The background was that the trade unions, in full compliance with Finnish law, had blockaded an Estonian ship. The trade unions were demanding that the Estonian Shipping Company (Esco) should respect Finnish agreements. How does the Commission justify its intervention and on what legal basis did it act? Does the Commission consider that it has the right to intervene in legal trade union disputes?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to Transitions démographiques, Transitions économiques (Demographic Change, Economic Change), a pressure group comprising 50 French economists which specialises in studies on the impact of the ageing population on society, workers who endure poor conditions throughout their working lives see their health decline in both the short and long term. The effects are most apparent in old age, with 32% of retired persons developing a chronic illness and 42% finding themselves restricted in what they can do. The study also highlights the likelihood of developing depression as a result of overly long exposure to psychosocial risks. All of these things are contributing to the decline in the quality of life of ordinary citizens, the long-term cost of which is currently being underestimated, or even ignored. What measures will the Commission take to prevent the health of EU citizens being undermined by poor working conditions?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [5]. </s>

E-008117-16

Labour, employment and pensions

According to Transitions démographiques, Transitions économiques (Demographic Change, Economic Change), a pressure group comprising 50 French economists which specialises in studies on the impact of the ageing population on society, workers who endure poor conditions throughout their working lives see their health decline in both the short and long term. The effects are most apparent in old age, with 32% of retired persons developing a chronic illness and 42% finding themselves restricted in what they can do. The study also highlights the likelihood of developing depression as a result of overly long exposure to psychosocial risks. All of these things are contributing to the decline in the quality of life of ordinary citizens, the long-term cost of which is currently being underestimated, or even ignored. What measures will the Commission take to prevent the health of EU citizens being undermined by poor working conditions?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "During the last two weeks of September 2002 the seas off the island of Fuerteventura in the Canaries — one of the EU's outlying regions — were the scene of a series of military manoeuvres, organised by the Spanish Ministry of Defence with NATO participation. These quite disproportionate activities provoked considerable surprise among local civilians and tourists on the island, and also surprised the Canaries authorities, who had not been officially informed that the manoeuvres would take place. Meanwhile, about a score of the rare cetaceans which inhabit the seas off the Canaries were washed up dead on the coasts of Fuerteventura. Despite the acute sensitivities of the local population, the surprise of the tourists and the political representations made in consequence by the Canaries institutions to the Spanish authorities, themanoeuvres went on. In whatever circumstances, given that this was a defence-related event falling within the scope of the Community legislation on the common foreign and security policy, and, specifically, Articles 21 and 28 of the Treaty on European Union, 1. Will the Council suggest to the Spanish government and NATO that they should take the necessary action to provide compensation for the economic and social damage arising to the island of Fuerteventura, and take all steps to ensure that this incident is not repeated 2. Will the Council ensure, in the context of EU/NATO relations, that military manoeuvres are planned so that environmental considerations are taken into account and significant ecological consequences are avoided?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-2830/02

Defence

During the last two weeks of September 2002 the seas off the island of Fuerteventura in the Canaries — one of the EU's outlying regions — were the scene of a series of military manoeuvres, organised by the Spanish Ministry of Defence with NATO participation. These quite disproportionate activities provoked considerable surprise among local civilians and tourists on the island, and also surprised the Canaries authorities, who had not been officially informed that the manoeuvres would take place. Meanwhile, about a score of the rare cetaceans which inhabit the seas off the Canaries were washed up dead on the coasts of Fuerteventura. Despite the acute sensitivities of the local population, the surprise of the tourists and the political representations made in consequence by the Canaries institutions to the Spanish authorities, themanoeuvres went on. In whatever circumstances, given that this was a defence-related event falling within the scope of the Community legislation on the common foreign and security policy, and, specifically, Articles 21 and 28 of the Treaty on European Union, 1. Will the Council suggest to the Spanish government and NATO that they should take the necessary action to provide compensation for the economic and social damage arising to the island of Fuerteventura, and take all steps to ensure that this incident is not repeated 2. Will the Council ensure, in the context of EU/NATO relations, that military manoeuvres are planned so that environmental considerations are taken into account and significant ecological consequences are avoided?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Control Arms UK, a coalition of non-governmental organisations, has recently submitted a report detailing shortcomings in the UK arms sales strategy, namely the extent of the UK’s engagement in the conflict in Yemen. According to the report, concerns remain about the transparency of the use of arms export licenses by UK companies. Furthermore, there has been an overall lack of action to limit arms exports to Yemen, despite numerous calls for a limit on arms exports to those involved in this appalling conflict. In its resolution of 4October2018, Parliament called for an end to arms exports to countries actively participating in the Yemeni conflict(1). Is the VP/HR prepared to support an arms embargo on countries actively engaging in the war in Yemen, such as Saudi Arabia? Is it prepared to raise awareness about the extent of Member States’ participation in arms exports to countries actively engaging in the conflict in Yemen? (1)Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0383.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-000586-19

Defence

Control Arms UK, a coalition of non-governmental organisations, has recently submitted a report detailing shortcomings in the UK arms sales strategy, namely the extent of the UK’s engagement in the conflict in Yemen. According to the report, concerns remain about the transparency of the use of arms export licenses by UK companies. Furthermore, there has been an overall lack of action to limit arms exports to Yemen, despite numerous calls for a limit on arms exports to those involved in this appalling conflict. In its resolution of 4October2018, Parliament called for an end to arms exports to countries actively participating in the Yemeni conflict(1). Is the VP/HR prepared to support an arms embargo on countries actively engaging in the war in Yemen, such as Saudi Arabia? Is it prepared to raise awareness about the extent of Member States’ participation in arms exports to countries actively engaging in the conflict in Yemen? (1)Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0383.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The summit of heads of state and government of the 19 NATO countries held in Prague on 21/22 November 2002 in the presence of the leaders of the organisation's 27 partner countries meeting in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council was primarily concerned with two fundamental issues: upgrading NATO's strategic capabilities and the enlargement of NATO, three years after the accession of the first three former Soviet bloc members. The need to overhaul the North Atlantic Alliance's political and strategic structure arises from the proliferation of potential sources of instability and insecurity (in contrast with the Soviet threat which previously predominated) and the extension of the tasks entrusted to NATO by the Strategic Concept of 1991 and 1999, which included opposition to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and action to combat international terrorism and organised crime. It appears from the results achieved in Prague that the North Atlantic Alliance is still the political and military linchpin of Europe's new security, even if the summit did not succeed in solving all the outstanding political and institutional issues to be resolved by the Alliance. Can the Council answer the following: 1. Does it regard NATO as an alliance in the traditional sense, or as a new and more effective system of collective security in embryo? 2. Within NATO, how are relations between the European Union and the United States progressing and developing? 3. In military terms, what will be the relationship between European Union's Rapid Reaction Force and NATO's Response Force, given that 17 of the 19 NATO states are European? 4. What role is played by the WEU in this connection? 5. Is it conceivable that the """"""""enhanced cooperation"""""""" approach could give the participating countries the effectiveness required to ensure an autonomous defence policy?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-0334/03

Defence

The summit of heads of state and government of the 19 NATO countries held in Prague on 21/22 November 2002 in the presence of the leaders of the organisation's 27 partner countries meeting in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council was primarily concerned with two fundamental issues: upgrading NATO's strategic capabilities and the enlargement of NATO, three years after the accession of the first three former Soviet bloc members. The need to overhaul the North Atlantic Alliance's political and strategic structure arises from the proliferation of potential sources of instability and insecurity (in contrast with the Soviet threat which previously predominated) and the extension of the tasks entrusted to NATO by the Strategic Concept of 1991 and 1999, which included opposition to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and action to combat international terrorism and organised crime. It appears from the results achieved in Prague that the North Atlantic Alliance is still the political and military linchpin of Europe's new security, even if the summit did not succeed in solving all the outstanding political and institutional issues to be resolved by the Alliance. Can the Council answer the following: 1. Does it regard NATO as an alliance in the traditional sense, or as a new and more effective system of collective security in embryo? 2. Within NATO, how are relations between the European Union and the United States progressing and developing? 3. In military terms, what will be the relationship between European Union's Rapid Reaction Force and NATO's Response Force, given that 17 of the 19 NATO states are European? 4. What role is played by the WEU in this connection? 5. Is it conceivable that the """"""""enhanced cooperation"""""""" approach could give the participating countries the effectiveness required to ensure an autonomous defence policy?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The geopolitical importance of the Arctic region is constantly growing. The impact of climate change, growing competition for access to the Arctic and its natural resources and increasing economic activity have created both new opportunities and new dangers in the region, including, however, potential security problems. So far, it has been relatively clearly understood that it is important to try to avoid further militarisation of the Arctic. However, Russia is already proceeding with it at some speed. For example, in recent years Russia has stationed at least four new army brigades north of the Arctic Circle, built 16 deep-sea ports and 14 airbases, and acquired 40 icebreakers (a further 11 are still being built). Russia has also established an Arctic military district. In view of the spirit of cooperation that has so far prevailed in the Arctic, of course, one might rhetorically ask why Russia is investing so much in the Arctic militarily. In its communication concerning the Arctic, the Commission has avoided saying anything about security, whereas in the ensuing discussions the subject has already received a good deal of attention. Does the Commission have an overview of Russia’s activities in the Arctic? What does the Commission believe has prompted Russia to behave in the way that it is doing, that is to say, increasing the militarisation of the Arctic, bearing in mind that it is a ‘region free of tension’? In the light of recent developments, will the Commission nonetheless draw up an Arctic strategy for theEU, including a section on security in the region?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-004272-17

Defence

The geopolitical importance of the Arctic region is constantly growing. The impact of climate change, growing competition for access to the Arctic and its natural resources and increasing economic activity have created both new opportunities and new dangers in the region, including, however, potential security problems. So far, it has been relatively clearly understood that it is important to try to avoid further militarisation of the Arctic. However, Russia is already proceeding with it at some speed. For example, in recent years Russia has stationed at least four new army brigades north of the Arctic Circle, built 16 deep-sea ports and 14 airbases, and acquired 40 icebreakers (a further 11 are still being built). Russia has also established an Arctic military district. In view of the spirit of cooperation that has so far prevailed in the Arctic, of course, one might rhetorically ask why Russia is investing so much in the Arctic militarily. In its communication concerning the Arctic, the Commission has avoided saying anything about security, whereas in the ensuing discussions the subject has already received a good deal of attention. Does the Commission have an overview of Russia’s activities in the Arctic? What does the Commission believe has prompted Russia to behave in the way that it is doing, that is to say, increasing the militarisation of the Arctic, bearing in mind that it is a ‘region free of tension’? In the light of recent developments, will the Commission nonetheless draw up an Arctic strategy for theEU, including a section on security in the region?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Mitrokhin papers forwarded by the British Government have revealed that a dense spy network used to operate in Italy employed by the secret services of a foreign State hostile to Italy and free Europe. It used to monitor and put pressure on the institutions of the Italian State and even reached the highest political and government levels. What steps does the Council intend to take to shed light on this affair as swiftly as possible? Will the Council bring pressure to bear on the Italian Government to ensure that all the information needed to ascertain the truth is made known and, if necessary, call on the governments of other Member States to supply any documentation connected with the revelations contained in the Mitrokhin papers?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-1988/99

