Datasets:

siacus

/

cap_pe_v2

like 0

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 19 September 2020, Commissioners Valdis Dombrovskis and Paolo Gentiloni sent a letter to the Member States to guide them in drawing up their national budget legislation. In that letter they confirmed the validity of the general escape clause, through which ECOFIN suspended the stability pact last March until 2021, saying that decision would be reviewed in spring 2021.Currently Member States are preparing new measures to stem the second wave of COVID‑19. Coming just a few months after the first wave, this threatens to cause many already suffering economies, such as Italy’s, to collapse, with the undeniable delay in activating the Recovery Fund a further factor.In view of the official statement at the end of the ECOFIN meeting of 23 March 2020, according to which ‘Ministers remain fully committed to the respect of the Stability and Growth Pact’, and given the Netherlands’ recent requests for the Stability and Growth Pact to be linked to the Recovery Fund;whereas the stability pact is an inefficient mechanism which hinders economic recovery, as I pointed out in my previous questions,and new rules will be needed in Europe’s post-pandemic scenario to encourage a real recovery. Given these facts:1.For how long will the escape clause remain in force and the stability pact be suspended?2.Is the Commission planning to cancel the stability pact permanently?3.If not, how will it readjust budgetary constraints in light of the very serious economic situation in the EU?". 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-006046/2020

Macroeconomics

On 19 September 2020, Commissioners Valdis Dombrovskis and Paolo Gentiloni sent a letter to the Member States to guide them in drawing up their national budget legislation. In that letter they confirmed the validity of the general escape clause, through which ECOFIN suspended the stability pact last March until 2021, saying that decision would be reviewed in spring 2021.Currently Member States are preparing new measures to stem the second wave of COVID‑19. Coming just a few months after the first wave, this threatens to cause many already suffering economies, such as Italy’s, to collapse, with the undeniable delay in activating the Recovery Fund a further factor.In view of the official statement at the end of the ECOFIN meeting of 23 March 2020, according to which ‘Ministers remain fully committed to the respect of the Stability and Growth Pact’, and given the Netherlands’ recent requests for the Stability and Growth Pact to be linked to the Recovery Fund;whereas the stability pact is an inefficient mechanism which hinders economic recovery, as I pointed out in my previous questions,and new rules will be needed in Europe’s post-pandemic scenario to encourage a real recovery. Given these facts:1.For how long will the escape clause remain in force and the stability pact be suspended?2.Is the Commission planning to cancel the stability pact permanently?3.If not, how will it readjust budgetary constraints in light of the very serious economic situation in the EU?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Internet and the Euro facilitate the tightening of the distribution chain. Manufacturers have easier direct access to the retail industry, particularly the major chains, and the consumers themselves.The wholesale industry, after losing on the internal market the customs processing function and, through the Euro, the cash management function is now being deprived by the Internet even of its advance in information expertise over the retail industry. There is therefore a danger that in the next few years the wholesale industry will come under still more pressure between the major manufacturers and the retail industry dominant on the market on account of ever greater concentration. Does the Commission have plans for measures to prevent a further concentration in the industry, what measures are planned in the light of the threat from Internet and the Euro to eliminate small and medium-sized wholesale industry, and how does it view the chances of a sustainable future for such wholesale traders?". 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-1993/99

Macroeconomics

The Internet and the Euro facilitate the tightening of the distribution chain. Manufacturers have easier direct access to the retail industry, particularly the major chains, and the consumers themselves.The wholesale industry, after losing on the internal market the customs processing function and, through the Euro, the cash management function is now being deprived by the Internet even of its advance in information expertise over the retail industry. There is therefore a danger that in the next few years the wholesale industry will come under still more pressure between the major manufacturers and the retail industry dominant on the market on account of ever greater concentration. Does the Commission have plans for measures to prevent a further concentration in the industry, what measures are planned in the light of the threat from Internet and the Euro to eliminate small and medium-sized wholesale industry, and how does it view the chances of a sustainable future for such wholesale traders?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Workers in the fur sector in Kastoria and Siatista in Voio, Kozani are in dire straits, having suffered for years the consequences of the previous capitalist crisis and the Russian embargo imposed after the EU’s sanctions on Russia in 2014, as a result of the unfavourable climate for Greek products.Tens of thousands of workers are employed in this sector, and the majority of the workforce in these particular regions have also been affected by the lignite phase-out policy of the EU and Greek Governments, leading to thousands of workers losing their jobs.Workers in the sector, and particularly the thousands of women who sew fur at home, under non-standard work arrangements, without gifts or allowances, accepted the anti-labour offensive by the EU and governments, and the long-lasting Memoranda, but now the problems have been exacerbated by the pandemic.As a result of the new capitalist crisis and its burden on the shoulders of workers, subject to the threats of employers because of the very high levels of unemployment, hundreds of fur workers are working without collective agreements or insurance, and as a result they currently have no income.In view of this:Where does the Commission stand on the demands:1.to lift the EU sanctions that have led to the Russian embargo and to the difficulties with exports?2.that the billions lying in the Recovery Fund be used for the support of fur workers and workers as a whole, through immediate relief measures, and not for the EU and the government to decide to pay premiums to business groups?". 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-006983/2020

Macroeconomics

Workers in the fur sector in Kastoria and Siatista in Voio, Kozani are in dire straits, having suffered for years the consequences of the previous capitalist crisis and the Russian embargo imposed after the EU’s sanctions on Russia in 2014, as a result of the unfavourable climate for Greek products.Tens of thousands of workers are employed in this sector, and the majority of the workforce in these particular regions have also been affected by the lignite phase-out policy of the EU and Greek Governments, leading to thousands of workers losing their jobs.Workers in the sector, and particularly the thousands of women who sew fur at home, under non-standard work arrangements, without gifts or allowances, accepted the anti-labour offensive by the EU and governments, and the long-lasting Memoranda, but now the problems have been exacerbated by the pandemic.As a result of the new capitalist crisis and its burden on the shoulders of workers, subject to the threats of employers because of the very high levels of unemployment, hundreds of fur workers are working without collective agreements or insurance, and as a result they currently have no income.In view of this:Where does the Commission stand on the demands:1.to lift the EU sanctions that have led to the Russian embargo and to the difficulties with exports?2.that the billions lying in the Recovery Fund be used for the support of fur workers and workers as a whole, through immediate relief measures, and not for the EU and the government to decide to pay premiums to business groups?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 24 April 1997, the European Parliament passed a report on strengthening the business impact assessment system (A4-0413/96). During the April II part-session (1997), Commissioner Papoutsis commented: ‘I agree with the general idea of the report and with the European Parliament's resolution ... I would like to assure you of my determination to support a strengthening of the business impact assessment system.' (PE 222.596). In May 1997, OECD ministers endorsed the recommendations in the OECD Report on Regulatory Reform. These included that governments integrate Regulatory Impace Assessment (RIA) into the development, review and reform of regulations. It also identified ten elements of """"""""best practice"""""""" in this area: maximize political commitment to RIA; allocate responsibilities for IRA programme elements carefully; train regulators; use a consistent but flexible analytical method; develop and implement data collection strategies; target RIA efforts; integrate RIA into the policy-making process, starting as early as possible; communicate the results; involve the public extensively; apply RIA to existing and new regulation. Has the Commission taken account of the OECD best practice recommendations in its own on-going review; and what is the Commission's assessment of its own performance in each of the ten areas identified?". 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-0338/98

Macroeconomics

On 24 April 1997, the European Parliament passed a report on strengthening the business impact assessment system (A4-0413/96). During the April II part-session (1997), Commissioner Papoutsis commented: ‘I agree with the general idea of the report and with the European Parliament's resolution ... I would like to assure you of my determination to support a strengthening of the business impact assessment system.' (PE 222.596). In May 1997, OECD ministers endorsed the recommendations in the OECD Report on Regulatory Reform. These included that governments integrate Regulatory Impace Assessment (RIA) into the development, review and reform of regulations. It also identified ten elements of """"""""best practice"""""""" in this area: maximize political commitment to RIA; allocate responsibilities for IRA programme elements carefully; train regulators; use a consistent but flexible analytical method; develop and implement data collection strategies; target RIA efforts; integrate RIA into the policy-making process, starting as early as possible; communicate the results; involve the public extensively; apply RIA to existing and new regulation. Has the Commission taken account of the OECD best practice recommendations in its own on-going review; and what is the Commission's assessment of its own performance in each of the ten areas identified?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The mining division of ZGK BolesławS.A. comprised three mines, namely the Bolesław, the Olkusz and the Pomorzany. As a result of the exhaustion of the resources they contained, between 1995 and 1998 the mines were placed in liquidation and between 1995 and 2003 approximately PLN 112million was spent on closing down the mines and on social measures for the miners. In 2004 and 2005, despite the fact that PLN11.2million and PLN9million were earmarked in the national budget, only PLN6.2million and PLN4.6million was spent on social measures. The reason for suspending the provision of resources for the mine closures was that funding for mine closures was classified as public aid following Poland's accession to the European Union. In connection with this, a plan for the restructuring of the BolesławS.A. mining and metallurgy company between 2004 and 2006 was drawn up and forwarded to the EU. It should be pointed out that the main reason for the deterioration in the financial situation of the mines over the years was the introduction by the Polish authorities during the 1990s of exorbitant and grossly unjust eco-taxes. Furthermore the recent suspension of national public funding for the restructuring of the mines will totally paralyse all ZGH BolesławS.A operations. Given the above, would the Commission state: 1. Whether it would not agree that the need to complete of the process of restructuring the eco-tax debt and closing the mines in order to rescue them justifies authorisation being given for State aid to be granted? 2. Whether it would not agree that the fact that over the past 40years the Polish State has drawn benefits from the mines, since up until 2002 there was no obligation in Poland to set up reserves against future closure and the profits generated during that time were used for general public expenditure, is adequate grounds for the cost of restructuring and closing old mines being financed from public funds? 3. Whether, given that the decisions on providing public funding for restructuring the eco-tax debt and completing the process of closing the mines were taken prior to Poland's accession to the European Union and that the underlying legislation was adopted in December2003, it would not agree that the recent decision not to allow any further national public funding of the closing stages of the mine restructuring process is tantamount to consenting to legislation being introduced retroactively, something that is inadmissible and harmful in a democratic system?". 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-4626/05

Macroeconomics

The mining division of ZGK BolesławS.A. comprised three mines, namely the Bolesław, the Olkusz and the Pomorzany. As a result of the exhaustion of the resources they contained, between 1995 and 1998 the mines were placed in liquidation and between 1995 and 2003 approximately PLN 112million was spent on closing down the mines and on social measures for the miners. In 2004 and 2005, despite the fact that PLN11.2million and PLN9million were earmarked in the national budget, only PLN6.2million and PLN4.6million was spent on social measures. The reason for suspending the provision of resources for the mine closures was that funding for mine closures was classified as public aid following Poland's accession to the European Union. In connection with this, a plan for the restructuring of the BolesławS.A. mining and metallurgy company between 2004 and 2006 was drawn up and forwarded to the EU. It should be pointed out that the main reason for the deterioration in the financial situation of the mines over the years was the introduction by the Polish authorities during the 1990s of exorbitant and grossly unjust eco-taxes. Furthermore the recent suspension of national public funding for the restructuring of the mines will totally paralyse all ZGH BolesławS.A operations. Given the above, would the Commission state: 1. Whether it would not agree that the need to complete of the process of restructuring the eco-tax debt and closing the mines in order to rescue them justifies authorisation being given for State aid to be granted? 2. Whether it would not agree that the fact that over the past 40years the Polish State has drawn benefits from the mines, since up until 2002 there was no obligation in Poland to set up reserves against future closure and the profits generated during that time were used for general public expenditure, is adequate grounds for the cost of restructuring and closing old mines being financed from public funds? 3. Whether, given that the decisions on providing public funding for restructuring the eco-tax debt and completing the process of closing the mines were taken prior to Poland's accession to the European Union and that the underlying legislation was adopted in December2003, it would not agree that the recent decision not to allow any further national public funding of the closing stages of the mine restructuring process is tantamount to consenting to legislation being introduced retroactively, something that is inadmissible and harmful in a democratic system?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Does the Commission believe that the new 50% top rate of income tax in the UK will help the EU to come out of recession and reduce debt?". 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-3377/09

Macroeconomics

Does the Commission believe that the new 50% top rate of income tax in the UK will help the EU to come out of recession and reduce debt?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In order to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of campaigns run by theDG, can the Commissioner provide further details on how particular aspects of the budget were spent for the last two years for which figures are available? This relates to the following lines (coded as per the 2006 budget): — 18 04 01 02 — Which NGOs are funded in the UK under DaphneII, particularly for policy development and public information campaigns? — 18 04 03 — Can the Commissioner list the UK experts on fundamental rights and the organisations from which they hail? — 18 04 05 02 — Can the Commissioner list the policy documents and public information material in English that have been published in English by the Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia? — 18 05 01 03 — How many UK judges have participated, and at what level of seniority; what does the exchange programme consist of from an EU level input; what has been spent on the development of common learning and teaching materials, with what end result? — 18 05 04 — What has been provided to UK nationals? — 18 05 05 — Does any training in the European Police College involve material related to the broader ideology of European integration? — 18 06 01 02 — What information campaigns were run to improve public awareness?". 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-1693/07

Macroeconomics

In order to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of campaigns run by theDG, can the Commissioner provide further details on how particular aspects of the budget were spent for the last two years for which figures are available? This relates to the following lines (coded as per the 2006 budget): — 18 04 01 02 — Which NGOs are funded in the UK under DaphneII, particularly for policy development and public information campaigns? — 18 04 03 — Can the Commissioner list the UK experts on fundamental rights and the organisations from which they hail? — 18 04 05 02 — Can the Commissioner list the policy documents and public information material in English that have been published in English by the Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia? — 18 05 01 03 — How many UK judges have participated, and at what level of seniority; what does the exchange programme consist of from an EU level input; what has been spent on the development of common learning and teaching materials, with what end result? — 18 05 04 — What has been provided to UK nationals? — 18 05 05 — Does any training in the European Police College involve material related to the broader ideology of European integration? — 18 06 01 02 — What information campaigns were run to improve public awareness?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Final Report of the High Level Group on the Competitiveness of the European Chemicals Industry (2009) and the Commission communication entitled ‘The raw materials initiative — meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs in Europe’ (COM(2008)0699) refer to the problems faced by the chemicals industry in obtaining access to renewable raw materials at world market prices. This applies in particular to bioethanol. In its communication, the Commission says: ‘Besides external impediments to raw materials supply, the EU should also keep under review the EU tariff regime with a view to ensuring coherence with developments in EU demand for raw materials and in particular assess ways of lowering import restrictions for raw materials, including renewables, needed by industry as inputs for other products such as chemicals.’ (COM(2008)0699, point2.1, eighth paragraph). 1.Can the Commission outline the state of play? 2.Is the Commission working towards a solution to this problem? 3.When can a solution be expected?". 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-5616/09