Defence

The Mitrokhin papers forwarded by the British Government have revealed that a dense spy network used to operate in Italy employed by the secret services of a foreign State hostile to Italy and free Europe. It used to monitor and put pressure on the institutions of the Italian State and even reached the highest political and government levels. What steps does the Council intend to take to shed light on this affair as swiftly as possible? Will the Council bring pressure to bear on the Italian Government to ensure that all the information needed to ascertain the truth is made known and, if necessary, call on the governments of other Member States to supply any documentation connected with the revelations contained in the Mitrokhin papers?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Since March2014, in response to the annexation of Crimea and interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine, theEU has been imposing sanctions on Russia, including restrictions on access to EU capital markets, a ban on importing goods from and investing in Crimea and a freeze on the assets of entities which support anti-Ukrainian activities. Despite the EU’s clear reaction and the sanctions being extended, Russia has become involved militarily in the war in Syria. At the same time, since 2011 EU Member States such as Spain, Malta and Greece have been receiving Russian warships in their ports. In Ceuta alone there have already been more than 50. It should be stressed that Russian warships continue to visit Spanish ports despite the sanctions that are still in force and in the face of aggression by the Russian navy and air force against Nato forces. 1.Is the Commission aware that some Member States are receiving Russian warships?2.Does the Commission intend to intervene in this matter?3.Does the Commission believe that such actions by Member States threaten the solidarity of the European Community?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

P-008049-16

Defence

Since March2014, in response to the annexation of Crimea and interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine, theEU has been imposing sanctions on Russia, including restrictions on access to EU capital markets, a ban on importing goods from and investing in Crimea and a freeze on the assets of entities which support anti-Ukrainian activities. Despite the EU’s clear reaction and the sanctions being extended, Russia has become involved militarily in the war in Syria. At the same time, since 2011 EU Member States such as Spain, Malta and Greece have been receiving Russian warships in their ports. In Ceuta alone there have already been more than 50. It should be stressed that Russian warships continue to visit Spanish ports despite the sanctions that are still in force and in the face of aggression by the Russian navy and air force against Nato forces. 1.Is the Commission aware that some Member States are receiving Russian warships?2.Does the Commission intend to intervene in this matter?3.Does the Commission believe that such actions by Member States threaten the solidarity of the European Community?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will Member States publish comprehensive annual reports of their arms exports, in order to achieve greater transparency under the new code of conduct on arms exports?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-3302/98

Defence

Will Member States publish comprehensive annual reports of their arms exports, in order to achieve greater transparency under the new code of conduct on arms exports?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Speaking on the eve of Bastille Day, the French President revealed that France is planning to draw up fresh proposals to strengthen EU defence policy, now that the UK has voted to leave theEU and, as he implied, will no longer be able to stand in the way of policy initiatives of this kind. At a time when defence is still a key aspect of Member State sovereignty, what is the Commission’s view on the prospects for a European Army?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-006131-16

Defence

Speaking on the eve of Bastille Day, the French President revealed that France is planning to draw up fresh proposals to strengthen EU defence policy, now that the UK has voted to leave theEU and, as he implied, will no longer be able to stand in the way of policy initiatives of this kind. At a time when defence is still a key aspect of Member State sovereignty, what is the Commission’s view on the prospects for a European Army?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The 2021 US defence budget steps up the sanctions introduced in 2019 and 2020 against firms involved in the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a project owned by Gazprom and co-financed by five European companies. The sanctions now target not only the firms selling, lending or providing the vessels used to lay the pipeline, but also those which ‘enable’ the vessels to be used. Moreover, the list of vessels black-listed by the US authorities has been expanded to include all those involved, either directly or indirectly, in pipe-laying ‘activities’. Although the construction work is nearly finished and was set to resume for the 120 European firms involved, several have recently bowed to the pressure and withdrawn from the project. In July 2020, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the European Union, Josep Borrell, condemned the unilateral US decision to impose sanctions ‘on European firms and interests’. Will the Commission move beyond mere rhetoric and take action to counter these extraterritorial measures that constitute a violation of international law and a direct attack against our economic interests and national sovereignties?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-001273/2021

Defence

The 2021 US defence budget steps up the sanctions introduced in 2019 and 2020 against firms involved in the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a project owned by Gazprom and co-financed by five European companies. The sanctions now target not only the firms selling, lending or providing the vessels used to lay the pipeline, but also those which ‘enable’ the vessels to be used. Moreover, the list of vessels black-listed by the US authorities has been expanded to include all those involved, either directly or indirectly, in pipe-laying ‘activities’. Although the construction work is nearly finished and was set to resume for the 120 European firms involved, several have recently bowed to the pressure and withdrawn from the project. In July 2020, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the European Union, Josep Borrell, condemned the unilateral US decision to impose sanctions ‘on European firms and interests’. Will the Commission move beyond mere rhetoric and take action to counter these extraterritorial measures that constitute a violation of international law and a direct attack against our economic interests and national sovereignties?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The latest statements by the EU High Representative regarding Operation Irini show the need for the European Union to strengthen its geopolitical presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.Operation Irini is enforcing the embargo which has been imposed and has prevented more than 100 arms shipments from reaching Libya; in this way, the European Union is strengthening its position, actively contributing to stability in the region.Operation Irini is therefore a positive and absolutely necessary initiative which, as the High Representative of the European Union has stressed, must be strengthened and framed by further initiatives.In view of the above, will the High Representative say:1.How does he intend to strengthen the role and increase the resources of Operation Irini in the context of the new 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework?2.What further operations does the European Union intend to launch and finance in order to strengthen its role in the Eastern Mediterranean?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-003720/2020

Defence

The latest statements by the EU High Representative regarding Operation Irini show the need for the European Union to strengthen its geopolitical presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.Operation Irini is enforcing the embargo which has been imposed and has prevented more than 100 arms shipments from reaching Libya; in this way, the European Union is strengthening its position, actively contributing to stability in the region.Operation Irini is therefore a positive and absolutely necessary initiative which, as the High Representative of the European Union has stressed, must be strengthened and framed by further initiatives.In view of the above, will the High Representative say:1.How does he intend to strengthen the role and increase the resources of Operation Irini in the context of the new 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework?2.What further operations does the European Union intend to launch and finance in order to strengthen its role in the Eastern Mediterranean?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "It is well known that concern is felt throughout Europe about the possible hazard posed by the toxicity of the depleted uranium in munitions used by NATO soldiers. The University of Witten-Herdecke in Germany has studied the health of radar technicians in the German army who worked with the Hawk and Patriot missile defence systems. Of the 99 former radar technicians examined, 69 have contracted cancer. 24 of them have now died. This was reported by the German television station ZDF on 13 January 2001. 1.Is the Council aware of the latter report? 2.Does the Council agree that concern about the health of employees in Europe's armies could damage the common security policy? 3.If so, does the Council agree that information about the health of European military personnel is covered by Article 16 of the Treaty and that all information concerning this and other matters should be shared by the Member States as soon as it becomes available? 4.Is the available information concerning the possible damaging effects of the Hawk and Patriot missile defence systems currently being shared by the Member States whose military personnel work with these systems? How is this information exchange coordinated? 5.Will the Council keep the European Parliament informed about the above and any related matters, pursuant to Article 21 of the Treaty?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-0186/01

Defence

It is well known that concern is felt throughout Europe about the possible hazard posed by the toxicity of the depleted uranium in munitions used by NATO soldiers. The University of Witten-Herdecke in Germany has studied the health of radar technicians in the German army who worked with the Hawk and Patriot missile defence systems. Of the 99 former radar technicians examined, 69 have contracted cancer. 24 of them have now died. This was reported by the German television station ZDF on 13 January 2001. 1.Is the Council aware of the latter report? 2.Does the Council agree that concern about the health of employees in Europe's armies could damage the common security policy? 3.If so, does the Council agree that information about the health of European military personnel is covered by Article 16 of the Treaty and that all information concerning this and other matters should be shared by the Member States as soon as it becomes available? 4.Is the available information concerning the possible damaging effects of the Hawk and Patriot missile defence systems currently being shared by the Member States whose military personnel work with these systems? How is this information exchange coordinated? 5.Will the Council keep the European Parliament informed about the above and any related matters, pursuant to Article 21 of the Treaty?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "For months now, the vast majority of Commission and EEAS officials have been teleworking in Brussels, their own countries or EU delegations throughout the world. As the headquarters of NATO, Brussels is a playground for the intelligence services of friend and foe alike, who take a keen interest in what the Commission and the EEAS are doing.1.How do the Commission and the EEAS protect its staff and their homes from bugging of their work telephone conversations and hacking of their PCs? What precautions are taken to protect confidential documents which are lying around? And how are the 40 000 staff protected from exploitation and recruitment?2.What trained personnel do the Commission and the EEAS have at their disposal for protection against espionage?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-006903/2020

Defence

For months now, the vast majority of Commission and EEAS officials have been teleworking in Brussels, their own countries or EU delegations throughout the world. As the headquarters of NATO, Brussels is a playground for the intelligence services of friend and foe alike, who take a keen interest in what the Commission and the EEAS are doing.1.How do the Commission and the EEAS protect its staff and their homes from bugging of their work telephone conversations and hacking of their PCs? What precautions are taken to protect confidential documents which are lying around? And how are the 40 000 staff protected from exploitation and recruitment?2.What trained personnel do the Commission and the EEAS have at their disposal for protection against espionage?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 25 and 26October I visited the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania (Russian Federation) at the invitation of the Chair of the Parliament. I've also managed to visit South Ossetia and its capital Tskhinval. On 26October in the morning I examined the situation at the border of South Ossetia on the principal road from Tskhinval to Gori and Tbilisi. This border point near the village of Ergneti is extremely important from a security point of view. It is situated on the hill from which Tskhinval in the valley can be observed. Iremained at this point for more than one hour (from 8.30 to 9.45). During this period of time I did not notice any presence of staff of the European Union Monitoring Mission or other persons within a distance of at least 500metres. According to Article3(2) of the Council Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP(1) of 15September 2008 on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, EUMM Georgia, one of the mission's tasks is monitoring the security of transport links. — Does the Council intend to guarantee the security of the Tskhinval city by deploying EUMM Georgia? — Is guaranteeing and/or monitoring such security possible without any permanent or temporary posts of EUMM Georgia near Tskhinval? — Does the Council take any responsibility for possible resumption of hostilities due to inadequate protection of Tskhinval? (1)OJ L 248, 17.9.2008, p. 26.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

P-6054/08

Defence

On 25 and 26October I visited the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania (Russian Federation) at the invitation of the Chair of the Parliament. I've also managed to visit South Ossetia and its capital Tskhinval. On 26October in the morning I examined the situation at the border of South Ossetia on the principal road from Tskhinval to Gori and Tbilisi. This border point near the village of Ergneti is extremely important from a security point of view. It is situated on the hill from which Tskhinval in the valley can be observed. Iremained at this point for more than one hour (from 8.30 to 9.45). During this period of time I did not notice any presence of staff of the European Union Monitoring Mission or other persons within a distance of at least 500metres. According to Article3(2) of the Council Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP(1) of 15September 2008 on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, EUMM Georgia, one of the mission's tasks is monitoring the security of transport links. — Does the Council intend to guarantee the security of the Tskhinval city by deploying EUMM Georgia? — Is guaranteeing and/or monitoring such security possible without any permanent or temporary posts of EUMM Georgia near Tskhinval? — Does the Council take any responsibility for possible resumption of hostilities due to inadequate protection of Tskhinval? (1)OJ L 248, 17.9.2008, p. 26.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Volcanic ash can turn into glass at high temperatures, for example in engines. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), over the past thirty years 100passenger aircraft have flown through ash clouds, and in a few cases damaged planes have had to cut short their flight. Volcanic ash is treacherous since although it thins as it spreads, the concentration of particles can be dense enough in places to cause engine damage. Particles of this type were reportedly found in the engines of several F-16-type NATO aircraft after flying through the ash cloud. It appears that the United States has reduced its military exercises as a result. 1.What NATO exercises (small- or large-scale) were held on NATO territory between 10 and 20April2010? 2.Were any new findings made in this context? 3.What consequences did the ash cloud have for planned NATO exercises? 4.To what extent does the Commission believe that volcanic eruptions or other natural events can affect theEU Member States' military capacity in the future and what does it think are the options for future action? 5.In this regard, are EU‑wide emergency plans in place or are any in the pipeline? 6.What preventive measures are being taken? 7.How will risk assessment, coordination and command be carried out in future in the event of occurrences of this kind?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-4977/2010

Defence

Volcanic ash can turn into glass at high temperatures, for example in engines. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), over the past thirty years 100passenger aircraft have flown through ash clouds, and in a few cases damaged planes have had to cut short their flight. Volcanic ash is treacherous since although it thins as it spreads, the concentration of particles can be dense enough in places to cause engine damage. Particles of this type were reportedly found in the engines of several F-16-type NATO aircraft after flying through the ash cloud. It appears that the United States has reduced its military exercises as a result. 1.What NATO exercises (small- or large-scale) were held on NATO territory between 10 and 20April2010? 2.Were any new findings made in this context? 3.What consequences did the ash cloud have for planned NATO exercises? 4.To what extent does the Commission believe that volcanic eruptions or other natural events can affect theEU Member States' military capacity in the future and what does it think are the options for future action? 5.In this regard, are EU‑wide emergency plans in place or are any in the pipeline? 6.What preventive measures are being taken? 7.How will risk assessment, coordination and command be carried out in future in the event of occurrences of this kind?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A number of Member States have intelligence agencies which have police powers. Knowledge gained through information exchange with such agencies could be used for coercive measures. This is prohibited in countries like Germany, because of the experience with the Gestapo. Which of their intelligence agencies (or police services with intelligence agency capabilities) have which Member States or third countries linked up with Europol, for example by means of the Europol Liaison Office in The Hague or the SIENA information system? What results can the Commission report following the two-year survey of possible ways for Europol and the Counter-Terrorism Group (CTG), which operates as an intelligence agency, to cooperate? Why is the survey being carried out? With which international organisations is Europol investigating possibilities for sharing battlefield information?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-001597-18

Defence

A number of Member States have intelligence agencies which have police powers. Knowledge gained through information exchange with such agencies could be used for coercive measures. This is prohibited in countries like Germany, because of the experience with the Gestapo. Which of their intelligence agencies (or police services with intelligence agency capabilities) have which Member States or third countries linked up with Europol, for example by means of the Europol Liaison Office in The Hague or the SIENA information system? What results can the Commission report following the two-year survey of possible ways for Europol and the Counter-Terrorism Group (CTG), which operates as an intelligence agency, to cooperate? Why is the survey being carried out? With which international organisations is Europol investigating possibilities for sharing battlefield information?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In a recent public statement the Royal British Legion claimed that post-war care for soldier victims is seriously lacking in Britain. This is very sad when one considers that the soldiers concerned risked their lives in the performance of their duty to their country. Whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, can the Commission in any way help to remedy this sorry state of affairs?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-5901/07

Defence

In a recent public statement the Royal British Legion claimed that post-war care for soldier victims is seriously lacking in Britain. This is very sad when one considers that the soldiers concerned risked their lives in the performance of their duty to their country. Whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, can the Commission in any way help to remedy this sorry state of affairs?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Media reports circulate that Iran has given Hezbollah, a terrorist group, Fateh-110 ballistic missiles with a range of up to 220 miles. Hezbollah already has Scud-Ds, which have an even greater range. — It has been mooted that, due to the looseness of the ‘Iran’ agreement, Iran could have atomic weapons in 10years. — Syrian forces have their own version of the Fateh-110, which could be seized by Islamic State if the bases are overrun. — US intelligence warned that Islamic State is aggressively trying to acquire chemical weapons as part of its campaign against the West. As a contingency against any conflation of the above, will the Commission encourage Member States to take a holistic view of terrorists' strategic weapons and plan their anti-terror campaigns accordingly?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-015033-15

Defence

Media reports circulate that Iran has given Hezbollah, a terrorist group, Fateh-110 ballistic missiles with a range of up to 220 miles. Hezbollah already has Scud-Ds, which have an even greater range. — It has been mooted that, due to the looseness of the ‘Iran’ agreement, Iran could have atomic weapons in 10years. — Syrian forces have their own version of the Fateh-110, which could be seized by Islamic State if the bases are overrun. — US intelligence warned that Islamic State is aggressively trying to acquire chemical weapons as part of its campaign against the West. As a contingency against any conflation of the above, will the Commission encourage Member States to take a holistic view of terrorists' strategic weapons and plan their anti-terror campaigns accordingly?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "If there is to be a European army, will each Member State provide its fair share of both resources and fighting men, unlike what currently happens in Afghanistan?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-3501/08

Defence

If there is to be a European army, will each Member State provide its fair share of both resources and fighting men, unlike what currently happens in Afghanistan?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to a recent article by BBC News, Slovakia has concluded an arms sale to SriLanka consisting of missiles due to be shipped to the SriLankan capital Colombo next Thursday. Is the Council aware of this transaction and if so, has this issue been discussed in the COARM (EU working party on arms)? Has the Slovakian Government explained to the other EU Member States how it believes such a sale to be in harmony with the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports in the perspective of the existing conflict and of the deteriorating human rights situation in SriLanka? What actions will the Council undertake in relation to the Slovakian Government?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-2415/08

Defence

According to a recent article by BBC News, Slovakia has concluded an arms sale to SriLanka consisting of missiles due to be shipped to the SriLankan capital Colombo next Thursday. Is the Council aware of this transaction and if so, has this issue been discussed in the COARM (EU working party on arms)? Has the Slovakian Government explained to the other EU Member States how it believes such a sale to be in harmony with the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports in the perspective of the existing conflict and of the deteriorating human rights situation in SriLanka? What actions will the Council undertake in relation to the Slovakian Government?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Since 12September 2001, the collective defence clause under Article5 of the NATO Treaty has been in operation. As part of this defence clause, eight separate measures have been taken by NATO/EU countries to support the USA. What measures are the individual EU States actually taking, and what is the extent thereof? How does participation in these measures affect the military, technological and human resources of EU States and the development of EU Battle Groups? 2.In the Council’s view, how have the various NATO measures been implemented since 2001? 3.What is the Council’s opinion of the extension of some of the measures, for instance ‘Operation Active Endeavour’? Does this hinder the creation of the new EU political defence mechanisms? 4.How long can/should the collective security clause remain in force? Is the Council discussing its timeframe? What position is the Council of the EU taking on this issue?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-4565/05

Defence

1.Since 12September 2001, the collective defence clause under Article5 of the NATO Treaty has been in operation. As part of this defence clause, eight separate measures have been taken by NATO/EU countries to support the USA. What measures are the individual EU States actually taking, and what is the extent thereof? How does participation in these measures affect the military, technological and human resources of EU States and the development of EU Battle Groups? 2.In the Council’s view, how have the various NATO measures been implemented since 2001? 3.What is the Council’s opinion of the extension of some of the measures, for instance ‘Operation Active Endeavour’? Does this hinder the creation of the new EU political defence mechanisms? 4.How long can/should the collective security clause remain in force? Is the Council discussing its timeframe? What position is the Council of the EU taking on this issue?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The creation of professional armies is acontemporary aspect of the restructuring of armies in EU Member States which marks anew departure, with conscription becoming athing of the past. However, in some units of the armed forces in the Member States, the number of posts on offer outstrips the demand from professional soldiers who have opted to pursue acareer in the armed forces. Does the Council see the need to promote access for Community citizens under the CFSP to certain posts in the armed forces in any EU Member State, regardless of their nationality, by encouraging mobility in the Member States' armed forces?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-0160/01