Macroeconomics

The Final Report of the High Level Group on the Competitiveness of the European Chemicals Industry (2009) and the Commission communication entitled ‘The raw materials initiative — meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs in Europe’ (COM(2008)0699) refer to the problems faced by the chemicals industry in obtaining access to renewable raw materials at world market prices. This applies in particular to bioethanol. In its communication, the Commission says: ‘Besides external impediments to raw materials supply, the EU should also keep under review the EU tariff regime with a view to ensuring coherence with developments in EU demand for raw materials and in particular assess ways of lowering import restrictions for raw materials, including renewables, needed by industry as inputs for other products such as chemicals.’ (COM(2008)0699, point2.1, eighth paragraph). 1.Can the Commission outline the state of play? 2.Is the Commission working towards a solution to this problem? 3.When can a solution be expected?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Zero Emissions Research Initiative (ZERI) Foundation aims to design corporate strategies and industrial policies based on the principle of sustainable social and economic development. Does the Commission intend to send a representative to the forthcoming ZERI conference in Geneva?". 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-1367/98

Macroeconomics

The Zero Emissions Research Initiative (ZERI) Foundation aims to design corporate strategies and industrial policies based on the principle of sustainable social and economic development. Does the Commission intend to send a representative to the forthcoming ZERI conference in Geneva?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Council provide information about the allocation of resources to South Tirol during the 10-year period between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 1994, broken down on an annual basis? Will it also specify the authorities of the relevant EU initiatives and structural programmes responsible for the allocation of these resources?". 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-2300/95

Macroeconomics

Will the Council provide information about the allocation of resources to South Tirol during the 10-year period between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 1994, broken down on an annual basis? Will it also specify the authorities of the relevant EU initiatives and structural programmes responsible for the allocation of these resources?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "How would the High Representative characterise the political, social and economic situation in Barbados?". 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-009082-13

Macroeconomics

How would the High Representative characterise the political, social and economic situation in Barbados?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission’s 31stannual report on monitoring the application of Community law mentions the fact that, in a number of cases, proceedings have been instigated because of failure to transpose, or incomplete transposition of, tax directives. Can the Commission indicate the main directives subject to delays or difficulties in the transposition of tax provisions?". 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-008026-15

Macroeconomics

The Commission’s 31stannual report on monitoring the application of Community law mentions the fact that, in a number of cases, proceedings have been instigated because of failure to transpose, or incomplete transposition of, tax directives. Can the Commission indicate the main directives subject to delays or difficulties in the transposition of tax provisions?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Industry in north-east England welcomes the added protective measures that the implementation of the REACH Regulations will bring to the users of chemical substances. Industry is aware, however, that this is a complex and wide-ranging piece of legislation, which will affect organisations from manufacturing sectors that are unfamiliar with the regulation of chemical substances. It will also involve the introduction of a large and very complicated computerised registration, recording and data management system, and the introduction of a variety of competent authorities from around the EC Member States. Does the Commission have contingency arrangements to deal with any failure of the registration system? In particular, in the event that European Chemicals Agency software systems are unable to manage the quantity or complexity of data required to be input into them, is there any plan either to use a manual logging system for pre-registration or to allow for an extension to the pre-registration deadline? What action does the Commission plan to take if it is found that, through a lack of awareness of the breadth of impact that the REACH Regulations will have, a significant number of organisations miss the deadline for pre-registration of substances? If the competent authority of a Member State finds that there has been a failure to communicate adequately along the supply chain within their state, what action will the Commission take?". 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-5575/08

Macroeconomics

Industry in north-east England welcomes the added protective measures that the implementation of the REACH Regulations will bring to the users of chemical substances. Industry is aware, however, that this is a complex and wide-ranging piece of legislation, which will affect organisations from manufacturing sectors that are unfamiliar with the regulation of chemical substances. It will also involve the introduction of a large and very complicated computerised registration, recording and data management system, and the introduction of a variety of competent authorities from around the EC Member States. Does the Commission have contingency arrangements to deal with any failure of the registration system? In particular, in the event that European Chemicals Agency software systems are unable to manage the quantity or complexity of data required to be input into them, is there any plan either to use a manual logging system for pre-registration or to allow for an extension to the pre-registration deadline? What action does the Commission plan to take if it is found that, through a lack of awareness of the breadth of impact that the REACH Regulations will have, a significant number of organisations miss the deadline for pre-registration of substances? If the competent authority of a Member State finds that there has been a failure to communicate adequately along the supply chain within their state, what action will the Commission take?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Last Sunday's elections in Italy seem to have resulted in awin for the centre-right ForzaItaliaparty. Theelection programme of the chairman of the party and possible future prime minister, MrSilvio Berlusconi, MEP, included promises of significant tax cuts and increased public investment. Unfortunately, it was not made clear how these promises would be financed. 1.Does the Commission propose to take any measures if this expansionist economic policy is implemented in Italy at atime when the inflationary pressure on the euro areais still high? 2.Is the Commission considering initiating the same type of procedure as in the case of Ireland? Inother words will it give awarning to Italy too, if Italy's taxation and public spending solutions are in conflict with the country's growth and stability package and have aharmful impact on the stability of the euro areaas awhole? Or are such warnings only given to the small countries in the euro area?". 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-1608/01

Macroeconomics

Last Sunday's elections in Italy seem to have resulted in awin for the centre-right ForzaItaliaparty. Theelection programme of the chairman of the party and possible future prime minister, MrSilvio Berlusconi, MEP, included promises of significant tax cuts and increased public investment. Unfortunately, it was not made clear how these promises would be financed. 1.Does the Commission propose to take any measures if this expansionist economic policy is implemented in Italy at atime when the inflationary pressure on the euro areais still high? 2.Is the Commission considering initiating the same type of procedure as in the case of Ireland? Inother words will it give awarning to Italy too, if Italy's taxation and public spending solutions are in conflict with the country's growth and stability package and have aharmful impact on the stability of the euro areaas awhole? Or are such warnings only given to the small countries in the euro area?

<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 B3-4110 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-3362/95

Macroeconomics

Will the Commission state how much of the appropriation under heading B3-4110 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: "In 2015, as part of the Investment Plan for Europe, a European Investment Advisory Hub was set up to provide advice and information to support investment. The establishment of an institution with an average annual budget of more than EUR 26 million was intended to stimulate investment by helping to rebuild the European economy after the economic crisis. The Hub, which was set up in partnership between the Commission and the European Central Bank, works with national banks and institutions supporting investment.However, during its five years in operation the Hub has not been an investment catalyst in Europe. Interest in and demand for such an institution is significantly lower than expected. The relatively low number of applications means that the Hub’s resources exceed the number of tasks entrusted to it.In light of the foregoing:1.Is the Commission conducting an internal audit of the European Investment Advisory Hub’s operations?2.Does the Commission plan to reorganise the European Investment Advisory Hub’s operations?". 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-004815/2020

Macroeconomics

In 2015, as part of the Investment Plan for Europe, a European Investment Advisory Hub was set up to provide advice and information to support investment. The establishment of an institution with an average annual budget of more than EUR 26 million was intended to stimulate investment by helping to rebuild the European economy after the economic crisis. The Hub, which was set up in partnership between the Commission and the European Central Bank, works with national banks and institutions supporting investment.However, during its five years in operation the Hub has not been an investment catalyst in Europe. Interest in and demand for such an institution is significantly lower than expected. The relatively low number of applications means that the Hub’s resources exceed the number of tasks entrusted to it.In light of the foregoing:1.Is the Commission conducting an internal audit of the European Investment Advisory Hub’s operations?2.Does the Commission plan to reorganise the European Investment Advisory Hub’s operations?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In August2018, the Turkish lira collapsed suddenly against other currencies following diplomatic tensions between Turkey and the United States. The Turkish lira is currently down more than 30% against the euro since the start of this year. This is good news for European tourists visiting Turkey, but it is a cause for concern for European banks exposed to the Turkish currency. What does the Commission intend to do to help stabilise the Turkish lira and ease the tension between Turkey and the United 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-004842-18

Macroeconomics

In August2018, the Turkish lira collapsed suddenly against other currencies following diplomatic tensions between Turkey and the United States. The Turkish lira is currently down more than 30% against the euro since the start of this year. This is good news for European tourists visiting Turkey, but it is a cause for concern for European banks exposed to the Turkish currency. What does the Commission intend to do to help stabilise the Turkish lira and ease the tension between Turkey and the United States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission lays down in a service contract the terms of payment for pilot projects which it launches. The contract provides for a first payment of 40% to be made at the start of the project, followed by a second payment of 60% within 60days of completion of the project. These payments are dependent upon the approval of a report, with the Commission reserving the right to suspend payment if it considers the request inadmissible. These terms are unfavourable to contractors, particularly SMEs, which need to pay a large part of the costs up front and face uncertainty over payment deadlines. 1.With the European Union aiming to include more SMEs in its development programmes, is the Commission considering a review of these contractual terms so as to remove the existing barriers? 2.Is the Commission considering, for example, spreading the payments more progressively throughout the duration of the project, enabling participants to cover their operating costs? 3.The article providing for payments to be suspended if the report is not approved seems excessive and has frequently been criticised. Does the Commission have any details about the average time between the completion of a project and the actual payment?". 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-014746-15

Macroeconomics

The Commission lays down in a service contract the terms of payment for pilot projects which it launches. The contract provides for a first payment of 40% to be made at the start of the project, followed by a second payment of 60% within 60days of completion of the project. These payments are dependent upon the approval of a report, with the Commission reserving the right to suspend payment if it considers the request inadmissible. These terms are unfavourable to contractors, particularly SMEs, which need to pay a large part of the costs up front and face uncertainty over payment deadlines. 1.With the European Union aiming to include more SMEs in its development programmes, is the Commission considering a review of these contractual terms so as to remove the existing barriers? 2.Is the Commission considering, for example, spreading the payments more progressively throughout the duration of the project, enabling participants to cover their operating costs? 3.The article providing for payments to be suspended if the report is not approved seems excessive and has frequently been criticised. Does the Commission have any details about the average time between the completion of a project and the actual payment?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "What is the total of European Union funds spent in or allocated to London for each of the last five years, for which figures are 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] [1]. </s>

E-3317/00

Macroeconomics

What is the total of European Union funds spent in or allocated to London for each of the last five years, for which figures are available?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The fact that the GDP growth rate for Greece (4 % for 2001), presented as indicative of sound economic performance compared with the European average, is in fact being achieved through EU budget-based redistribution, since, according to the Commission's information, the figure for 2001 is in fact 3,5 %, lends credence to concerns regarding prospects for sustained economic growth in Greece following expiry of the third CSF (2006) and the reduction or halting of large injections of Community funding. Furthermore, this is accompanied by an increase in the balance of payments current account deficit (Bank of Greece statistics for January — August 2002), resulting from a 13 % drop in trade figures and a substantial decline in transfers, that is to say remittances from emigrants, and in net revenue from the EU. Whereas the fact that Greek products are being squeezed out of foreign markets is leading to a loss in production figures and an increase in unemployment: 1. What does the Commission estimate will be the level of public debt following the revised Eurostat figures for the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003? 2. What will be the impact of these revised figures on the public deficit for the years 2000-2002 and what are the Commission's estimates for the year 2003? 3. What state guarantees have been provided in the form of loans for public-sector undertakings (public enterprises and bodies, Olympic Airways, Greek railways), and through social funds and local authorities and what percentage of the public deficit does this constitute? 4. What measures does the Commission recommend to rationalise the Greek economy (public debt rescheduling, reduction of public deficit) while continuing to implement the programme of public investment at the same rate?". 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-3400/02

Macroeconomics

The fact that the GDP growth rate for Greece (4 % for 2001), presented as indicative of sound economic performance compared with the European average, is in fact being achieved through EU budget-based redistribution, since, according to the Commission's information, the figure for 2001 is in fact 3,5 %, lends credence to concerns regarding prospects for sustained economic growth in Greece following expiry of the third CSF (2006) and the reduction or halting of large injections of Community funding. Furthermore, this is accompanied by an increase in the balance of payments current account deficit (Bank of Greece statistics for January — August 2002), resulting from a 13 % drop in trade figures and a substantial decline in transfers, that is to say remittances from emigrants, and in net revenue from the EU. Whereas the fact that Greek products are being squeezed out of foreign markets is leading to a loss in production figures and an increase in unemployment: 1. What does the Commission estimate will be the level of public debt following the revised Eurostat figures for the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003? 2. What will be the impact of these revised figures on the public deficit for the years 2000-2002 and what are the Commission's estimates for the year 2003? 3. What state guarantees have been provided in the form of loans for public-sector undertakings (public enterprises and bodies, Olympic Airways, Greek railways), and through social funds and local authorities and what percentage of the public deficit does this constitute? 4. What measures does the Commission recommend to rationalise the Greek economy (public debt rescheduling, reduction of public deficit) while continuing to implement the programme of public investment at the same rate?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "To be competitive economies need investment. Given that many Member States have budget deficit constraints, will the Commission introduce rules on a new approach to calculating budget deficits that does not include the contributions Member States pay towards projects co‐financed with the EU?". 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-003110-19

Macroeconomics

To be competitive economies need investment. Given that many Member States have budget deficit constraints, will the Commission introduce rules on a new approach to calculating budget deficits that does not include the contributions Member States pay towards projects co‐financed with the EU?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission please indicate what meetings have taken place at senior level between staff of the European Commission and the European Central Bank, that information to include: (a) the dates of those meetings; (b) the venues of those meetings; (c) the identities of those attending the meetings; Can the Commission also indicate if the European Central Bank is entirely independent of the Commission, or whether the European Central Bank can in any shape or form be said to be influenced by the Commission?". 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-1402/00

Macroeconomics

Will the Commission please indicate what meetings have taken place at senior level between staff of the European Commission and the European Central Bank, that information to include: (a) the dates of those meetings; (b) the venues of those meetings; (c) the identities of those attending the meetings; Can the Commission also indicate if the European Central Bank is entirely independent of the Commission, or whether the European Central Bank can in any shape or form be said to be influenced by the Commission?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 23April 1998 the Commission adopted three recommendations concerning the euro. One of the recommendations dealt with bank charges for conversions and stipulated that exchange transactions between European currencies should be completely free of charge, that banks should make no charge for the conversion of incoming and outgoing payments or for the conversion of current accounts from the national currency unit to the euro at the end of the transitional period. Only a few days after the launch of the euro, which was universally hailed as a fundamental step towards the realisation of the single European market and backed by intensive information and awareness-raising campaigns, it has emerged that the Italian banks and a number of European banks are still charging their clients foreign exchange commission, which in Italy varies between ITL5000 and 10000, in addition to a percentage of the amount changed. This is a clear infringement of a previous common undertaking by credit institutions to ensure that no charge would be made on foreign exchange transactions involving national currencies in the euro zone. There have also been irregularities in cross-border payment and transfer transactions, which are still not dealt with in the same way as national payments since they are subject to additional costs. It is vital, in order not to undermine the widespread optimism generated during the period immediately after the launch, that consumers are not made to bear the burden of the costs of the transition to the euro. In view of the above, will the Commission: - investigate the continued application of these banking charges and, if necessary, say whether or not this constitutes a clear infringement of the Community law on the single market; - establish whether or not the banks' conduct contravenes the Treaty of Rome as a result of agreements, secret understandings or concerted practices and abuse of dominant position the direct consequence of which is a failure to comply with the rules on competition; - lastly, say whether it considers that an unjustifiable infringement of consumer rights has taken place, and that appropriate steps should therefore be taken as a matter of urgency?". 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-0109/99