Defence

The creation of professional armies is acontemporary aspect of the restructuring of armies in EU Member States which marks anew departure, with conscription becoming athing of the past. However, in some units of the armed forces in the Member States, the number of posts on offer outstrips the demand from professional soldiers who have opted to pursue acareer in the armed forces. Does the Council see the need to promote access for Community citizens under the CFSP to certain posts in the armed forces in any EU Member State, regardless of their nationality, by encouraging mobility in the Member States' armed forces?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "European Union citizens who are members of reserve armies have to undergo training from time to time. 1. What information does the Commission possess about the periods of time reservists have to serve annually in each Member State? 2. (a) Which Member States have legislation to protect the civilian occupations of reservists who are called up? (b) Does the Commission have plans to bring forward a Directive to protect these jobs?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-530/95

Defence

European Union citizens who are members of reserve armies have to undergo training from time to time. 1. What information does the Commission possess about the periods of time reservists have to serve annually in each Member State? 2. (a) Which Member States have legislation to protect the civilian occupations of reservists who are called up? (b) Does the Commission have plans to bring forward a Directive to protect these jobs?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "During the debate on Arms Exports in plenary on Wednesday 12 March 2008, the Slovenian Presidency mentioned that seven Member States have not transposed into national legislation the 2003 Common Position on arms brokering. Which are these seven Member States and by what date do each of the seven expect to complete transposition? What action is the Presidency intending to take to speed up transposition by these seven Member States?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-1881/08

Defence

During the debate on Arms Exports in plenary on Wednesday 12 March 2008, the Slovenian Presidency mentioned that seven Member States have not transposed into national legislation the 2003 Common Position on arms brokering. Which are these seven Member States and by what date do each of the seven expect to complete transposition? What action is the Presidency intending to take to speed up transposition by these seven Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Given the security situation in Haiti, what is the Council doing to ensure that MINUSTAH is able to fulfil its mandate to protect the population? Is the Council concerned that only 30% of the total authorised strength is deployed and that Spain and France are the only Member States which are participating?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-2586/04

Defence

Given the security situation in Haiti, what is the Council doing to ensure that MINUSTAH is able to fulfil its mandate to protect the population? Is the Council concerned that only 30% of the total authorised strength is deployed and that Spain and France are the only Member States which are participating?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 19May2015, Germany, Italy and France signed an agreement to jointly develop a European-made military drone. These countries intend to build a medium-sized drone capable of carrying weapons by the end of 2015. In 2012, the Commission announced that it would coordinate the introduction of drones into civilian airspace in Europe. A ‘roadmap’ including a target date of 2028 for the full integration of drones into commercial airspace was published in June2013. However, the roadmap is limited to civil aviation, which enables theEU to continue to leave aside military drones as a matter for the Member States, while the Commission points out that ‘opportunities offered’ for police use of drones should be ‘well exploited’. Could the Commission clarify its view on the use of drones for policing and security purposes in European airspace?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-010072-15

Defence

On 19May2015, Germany, Italy and France signed an agreement to jointly develop a European-made military drone. These countries intend to build a medium-sized drone capable of carrying weapons by the end of 2015. In 2012, the Commission announced that it would coordinate the introduction of drones into civilian airspace in Europe. A ‘roadmap’ including a target date of 2028 for the full integration of drones into commercial airspace was published in June2013. However, the roadmap is limited to civil aviation, which enables theEU to continue to leave aside military drones as a matter for the Member States, while the Commission points out that ‘opportunities offered’ for police use of drones should be ‘well exploited’. Could the Commission clarify its view on the use of drones for policing and security purposes in European airspace?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Various prestigious NGO's (Oxfam, Amnesty International, Greenpeace) and the Autonomous University of Barcelona's Peace Culture School have claimed that Spain has been exporting military ammunition, as if it were hunting ammunition, to the following African countries: Ghana, Guinea Conakry, Central African Republic, Mauritania, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal, Guinea Bissau, Angola, Burkina Fasso and Cameroon. Apparently the Customs Registers of the Spanish Tax Agency show that the cartridges exported weighed on average 40 kg, and cost an average of EUR 120 each. Given that it is difficult to believe that hunting ammunition of such dimensions exists, and that these exports of munitions brought in over EUR 4 million in 2002, is the Commission aware of these Spanish exports? If the Commission is aware of the claims, has it taken or does it intend to take any steps?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-0620/04

Defence

Various prestigious NGO's (Oxfam, Amnesty International, Greenpeace) and the Autonomous University of Barcelona's Peace Culture School have claimed that Spain has been exporting military ammunition, as if it were hunting ammunition, to the following African countries: Ghana, Guinea Conakry, Central African Republic, Mauritania, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal, Guinea Bissau, Angola, Burkina Fasso and Cameroon. Apparently the Customs Registers of the Spanish Tax Agency show that the cartridges exported weighed on average 40 kg, and cost an average of EUR 120 each. Given that it is difficult to believe that hunting ammunition of such dimensions exists, and that these exports of munitions brought in over EUR 4 million in 2002, is the Commission aware of these Spanish exports? If the Commission is aware of the claims, has it taken or does it intend to take any steps?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Under the current Pilot Project on defence research (budget line 02 04 77 02), the IPR rules have been defined and detailed in AnnexI of the call for proposals (dated 13May2016). However, the call for proposals also states that: ‘Regarding the IPR arrangements of the projects, a case by case approach shall be adopted with negotiations with the participants taking place before the award’. 1.Could the Commission explain whether the general EU framework of IPR rules has been fully respected for each of the three projects awarded funding? If not, could the Commission provide the details of the specific IPR rules that might have been negotiated and adapted for each of the three projects awarded funding? 2.With reference to the results generated, can the Commission certify that it has the means to stop any transfer of ownership or licencing to a non-EU entity (AnnexI, point7.3, last paragraph)? In other words, is the Commission’s opinion legally binding on the entity concerned? If not, how can the Commission guarantee that such transfers or licencing outside EU territory of results generated through EU funding will not take place?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-007496-17

Defence

Under the current Pilot Project on defence research (budget line 02 04 77 02), the IPR rules have been defined and detailed in AnnexI of the call for proposals (dated 13May2016). However, the call for proposals also states that: ‘Regarding the IPR arrangements of the projects, a case by case approach shall be adopted with negotiations with the participants taking place before the award’. 1.Could the Commission explain whether the general EU framework of IPR rules has been fully respected for each of the three projects awarded funding? If not, could the Commission provide the details of the specific IPR rules that might have been negotiated and adapted for each of the three projects awarded funding? 2.With reference to the results generated, can the Commission certify that it has the means to stop any transfer of ownership or licencing to a non-EU entity (AnnexI, point7.3, last paragraph)? In other words, is the Commission’s opinion legally binding on the entity concerned? If not, how can the Commission guarantee that such transfers or licencing outside EU territory of results generated through EU funding will not take place?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "It is not the actions of Russia but of the USA which may provoke a cold war and a new arms race — these were the words of the Russian President Putin at the international economic forum in St Petersburg. Vladimir Putin said that ‘it is not local conflicts but global-scale decisions which are bringing about a cold war, such as Washington’s unilateral action in withdrawing from the international agreement on the limitation of anti-ballistic missile systems (ABM Treaty) in 2002. In reality it is such action which is pushing us towards a new wave of arms proliferation and altering the global security order.’ And these are not the most worrying of the comments made by the Russian President. Recently, when negotiating with the Finnish President Sauli Niinistö, he said this: ‘Russia will be forced to direct its weapons towards those countries which threaten it.’ What is theEU High Representative’s view of these statements by the Russian President? In what ways, and how seriously, is theEU preparing for potentially escalating conflicts in Europe? How is the strength of Europe’s armaments being increased, and how could it potentially be increased in future?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-010734-15

Defence

It is not the actions of Russia but of the USA which may provoke a cold war and a new arms race — these were the words of the Russian President Putin at the international economic forum in St Petersburg. Vladimir Putin said that ‘it is not local conflicts but global-scale decisions which are bringing about a cold war, such as Washington’s unilateral action in withdrawing from the international agreement on the limitation of anti-ballistic missile systems (ABM Treaty) in 2002. In reality it is such action which is pushing us towards a new wave of arms proliferation and altering the global security order.’ And these are not the most worrying of the comments made by the Russian President. Recently, when negotiating with the Finnish President Sauli Niinistö, he said this: ‘Russia will be forced to direct its weapons towards those countries which threaten it.’ What is theEU High Representative’s view of these statements by the Russian President? In what ways, and how seriously, is theEU preparing for potentially escalating conflicts in Europe? How is the strength of Europe’s armaments being increased, and how could it potentially be increased in future?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Under the freedom of information regulation (Regulation (EC) No1049/2001(1)), Ishould like to know whether the European Defence Agency was consulted in any way and if so, at which times in relation to the MOD procurement of the FCLV (Future Command and Liaison Vehicle) or their equivalents such as the MLV (Multi-Role Light Vehicle), and, if so, what advice was given? (1)OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-2937/05

Defence

Under the freedom of information regulation (Regulation (EC) No1049/2001(1)), Ishould like to know whether the European Defence Agency was consulted in any way and if so, at which times in relation to the MOD procurement of the FCLV (Future Command and Liaison Vehicle) or their equivalents such as the MLV (Multi-Role Light Vehicle), and, if so, what advice was given? (1)OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Turkey’s military offensive will bring further chaos and destruction to Syria, a country torn apart by political and social strife. It will severely worsen the already untenable plight of the Kurdish people, on whom Erdogan has declared war. Christians, Yazidis and the rest of the area’s population also find themselves in a critical situation. According to NGOs, six million people live in northern and eastern Syria, 1.5million of whom are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, 650000 people have been displaced as a result of the war. 1.What action will the Commission take to halt the escalation of violence following the Turkish attack on northern Syria? What will the Commission do to guarantee the stability of the area and to contribute to peace-making? 2.Will the Commission suspend trade and military agreements with Turkey until it ceases its invasion of northern Syria?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [16]. </s>

E-003185-19

Defence

Turkey’s military offensive will bring further chaos and destruction to Syria, a country torn apart by political and social strife. It will severely worsen the already untenable plight of the Kurdish people, on whom Erdogan has declared war. Christians, Yazidis and the rest of the area’s population also find themselves in a critical situation. According to NGOs, six million people live in northern and eastern Syria, 1.5million of whom are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, 650000 people have been displaced as a result of the war. 1.What action will the Commission take to halt the escalation of violence following the Turkish attack on northern Syria? What will the Commission do to guarantee the stability of the area and to contribute to peace-making? 2.Will the Commission suspend trade and military agreements with Turkey until it ceases its invasion of northern Syria?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The second subparagraph of Article287(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) states that: ‘The Court of Auditors shall provide the European Parliament and the Council with a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions which shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. This statement may be supplemented by specific assessments for each major area of Union activity.’ Over the years, the European Court of Auditors has presented this statement of assurance in different ways and, more recently, for the financial year ending on 31December2010, in the form of four opinions on: — the reliability of the accounts; — the legality and regularity of revenue underlying the accounts; — the legality and regularity of commitments underlying the accounts; — the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts, together with evidence supporting this last opinion, which is unfavourable. The fact that the Court of Auditors has presented a statement of assurance following its audit in the form of four separate opinions makes it difficult for the European Parliament to decide whether it is dealing with a positive or negative statement of assurance. However, it is vital that the Court of Auditors’ opinion is accurately assessed by the European Parliament so that, in full knowledge of the facts, it can monitor the Commission and exercise its political responsibility which involves — acting on a recommendation from the Council — giving a discharge to the European Commission in respect of the implementation of theEU budget pursuant to Article319 TFEU based on the statement of assurance referred to in the second subparagraph of Article287(1) TFEU. In view of this, Iam asking whoever it may concern at the Commission, whether, by submitting its statement of assurance like this with four separate opinions, the European Court of Auditors is acting in strict compliance with Article287 TFEU, which provides for a single statement of assurance and not several opinions?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-004126/2012

Macroeconomics

The second subparagraph of Article287(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) states that: ‘The Court of Auditors shall provide the European Parliament and the Council with a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions which shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. This statement may be supplemented by specific assessments for each major area of Union activity.’ Over the years, the European Court of Auditors has presented this statement of assurance in different ways and, more recently, for the financial year ending on 31December2010, in the form of four opinions on: — the reliability of the accounts; — the legality and regularity of revenue underlying the accounts; — the legality and regularity of commitments underlying the accounts; — the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts, together with evidence supporting this last opinion, which is unfavourable. The fact that the Court of Auditors has presented a statement of assurance following its audit in the form of four separate opinions makes it difficult for the European Parliament to decide whether it is dealing with a positive or negative statement of assurance. However, it is vital that the Court of Auditors’ opinion is accurately assessed by the European Parliament so that, in full knowledge of the facts, it can monitor the Commission and exercise its political responsibility which involves — acting on a recommendation from the Council — giving a discharge to the European Commission in respect of the implementation of theEU budget pursuant to Article319 TFEU based on the statement of assurance referred to in the second subparagraph of Article287(1) TFEU. In view of this, Iam asking whoever it may concern at the Commission, whether, by submitting its statement of assurance like this with four separate opinions, the European Court of Auditors is acting in strict compliance with Article287 TFEU, which provides for a single statement of assurance and not several opinions?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Cars running on LPG are less environmentally damaging than those with diesel or petrol engines, but too few tax incentives exist for them. Moreover, in many cases LPG cars are not permitted to enter underground car parks. This is despite the fact that the latest LPG/LPIsystems are closed systems from which no gas can possibly escape. What tax incentives or other financial incentives exist in the various Member States? What will the Commission do to provide more encouragement to use LPG cars?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-4997/09

Macroeconomics

Cars running on LPG are less environmentally damaging than those with diesel or petrol engines, but too few tax incentives exist for them. Moreover, in many cases LPG cars are not permitted to enter underground car parks. This is despite the fact that the latest LPG/LPIsystems are closed systems from which no gas can possibly escape. What tax incentives or other financial incentives exist in the various Member States? What will the Commission do to provide more encouragement to use LPG cars?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In Italy in recent months, during the government's drafting of the law transposing Directive2006/123/EC(1), demonstrations and protests were held by street and market traders worried about the entry into force of legal provisions which, under the terms of the above directive, would allow capital companies and cooperatives to obtain permits to trade in public areas (local and farmers' markets). The measures contained in the Italian implementing law stipulate that permits to trade in markets currently held by traditional street traders (usually one-person or family companies) should be reassigned once they expire by means of public award procedures in which capital companies and cooperatives would be able to take part and where no preference would be given to existing permit holders. Street traders have therefore held demonstrations and public protests condemning the effects of the directive on the street trading sector, where traditional local market traders are liable to be replaced by traders who would distort the established role of markets as places of significance not only in commercial terms but also in perpetuating the identity and traditions of local communities everywhere. Will the Commission say whether Bulgaria has yet transposed the Bolkestein Directive and whether protests or demonstrations similar to those in Italy were held by street and market traders before, during or after the entry into force of the law transposing the directive? What was the legal and regulatory framework governing the street trading sector in Bulgaria before the directive? What legal, social and economic effects has the implementation of the directive had on the street trading sector in Bulgaria? Before the directive was implemented, did Bulgarian law allow capital companies and cooperatives to trade in public areas and markets and did street traders obtain permits to trade from local authorities or was trade in public areas and markets completely unregulated? How were permits allocated before the directive was implemented and how has the procedure changed since? (1)OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-3939/2010

Macroeconomics

In Italy in recent months, during the government's drafting of the law transposing Directive2006/123/EC(1), demonstrations and protests were held by street and market traders worried about the entry into force of legal provisions which, under the terms of the above directive, would allow capital companies and cooperatives to obtain permits to trade in public areas (local and farmers' markets). The measures contained in the Italian implementing law stipulate that permits to trade in markets currently held by traditional street traders (usually one-person or family companies) should be reassigned once they expire by means of public award procedures in which capital companies and cooperatives would be able to take part and where no preference would be given to existing permit holders. Street traders have therefore held demonstrations and public protests condemning the effects of the directive on the street trading sector, where traditional local market traders are liable to be replaced by traders who would distort the established role of markets as places of significance not only in commercial terms but also in perpetuating the identity and traditions of local communities everywhere. Will the Commission say whether Bulgaria has yet transposed the Bolkestein Directive and whether protests or demonstrations similar to those in Italy were held by street and market traders before, during or after the entry into force of the law transposing the directive? What was the legal and regulatory framework governing the street trading sector in Bulgaria before the directive? What legal, social and economic effects has the implementation of the directive had on the street trading sector in Bulgaria? Before the directive was implemented, did Bulgarian law allow capital companies and cooperatives to trade in public areas and markets and did street traders obtain permits to trade from local authorities or was trade in public areas and markets completely unregulated? How were permits allocated before the directive was implemented and how has the procedure changed since? (1)OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The UK’s departure will leave an annual shortfall of EUR12billion in theEU budget, which will have to be made up by payments from the remaining 27Member States. The media have reported that an agreement was reached at a meeting on the EU’s cohesion policy with the representatives of eight Eastern European Member States that, in the future, these countries will pay ‘1.1% or perhaps even 1.2%’ of their proportional GDP. Until now, they have been paying 1%. These details of the agreement have been denied by the Croatian Ministry of Regional Development. Can the Commission say: What is the state of play as regards an agreement on increasing payments to the common EU budget after Brexit? How much will Croatia be expected to pay?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-001064-18

Macroeconomics

The UK’s departure will leave an annual shortfall of EUR12billion in theEU budget, which will have to be made up by payments from the remaining 27Member States. The media have reported that an agreement was reached at a meeting on the EU’s cohesion policy with the representatives of eight Eastern European Member States that, in the future, these countries will pay ‘1.1% or perhaps even 1.2%’ of their proportional GDP. Until now, they have been paying 1%. These details of the agreement have been denied by the Croatian Ministry of Regional Development. Can the Commission say: What is the state of play as regards an agreement on increasing payments to the common EU budget after Brexit? How much will Croatia be expected to pay?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, national governments should have introduced wide-ranging measures to protect citizens’ health and make it easier for people to protect themselves against the virus. One of the measures that a number of European countries did introduce was to lower the VAT on face masks so that this essential piece of medical equipment was not exorbitantly expensive.On several occasions, and over the course of several months, the Spanish Government has been asked by a number of organisations, entities and political parties to apply a VAT reduction to face masks, yet it has refused, claiming that this is not allowed by the EU.In the light of the above:1.Has the Commission informed the Member States that there will be no penalty for reducing the VAT on face masks? If so, when were they informed?2.Is the Commission currently preventing countries from reducing the VAT on face masks?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-006274/2020/rev.1

Macroeconomics

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, national governments should have introduced wide-ranging measures to protect citizens’ health and make it easier for people to protect themselves against the virus. One of the measures that a number of European countries did introduce was to lower the VAT on face masks so that this essential piece of medical equipment was not exorbitantly expensive.On several occasions, and over the course of several months, the Spanish Government has been asked by a number of organisations, entities and political parties to apply a VAT reduction to face masks, yet it has refused, claiming that this is not allowed by the EU.In the light of the above:1.Has the Commission informed the Member States that there will be no penalty for reducing the VAT on face masks? If so, when were they informed?2.Is the Commission currently preventing countries from reducing the VAT on face masks?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 11May2011, the French Government submitted a proposal to establish a special tax on holiday homes owned by foreigners or French nationals living abroad. The tax rate is to amount to 20% of the theoretical rental value of the property. Provided that the French Parliament gives its approval, the special tax will enter into force on 1January2012. In principle, each Member State makes its own decisions on its tax system. However, measures taken by individual Member States must always comply with the basic freedoms laid down in the Treaties — in particular the principle of equal treatment. The planned special tax only applies to foreign property owners or French nationals living abroad. 1.Does the tax reform planned in France breach the principle of non-discrimination or any internal market rules? 2.In the Commission’s view, will the planned reform create an inadmissible obstacle to foreign investments in France?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-005896/2011

Macroeconomics

On 11May2011, the French Government submitted a proposal to establish a special tax on holiday homes owned by foreigners or French nationals living abroad. The tax rate is to amount to 20% of the theoretical rental value of the property. Provided that the French Parliament gives its approval, the special tax will enter into force on 1January2012. In principle, each Member State makes its own decisions on its tax system. However, measures taken by individual Member States must always comply with the basic freedoms laid down in the Treaties — in particular the principle of equal treatment. The planned special tax only applies to foreign property owners or French nationals living abroad. 1.Does the tax reform planned in France breach the principle of non-discrimination or any internal market rules? 2.In the Commission’s view, will the planned reform create an inadmissible obstacle to foreign investments in France?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Did the Commission make any financial contribution to the Swedish referendum on the euro, either directly, or indirectly? If yes please give details. 2.Did the Commission supply euro publicity material to the Swedish Government or any other body ahead of the Swedish euro referendum? If yes please give details. 3.What involvement, if any, did the Commission have in the Swedish referendum? 4.Has the Commission distributed any publicity on the euro to either UK, Sweden or Denmark over the last 24 months? Does the Commission have any plans to do so? 5.Would the Commission envisage a role for itself in any possible euro referendum in the UK?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-3197/03