Macroeconomics

On 23April 1998 the Commission adopted three recommendations concerning the euro. One of the recommendations dealt with bank charges for conversions and stipulated that exchange transactions between European currencies should be completely free of charge, that banks should make no charge for the conversion of incoming and outgoing payments or for the conversion of current accounts from the national currency unit to the euro at the end of the transitional period. Only a few days after the launch of the euro, which was universally hailed as a fundamental step towards the realisation of the single European market and backed by intensive information and awareness-raising campaigns, it has emerged that the Italian banks and a number of European banks are still charging their clients foreign exchange commission, which in Italy varies between ITL5000 and 10000, in addition to a percentage of the amount changed. This is a clear infringement of a previous common undertaking by credit institutions to ensure that no charge would be made on foreign exchange transactions involving national currencies in the euro zone. There have also been irregularities in cross-border payment and transfer transactions, which are still not dealt with in the same way as national payments since they are subject to additional costs. It is vital, in order not to undermine the widespread optimism generated during the period immediately after the launch, that consumers are not made to bear the burden of the costs of the transition to the euro. In view of the above, will the Commission: - investigate the continued application of these banking charges and, if necessary, say whether or not this constitutes a clear infringement of the Community law on the single market; - establish whether or not the banks' conduct contravenes the Treaty of Rome as a result of agreements, secret understandings or concerted practices and abuse of dominant position the direct consequence of which is a failure to comply with the rules on competition; - lastly, say whether it considers that an unjustifiable infringement of consumer rights has taken place, and that appropriate steps should therefore be taken as a matter of urgency?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Portuguese press has reported that Portugal intends to submit at least two applications to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, both relating to the motor industry: one of the applications covers the Lisbon/Alentejo region, and the other, North/Centre region. The reports state that support is initially to be sought for 1122 people who lost their jobs because of the closure of the Opel, Alcoa Fujikura, and Johnson Controls factories in Azambuja, Seixal, and Portalegre respectively. The support, designed to offset global competition, could total EUR5m. 1.Does the Commission know about these applications to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund? 2.What is its attitude to the applications? 3.Have other applications to the Fund already been accepted?". 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-5451/07

Macroeconomics

The Portuguese press has reported that Portugal intends to submit at least two applications to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, both relating to the motor industry: one of the applications covers the Lisbon/Alentejo region, and the other, North/Centre region. The reports state that support is initially to be sought for 1122 people who lost their jobs because of the closure of the Opel, Alcoa Fujikura, and Johnson Controls factories in Azambuja, Seixal, and Portalegre respectively. The support, designed to offset global competition, could total EUR5m. 1.Does the Commission know about these applications to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund? 2.What is its attitude to the applications? 3.Have other applications to the Fund already been accepted?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 12September 2006, the Board of Telecom Italia S.p.A. announced that it was embarking on a restructuring plan aimed at reorganising the whole group. The plan involved the demerger of TIM (Telecom Italia Mobile) and the fixed-link network, both of which would be 100% controlled by the new Telecom, which would become a ‘media company’. In point of fact, the board envisaged the subsequent sale of TIMItalia and TIMBrazil, with a view to streamlining the current set-up and focusing its activities more strongly on broadband and media services. The company management justified their decision by reference to the specific objective of paying off a large part of the group's EUR41.3billion debt, but did not take the slightest account of the adverse effect the decision would have on direct and indirect employment in the sector. In view of the foregoing: 1. Would the Commission state whether Telecom Italia S.p.A. complied with the provisions of Directive94/45/EC, as amended by Directive97/74/EC, on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees, and of Directive2002/14/EC establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees? 2. Would the Commission state whether Telecom Italia S.p.A. complied with the provisions of Directive2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses, as highlighted recently in CaseC‑425/02 as regards the application of the rule requiring rights to be retained?". 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-4145/06

Macroeconomics

On 12September 2006, the Board of Telecom Italia S.p.A. announced that it was embarking on a restructuring plan aimed at reorganising the whole group. The plan involved the demerger of TIM (Telecom Italia Mobile) and the fixed-link network, both of which would be 100% controlled by the new Telecom, which would become a ‘media company’. In point of fact, the board envisaged the subsequent sale of TIMItalia and TIMBrazil, with a view to streamlining the current set-up and focusing its activities more strongly on broadband and media services. The company management justified their decision by reference to the specific objective of paying off a large part of the group's EUR41.3billion debt, but did not take the slightest account of the adverse effect the decision would have on direct and indirect employment in the sector. In view of the foregoing: 1. Would the Commission state whether Telecom Italia S.p.A. complied with the provisions of Directive94/45/EC, as amended by Directive97/74/EC, on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees, and of Directive2002/14/EC establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees? 2. Would the Commission state whether Telecom Italia S.p.A. complied with the provisions of Directive2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses, as highlighted recently in CaseC‑425/02 as regards the application of the rule requiring rights to be retained?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission confirm that there is no significant economic gain for Denmark, Sweden and the UK in keeping their own currencies?". 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-3089/06

Macroeconomics

Will the Commission confirm that there is no significant economic gain for Denmark, Sweden and the UK in keeping their own currencies?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds. The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities. The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission. Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Terni, urgently need to use European funds to support actions and initiatives encouraging sustainable development undertaken by operators in the Community and in developing countries, can the Commission state: 1. whether the municipality of Terni has submitted projects for the decentralised cooperation programme? 2. whether the municipality of Terni has secured funding for these projects? 3. whether this funding has been used?". 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-1003/03

Macroeconomics

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds. The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities. The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission. Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Terni, urgently need to use European funds to support actions and initiatives encouraging sustainable development undertaken by operators in the Community and in developing countries, can the Commission state: 1. whether the municipality of Terni has submitted projects for the decentralised cooperation programme? 2. whether the municipality of Terni has secured funding for these projects? 3. whether this funding has been used?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "As required by Article8b of the directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC), on 17December2018 the Commission published its report providing an overview and an assessment of the statistics and information received through automatic exchanges under Articles8 and 8a. As regards the benefits of DAC in terms of increased tax compliance, only five out of 28Member States (Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Poland and Slovenia) have been able to calculate the monetary benefits resulting from the use of DAC1 information. As regards the main features of DAC1 information exchange, the Commission provides only aggregated information. This is preventing the proper assessment of the effectiveness of DAC1. 1.Can the Commission publish, for each of the five categories of income and capital covered in DAC1, the values corresponding to the information exchanged, broken down by Member State and, for immovable property, differentiated between ownership and income? 2.Can the Commission specify for immovable property whether the information exchanged corresponds to legal or to beneficial ownership? 3.Can the Commission publish the number of taxpayers affected, broken down into pay bands and the corresponding tax payments?". 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-002400-19

Macroeconomics

As required by Article8b of the directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC), on 17December2018 the Commission published its report providing an overview and an assessment of the statistics and information received through automatic exchanges under Articles8 and 8a. As regards the benefits of DAC in terms of increased tax compliance, only five out of 28Member States (Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Poland and Slovenia) have been able to calculate the monetary benefits resulting from the use of DAC1 information. As regards the main features of DAC1 information exchange, the Commission provides only aggregated information. This is preventing the proper assessment of the effectiveness of DAC1. 1.Can the Commission publish, for each of the five categories of income and capital covered in DAC1, the values corresponding to the information exchanged, broken down by Member State and, for immovable property, differentiated between ownership and income? 2.Can the Commission specify for immovable property whether the information exchanged corresponds to legal or to beneficial ownership? 3.Can the Commission publish the number of taxpayers affected, broken down into pay bands and the corresponding tax payments?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Act No. 364/2019 Coll., amending certain laws in the area of ​​taxes in connection with increasing public budget revenues, was adopted in 2019. It amended Act No. 187/2016 Coll. on the gambling tax and entered into force on 1 January 2020. Until the entry into force of Act No. 364/2019 Coll. in the Czech Republic, gambling was subject to a graduated tax rate depending on the harmfulness of the type of gambling concerned. The gambling tax thus served as a measure to prevent and combat the socially harmful phenomena associated with gambling activities and to protect players. When the above-mentioned law was adopted, it was openly and publicly stated in the Czech Republic that it was aimed at imposing taxation on Sazka a.s., which is the dominant player in the running of lotteries in the Czech Republic. I have read publicly available information stating that this company asked the Commission immediately after the approval of the law to investigate whether the higher than normal taxation of Sazka a.s. was evidence that the Czech Republic was providing unauthorised public support to competing gambling companies.Has the Commission already reached a conclusion in its investigation?". 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-004233/2020

Macroeconomics

Act No. 364/2019 Coll., amending certain laws in the area of ​​taxes in connection with increasing public budget revenues, was adopted in 2019. It amended Act No. 187/2016 Coll. on the gambling tax and entered into force on 1 January 2020. Until the entry into force of Act No. 364/2019 Coll. in the Czech Republic, gambling was subject to a graduated tax rate depending on the harmfulness of the type of gambling concerned. The gambling tax thus served as a measure to prevent and combat the socially harmful phenomena associated with gambling activities and to protect players. When the above-mentioned law was adopted, it was openly and publicly stated in the Czech Republic that it was aimed at imposing taxation on Sazka a.s., which is the dominant player in the running of lotteries in the Czech Republic. I have read publicly available information stating that this company asked the Commission immediately after the approval of the law to investigate whether the higher than normal taxation of Sazka a.s. was evidence that the Czech Republic was providing unauthorised public support to competing gambling companies.Has the Commission already reached a conclusion in its investigation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Family businesses are one of the biggest sources of employment in the private sector. On of their many advantages is the fact that they are closely bound to a particular location, and so can provide long-term employment in rural areas and regions which are unattractive to other businesses and investors. Family businesses also show greater social responsibility when dealing with their staff and in managing their human and local resources. Even though family businesses play a very important role in the economy, make up more than 60% of all EU businesses and provide some 40-50% of all jobs in the private sector, they are afforded little importance under the current legal framework and in politics. 1.Exactly what steps is the Commission planning to take to support family businesses and help them to develop? 2.When does the Commission plan to carry out an in-depth analysis of family businesses and draw up a plan involving a list of proposed measures which would make the economic environment more conducive to the development of family businesses in the EU? 3.Will the Commission consider creating a single legal category for family businesses, which would make a real difference to the creation of future regulations?". 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-014716-15

Macroeconomics

Family businesses are one of the biggest sources of employment in the private sector. On of their many advantages is the fact that they are closely bound to a particular location, and so can provide long-term employment in rural areas and regions which are unattractive to other businesses and investors. Family businesses also show greater social responsibility when dealing with their staff and in managing their human and local resources. Even though family businesses play a very important role in the economy, make up more than 60% of all EU businesses and provide some 40-50% of all jobs in the private sector, they are afforded little importance under the current legal framework and in politics. 1.Exactly what steps is the Commission planning to take to support family businesses and help them to develop? 2.When does the Commission plan to carry out an in-depth analysis of family businesses and draw up a plan involving a list of proposed measures which would make the economic environment more conducive to the development of family businesses in the EU? 3.Will the Commission consider creating a single legal category for family businesses, which would make a real difference to the creation of future regulations?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Valencian Regional Government has approved the launch of the Valencian Media Corporation, with the aim of setting up a new public television station under the name ‘À.’ (‘A dot’). The station will have a budget of EUR55million, directly approved by the Valencian Regional Government. It should be noted that this budget has not been approved by the Valencian Parliament, as should happen with the budget of any public body in the Community. The Valencian Community was one of the autonomous communities which was unable to meet the deficit target in 2016, with a deficit of 1.2%, half a point above the target set for the year. For 2017, the tax authority (Airef) considers it ‘highly unlikely’ that the Valencian Community will meet the deficit target of 0.6% set for the regions so that Spain can comply with the deficit target set by the European Union. 1.Does the Commission consider that a region having difficulties in meeting its deficit target is in a position to be able to launch a project with the huge budgetary impact described above? 2.Can the Commission take any action or make any recommendations to the Member State concerned in this regard?". 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-001968-17

Macroeconomics

The Valencian Regional Government has approved the launch of the Valencian Media Corporation, with the aim of setting up a new public television station under the name ‘À.’ (‘A dot’). The station will have a budget of EUR55million, directly approved by the Valencian Regional Government. It should be noted that this budget has not been approved by the Valencian Parliament, as should happen with the budget of any public body in the Community. The Valencian Community was one of the autonomous communities which was unable to meet the deficit target in 2016, with a deficit of 1.2%, half a point above the target set for the year. For 2017, the tax authority (Airef) considers it ‘highly unlikely’ that the Valencian Community will meet the deficit target of 0.6% set for the regions so that Spain can comply with the deficit target set by the European Union. 1.Does the Commission consider that a region having difficulties in meeting its deficit target is in a position to be able to launch a project with the huge budgetary impact described above? 2.Can the Commission take any action or make any recommendations to the Member State concerned in this regard?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Law No 157/2019 imposes new limits on cash payments in Italy.From 1 July 2020, the limit will be EUR 2000, and from 1 January 2022, EUR 1000. On 16 December 2019, the European Central Bank wrote a letter to Minister Gualtieri pointing out certain problems that could arise from the application of these limits.The document observes that cash payment is a tool for the inclusion of the entire population in the economic system and that this change could result in social inequality. Moreover, cash payments do not require technical infrastructure which would force small businesses – crucial to the Italian economy – to incur expenditure.It has also been pointed out that the government should have checked how the costs of alternative means of payment compare with those of using cash and whether tax evasion can be countered in alternative ways that would have less adverse impact. Also relevant to this is Directive (EU) 2015/849 on specific checks in the case of payments of at least EUR 10000.In the light of the above, I should like to put the following questions to the Commission:Does the Commission take a similar line on this to the ECB?What does it intend to do to prevent the risks highlighted by the ECB?". 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-000369/2020