Macroeconomics

1.Did the Commission make any financial contribution to the Swedish referendum on the euro, either directly, or indirectly? If yes please give details. 2.Did the Commission supply euro publicity material to the Swedish Government or any other body ahead of the Swedish euro referendum? If yes please give details. 3.What involvement, if any, did the Commission have in the Swedish referendum? 4.Has the Commission distributed any publicity on the euro to either UK, Sweden or Denmark over the last 24 months? Does the Commission have any plans to do so? 5.Would the Commission envisage a role for itself in any possible euro referendum in the UK?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Under the Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Biotechnology and Advanced Manufacturing and Processing strand of the Horizon 2020 programme, the Commission funded research proposals for the construction industry in the EU to follow the latest technological developments that go beyond building information modelling towards digital building twins – real time digital representations of a building or infrastructure with tools and technologies to collect and process real data and information from the various pieces of machinery, parts and components on an ongoing construction site.The widespread use of such technologies could save lives and prevent construction site accidents, which are often fatal for workers and residents living in the vicinity of these sites.1.How many project proposals did the Commission receive under this funding strand?2.How does it plan to encourage further research into digital building twins under the new multiannual financial framework 2021-2027?3.In which Member States are the research institutions or teams predominantly based and how does the Commission aim to disseminate their knowledge and research across all Member States?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-003504/2020

Macroeconomics

Under the Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Biotechnology and Advanced Manufacturing and Processing strand of the Horizon 2020 programme, the Commission funded research proposals for the construction industry in the EU to follow the latest technological developments that go beyond building information modelling towards digital building twins – real time digital representations of a building or infrastructure with tools and technologies to collect and process real data and information from the various pieces of machinery, parts and components on an ongoing construction site.The widespread use of such technologies could save lives and prevent construction site accidents, which are often fatal for workers and residents living in the vicinity of these sites.1.How many project proposals did the Commission receive under this funding strand?2.How does it plan to encourage further research into digital building twins under the new multiannual financial framework 2021-2027?3.In which Member States are the research institutions or teams predominantly based and how does the Commission aim to disseminate their knowledge and research across all Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "By exploiting the method of calculating public debt used by the Union's statistical services, some Member States are using new methods of expanding their debt without the corresponding increase being reflected in the statistics. In specific terms, government bonds are issued against future government or public company revenue which is not always certain to materialise. Recently, new bonds were issued against anticipated funds from the EU's 3rd Community Support Framework. These loans are not recorded as public debt and, therefore, in the short term the debt appears, falsely, to have decreased, whereas in fact it not only remains outstanding but has increased at the same time as incurring very high interest-rate charges. The emergence of the debt and its payment are simply deferred to a later point in time to burden future generations and governments who will have to deal with a problem for which they bear no responsibility. The International Monetary Fund has already sharply criticised such """"""""creative accounting"""""""". Is the Commission aware of this matter? Has it investigated which countries employ these methods? Does it intend to change the method of calculating public debt to show the actual extent of the debt? If not, is it not inevitable that Member States' public finances and, consequently, the general economic situation in the Union will deteriorate in the medium term?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-0380/02

Macroeconomics

By exploiting the method of calculating public debt used by the Union's statistical services, some Member States are using new methods of expanding their debt without the corresponding increase being reflected in the statistics. In specific terms, government bonds are issued against future government or public company revenue which is not always certain to materialise. Recently, new bonds were issued against anticipated funds from the EU's 3rd Community Support Framework. These loans are not recorded as public debt and, therefore, in the short term the debt appears, falsely, to have decreased, whereas in fact it not only remains outstanding but has increased at the same time as incurring very high interest-rate charges. The emergence of the debt and its payment are simply deferred to a later point in time to burden future generations and governments who will have to deal with a problem for which they bear no responsibility. The International Monetary Fund has already sharply criticised such """"""""creative accounting"""""""". Is the Commission aware of this matter? Has it investigated which countries employ these methods? Does it intend to change the method of calculating public debt to show the actual extent of the debt? If not, is it not inevitable that Member States' public finances and, consequently, the general economic situation in the Union will deteriorate in the medium term?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In the wake of the COVID-19 emergency, the Commission has announced the waiver of the obligation to seek the return of unspent funding earmarked for operational programmes (OPs) without, however, allocating additional resources.To date, take-up of EU funding has proved harder in southern Italian regions, especially in view of the administrative gridlock caused by the COVID-19 virus, compounded by the lack of medical facilities comparable to those in the north of Italy.Any targeted transfer of `unspent´ funding from regional OPs to national projects would increase the risk of greater regional disparities.The rapid spread of he virus means that urgent action is necessary to assist undertakings with severe cash-flow problems. Otherwise, investment projects are in danger of grinding to a halt, resulting in the decommitment of funding for southern regions.In view of this:1.Can the Commission say what measures it will take in response to the administrative gridlock and cash-flow crisis being caused by the pandemic?2.Would it be prepared to envisage an extension of OP deadlines, exceptional OP payment advances and ERDF funding top-ups in response to the crisis?3.Can it say what EU funding mechanisms are being activated using unspent OP funding?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-001703/2020

Macroeconomics

In the wake of the COVID-19 emergency, the Commission has announced the waiver of the obligation to seek the return of unspent funding earmarked for operational programmes (OPs) without, however, allocating additional resources.To date, take-up of EU funding has proved harder in southern Italian regions, especially in view of the administrative gridlock caused by the COVID-19 virus, compounded by the lack of medical facilities comparable to those in the north of Italy.Any targeted transfer of `unspent´ funding from regional OPs to national projects would increase the risk of greater regional disparities.The rapid spread of he virus means that urgent action is necessary to assist undertakings with severe cash-flow problems. Otherwise, investment projects are in danger of grinding to a halt, resulting in the decommitment of funding for southern regions.In view of this:1.Can the Commission say what measures it will take in response to the administrative gridlock and cash-flow crisis being caused by the pandemic?2.Would it be prepared to envisage an extension of OP deadlines, exceptional OP payment advances and ERDF funding top-ups in response to the crisis?3.Can it say what EU funding mechanisms are being activated using unspent OP funding?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Despite the European Parliament and Council directive 97/5/EC(1) of 27January 1997 on cross-border credit transfers, a study carried out by the IECI and presented on 5February shows that within the 11 EURO Member States, for payments abroad: - the costs of cross-border transfers are, firstly, far too high and out of all proportion to the costs actually incurred by the banks; secondly, they vary quite considerably depending on the direction in which they are made; - despite the ban (if there is no agreement) on charging the recipient, this is nevertheless what happens in 35 % of cases in 10 of the 11 countries; - the specified time limit of 5 days is not respected in most countries. What action does the Commission intend to take, in the interests of consumers, to prohibit this abuse which is tolerated in individual Member States? (1)OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 25.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-2392/00

Macroeconomics

Despite the European Parliament and Council directive 97/5/EC(1) of 27January 1997 on cross-border credit transfers, a study carried out by the IECI and presented on 5February shows that within the 11 EURO Member States, for payments abroad: - the costs of cross-border transfers are, firstly, far too high and out of all proportion to the costs actually incurred by the banks; secondly, they vary quite considerably depending on the direction in which they are made; - despite the ban (if there is no agreement) on charging the recipient, this is nevertheless what happens in 35 % of cases in 10 of the 11 countries; - the specified time limit of 5 days is not respected in most countries. What action does the Commission intend to take, in the interests of consumers, to prohibit this abuse which is tolerated in individual Member States? (1)OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 25.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission state how much of the appropriation under heading B7-852 was allocated in 1994 to expenditure on research, expenditure on meetings of experts, expenditure on conferences and congresses, expenditure on information and publications? Can the Commission also specify the proportion which these four types of expenditure represent out of the total appropriation allocated to the above heading and state whether or not it regards this proportion as reasonable?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-3426/95

Macroeconomics

Will the Commission state how much of the appropriation under heading B7-852 was allocated in 1994 to expenditure on research, expenditure on meetings of experts, expenditure on conferences and congresses, expenditure on information and publications? Can the Commission also specify the proportion which these four types of expenditure represent out of the total appropriation allocated to the above heading and state whether or not it regards this proportion as reasonable?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Finland will be abolishing the confectionery tax in 2017. This is being done because of a warning from the Commission (the unofficial procedure in question was announced in the Finnish Government’s information bulletin on 29September2015) that the tax is incompatible with EU State aid rules. According to the published information, the Commission considers the confectionery tax, which is linked to tariff headings and supported by economic grounds, to be contrary to the state aid rules. It maintains that the tax is selective and does not treat similar products equally in terms of tax aims. Now that the confectionery tax is being abolished, options are being considered in order to make up for the resulting tax revenue shortfall. One possibility is to tax all products containing added sugar in the interest of public health. —What does the Commission think about public health-related taxation of products containing added sugar from the point of view of EU State aid rules?—Could a ‘sugar tax’, whereby a product would be taxed according to, say, the amount of sugar added, be problematic as regards EU State aid rules? If so, in what way?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

P-007855-16

Macroeconomics

Finland will be abolishing the confectionery tax in 2017. This is being done because of a warning from the Commission (the unofficial procedure in question was announced in the Finnish Government’s information bulletin on 29September2015) that the tax is incompatible with EU State aid rules. According to the published information, the Commission considers the confectionery tax, which is linked to tariff headings and supported by economic grounds, to be contrary to the state aid rules. It maintains that the tax is selective and does not treat similar products equally in terms of tax aims. Now that the confectionery tax is being abolished, options are being considered in order to make up for the resulting tax revenue shortfall. One possibility is to tax all products containing added sugar in the interest of public health. —What does the Commission think about public health-related taxation of products containing added sugar from the point of view of EU State aid rules?—Could a ‘sugar tax’, whereby a product would be taxed according to, say, the amount of sugar added, be problematic as regards EU State aid rules? If so, in what way?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.How can the statement made by the European Commission on 24 September 2002 about a relaxation of the rules governing the reduction of budget deficits be reconciled with another statement it made on the same day that there will be no tampering with the Stability Pact, and is the European Commission aware that, in taking that position, it was acting against the spirit of the Stability Pact and, consequently, inflicting serious damage on consumer confidence, which is already low? 2.Can the European Commission clarify how it will explain to Irish citizens why their country received a warning earlier this year, while Germany, a """"""""big"""""""" Member State, did not and why now, for the second time within a period of a few months, some """"""""big"""""""" Member States — France and Italy — will not have to comply with their obligations under the Stability Pact, and can the European Commission confirm that a twin-track policy is being pursued within the euro area, with the """"""""big"""""""" Member States being able to ignore agreements but not the """"""""little"""""""" Member States? 3.How can the European Commission's current position be reconciled with the press release dated 14 May 2002 issued by Commissioner Solbes, in which he """"""""urged the Member States … to make a last effort to reach a close to balance by 2004. … Stability should become the acquis for the euro area and Europe. … The process of budgetary consolidations needs to resume as soon as possible. Otherwise we will be forever in a transition period and would be impossible to milk the full benefits of our economic policy"""""""". (sic)". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

P-2806/02

Macroeconomics

1.How can the statement made by the European Commission on 24 September 2002 about a relaxation of the rules governing the reduction of budget deficits be reconciled with another statement it made on the same day that there will be no tampering with the Stability Pact, and is the European Commission aware that, in taking that position, it was acting against the spirit of the Stability Pact and, consequently, inflicting serious damage on consumer confidence, which is already low? 2.Can the European Commission clarify how it will explain to Irish citizens why their country received a warning earlier this year, while Germany, a """"""""big"""""""" Member State, did not and why now, for the second time within a period of a few months, some """"""""big"""""""" Member States — France and Italy — will not have to comply with their obligations under the Stability Pact, and can the European Commission confirm that a twin-track policy is being pursued within the euro area, with the """"""""big"""""""" Member States being able to ignore agreements but not the """"""""little"""""""" Member States? 3.How can the European Commission's current position be reconciled with the press release dated 14 May 2002 issued by Commissioner Solbes, in which he """"""""urged the Member States … to make a last effort to reach a close to balance by 2004. … Stability should become the acquis for the euro area and Europe. … The process of budgetary consolidations needs to resume as soon as possible. Otherwise we will be forever in a transition period and would be impossible to milk the full benefits of our economic policy"""""""". (sic)

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.The operational capability of the European internal market is not making any significant progress. What is the Commission doing to further develop the internal market in this important area? 2.The high cost of electricity (especially in Germany) has led to complaints from energy-intensive industries. Sites are being closed down (e.g.recently in Hamburg) and many jobs are at stake. What is the Commission's analysis of how the situation in the energy market influences the competitiveness of industry? 3.The economy has been further burdened with the obligations of the international Kyoto agreement on the reduction of CO2 emissions and the resulting trade system with emission certificates. What is the Commission's view of the functioning of the trade system with emission certificates in the international context? Is the European economy further losing its competitiveness through this system, which is not used in other countries and economic regions? 4.The price for emission certificates leads to electricity suppliers including ‘opportunity costs’ in their prices and thus further increases electricity prices. How does the Commission intend to put a stop to this? What is the situation in the various Member States?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-4397/05

Macroeconomics

1.The operational capability of the European internal market is not making any significant progress. What is the Commission doing to further develop the internal market in this important area? 2.The high cost of electricity (especially in Germany) has led to complaints from energy-intensive industries. Sites are being closed down (e.g.recently in Hamburg) and many jobs are at stake. What is the Commission's analysis of how the situation in the energy market influences the competitiveness of industry? 3.The economy has been further burdened with the obligations of the international Kyoto agreement on the reduction of CO2 emissions and the resulting trade system with emission certificates. What is the Commission's view of the functioning of the trade system with emission certificates in the international context? Is the European economy further losing its competitiveness through this system, which is not used in other countries and economic regions? 4.The price for emission certificates leads to electricity suppliers including ‘opportunity costs’ in their prices and thus further increases electricity prices. How does the Commission intend to put a stop to this? What is the situation in the various Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Spanish Government has recently announced its intention to go ahead with the permanent closure of the Hunosa mining concern, by the year 2002. Should there not be sufficient reindustrialization before then, central Asturias could become an industrial graveyard. The coal-mining industry in Asturias has shrunk dramatically in recent years: in 1980 there were 27000 workers and 24 mines, producing 4 m tonnes of coal, whereas now, in 1996, only 10 000 workers and 10 mines produce 2 m tonnes. Is the Commission aware of the extremely grave economic and social consequences of the industrial decline of Asturias and the uncertain prospects for the future? What is the Commission's assessment of the results of the plan for the restructuring of the coal-mining industry in Asturias for 1994-1997, in terms of employment and reindustrialization? In the event of there being (as is likely) no improvement in, or a deterioration of, the dramatic economic and social conditions linked to the gradual running down of the Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and La Camocha concerns, will it be possible to prolong public aid to the coal-mining industry in Asturias beyond the year 2002? Is the Commission willing to cooperate with the authorities in Asturias with a view to proposing alternatives for reindustrialization and economic diversification in this EU region, with the direct participation of the sectors of society in Asturias most concerned and, in particular, trade unions, employers' organizations, chambers of commerce and the university?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

P-3407/96

Macroeconomics

The Spanish Government has recently announced its intention to go ahead with the permanent closure of the Hunosa mining concern, by the year 2002. Should there not be sufficient reindustrialization before then, central Asturias could become an industrial graveyard. The coal-mining industry in Asturias has shrunk dramatically in recent years: in 1980 there were 27000 workers and 24 mines, producing 4 m tonnes of coal, whereas now, in 1996, only 10 000 workers and 10 mines produce 2 m tonnes. Is the Commission aware of the extremely grave economic and social consequences of the industrial decline of Asturias and the uncertain prospects for the future? What is the Commission's assessment of the results of the plan for the restructuring of the coal-mining industry in Asturias for 1994-1997, in terms of employment and reindustrialization? In the event of there being (as is likely) no improvement in, or a deterioration of, the dramatic economic and social conditions linked to the gradual running down of the Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and La Camocha concerns, will it be possible to prolong public aid to the coal-mining industry in Asturias beyond the year 2002? Is the Commission willing to cooperate with the authorities in Asturias with a view to proposing alternatives for reindustrialization and economic diversification in this EU region, with the direct participation of the sectors of society in Asturias most concerned and, in particular, trade unions, employers' organizations, chambers of commerce and the university?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "SMEs tell us repeatedly that contracts concluded under the THERMIE programme are processed only very slowly. Evidently, contractually guaranteed payments are paid not within two months but often after three to six months - in other words, from 12 to 18 months after the work was carried out. This would indeed be an intolerable burden for SMEs which are as a rule financially weaker than big companies. Can the Commission provide information without delay on the following questions: 1. What is the situation as regards the settlement of accounts relating to OPET contracts, which were funded under the THERMIE Regulation that expired on 31December 1994 and on the basis of which the work on accompanying measures was carried out during the relevant period? 2. What is the Commission's explanation for the delays in the payments it is due to make? Are those delays connected with the inappropriate settlement of accounts on a real-cost basis, criticized by the Court of Auditors in chapter 9, paragraph 9.8 of its draft report for 1995? 3. What will the Commission do to put an end to this deplorable state of affairs? 4. Does this Commission have any information about whether the delays in payment have adversely affected participating SMEs, even to the point of insolvency?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-2059/96

Macroeconomics

SMEs tell us repeatedly that contracts concluded under the THERMIE programme are processed only very slowly. Evidently, contractually guaranteed payments are paid not within two months but often after three to six months - in other words, from 12 to 18 months after the work was carried out. This would indeed be an intolerable burden for SMEs which are as a rule financially weaker than big companies. Can the Commission provide information without delay on the following questions: 1. What is the situation as regards the settlement of accounts relating to OPET contracts, which were funded under the THERMIE Regulation that expired on 31December 1994 and on the basis of which the work on accompanying measures was carried out during the relevant period? 2. What is the Commission's explanation for the delays in the payments it is due to make? Are those delays connected with the inappropriate settlement of accounts on a real-cost basis, criticized by the Court of Auditors in chapter 9, paragraph 9.8 of its draft report for 1995? 3. What will the Commission do to put an end to this deplorable state of affairs? 4. Does this Commission have any information about whether the delays in payment have adversely affected participating SMEs, even to the point of insolvency?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Mr Prodi has just expressed himself in favour of creating a European Super-Commissioner responsible for economic affairs. Does the Commission intend to encourage the creation of an analogous post in the field of social affairs or would the Super-Commissioner for economic affairs also be responsible, in a clear and precise manner, for social affairs?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

P-0892/04

Macroeconomics

Mr Prodi has just expressed himself in favour of creating a European Super-Commissioner responsible for economic affairs. Does the Commission intend to encourage the creation of an analogous post in the field of social affairs or would the Super-Commissioner for economic affairs also be responsible, in a clear and precise manner, for social affairs?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2014-2020 provides for a reduction in the budget for the European Food Aid Programme (PEAD) from EUR500million to EUR360million. The funds are apparently to be transferred to the European Cohesion Fund, the main objective of which is to promote employment, which is very different from the aims of the PEAD. Reducing the PEAD budget will not address the needs of the most deprived people in theEU. The Member States implementing the programme have asked the Commission to provide EUR675million, i.e.twice as much as the Commission has planned. Reducing this funding will have disastrous consequences in the form of food insecurity for the EU’s most deprived citizens, which will further increase the scale of poverty and disturb the present system of cooperation. Food is the basis of life; everyone should have access to it. In this connection: 1. Why was the decision taken to reduce the PEAD budget? 2. Has the Commission drawn up a report on the negative impact of reducing the PEAD budget? 3. How does the Commission intend to tackle malnutrition and poverty in the EU? 4. How does the Commission believe the PEAD programme should be implemented within the framework of the EFS?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-006221/2012

Macroeconomics

The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2014-2020 provides for a reduction in the budget for the European Food Aid Programme (PEAD) from EUR500million to EUR360million. The funds are apparently to be transferred to the European Cohesion Fund, the main objective of which is to promote employment, which is very different from the aims of the PEAD. Reducing the PEAD budget will not address the needs of the most deprived people in theEU. The Member States implementing the programme have asked the Commission to provide EUR675million, i.e.twice as much as the Commission has planned. Reducing this funding will have disastrous consequences in the form of food insecurity for the EU’s most deprived citizens, which will further increase the scale of poverty and disturb the present system of cooperation. Food is the basis of life; everyone should have access to it. In this connection: 1. Why was the decision taken to reduce the PEAD budget? 2. Has the Commission drawn up a report on the negative impact of reducing the PEAD budget? 3. How does the Commission intend to tackle malnutrition and poverty in the EU? 4. How does the Commission believe the PEAD programme should be implemented within the framework of the EFS?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Repeated assurances have been given by the Commission that the Med Programmes are about to be re-launched, according to the last communication I received from the Commission """"""""early in 1998"""""""". Some organisations, such as the London Borough of Islington in my constituency, had projects approved in 1995 and have invested considerable resources in maintaining the relevant networks underpinning them, so that they could be re-activated when the Programmes were re-launched. Can the Commission give any clear indication of when this will happen?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