Macroeconomics

Law No 157/2019 imposes new limits on cash payments in Italy.From 1 July 2020, the limit will be EUR 2000, and from 1 January 2022, EUR 1000. On 16 December 2019, the European Central Bank wrote a letter to Minister Gualtieri pointing out certain problems that could arise from the application of these limits.The document observes that cash payment is a tool for the inclusion of the entire population in the economic system and that this change could result in social inequality. Moreover, cash payments do not require technical infrastructure which would force small businesses – crucial to the Italian economy – to incur expenditure.It has also been pointed out that the government should have checked how the costs of alternative means of payment compare with those of using cash and whether tax evasion can be countered in alternative ways that would have less adverse impact. Also relevant to this is Directive (EU) 2015/849 on specific checks in the case of payments of at least EUR 10000.In the light of the above, I should like to put the following questions to the Commission:Does the Commission take a similar line on this to the ECB?What does it intend to do to prevent the risks highlighted by the ECB?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The industrial sector in Europe, and the steel sector in particular, is facing major challenges as a result of technological changes, trade openness and environmental commitments. For this reason, Iam of the opinion that the European Union should make an additional effort to design and set up different types of funding to accompany this period of transition. In light of this, and with particular reference to the British company Vesuvius PLC, Iwould like to ask the following: 1. In which European funding programmes for research and innovation, for example the seventh Framework Programme for Research or Horizon 2020, has Vesuvius PLC participated? 2. What was Europe’s overall financial contribution to the Vesuvius PLC programmes? 3. Has Vesuvius PLC responded to any other calls for funding, the final allocation of which is pending?". 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-002881-19

Macroeconomics

The industrial sector in Europe, and the steel sector in particular, is facing major challenges as a result of technological changes, trade openness and environmental commitments. For this reason, Iam of the opinion that the European Union should make an additional effort to design and set up different types of funding to accompany this period of transition. In light of this, and with particular reference to the British company Vesuvius PLC, Iwould like to ask the following: 1. In which European funding programmes for research and innovation, for example the seventh Framework Programme for Research or Horizon 2020, has Vesuvius PLC participated? 2. What was Europe’s overall financial contribution to the Vesuvius PLC programmes? 3. Has Vesuvius PLC responded to any other calls for funding, the final allocation of which is pending?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 21October2009, the Greek Government informed the Commission that the estimated deficit figure for that year was to be revised upwards from 5% (revised figure for April2009) to 12.75%. One of the reasons for this was the inclusion in the national accounts of non-recurrent expenditure in respect of payments to hospital suppliers. Under what article of the regulation on European system of national and regional accounts in the Community (ESA 95) did the Greek Government justify the inclusion of non-recurrent expenditure in the 2009 deficit? Was it acting on the advice of Eurostat? Was the Greek Government required to include non-recurrent expenditure on hospital supplies for that year? Which other Member States have included in their national accounts non-recurrent expenditure in respect of payments outstanding to public hospital suppliers?". 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-009011/2011

Macroeconomics

On 21October2009, the Greek Government informed the Commission that the estimated deficit figure for that year was to be revised upwards from 5% (revised figure for April2009) to 12.75%. One of the reasons for this was the inclusion in the national accounts of non-recurrent expenditure in respect of payments to hospital suppliers. Under what article of the regulation on European system of national and regional accounts in the Community (ESA 95) did the Greek Government justify the inclusion of non-recurrent expenditure in the 2009 deficit? Was it acting on the advice of Eurostat? Was the Greek Government required to include non-recurrent expenditure on hospital supplies for that year? Which other Member States have included in their national accounts non-recurrent expenditure in respect of payments outstanding to public hospital suppliers?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 23March 2020, the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) made freely available 11 standards that cover common filtering masks, medical gloves and protective clothing. Normally, standards must be purchased and used in line with intellectual property right rules, since the copyright of the standards belongs to the organisation that developed them. Free access to the standards will enable companies to have quicker access to the fundamental medical and personal protection equipment (PPE) market, meaning they would be able to provide vital equipment to those in need.The derogation from this business model is a strong European response that is based on a sense of social responsibility and solidarity to address the shortage of PPE as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.S&D welcomes such initiatives from the Commission.How will the Commission promote this derogation in the Member States for businesses, and in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises?". 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-001934/2020

Macroeconomics

On 23March 2020, the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) made freely available 11 standards that cover common filtering masks, medical gloves and protective clothing. Normally, standards must be purchased and used in line with intellectual property right rules, since the copyright of the standards belongs to the organisation that developed them. Free access to the standards will enable companies to have quicker access to the fundamental medical and personal protection equipment (PPE) market, meaning they would be able to provide vital equipment to those in need.The derogation from this business model is a strong European response that is based on a sense of social responsibility and solidarity to address the shortage of PPE as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.S&D welcomes such initiatives from the Commission.How will the Commission promote this derogation in the Member States for businesses, and in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Southern Italy is becoming a powerhouse for development projects, and the human resources to be found there have an increasingly high degree of professional expertise. The authorities in southern Italy have undoubtedly matured and are able to respond to the call to cut through the red tape and speed up the procedures. Apulia in particular has shown itself to be capable of genuinely meshing with European programming. Will the Commission support Bari's application to become the seat of the European Bank for the Mediterranean, bearing in mind the strategic geopolitical position of Apulia within the Mediterranean 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] [1]. </s>

P-2270/03

Macroeconomics

Southern Italy is becoming a powerhouse for development projects, and the human resources to be found there have an increasingly high degree of professional expertise. The authorities in southern Italy have undoubtedly matured and are able to respond to the call to cut through the red tape and speed up the procedures. Apulia in particular has shown itself to be capable of genuinely meshing with European programming. Will the Commission support Bari's application to become the seat of the European Bank for the Mediterranean, bearing in mind the strategic geopolitical position of Apulia within the Mediterranean region?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Could the Commission state what assessment, if any, was undertaken of the impact on return on investment before announcing the Commission’s proposals to cut the budgets of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) and the European Research Council (ERC) as part of the new European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)? The proposed cuts disproportionally affect the EIT relative to the other Horizon 2020 instruments, thereby changing the funding environment for businesses that are successfully investing via public-private collaboration and innovating in the field. A number of particularly good examples of innovation supported by the use of these funds can be found in my region of the West Midlands (UK). 2.With this in mind, is this decision consistent with President Juncker’s plans to create a new innovative economy within theEU which attracts large levels of private investment? 3.Does the new Commission still value the Horizon 2020 programme?". 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-000988-15

Macroeconomics

1.Could the Commission state what assessment, if any, was undertaken of the impact on return on investment before announcing the Commission’s proposals to cut the budgets of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) and the European Research Council (ERC) as part of the new European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)? The proposed cuts disproportionally affect the EIT relative to the other Horizon 2020 instruments, thereby changing the funding environment for businesses that are successfully investing via public-private collaboration and innovating in the field. A number of particularly good examples of innovation supported by the use of these funds can be found in my region of the West Midlands (UK). 2.With this in mind, is this decision consistent with President Juncker’s plans to create a new innovative economy within theEU which attracts large levels of private investment? 3.Does the new Commission still value the Horizon 2020 programme?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Several European airlines, including KLM, Air France and Lufthansa, have signed a petition warning that there will be an enormous loss of jobs in the European aviation sector. 1.Does the Commission think that the practice of hiring cheap Thai labour and jeopardising the jobs of Dutch, French and German nationals is in accordance with MrJuncker’s ‘number one priority’ of promoting growth in theEU and getting people back into work? 2.Is the Commission committed to safeguarding jobs in theEU or does it prefer to promote growth in jobs outside the EU? 3.Does the Commission have a plan to counter this pressure on the labour market by underpaid and possibly undertrained workers from third countries?". 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-010378-14

Macroeconomics

Several European airlines, including KLM, Air France and Lufthansa, have signed a petition warning that there will be an enormous loss of jobs in the European aviation sector. 1.Does the Commission think that the practice of hiring cheap Thai labour and jeopardising the jobs of Dutch, French and German nationals is in accordance with MrJuncker’s ‘number one priority’ of promoting growth in theEU and getting people back into work? 2.Is the Commission committed to safeguarding jobs in theEU or does it prefer to promote growth in jobs outside the EU? 3.Does the Commission have a plan to counter this pressure on the labour market by underpaid and possibly undertrained workers from third countries?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to the Commission, EU funding is ‘managed according to strict rules to ensure there is tight control over how funds are used and that the money is spent in a transparent, accountable manner’(1). The Commission also claims to attach the ‘utmost importance to follow up and implement recommendations from European Court of Auditors special reports’(2).The Court has highlighted a number of difficulties the Commission is having in the management of the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD), including non-compliance issues(3). It also concluded that the results framework should be improved and that the average financial leverage figure(4) in the implementation report is insufficiently reliable, and could be overestimated.Considering that the Commission is proposing to increase the EFSD Guarantee from EUR 1.5 billion to EUR 3.6billion and to expand eligibility for funding to the Western Balkans:1.Will the Commission reassess its decision(5) not to accompany its proposal for a regulation on the EFSD with a full and proper impact assessment?2.Will the Commission review the EFSD’s business processes and evaluate the EFSD Guarantee Fund, as recommended by the Court?3.What steps has the Commission taken to address the reliability of the average financial leverage figures? (1)https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/funding-grants_en (2)Answer by Commissioner Hahn to question E-003739/2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-003739-ASW_EN.html (3)Opinion No 7/2020 accompanying the Commission’s report on the implementation of the European Fund for Sustainable Development, https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/op20_07/op20_07_en.pdf (4)An indicator of the EFSD’s capacity to mobilise additional investments. (5)Proposal of 14 September 2016 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) and establishing the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund, COM(2016)0586.". 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-005977/2020

Macroeconomics

According to the Commission, EU funding is ‘managed according to strict rules to ensure there is tight control over how funds are used and that the money is spent in a transparent, accountable manner’(1). The Commission also claims to attach the ‘utmost importance to follow up and implement recommendations from European Court of Auditors special reports’(2).The Court has highlighted a number of difficulties the Commission is having in the management of the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD), including non-compliance issues(3). It also concluded that the results framework should be improved and that the average financial leverage figure(4) in the implementation report is insufficiently reliable, and could be overestimated.Considering that the Commission is proposing to increase the EFSD Guarantee from EUR 1.5 billion to EUR 3.6billion and to expand eligibility for funding to the Western Balkans:1.Will the Commission reassess its decision(5) not to accompany its proposal for a regulation on the EFSD with a full and proper impact assessment?2.Will the Commission review the EFSD’s business processes and evaluate the EFSD Guarantee Fund, as recommended by the Court?3.What steps has the Commission taken to address the reliability of the average financial leverage figures? (1)https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/funding-grants_en (2)Answer by Commissioner Hahn to question E-003739/2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-003739-ASW_EN.html (3)Opinion No 7/2020 accompanying the Commission’s report on the implementation of the European Fund for Sustainable Development, https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/op20_07/op20_07_en.pdf (4)An indicator of the EFSD’s capacity to mobilise additional investments. (5)Proposal of 14 September 2016 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) and establishing the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund, COM(2016)0586.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Is the Commission aware that, since 28 February 1996, the Belgian Treasury has been issuing government bonds (with a five-year maturity) with a fixed interest rate in American dollars, with the restriction that residents of Belgium are not permitted to subscribe for them? Does the Commission recall that it previously instituted proceedings against Belgium pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty because in 1994 the Belgian State imposed a similar restriction on residents of Belgium in connection with a bond issue in German marks, which constituted a violation of Community law? Does the Commission agree that, in restricting the right of residents of Belgium to purchase government bonds, the Belgian State is violating Community law, irrespective of the currency in which the bonds are being issued? If so, will the Commission urge the Belgian authorities to terminate immediately this unlawful and inadmissible conduct, in view, inter alia, of the fact that in 1995 they received a formal notification concerning a similar violation of Community law? If not, can the Commission explain why it is permitting the Belgian State to violate Community law by retaining the restrictions on the right of residents of Belgium to purchase Treasury Eurobonds, despite the Commission's formal notice of complaint in 1995 in connection with proceedings pursuant to Article 169?". 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-0039/97

Macroeconomics

Is the Commission aware that, since 28 February 1996, the Belgian Treasury has been issuing government bonds (with a five-year maturity) with a fixed interest rate in American dollars, with the restriction that residents of Belgium are not permitted to subscribe for them? Does the Commission recall that it previously instituted proceedings against Belgium pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty because in 1994 the Belgian State imposed a similar restriction on residents of Belgium in connection with a bond issue in German marks, which constituted a violation of Community law? Does the Commission agree that, in restricting the right of residents of Belgium to purchase government bonds, the Belgian State is violating Community law, irrespective of the currency in which the bonds are being issued? If so, will the Commission urge the Belgian authorities to terminate immediately this unlawful and inadmissible conduct, in view, inter alia, of the fact that in 1995 they received a formal notification concerning a similar violation of Community law? If not, can the Commission explain why it is permitting the Belgian State to violate Community law by retaining the restrictions on the right of residents of Belgium to purchase Treasury Eurobonds, despite the Commission's formal notice of complaint in 1995 in connection with proceedings pursuant to Article 169?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Following the disclosure that EESC Members permanently resident in Brussels have been receiving thousands of euros a year in daily allowances, will the Council act to revise arrangements so that daily allowances are not paid to Members permanently resident in Brussels and that any expenses they incur on overnight accommodation can be reimbursed upon submission of supporting documents? The disclosure referred to was made on 21 August 2019 in the EUobserver article ‘The EU committee's great 'per diem' charade’.". 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-000006/2020

Macroeconomics

Following the disclosure that EESC Members permanently resident in Brussels have been receiving thousands of euros a year in daily allowances, will the Council act to revise arrangements so that daily allowances are not paid to Members permanently resident in Brussels and that any expenses they incur on overnight accommodation can be reimbursed upon submission of supporting documents? The disclosure referred to was made on 21 August 2019 in the EUobserver article ‘The EU committee's great 'per diem' charade’.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "With regard to heading B6-7122 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on: - studies - meetings of experts - conferences and congresses - information and publications. Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.". 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-0766/97

Macroeconomics

With regard to heading B6-7122 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on: - studies - meetings of experts - conferences and congresses - information and publications. Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission's recommendations to Greece concerning employment policies have remained virtually unchanged since 1998. Greece is criticised for having a low rate of employment and high youth and female unemployment; the Commission's proposed recommendations for 2002 (COM 2001)512) are along the same lines. Furthermore, the Greek Minister of Labour recently stated that Greece was unable to attain employment rates in line with the Lisbon and Stockholm objectives. Will the Commission say: 1. Are the Lisbon and Stockholm objectives binding for the Member States? 2. Has Greece attained the objectives it set to receive funding to combat unemployment under the Second Community Support Framework ? 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] [1]. </s>

E-3266/01

Macroeconomics

The Commission's recommendations to Greece concerning employment policies have remained virtually unchanged since 1998. Greece is criticised for having a low rate of employment and high youth and female unemployment; the Commission's proposed recommendations for 2002 (COM 2001)512) are along the same lines. Furthermore, the Greek Minister of Labour recently stated that Greece was unable to attain employment rates in line with the Lisbon and Stockholm objectives. Will the Commission say: 1. Are the Lisbon and Stockholm objectives binding for the Member States? 2. Has Greece attained the objectives it set to receive funding to combat unemployment under the Second Community Support Framework ? If not, why not?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Each year, theEU loses billions of euros in potential tax revenue due to fraud, evasion and aggressive tax planning. This represents an annual cost of EUR2000 per EU citizen, unless appropriate measures are taken in response. The EU must take immediate and coordinated action against tax havens and aggressive tax planning. Furthermore, Ibelieve that an international agreement on the automatic exchange of tax information should be established to reduce tax fraud and evasion. The Member States must halve the tax differential by 2020. Although countries remain responsible for their respective tax systems, fraud and evasion require a coordinated approach at national, European and international level. The Commission should adopt a common set of criteria for identifying tax havens and create a public European blacklist of tax havens by 31December2014. At the European Council of May2013, EU leaders analysed several measures to combat tax fraud and evasion, but these will only be adopted at a new EU summit in December. 1.What proposals are being discussed and analysed to promote an effective fight against tax fraud and evasion? 2.When does the Commission believe that these proposals could enter into force?". 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-006245-13