P-0938/98

Macroeconomics

Repeated assurances have been given by the Commission that the Med Programmes are about to be re-launched, according to the last communication I received from the Commission """"""""early in 1998"""""""". Some organisations, such as the London Borough of Islington in my constituency, had projects approved in 1995 and have invested considerable resources in maintaining the relevant networks underpinning them, so that they could be re-activated when the Programmes were re-launched. Can the Commission give any clear indication of when this will happen?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The EU is deeply committed to the peace process in Colombia, and has announced new funding to help the country put the conflict behind it and consolidate peace. A package worth over EUR575million is envisaged, combining the cooperation funds earmarked from theEU Trust Fund, the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (EUR18 million) in support of the Colombian Government's Rapid Response Plan, and loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB), together with other cooperation funding that has already been allocated (EUR67million for the 2014-2017 period). The EUR90million in aid pledged by the Commission and 10Member States via the ‘Fondo Columba’ is of particular importance. The EIB plans to link a loan package of EUR400million to the action financed by the Trust Fund. How will the EIB participate in the various projects financed by the EU? Is there any intention to set aside part of the EIB's budget for rural development in Colombia and, in particular, to helping women in rural areas enter the formal economy? Has Colombia shown any commitment to such aims?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-005961-16

Macroeconomics

The EU is deeply committed to the peace process in Colombia, and has announced new funding to help the country put the conflict behind it and consolidate peace. A package worth over EUR575million is envisaged, combining the cooperation funds earmarked from theEU Trust Fund, the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (EUR18 million) in support of the Colombian Government's Rapid Response Plan, and loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB), together with other cooperation funding that has already been allocated (EUR67million for the 2014-2017 period). The EUR90million in aid pledged by the Commission and 10Member States via the ‘Fondo Columba’ is of particular importance. The EIB plans to link a loan package of EUR400million to the action financed by the Trust Fund. How will the EIB participate in the various projects financed by the EU? Is there any intention to set aside part of the EIB's budget for rural development in Colombia and, in particular, to helping women in rural areas enter the formal economy? Has Colombia shown any commitment to such aims?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Is the Commission aware of the remarks made by the German Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble(1)(2), concerning the reform of the eurozone and the appointment of a ‘currency Commissioner’? If so, does it share his views, and why? If not, why not? Which of his views does it not share? 2.Can or will the Commission state whether MrSchäuble discussed these plans with it in advance? 3.MrSchäuble wants to give the so-called ‘currency Commissioner’ so much power that he or she would be able to overrule national governments and parliaments. Does the Commission endorse this approach? If so, why? If not, why not? 4.What is more, MrSchäuble wants to change the voting arrangements in the European Parliament. In future, only MEPs from those Member States affected by a given policy proposal would be able to vote on it. Does the Commission share MrSchäuble’s views? If so, why? If not, why not? (1)http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/schaeuble-presents-euro-reforms-and-broad-new-powers-for-eu-a-861529.html (2)http://www.ftd.de/politik/europa/:eu-umbau-schaeuble-stoesst-auf-widerstand/70105070.html". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-009420-12

Macroeconomics

1.Is the Commission aware of the remarks made by the German Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble(1)(2), concerning the reform of the eurozone and the appointment of a ‘currency Commissioner’? If so, does it share his views, and why? If not, why not? Which of his views does it not share? 2.Can or will the Commission state whether MrSchäuble discussed these plans with it in advance? 3.MrSchäuble wants to give the so-called ‘currency Commissioner’ so much power that he or she would be able to overrule national governments and parliaments. Does the Commission endorse this approach? If so, why? If not, why not? 4.What is more, MrSchäuble wants to change the voting arrangements in the European Parliament. In future, only MEPs from those Member States affected by a given policy proposal would be able to vote on it. Does the Commission share MrSchäuble’s views? If so, why? If not, why not? (1)http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/schaeuble-presents-euro-reforms-and-broad-new-powers-for-eu-a-861529.html (2)http://www.ftd.de/politik/europa/:eu-umbau-schaeuble-stoesst-auf-widerstand/70105070.html

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Road haulage is fundamental to the free movement of goods within the European Union. Many road haulage firms, in particular in Italy, have been forced out of business by the unfair competition practised by some Member States. Small and medium-sized enterprises have been the hardest hit: in Italy, between 2008 and 2016, their numbers dropped by 25 587 to roughly 84 500. Some countries in eastern Europe offer terms which Italian firms simply cannot match, given the labour and labour-related costs they are required to bear. The only word for these practices is social dumping. 1.Does the Commission intend to revise the rules governing cabotage? 2.Will it take steps to halt the illegal use of arrangements involving the posting of workers, which distort competition?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-001256-18

Macroeconomics

Road haulage is fundamental to the free movement of goods within the European Union. Many road haulage firms, in particular in Italy, have been forced out of business by the unfair competition practised by some Member States. Small and medium-sized enterprises have been the hardest hit: in Italy, between 2008 and 2016, their numbers dropped by 25 587 to roughly 84 500. Some countries in eastern Europe offer terms which Italian firms simply cannot match, given the labour and labour-related costs they are required to bear. The only word for these practices is social dumping. 1.Does the Commission intend to revise the rules governing cabotage? 2.Will it take steps to halt the illegal use of arrangements involving the posting of workers, which distort competition?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "‘Euro banknotes and euro coins are the only legal tender in the euro area. The legal tender status of euro banknotes and coins is protected by the EU Treaties and secondary EU legislation. During the COVID-19 outbreak, citizens have tended to prefer electronic payments in order to avoid physical contact and maintain social distancing’, the Commission said in reply to a question submitted by MEPs Christine Anderson and Gunnar Beck(1) .However, it is ignoring the fact that customers often have no choice between cash and card payments. The institutions of the European Union are, sadly, setting a negative example in this respect: payment by cash is no longer possible.There are currently no definitive studies showing that germs or the SARS-CoV-2 virus can be spread between humans via bank notes. This overreaction, which is precautionary and has no scientific basis, deprives people in the EU of some of the freedom that the use of cash offers.1.Does the Commission have any scientific evidence (including, where possible, the source and the number of cases) that COVID-19 is transferred by means of payment with euro coins or euro banknotes?2.Otherwise, does the Commission intend to address, on the basis of its Action Plan against Disinformation, allegations that cash payments favour the transfer of COVID-19?3.In order to increase confidence in the euro, does the Commission intend to encourage citizens and traders in the Member States to continue to accept cash payments in good faith? (1)https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-002507-ASW_EN.html". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-005042/2020

Macroeconomics

‘Euro banknotes and euro coins are the only legal tender in the euro area. The legal tender status of euro banknotes and coins is protected by the EU Treaties and secondary EU legislation. During the COVID-19 outbreak, citizens have tended to prefer electronic payments in order to avoid physical contact and maintain social distancing’, the Commission said in reply to a question submitted by MEPs Christine Anderson and Gunnar Beck(1) .However, it is ignoring the fact that customers often have no choice between cash and card payments. The institutions of the European Union are, sadly, setting a negative example in this respect: payment by cash is no longer possible.There are currently no definitive studies showing that germs or the SARS-CoV-2 virus can be spread between humans via bank notes. This overreaction, which is precautionary and has no scientific basis, deprives people in the EU of some of the freedom that the use of cash offers.1.Does the Commission have any scientific evidence (including, where possible, the source and the number of cases) that COVID-19 is transferred by means of payment with euro coins or euro banknotes?2.Otherwise, does the Commission intend to address, on the basis of its Action Plan against Disinformation, allegations that cash payments favour the transfer of COVID-19?3.In order to increase confidence in the euro, does the Commission intend to encourage citizens and traders in the Member States to continue to accept cash payments in good faith? (1)https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-002507-ASW_EN.html

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Small and medium-sized producers in the plant protection sector take the view that Directive 91/414/EEC(1), and in particular Article 13(3)(d) thereof, consolidates the monopoly position of multinational firms instead of promoting free trade, and argue that small and medium-sized producers do not have the financial resources to fund the studies required to obtain renewed authorisation from the EU authorities for existing active substances. As few firms can afford to fund such studies, they claim, this requirement clearly places small and medium-sized producers at acompetitive disadvantage. Does the Commission endorse that view? In the United States, by contrast, multinational companies are obliged by law to share newly completed studies on existing active substances with their smaller competitors, subject to their paying an appropriate share of the costs (the """"""""datacompensation system""""""""). Is it true that the situation described above arose because of the lack of legislation in the Member States on fair access to data? Would it be possible to consider solving such problems by means of apan-European system to ensure fair access to datawithin the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC? Would the Commission be prepared to take action to achieve that end? (1)OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-1412/01

Macroeconomics

Small and medium-sized producers in the plant protection sector take the view that Directive 91/414/EEC(1), and in particular Article 13(3)(d) thereof, consolidates the monopoly position of multinational firms instead of promoting free trade, and argue that small and medium-sized producers do not have the financial resources to fund the studies required to obtain renewed authorisation from the EU authorities for existing active substances. As few firms can afford to fund such studies, they claim, this requirement clearly places small and medium-sized producers at acompetitive disadvantage. Does the Commission endorse that view? In the United States, by contrast, multinational companies are obliged by law to share newly completed studies on existing active substances with their smaller competitors, subject to their paying an appropriate share of the costs (the """"""""datacompensation system""""""""). Is it true that the situation described above arose because of the lack of legislation in the Member States on fair access to data? Would it be possible to consider solving such problems by means of apan-European system to ensure fair access to datawithin the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC? Would the Commission be prepared to take action to achieve that end? (1)OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.What appropriations are earmarked for this in the Budget? 2.The EC-Mexico Agreement lists 29 areas of cooperation. How does the Commission intend to put this into practice?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [1]. </s>

E-1920/00

Macroeconomics

1.What appropriations are earmarked for this in the Budget? 2.The EC-Mexico Agreement lists 29 areas of cooperation. How does the Commission intend to put this into practice?