Macroeconomics

Each year, theEU loses billions of euros in potential tax revenue due to fraud, evasion and aggressive tax planning. This represents an annual cost of EUR2000 per EU citizen, unless appropriate measures are taken in response. The EU must take immediate and coordinated action against tax havens and aggressive tax planning. Furthermore, Ibelieve that an international agreement on the automatic exchange of tax information should be established to reduce tax fraud and evasion. The Member States must halve the tax differential by 2020. Although countries remain responsible for their respective tax systems, fraud and evasion require a coordinated approach at national, European and international level. The Commission should adopt a common set of criteria for identifying tax havens and create a public European blacklist of tax havens by 31December2014. At the European Council of May2013, EU leaders analysed several measures to combat tax fraud and evasion, but these will only be adopted at a new EU summit in December. 1.What proposals are being discussed and analysed to promote an effective fight against tax fraud and evasion? 2.When does the Commission believe that these proposals could enter into force?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "With regard to heading B3-4111 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on: - studies - meetings of experts - conferences and congresses - information and publications. Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.". 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-0726/97

Macroeconomics

With regard to heading B3-4111 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on: - studies - meetings of experts - conferences and congresses - information and publications. Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In its 2009 Annual Report the European Court of Auditors states that the Commission has improved the information it provides about recoveries of irregularly paid amounts and other financial corrections. However, this information is not yet completely reliable. Furthermore, the Commission's data on corrections cannot meaningfully be compared with the Court's estimated error rate. This being so, 1.How does the Commission plan to improve the reporting of recoveries relating to irregularly paid amounts so as to make the data it provides more reliable? 2.How does the Commission plan to change its reporting methodology for the data on corrections so that this data can be compared with the Court's estimated error rate?". 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-011212/2010

Macroeconomics

In its 2009 Annual Report the European Court of Auditors states that the Commission has improved the information it provides about recoveries of irregularly paid amounts and other financial corrections. However, this information is not yet completely reliable. Furthermore, the Commission's data on corrections cannot meaningfully be compared with the Court's estimated error rate. This being so, 1.How does the Commission plan to improve the reporting of recoveries relating to irregularly paid amounts so as to make the data it provides more reliable? 2.How does the Commission plan to change its reporting methodology for the data on corrections so that this data can be compared with the Court's estimated error rate?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The large hypermarkets have launched an offensive against Romanian companies that fail to pay their suppliers within 90days, the maximum period stipulated by Law 321/2009 on the marketing of foodstuffs being 30days. Farmers have also announced their intention of organising demonstrations in protest at the refusal of the large supermarket chains to pay producers and processors a fair price as required by law. Instead they are forcing down the price of dairy products, refusing to buy from processors who refuse to go along with this. In the meantime, retail prices are steadily rising. In view of this, what instruments does the Commission have at its disposal to remedy matters and ensure that the Romanian authorities establish a fair and responsible balance between the interests of retailers and producers in Romania?". 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-005694-17

Macroeconomics

The large hypermarkets have launched an offensive against Romanian companies that fail to pay their suppliers within 90days, the maximum period stipulated by Law 321/2009 on the marketing of foodstuffs being 30days. Farmers have also announced their intention of organising demonstrations in protest at the refusal of the large supermarket chains to pay producers and processors a fair price as required by law. Instead they are forcing down the price of dairy products, refusing to buy from processors who refuse to go along with this. In the meantime, retail prices are steadily rising. In view of this, what instruments does the Commission have at its disposal to remedy matters and ensure that the Romanian authorities establish a fair and responsible balance between the interests of retailers and producers in Romania?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Freedom of movement of persons in the European Union is guaranteed, and any Community national may elect to reside in any EU country, register his name on the relevant lists and - if he so wishes - purchase a private vehicle fitted with numberplates from the Member State in which he has opted to reside. In this way many Greeks have legally acquired private vehicles with Community numberplates which they drive in Greece. However the Greek authorities severely penalise this practice, since they do not allow such vehicles to circulate for more than six months and, where this period is found to have elapsed, they impound the vehicle and impose very heavy fines, despite the fact that the owners of these vehicles are legally resident in (and even nationals of) another EU Member State. Are these actions by the Greek authorities in line with Community legislation? In which other EU Member States are vehicles circulating with numberplates from another EU Member State impounded and their owners given draconian fines? Does it intend to take any action and, if so, what action to put an end to this state of affairs caused by the distorted Greek tax system which excessively taxes vehicles over 1 800 c.c. which are exceedingly expensive in Greece (the country with the lowest per capita income in the EU - a mere 67% of the Community average, according to the latest Eurostat statistics), thereby forcing many Greeks to purchase vehicles with numberplates from another Member State?". 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-3819/03

Macroeconomics

Freedom of movement of persons in the European Union is guaranteed, and any Community national may elect to reside in any EU country, register his name on the relevant lists and - if he so wishes - purchase a private vehicle fitted with numberplates from the Member State in which he has opted to reside. In this way many Greeks have legally acquired private vehicles with Community numberplates which they drive in Greece. However the Greek authorities severely penalise this practice, since they do not allow such vehicles to circulate for more than six months and, where this period is found to have elapsed, they impound the vehicle and impose very heavy fines, despite the fact that the owners of these vehicles are legally resident in (and even nationals of) another EU Member State. Are these actions by the Greek authorities in line with Community legislation? In which other EU Member States are vehicles circulating with numberplates from another EU Member State impounded and their owners given draconian fines? Does it intend to take any action and, if so, what action to put an end to this state of affairs caused by the distorted Greek tax system which excessively taxes vehicles over 1 800 c.c. which are exceedingly expensive in Greece (the country with the lowest per capita income in the EU - a mere 67% of the Community average, according to the latest Eurostat statistics), thereby forcing many Greeks to purchase vehicles with numberplates from another Member State?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In its reply of 9March 2006 to my previous question (E‑3293/05) the Council referred to the reassuring if somewhat generally-worded statement by the European Council (of December 2005) welcoming the Member States' national reform programmes (NRP), including that of Greece, regarding growth and employment for the period 2005‑08. Recently, according to the Greek press, the new OECD Secretary-General, on a recent visit to Greece, expressed alarm to government representatives responsible regarding the high unemployment figures in that country which, according to the latest official figures, amounted to 9.7% in 2005 and, when broken down by age group, more alarming, exceeding 19% in the youngest age group (15‑29), the figures for women in this category rising to 26.6%, with the (overall) figure for women approaching 15%. According to provisional data released by the National Statistics Service, in the first quarter of 2006 numbers employed in the industrial sector were 20300 less than in the corresponding period of 2005 (that is to say a 3.6% difference for the whole of Greece). Does the Commission consider that despite an unpromising start to 2006, the NRP for 2005‑06 will in fact facilitate a reduction in unemployment in real terms, while increasing employment levels in Greece, or does it share the concerns expressed by the OECD?". 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-3250/06

Macroeconomics

In its reply of 9March 2006 to my previous question (E‑3293/05) the Council referred to the reassuring if somewhat generally-worded statement by the European Council (of December 2005) welcoming the Member States' national reform programmes (NRP), including that of Greece, regarding growth and employment for the period 2005‑08. Recently, according to the Greek press, the new OECD Secretary-General, on a recent visit to Greece, expressed alarm to government representatives responsible regarding the high unemployment figures in that country which, according to the latest official figures, amounted to 9.7% in 2005 and, when broken down by age group, more alarming, exceeding 19% in the youngest age group (15‑29), the figures for women in this category rising to 26.6%, with the (overall) figure for women approaching 15%. According to provisional data released by the National Statistics Service, in the first quarter of 2006 numbers employed in the industrial sector were 20300 less than in the corresponding period of 2005 (that is to say a 3.6% difference for the whole of Greece). Does the Commission consider that despite an unpromising start to 2006, the NRP for 2005‑06 will in fact facilitate a reduction in unemployment in real terms, while increasing employment levels in Greece, or does it share the concerns expressed by the OECD?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Given that the ‘Top 10’ consultation has identified the Health and Safety at Work Framework Directive as one of the most burdensome pieces of EU legislation for SMEs, how will the Commission now act to reduce the costs that this legislation causes small businesses?". 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-009970-13

Macroeconomics

Given that the ‘Top 10’ consultation has identified the Health and Safety at Work Framework Directive as one of the most burdensome pieces of EU legislation for SMEs, how will the Commission now act to reduce the costs that this legislation causes small businesses?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "How does the Commission propose to implement the action plan to replace old cars with new models using anti-pollution and environment-friendly technology? Does it consider that encouraging consumers to replace their old cars might, in addition to the environmental benefits, give a fresh boost to the European automobile industries, which have been hit by the current economic crisis?". 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-6078/08

Macroeconomics

How does the Commission propose to implement the action plan to replace old cars with new models using anti-pollution and environment-friendly technology? Does it consider that encouraging consumers to replace their old cars might, in addition to the environmental benefits, give a fresh boost to the European automobile industries, which have been hit by the current economic crisis?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Sixth Council Directive77/388/EEC of 17May1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment was not implemented by Belgium on time. This led to some Belgian citizens having to pay more value added tax than they would have done under European rules. The Belgian rules were brought into line with the European VAT Directive in order to avoid double taxation. Accordingly, in August1988 a Belgian citizen claimed back the excess VAT for the period 1984 to 1988, in view of the unlawful nature of this payment. However, the national authorities say that a substantial proportion of the payments cannot be reimbursed, as the claim has lapsed. Is it right that a country which is guilty of the improper or late implementation of a European directive should refuse to reimburse unlawfully exacted payments with the justification that the claim has lapsed?". 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-4575/09

Macroeconomics

Sixth Council Directive77/388/EEC of 17May1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment was not implemented by Belgium on time. This led to some Belgian citizens having to pay more value added tax than they would have done under European rules. The Belgian rules were brought into line with the European VAT Directive in order to avoid double taxation. Accordingly, in August1988 a Belgian citizen claimed back the excess VAT for the period 1984 to 1988, in view of the unlawful nature of this payment. However, the national authorities say that a substantial proportion of the payments cannot be reimbursed, as the claim has lapsed. Is it right that a country which is guilty of the improper or late implementation of a European directive should refuse to reimburse unlawfully exacted payments with the justification that the claim has lapsed?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "By decision of 1July 1994 (OJ L 182, 16.7.1994.) the Commission set up a Conciliation Body with the task of mediating in disputes between the Commission and the Member States in the context of the discharge procedure on financial adjustments to expenditure notified by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund. 1.Is the Commission prepared to allow this Body to mediate in disputes concerning financial adjustments to expenditure notified by Member States on budget lines in Article B2-51 (Completion of the internal market in the agricultural sector)? 2.If not, what are the reasons for this distinction the type of matters which can be referred to the Body? Would it not be more logical for all agricultural expenditure in the budget to be eligible for the same sort of conciliation? 3.What other opportunities do Member States have for appealing against financial adjustments to notified expenditure on budget lines in Article B2-51? 4.To what extent does the Commission consider it desirable for the conciliation procedure to be applied in future to notified expenditure on budget lines in Article B2-51? If so, what action does it intend taking? 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] [1]. </s>

E-0991/98

Macroeconomics

By decision of 1July 1994 (OJ L 182, 16.7.1994.) the Commission set up a Conciliation Body with the task of mediating in disputes between the Commission and the Member States in the context of the discharge procedure on financial adjustments to expenditure notified by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund. 1.Is the Commission prepared to allow this Body to mediate in disputes concerning financial adjustments to expenditure notified by Member States on budget lines in Article B2-51 (Completion of the internal market in the agricultural sector)? 2.If not, what are the reasons for this distinction the type of matters which can be referred to the Body? Would it not be more logical for all agricultural expenditure in the budget to be eligible for the same sort of conciliation? 3.What other opportunities do Member States have for appealing against financial adjustments to notified expenditure on budget lines in Article B2-51? 4.To what extent does the Commission consider it desirable for the conciliation procedure to be applied in future to notified expenditure on budget lines in Article B2-51? If so, what action does it intend taking? If not, why not?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In the interests of financial transparency, many questions have been raised about the fines applied to Member States and companies that do not comply with EU rules. Recent articles have mentioned the threat of the EU imposing multi-billion-dollar fines for the failure to meet the emissions target in Ireland. In addition, the EU recently imposed fines of billions of euros on giant companies and multinationals, including Google.Regarding these two different situations, could the Commission:1.Indicate precisely where the money from the fines for these multinationals goes in the general budget of the EU and whether detailed accounts are available?2.Indicate how the money raised from Member States for non-compliance with EU objectives is used and distributed, in particular with regard to the climate emergency?3.Present a precise national report on the fines applied to and the amount already collected from Ireland and a precise audit showing how that money is distributed between EU budgets?". 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-001106/2020

Macroeconomics

In the interests of financial transparency, many questions have been raised about the fines applied to Member States and companies that do not comply with EU rules. Recent articles have mentioned the threat of the EU imposing multi-billion-dollar fines for the failure to meet the emissions target in Ireland. In addition, the EU recently imposed fines of billions of euros on giant companies and multinationals, including Google.Regarding these two different situations, could the Commission:1.Indicate precisely where the money from the fines for these multinationals goes in the general budget of the EU and whether detailed accounts are available?2.Indicate how the money raised from Member States for non-compliance with EU objectives is used and distributed, in particular with regard to the climate emergency?3.Present a precise national report on the fines applied to and the amount already collected from Ireland and a precise audit showing how that money is distributed between EU budgets?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The ownership of real property, including houses, gardens and plots of land, and related issues such as the taxation of the owners are, in principle, the preserve of the national regulatory authorities. Will the Commission, therefore, say: — what the tax situation is in regard to the owners of houses and plots of land in the individual Member States, — what European rules there are concerning the taxation of owners of houses and plots of land, — whether it monitors and verifies the individual Member States' tax arrangements, and — where I can obtain more detailed information on the tax situation in the 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-2384/01

Macroeconomics

The ownership of real property, including houses, gardens and plots of land, and related issues such as the taxation of the owners are, in principle, the preserve of the national regulatory authorities. Will the Commission, therefore, say: — what the tax situation is in regard to the owners of houses and plots of land in the individual Member States, — what European rules there are concerning the taxation of owners of houses and plots of land, — whether it monitors and verifies the individual Member States' tax arrangements, and — where I can obtain more detailed information on the tax situation in the Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission please state its view concerning the practice whereby Ireland grants tax exemption to stud farms in respect of """"""""nomination fees"""""""" payable when a stallion impregnates a mare? Is this practice not an illegitimate form of state aid to stud farms in Ireland?". 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-1124/04

Macroeconomics

Will the Commission please state its view concerning the practice whereby Ireland grants tax exemption to stud farms in respect of """"""""nomination fees"""""""" payable when a stallion impregnates a mare? Is this practice not an illegitimate form of state aid to stud farms in Ireland?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 13December2011 the Commission approved a series of staff reform proposals designed to save EUR1 billion by 2020. Any action which contributes to the sustainability of the European economy and has transparency and social justice as its watchword is moving in the right direction. In my previous question, I referred to the matter of the very high allowances received by former Commissioners for three years after the end of their term of office. Could the Commission please inform us whether, as part of EU staff salary cuts, it intends to terminate payment of these allowances these wages to former Commissioners?". 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-001417/2012

Macroeconomics

On 13December2011 the Commission approved a series of staff reform proposals designed to save EUR1 billion by 2020. Any action which contributes to the sustainability of the European economy and has transparency and social justice as its watchword is moving in the right direction. In my previous question, I referred to the matter of the very high allowances received by former Commissioners for three years after the end of their term of office. Could the Commission please inform us whether, as part of EU staff salary cuts, it intends to terminate payment of these allowances these wages to former Commissioners?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "There is currently no European legislation to protect the designations of certain industrial goods and handicrafts. Creating a dedicated EU‐wide system for this would benefit both European producers, who would be able to have the provenance and quality of their goods certified, and consumers, who would receive greater information and guarantees with regard to goods. The cutlery sector in Albacete (Spain) is one of those that would benefit, and this is a sector of considerable importance representing 60 businesses and 900 jobs. The legal requirement to state the origin of non‐food items (the ‘made in’ label) is the main barrier to the adoption of the new European legislation on product safety and market surveillance. In view of the importance of introducing legislation in this area: 1. What action is the Council taking in order to resume progress on this proposal? 2. What is the Council’s assessment of the possible proposal for a legislative mechanism on the protection of geographical indications for non‐agricultural products?". 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-013642-15

Macroeconomics

There is currently no European legislation to protect the designations of certain industrial goods and handicrafts. Creating a dedicated EU‐wide system for this would benefit both European producers, who would be able to have the provenance and quality of their goods certified, and consumers, who would receive greater information and guarantees with regard to goods. The cutlery sector in Albacete (Spain) is one of those that would benefit, and this is a sector of considerable importance representing 60 businesses and 900 jobs. The legal requirement to state the origin of non‐food items (the ‘made in’ label) is the main barrier to the adoption of the new European legislation on product safety and market surveillance. In view of the importance of introducing legislation in this area: 1. What action is the Council taking in order to resume progress on this proposal? 2. What is the Council’s assessment of the possible proposal for a legislative mechanism on the protection of geographical indications for non‐agricultural products?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Stockholm European Council will, for the first time, evaluate the procedure established at the Lisbon Council, establishing the achievement of full employment as agoal for the year 2010. The Presidency suggested, at the Ecofin Council of 19 January in Brussels, that it might be possible to establish certain intermediate employment objectives, but so far no specific statements have been made as to what these intermediate objectives would comprise. How does the Commission view this proposal? What would the parameters be (e.g.: objectives by gender, age, types of activity, regions, temporary jobs, etc.) for these intermediate objectives, so as to be able better to diagnose the problem and target the best solutions, with aview to achieving full employment by the scheduled date?". 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-0526/01

Macroeconomics

The Stockholm European Council will, for the first time, evaluate the procedure established at the Lisbon Council, establishing the achievement of full employment as agoal for the year 2010. The Presidency suggested, at the Ecofin Council of 19 January in Brussels, that it might be possible to establish certain intermediate employment objectives, but so far no specific statements have been made as to what these intermediate objectives would comprise. How does the Commission view this proposal? What would the parameters be (e.g.: objectives by gender, age, types of activity, regions, temporary jobs, etc.) for these intermediate objectives, so as to be able better to diagnose the problem and target the best solutions, with aview to achieving full employment by the scheduled date?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Please state the annual rate of growth in each Member State of the European Union (including the United Kingdom) for each year since 1997.". 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-2768/04

Macroeconomics

Please state the annual rate of growth in each Member State of the European Union (including the United Kingdom) for each year since 1997.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Since 1975, Teleco Cavi S.p.a has been a leading producer of cables for the telecommunications and energy sectors, operating three plants in Roseto (Teramo province, Abruzzi region) and one in Frosinone. The latter plant, which currently employs 124 people, is the only one of the company's devoted to producing copper electric cables for transporting low-tension energy. However, thanks to higher raw material costs and other structural factors, it has now lost competitiveness and is in a state of major crisis. A restructuring plan has been drawn up for the renewal of the production lines and machinery: this is a locally well-implanted industrial zone with advanced structures and equipment and, above all, highly skilled staff. In addition, the restructuring plan proposes converting part of the Frosinone zone from industrial to commercial use. These circumstances risk jeopardising employment levels in this part of central Italy, and there may also be serious consequences for employment affecting all the SMEs which make up this sector, bringing social repercussions in their wake. Can the Commission state: 1. whether it believes state aids are permissible for the purpose of rescuing and restructuring companies in difficulty in the energy sector; 2. whether actions or programmes for technological innovation exist in the energy sector; 3. whether it can provide an overall picture of the situation?". 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-3007/04

Macroeconomics

Since 1975, Teleco Cavi S.p.a has been a leading producer of cables for the telecommunications and energy sectors, operating three plants in Roseto (Teramo province, Abruzzi region) and one in Frosinone. The latter plant, which currently employs 124 people, is the only one of the company's devoted to producing copper electric cables for transporting low-tension energy. However, thanks to higher raw material costs and other structural factors, it has now lost competitiveness and is in a state of major crisis. A restructuring plan has been drawn up for the renewal of the production lines and machinery: this is a locally well-implanted industrial zone with advanced structures and equipment and, above all, highly skilled staff. In addition, the restructuring plan proposes converting part of the Frosinone zone from industrial to commercial use. These circumstances risk jeopardising employment levels in this part of central Italy, and there may also be serious consequences for employment affecting all the SMEs which make up this sector, bringing social repercussions in their wake. Can the Commission state: 1. whether it believes state aids are permissible for the purpose of rescuing and restructuring companies in difficulty in the energy sector; 2. whether actions or programmes for technological innovation exist in the energy sector; 3. whether it can provide an overall picture of the situation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Textile industry workers in Portugal are extremely concerned, especially in the north of the country, where 13% of the working population are now unemployed and no new jobs are being created. The trade agreements recently signed by the Commission, in particular with Pakistan, are a source of further concern, especially in the home textiles sector, which still comprises major companies in Portugal. 1.What measures are being taken to prevent a further rise in unemployment, in particular in the textile sector in Portugal? 2.What is being done to address these problems, which affect the European textile industry, especially in economically vulnerable countries and areas where this sector is of vital importance to employment, industrial production and regional development?". 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-000117/2011

Macroeconomics

Textile industry workers in Portugal are extremely concerned, especially in the north of the country, where 13% of the working population are now unemployed and no new jobs are being created. The trade agreements recently signed by the Commission, in particular with Pakistan, are a source of further concern, especially in the home textiles sector, which still comprises major companies in Portugal. 1.What measures are being taken to prevent a further rise in unemployment, in particular in the textile sector in Portugal? 2.What is being done to address these problems, which affect the European textile industry, especially in economically vulnerable countries and areas where this sector is of vital importance to employment, industrial production and regional development?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Annex II of the proposal for a Council Regulation concerning trade in certain equipment and products which could be used for capital punishment or torture(1) allows Member States to control trade in listed products that may be used to inflict torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. How much such equipment or products are produced in EU Member States, where and by whom? (1)COM(2002) 770.". 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-1542/03

Macroeconomics

Annex II of the proposal for a Council Regulation concerning trade in certain equipment and products which could be used for capital punishment or torture(1) allows Member States to control trade in listed products that may be used to inflict torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. How much such equipment or products are produced in EU Member States, where and by whom? (1)COM(2002) 770.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Does the Presidency-in-Office support, and would it be prepared to use, the discretion granted by the Commission in its Communication SEC(97)2089 final on reduced VAT rates for selected labour-intensive services? Is the Presidency-in-Office prepared to accept that this discretion applies to the maintenance and repair of churches and historic listed buildings? Would the Presidency-in-Office consider this as part of the Commission's review of the harmonization of VAT throughout the European Union?". 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-1455/98

Macroeconomics

Does the Presidency-in-Office support, and would it be prepared to use, the discretion granted by the Commission in its Communication SEC(97)2089 final on reduced VAT rates for selected labour-intensive services? Is the Presidency-in-Office prepared to accept that this discretion applies to the maintenance and repair of churches and historic listed buildings? Would the Presidency-in-Office consider this as part of the Commission's review of the harmonization of VAT throughout the European Union?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 9May2012, Filivivi Srl, a textile company from Piovene Rocchette in the Veneto region, decided due to the crisis to close its spinning facility, began the redundancy process for its 127employees and proceeded with the concomitant relocation of production from Italy to Romania. — Is the Commission aware of the situation? — Will it mobilise the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for employees made redundant by Filivivi? — How does it intend to stem the problem of relocation which is increasingly hitting the European textile industry, its employees and their families? — What measures does it intend to take regarding the administrative, bureaucratic and social security discrepancies still present in the single market and which strongly distort competitiveness between the various EU 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-005245/2012

Macroeconomics

On 9May2012, Filivivi Srl, a textile company from Piovene Rocchette in the Veneto region, decided due to the crisis to close its spinning facility, began the redundancy process for its 127employees and proceeded with the concomitant relocation of production from Italy to Romania. — Is the Commission aware of the situation? — Will it mobilise the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for employees made redundant by Filivivi? — How does it intend to stem the problem of relocation which is increasingly hitting the European textile industry, its employees and their families? — What measures does it intend to take regarding the administrative, bureaucratic and social security discrepancies still present in the single market and which strongly distort competitiveness between the various EU Member States?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Has the Commission had any correspondence with the British Government regarding Britain's recent decision that it had been wrong to take VAT from sports clubs? What is the Commission's position 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] [1]. </s>

E-424/95

Macroeconomics

Has the Commission had any correspondence with the British Government regarding Britain's recent decision that it had been wrong to take VAT from sports clubs? What is the Commission's position on this issue?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Financial assistance to EU Member States includes EFSM (for EU28), ESM (for Eurozone countries) and BoP (for non-Eurozone countries) assistance. The EFSM was, together with the EFSF, introduced during the financial crises and was used for Eurozone Member States in difficulties. The ESM is now operational and has become the main support mechanism for Eurozone Member States. BoP, on the other hand, is the main support mechanism for non-Eurozone Member States. Can the Commission clarify what are the main characteristics that determine whether a non-Eurozone Member State in difficulty should use financial assistance from the EFSM or BoP?". 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-003595-16

Macroeconomics

Financial assistance to EU Member States includes EFSM (for EU28), ESM (for Eurozone countries) and BoP (for non-Eurozone countries) assistance. The EFSM was, together with the EFSF, introduced during the financial crises and was used for Eurozone Member States in difficulties. The ESM is now operational and has become the main support mechanism for Eurozone Member States. BoP, on the other hand, is the main support mechanism for non-Eurozone Member States. Can the Commission clarify what are the main characteristics that determine whether a non-Eurozone Member State in difficulty should use financial assistance from the EFSM or BoP?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 2 June 1997 in Luxembourg, EU foreign ministers gave their agreement to the creation of a European monitoring centre on racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism. What are the budgetary consequences of the creation of this centre? Will it have an equivalent status to the specialist European agencies and on what budget line will it operate?". 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-2399/97

Macroeconomics

On 2 June 1997 in Luxembourg, EU foreign ministers gave their agreement to the creation of a European monitoring centre on racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism. What are the budgetary consequences of the creation of this centre? Will it have an equivalent status to the specialist European agencies and on what budget line will it operate?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A constituent has approached me about the car market in Ireland and the Irish Government's policy of applying vehicle registration tax to vehicles bought outside the 26counties. Can the Commission say what the situation is and if it is in line with EU legislation?". 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-3298/07

Macroeconomics

A constituent has approached me about the car market in Ireland and the Irish Government's policy of applying vehicle registration tax to vehicles bought outside the 26counties. Can the Commission say what the situation is and if it is in line with EU legislation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "It emerged very recently that the German Government has purchased 30 million additional doses of the anti-COVID vaccine produced by Pfizer-BioNTech, in breach of the EU agreements on the fair distribution of medicines, thereby effectively altering unilaterally the allocation provisions set out in those agreements of 18 June 2020, which specified that there should be no separate negotiations on the purchase of additional doses.Given that economic recovery following the pandemic will hinge to a large extent on the ability to immunise as many people as possible, it is reasonable to argue that the provision of more vaccine doses by one State would increase its competitive advantage to the detriment of the other EU Member States.In the light of the above, can the Commission answer the following questions:1.Does it not take the view that Germany, by breaching the agreements of 18 June 2020, has violated one of the Union’s founding principles, namely that of equality between Member States?2.What measures will it take to prevent Germany from exploiting the anti-COVID vaccination campaign to increase its own economic power at the expense of the principle of fair 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-007103/2020

Macroeconomics

It emerged very recently that the German Government has purchased 30 million additional doses of the anti-COVID vaccine produced by Pfizer-BioNTech, in breach of the EU agreements on the fair distribution of medicines, thereby effectively altering unilaterally the allocation provisions set out in those agreements of 18 June 2020, which specified that there should be no separate negotiations on the purchase of additional doses.Given that economic recovery following the pandemic will hinge to a large extent on the ability to immunise as many people as possible, it is reasonable to argue that the provision of more vaccine doses by one State would increase its competitive advantage to the detriment of the other EU Member States.In the light of the above, can the Commission answer the following questions:1.Does it not take the view that Germany, by breaching the agreements of 18 June 2020, has violated one of the Union’s founding principles, namely that of equality between Member States?2.What measures will it take to prevent Germany from exploiting the anti-COVID vaccination campaign to increase its own economic power at the expense of the principle of fair competition?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Has the Commission received a copy of this study? Is it aware that this study was drawn up without consultation of the relevant local authorities? Is it aware that many of the latter consider that they study is flawed in its technical assessments as well as in its cost and price assessments? Does the Commission accept that it would be a mistake to base any policy decisions on this study?". 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-1188/98

Macroeconomics

Has the Commission received a copy of this study? Is it aware that this study was drawn up without consultation of the relevant local authorities? Is it aware that many of the latter consider that they study is flawed in its technical assessments as well as in its cost and price assessments? Does the Commission accept that it would be a mistake to base any policy decisions on this study?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Following the takeover of Douglas by Boeing and other disturbing developments such as the crisis at Fokker, will the Commission take measures to defend the European aeronautics industry, particularly the Airbus group?". 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-0108/97

Macroeconomics

Following the takeover of Douglas by Boeing and other disturbing developments such as the crisis at Fokker, will the Commission take measures to defend the European aeronautics industry, particularly the Airbus group?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Could the Commission please explain why European Business and Innovation Centres currently exist in relatively affluent areas of the UK such as Birmingham and Cambridge, when there is no Centre at all in the South-West of England, aregion that contains areas such as Cornwall which are among some of the poorest areas in the EU?". 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-3727/00

Macroeconomics

Could the Commission please explain why European Business and Innovation Centres currently exist in relatively affluent areas of the UK such as Birmingham and Cambridge, when there is no Centre at all in the South-West of England, aregion that contains areas such as Cornwall which are among some of the poorest areas in the EU?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "As part of an EU initiative relating to restrictions on cash payments, the Commission has opened a public consultation — Survey on potential restrictions on large payments in cash — which EU citizens have until 31May2017 to complete. My questions concern the methods of processing and publishing the results of the survey: 1. Will it be possible to divide answers to the question ‘If restrictions on payments in cash were introduced at EU level, should the limit be:’ according to whether the stakeholder supported or opposed the introduction of cash payment restrictions at EU level in a previous answer? 2. Does the Commission plan to publish all unprocessed ‘raw’ data at individual stakeholder level, in addition to the survey results? 3. If the answer to the previous question is ‘no’, will all unprocessed, ‘raw’ data be made available on request?". 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-003145-17

Macroeconomics

As part of an EU initiative relating to restrictions on cash payments, the Commission has opened a public consultation — Survey on potential restrictions on large payments in cash — which EU citizens have until 31May2017 to complete. My questions concern the methods of processing and publishing the results of the survey: 1. Will it be possible to divide answers to the question ‘If restrictions on payments in cash were introduced at EU level, should the limit be:’ according to whether the stakeholder supported or opposed the introduction of cash payment restrictions at EU level in a previous answer? 2. Does the Commission plan to publish all unprocessed ‘raw’ data at individual stakeholder level, in addition to the survey results? 3. If the answer to the previous question is ‘no’, will all unprocessed, ‘raw’ data be made available on request?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Consistent and rigorous budgetary implementation is a basic requirement for successfully handling the challenge of fiscal discipline in theEU Member States. With this in mind, it is important for each Member State to possess institutions with the capacity to monitor the fulfilment of budgetary commitments, particularly where these arise from an existing legal requirement. This week the Spanish Government announced that it was against paying EUR259million to the Catalan regional government under the terms of the third transitional provision of the Statute of Catalonia, which is an organic law adopted by the Spanish Parliament in 2006, despite the fact that this payment was included in the Spanish national budget for 2011. This refusal has been accompanied by Government statements to the effect that the budget allocation in question is ‘a spending option, but by no means an obligation’. Unfortunately, there is no independent Spanish body with powers to properly oversee compliance with budgetary commitments, along the lines of the European Court of Auditors, since the Spanish court of auditors has no powers when it comes to monitoring budgetary implementation. In light of the above: 1. Does the Commission consider that the Member States should fulfil their budgetary commitments? 2. Does the Commission consider that an independent body should exist within each Member State with full powers to monitor budgetary implementation? 3. Does the Commission feel that the Member States' national courts of auditors should, if necessary, be reformed so that they have the power to monitor budgetary implementation?". 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-012151/2011

Macroeconomics

Consistent and rigorous budgetary implementation is a basic requirement for successfully handling the challenge of fiscal discipline in theEU Member States. With this in mind, it is important for each Member State to possess institutions with the capacity to monitor the fulfilment of budgetary commitments, particularly where these arise from an existing legal requirement. This week the Spanish Government announced that it was against paying EUR259million to the Catalan regional government under the terms of the third transitional provision of the Statute of Catalonia, which is an organic law adopted by the Spanish Parliament in 2006, despite the fact that this payment was included in the Spanish national budget for 2011. This refusal has been accompanied by Government statements to the effect that the budget allocation in question is ‘a spending option, but by no means an obligation’. Unfortunately, there is no independent Spanish body with powers to properly oversee compliance with budgetary commitments, along the lines of the European Court of Auditors, since the Spanish court of auditors has no powers when it comes to monitoring budgetary implementation. In light of the above: 1. Does the Commission consider that the Member States should fulfil their budgetary commitments? 2. Does the Commission consider that an independent body should exist within each Member State with full powers to monitor budgetary implementation? 3. Does the Commission feel that the Member States' national courts of auditors should, if necessary, be reformed so that they have the power to monitor budgetary implementation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In my question (Ε-002592/2016) concerning the need to stamp out fuel smuggling in Greece, Inoted that ‘the relevant Law 4093/2012 was passed… over 100million public and private resources’. The Commission acknowledged the above, noting in its reply that the same measures which had been foreseen in the first Memorandum, as they had never been implemented, were transferred to the Memoranda of Understanding of September2015 and June2016. Such measures included: (a) the ‘timely implementation of the joint ministerial decision and action plan to combat fuel smuggling, as well as of the related measures for identifying storage tanks and for the installation of input-output systems’; (b) the ‘approval of a strategy against fuel and tobacco smuggling by May2016’; (c) the ‘purchase of scanners to equip the three main international ports by January2017’. Based on the above, and almost one year after my question, will the Commission say: 1. Whether the measures referred to in points (a), (b)and (c)have been implemented. If not, why? 2. Why is the Commission exerting stifling pressure, when it comes to reductions in wages and pensions, increasing fuel prices and imposing huge tax burdens, but is not acting with the same zeal in the massive issue of fighting fuel smuggling?". 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-000630-17

Macroeconomics

In my question (Ε-002592/2016) concerning the need to stamp out fuel smuggling in Greece, Inoted that ‘the relevant Law 4093/2012 was passed… over 100million public and private resources’. The Commission acknowledged the above, noting in its reply that the same measures which had been foreseen in the first Memorandum, as they had never been implemented, were transferred to the Memoranda of Understanding of September2015 and June2016. Such measures included: (a) the ‘timely implementation of the joint ministerial decision and action plan to combat fuel smuggling, as well as of the related measures for identifying storage tanks and for the installation of input-output systems’; (b) the ‘approval of a strategy against fuel and tobacco smuggling by May2016’; (c) the ‘purchase of scanners to equip the three main international ports by January2017’. Based on the above, and almost one year after my question, will the Commission say: 1. Whether the measures referred to in points (a), (b)and (c)have been implemented. If not, why? 2. Why is the Commission exerting stifling pressure, when it comes to reductions in wages and pensions, increasing fuel prices and imposing huge tax burdens, but is not acting with the same zeal in the massive issue of fighting fuel smuggling?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The SS Lazio sports club, which is heavily indebted to the Italian tax authorities to the sum of EUR157million, has agreed an ‘amicable’ solution to its debt problem with the national revenue agency by undertaking to pay a total of ‘only’ EUR140 million over a 23‑year period. Does the Commission not intend to take account of the fact that the total debt of SS Lazio also includes VAT, plus the tax on physical persons (IRPEF) in respect of its staff? In addition, should not this tax deal, which is highly anomalous by the standards of the treatment received by most Italian businesses, be considered as a hidden form of state aid to an ailing company? Should not the aid granted to SS Lazio, as a tax concession reserved for a single company in contradistinction to the usual treatment of undertakings by the Italian tax authorities, be considered a flagrant breach of the principle of free competition between enterprises?". 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-1422/05

Macroeconomics

The SS Lazio sports club, which is heavily indebted to the Italian tax authorities to the sum of EUR157million, has agreed an ‘amicable’ solution to its debt problem with the national revenue agency by undertaking to pay a total of ‘only’ EUR140 million over a 23‑year period. Does the Commission not intend to take account of the fact that the total debt of SS Lazio also includes VAT, plus the tax on physical persons (IRPEF) in respect of its staff? In addition, should not this tax deal, which is highly anomalous by the standards of the treatment received by most Italian businesses, be considered as a hidden form of state aid to an ailing company? Should not the aid granted to SS Lazio, as a tax concession reserved for a single company in contradistinction to the usual treatment of undertakings by the Italian tax authorities, be considered a flagrant breach of the principle of free competition between enterprises?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Regulation (EEC) 2082/92(1) was adopted in order to protect specific and traditional recipes defined in accordance with a set of conditions. Article 13 makes provision for two types of protection: """"""""partial"""""""" protection (Article 13(1)) and """"""""total"""""""" protection (Article 13(2)). How many products have been granted the total protection referred to in Article 13(2)? (1)OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.". 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-0773/99

Macroeconomics

Regulation (EEC) 2082/92(1) was adopted in order to protect specific and traditional recipes defined in accordance with a set of conditions. Article 13 makes provision for two types of protection: """"""""partial"""""""" protection (Article 13(1)) and """"""""total"""""""" protection (Article 13(2)). How many products have been granted the total protection referred to in Article 13(2)? (1)OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Since 2013, food donations to recognised food banks have been exempt from VAT in Belgium. This year, the exemption was extended to include recognised local charities. This means that it is now more advantageous to donate surplus food rather than destroy it. This measure has already led to a considerable increase in the number of food donations made by department stores and a proportional fall in food waste. This is a win-win situation which combats both food poverty and food waste. The previous Commission expressed its support for these measures. 1.What action is the Commission undertaking to encourage Member States to take similar steps? 2.Is the Commission planning to promote VAT exemption for food donations within the context of the proposal for more ambitious waste management which was announced in July2014?". 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-006248-15

Macroeconomics

Since 2013, food donations to recognised food banks have been exempt from VAT in Belgium. This year, the exemption was extended to include recognised local charities. This means that it is now more advantageous to donate surplus food rather than destroy it. This measure has already led to a considerable increase in the number of food donations made by department stores and a proportional fall in food waste. This is a win-win situation which combats both food poverty and food waste. The previous Commission expressed its support for these measures. 1.What action is the Commission undertaking to encourage Member States to take similar steps? 2.Is the Commission planning to promote VAT exemption for food donations within the context of the proposal for more ambitious waste management which was announced in July2014?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to recent figures, the economic and social indicators for northern Greece are continuing to worsen, with the main problem being the increase in poverty and unemployment. The closure or transfer of factories is seen as the main reason for this unfavourable trend. In particular, the Employment Centre in Thessaloniki has recorded a further increase of 0.5% in unemployment in recent months following the lay-off of more than 3000 workers during the last quarter, with unemployment in the region now standing at 18%. Thessaloniki is not the only region of northern Greece facing this problem. Mention could also be made of Naousa, where unemployment stands at 50% (the prefecture of Imathia is 45th out of52 in terms of declared income per taxpayer), Drama (where unemployment is close to 20% and per capita GDP is estimated to be 50% of the European average), Kastoria, Florina, and so on. As things stand, the situation of social and economic insecurity is close to breaking point. Is the Commission aware of this problem and has the Greek Government informed it of the measures it intends to take, not only to combat unemployment directly and effectively, but also to implement the requirements of the Lisbon Strategy?". 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-0261/06

Macroeconomics

According to recent figures, the economic and social indicators for northern Greece are continuing to worsen, with the main problem being the increase in poverty and unemployment. The closure or transfer of factories is seen as the main reason for this unfavourable trend. In particular, the Employment Centre in Thessaloniki has recorded a further increase of 0.5% in unemployment in recent months following the lay-off of more than 3000 workers during the last quarter, with unemployment in the region now standing at 18%. Thessaloniki is not the only region of northern Greece facing this problem. Mention could also be made of Naousa, where unemployment stands at 50% (the prefecture of Imathia is 45th out of52 in terms of declared income per taxpayer), Drama (where unemployment is close to 20% and per capita GDP is estimated to be 50% of the European average), Kastoria, Florina, and so on. As things stand, the situation of social and economic insecurity is close to breaking point. Is the Commission aware of this problem and has the Greek Government informed it of the measures it intends to take, not only to combat unemployment directly and effectively, but also to implement the requirements of the Lisbon Strategy?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In its reply of 12November2009 to Written Question E‑4470/2009 regarding Gozo, the Commission stated that Declaration 36 annexed to Malta’s accession treaty was a unilateral declaration and that it was the Maltese Government’s responsibility to ask for such a report to be produced. The Commissioner also highlighted the fact that, since both Malta and Gozo have remained within the convergence objectives for the budgetary period 2007-2013, such a report was not needed. In view of the current budgetary discussions for the period 2014-2020, and also in light of the recent statements by the Commission to the effect that Malta is now considered as a transitional country in relation to the convergence objective (formerly Objective1), has the Maltese Government submitted a request for a report to be drawn up on Gozo’s social and economic situation?". 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-011528/2011

Macroeconomics

In its reply of 12November2009 to Written Question E‑4470/2009 regarding Gozo, the Commission stated that Declaration 36 annexed to Malta’s accession treaty was a unilateral declaration and that it was the Maltese Government’s responsibility to ask for such a report to be produced. The Commissioner also highlighted the fact that, since both Malta and Gozo have remained within the convergence objectives for the budgetary period 2007-2013, such a report was not needed. In view of the current budgetary discussions for the period 2014-2020, and also in light of the recent statements by the Commission to the effect that Malta is now considered as a transitional country in relation to the convergence objective (formerly Objective1), has the Maltese Government submitted a request for a report to be drawn up on Gozo’s social and economic situation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Is the Commission aware that firms, for instance of British origin, are producing goods in Malta which are then exported to the EU under the terms of an Association Agreement between Malta and the EU? Malta grants such firms full tax relief, but only in respect of goods which Malta exports to the EU. The granting of full tax relief is distorting competition with firms producing goods within the EU. Moreover, the Commission has concluded that tax breaks are also covered by the prohibition on subsidies and aid.". 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-2269/98

Macroeconomics

Is the Commission aware that firms, for instance of British origin, are producing goods in Malta which are then exported to the EU under the terms of an Association Agreement between Malta and the EU? Malta grants such firms full tax relief, but only in respect of goods which Malta exports to the EU. The granting of full tax relief is distorting competition with firms producing goods within the EU. Moreover, the Commission has concluded that tax breaks are also covered by the prohibition on subsidies and aid.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In its reply to Written Question E-0273/00(1) the Commission appears to be confusing two different phenomena: the existence of price differences resulting from administrative and/or macroeconomic policy measures, generally considered on the basis of the classic text """"""""The Purchasing Power of Money"""""""" by Irving Fisher, and differences in market value for equal or similar goods and services arising from differences in supply and/or demand best summed up by JohnMaynard Keynes. Keynes quotes Dr Watson on a visit to the Isle of Skye, when he says (and I quote from memory) that, if the eggs on your miserable island are cheap, it is not because there is an abundance of eggs but because money is scarce. The problem posed here is impossible to resolve in the context of statistical method, because it belongs to the field of economic theory. As conceived by Fisher, PPPs represent the appropriate method for looking beyond price differences which do not stem from market mechanisms, which is not the case when the market itself attaches different values to goods. As Dr Watson realised using his own common sense, the value of goods and services varies not only according to conditions of supply but also according to conditions of demand, especially where their mobility is low. That being so, does the Commission not consider it absurd to correct the overall income of a particular geographical area using the assumed market value of goods and services in that area, to the extent that possible differences in prices do not reflect administrative measures? Does the Commission not believe that it would be appropriate to use an in-depth knowledge of economic theory as a basis before proposing measures to correct income in real terms, such as PPPs? (1)OJ C 330 E, 21.11.2000, p. 114.". 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-1553/00

Macroeconomics

In its reply to Written Question E-0273/00(1) the Commission appears to be confusing two different phenomena: the existence of price differences resulting from administrative and/or macroeconomic policy measures, generally considered on the basis of the classic text """"""""The Purchasing Power of Money"""""""" by Irving Fisher, and differences in market value for equal or similar goods and services arising from differences in supply and/or demand best summed up by JohnMaynard Keynes. Keynes quotes Dr Watson on a visit to the Isle of Skye, when he says (and I quote from memory) that, if the eggs on your miserable island are cheap, it is not because there is an abundance of eggs but because money is scarce. The problem posed here is impossible to resolve in the context of statistical method, because it belongs to the field of economic theory. As conceived by Fisher, PPPs represent the appropriate method for looking beyond price differences which do not stem from market mechanisms, which is not the case when the market itself attaches different values to goods. As Dr Watson realised using his own common sense, the value of goods and services varies not only according to conditions of supply but also according to conditions of demand, especially where their mobility is low. That being so, does the Commission not consider it absurd to correct the overall income of a particular geographical area using the assumed market value of goods and services in that area, to the extent that possible differences in prices do not reflect administrative measures? Does the Commission not believe that it would be appropriate to use an in-depth knowledge of economic theory as a basis before proposing measures to correct income in real terms, such as PPPs? (1)OJ C 330 E, 21.11.2000, p. 114.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Industrial Promotion Institute (formerly the IASM) is responsible for boosting production and promoting incentive and energy-production measures on the basis of economic development and cohesion policy guidelines and under the supervision of the Ministry for Economic Development. The ministry has given the institute responsibility for the provision of assistance to small and medium-sized enterprises within Objective1 areas. In spite of its remit, this year the institute has closed its local offices in southern Italy. It should be noted, in this connection, that part of the institute's funding comes from the FAS (Fund for Underutilised Areas). Given that in the 2007‑13 programming period approximately EUR21873761024 have been earmarked for Italy, including EUR17882902254 for convergence objective areas, would the Commission state: 1. how, given that the Industrial Promotion Institute no longer operates in southern Italy, particularly Calabria, will effective technical assistance be provided to SMEs and local authorities; 2. whether it would not agree that SMEs in southern Italy should be provided with encouragement in the form of more effective assistance and, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No1083/2006(1), the Member States should decentralise implementation of operational programmes; 3. what steps it intends to take to enforce Regulation (EC) No1083/2006, particularly in respect of decentralised management of resources earmarked for structural funding for the Convergence Objective in Italy? (1)OJL210, 31.7.2006, 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>

P-5991/07

Macroeconomics

The Industrial Promotion Institute (formerly the IASM) is responsible for boosting production and promoting incentive and energy-production measures on the basis of economic development and cohesion policy guidelines and under the supervision of the Ministry for Economic Development. The ministry has given the institute responsibility for the provision of assistance to small and medium-sized enterprises within Objective1 areas. In spite of its remit, this year the institute has closed its local offices in southern Italy. It should be noted, in this connection, that part of the institute's funding comes from the FAS (Fund for Underutilised Areas). Given that in the 2007‑13 programming period approximately EUR21873761024 have been earmarked for Italy, including EUR17882902254 for convergence objective areas, would the Commission state: 1. how, given that the Industrial Promotion Institute no longer operates in southern Italy, particularly Calabria, will effective technical assistance be provided to SMEs and local authorities; 2. whether it would not agree that SMEs in southern Italy should be provided with encouragement in the form of more effective assistance and, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No1083/2006(1), the Member States should decentralise implementation of operational programmes; 3. what steps it intends to take to enforce Regulation (EC) No1083/2006, particularly in respect of decentralised management of resources earmarked for structural funding for the Convergence Objective in Italy? (1)OJL210, 31.7.2006, p.25.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In Italy, a tax obligation arises from the making of a chargeable gain and, in the employment relationship, that chargeable gain is made by the employee, whilst the employer is by law jointly and severally liable for the fulfilment of the employee's tax obligation, in its capacity as withholding agent. The indivisibility of tax liability (ratified in law with regard to both the withholding agent and the taxpayer) derives from the unitary obligation binding the two parties. Considering that: — the settled principles of EClaw include effective legal protection (CJEU judgment C-362/12, 2013) and the principle of equal treatment; the certainty of law (CJEU judgments Kuhne & Heitz, 2004, and Kempter, 2008); and the ne bis in idem principle (Article50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; CJEU judgment Aklagaren, 2013); — the case-law of the Court of Justice has clarified on several occasions that protection of those rights applies both to the substantive action and in procedural terms; — the interpretation in bonam partem has been acknowledged in various sectors of European law; — there is a genuine requirement for Member States to punish any breaches of European law that prejudice the right of individuals to protect themselves in both substantive and procedural terms; the Commission is asked: 1. Can a final judgment favourable to the withholding agent, who is jointly and severally liable with the taxpayer, which absolves the former by ratifying the non-existence of the chargeable gain, be extended to the taxpayer? 2. Does not a favourable decision which declares the non-existence of the chargeable gain and therefore of the claim protect the taxpayer against further proceedings? Would the contrary not mean evading the ban on domestic double taxation?". 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-001788-14

Macroeconomics

In Italy, a tax obligation arises from the making of a chargeable gain and, in the employment relationship, that chargeable gain is made by the employee, whilst the employer is by law jointly and severally liable for the fulfilment of the employee's tax obligation, in its capacity as withholding agent. The indivisibility of tax liability (ratified in law with regard to both the withholding agent and the taxpayer) derives from the unitary obligation binding the two parties. Considering that: — the settled principles of EClaw include effective legal protection (CJEU judgment C-362/12, 2013) and the principle of equal treatment; the certainty of law (CJEU judgments Kuhne & Heitz, 2004, and Kempter, 2008); and the ne bis in idem principle (Article50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; CJEU judgment Aklagaren, 2013); — the case-law of the Court of Justice has clarified on several occasions that protection of those rights applies both to the substantive action and in procedural terms; — the interpretation in bonam partem has been acknowledged in various sectors of European law; — there is a genuine requirement for Member States to punish any breaches of European law that prejudice the right of individuals to protect themselves in both substantive and procedural terms; the Commission is asked: 1. Can a final judgment favourable to the withholding agent, who is jointly and severally liable with the taxpayer, which absolves the former by ratifying the non-existence of the chargeable gain, be extended to the taxpayer? 2. Does not a favourable decision which declares the non-existence of the chargeable gain and therefore of the claim protect the taxpayer against further proceedings? Would the contrary not mean evading the ban on domestic double taxation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Youth unemployment has proven to be the downside of austerity policies, and is a cause for concern in all EU countries. What change has there been in youth unemployment in Finland in the first quarter of 2013, compared with the same period in 2012?". 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-008520-13

Macroeconomics

Youth unemployment has proven to be the downside of austerity policies, and is a cause for concern in all EU countries. What change has there been in youth unemployment in Finland in the first quarter of 2013, compared with the same period in 2012?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to an analysis made by the economic daily ‘Italia Oggi’ the new Prodi government, because of an exceptionally large number (63) of ‘outside’ members (i.e.not MPs) will cost the Italian exchequer around EUR14.7million per year — twice as much as the salaries of the Berlusconi government in 2001. Does not the Commission consider that the new Prodi government’s unexpected exceeding of expenditure limits right from the start constitutes a blatant violation of the Maastricht criteria and the Stability Pact, which Italy was called upon to comply with on several occasions? Does it not consider that the Italian Government should be asked to make an appropriate cut in the astronomical cost of maintaining itself?". 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-2612/06

Macroeconomics

According to an analysis made by the economic daily ‘Italia Oggi’ the new Prodi government, because of an exceptionally large number (63) of ‘outside’ members (i.e.not MPs) will cost the Italian exchequer around EUR14.7million per year — twice as much as the salaries of the Berlusconi government in 2001. Does not the Commission consider that the new Prodi government’s unexpected exceeding of expenditure limits right from the start constitutes a blatant violation of the Maastricht criteria and the Stability Pact, which Italy was called upon to comply with on several occasions? Does it not consider that the Italian Government should be asked to make an appropriate cut in the astronomical cost of maintaining itself?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "According to the annual report of the State Audit Department of the Hellenic Republic for the financial year 2001, Greece appears to have an additional deficit in the order of Drs 1,5 trillion, which was never entered in the budget and represents almost 3,9 % of GDP for 2001. If added to the 1,2 % acknowledged by the government, this deficit exceeds 5,2 %. What impact do these revelations have on Greece's financial indicators? How do they affect Greece's obligations under the Stability Pact? What are the precise figures for the deficits and government debt in Greece following the latest interventions by Eurostat in collaboration with the Greek 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] [1]. </s>

P-3523/02

Macroeconomics

According to the annual report of the State Audit Department of the Hellenic Republic for the financial year 2001, Greece appears to have an additional deficit in the order of Drs 1,5 trillion, which was never entered in the budget and represents almost 3,9 % of GDP for 2001. If added to the 1,2 % acknowledged by the government, this deficit exceeds 5,2 %. What impact do these revelations have on Greece's financial indicators? How do they affect Greece's obligations under the Stability Pact? What are the precise figures for the deficits and government debt in Greece following the latest interventions by Eurostat in collaboration with the Greek Government?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: """""""""Libération"""""""" reported on 27 September 2002 that the Romanian authorities have announced the opening of an inquiry into the abuse of EU funds intended for the construction of a port facility on the Danube. Can the Commission confirm the correctness of this press report? Can the Commission provide guarantees that it is following this procedure with the necessary attention and that it will forward to Parliament, in good time, a detailed report in the context of the discharge procedure for the 2001 budget?". 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-2945/02

Macroeconomics

""""""""Libération"""""""" reported on 27 September 2002 that the Romanian authorities have announced the opening of an inquiry into the abuse of EU funds intended for the construction of a port facility on the Danube. Can the Commission confirm the correctness of this press report? Can the Commission provide guarantees that it is following this procedure with the necessary attention and that it will forward to Parliament, in good time, a detailed report in the context of the discharge procedure for the 2001 budget?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "2021 will see the introduction of a tax on plastic in the European Union, with 80 cents payable on every kilogram.1.Is the Commission aware that the cost of this tax will have to be borne by the consumer or will be transferred to the consumer?2.Why is the Commission proposing a project which is clearly not covered by the EU Treaties (tax sovereignty)?". 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-004889/2020

Macroeconomics

2021 will see the introduction of a tax on plastic in the European Union, with 80 cents payable on every kilogram.1.Is the Commission aware that the cost of this tax will have to be borne by the consumer or will be transferred to the consumer?2.Why is the Commission proposing a project which is clearly not covered by the EU Treaties (tax sovereignty)?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The European Central Bank (ECB) issued an opinion on 19March 2008 (CON/2008/13) on a bill which has already been adopted (Law No3655/08, Greek Government Journal A58/3.4.2008) on reforming the Greek social security system. In its opinion, the ECB maintains that Law No3655/08 on the one hand damages the institutional and financial independence of the Bank of Greece while, on the other, it covers up Central Bank deficits by means of monetary financing of the Bank of Greece. In its answer to a previous question (E‑1988/08), the Commission answered that it was awaiting the validation of data on the financial situation of the pension fund of the Greek Central Bank by a Greek auditor. The auditing company has already submitted its report. Despite the fact of the importance of monetary financing as an issue for illegal point of view to establish whether or not Law No3655/08 is compatible with Community law, the Commission seems not to attach the same importance to the argument about the independence of the Bank of Greece which is jeopardised by the provisions of the above law, which is completely contrary to the Treaty provisions. This is because the intervention in the staff social security scheme — which is safeguarded by the Bank of Greece statutes —, a phenomenon which is perfectly inanalogous with the recent legislative intervention in the employment regime of another National Central Bank, which the ECB categorically condemned. In view of the above, will the European Central Bank say whether, apart from the question of monetary financing, it insists on claiming that Law No.3655/2008 infringes the institutional and financial independence of the Bank of 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] [1]. </s>

E-0925/09

Macroeconomics

The European Central Bank (ECB) issued an opinion on 19March 2008 (CON/2008/13) on a bill which has already been adopted (Law No3655/08, Greek Government Journal A58/3.4.2008) on reforming the Greek social security system. In its opinion, the ECB maintains that Law No3655/08 on the one hand damages the institutional and financial independence of the Bank of Greece while, on the other, it covers up Central Bank deficits by means of monetary financing of the Bank of Greece. In its answer to a previous question (E‑1988/08), the Commission answered that it was awaiting the validation of data on the financial situation of the pension fund of the Greek Central Bank by a Greek auditor. The auditing company has already submitted its report. Despite the fact of the importance of monetary financing as an issue for illegal point of view to establish whether or not Law No3655/08 is compatible with Community law, the Commission seems not to attach the same importance to the argument about the independence of the Bank of Greece which is jeopardised by the provisions of the above law, which is completely contrary to the Treaty provisions. This is because the intervention in the staff social security scheme — which is safeguarded by the Bank of Greece statutes —, a phenomenon which is perfectly inanalogous with the recent legislative intervention in the employment regime of another National Central Bank, which the ECB categorically condemned. In view of the above, will the European Central Bank say whether, apart from the question of monetary financing, it insists on claiming that Law No.3655/2008 infringes the institutional and financial independence of the Bank of Greece?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Irish Revenue has informed me, in response to a question from my colleague, TD Pearse Doherty, that it has received 11 disclosures from the promoters of tax schemes under the Mandatory Disclosure of Certain Transactions Regulation 2011 since its introduction. Given the Commission’s proposal to introduce a similar mandatory disclosure regime across theEU, and given the low number of disclosures in Ireland, does the Commission observe exemptions or characteristics of the Irish regime that reduce its effectiveness? Which Member States have introduced a mandatory disclosure regime, and how many disclosures have been made on an annual basis where it is in force?". 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-006134-17

Macroeconomics

Irish Revenue has informed me, in response to a question from my colleague, TD Pearse Doherty, that it has received 11 disclosures from the promoters of tax schemes under the Mandatory Disclosure of Certain Transactions Regulation 2011 since its introduction. Given the Commission’s proposal to introduce a similar mandatory disclosure regime across theEU, and given the low number of disclosures in Ireland, does the Commission observe exemptions or characteristics of the Irish regime that reduce its effectiveness? Which Member States have introduced a mandatory disclosure regime, and how many disclosures have been made on an annual basis where it is in force?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Can the Commission please explain why the Leader programme is no longer allowed to support the artisan food sector, even though it has done so in the past with very positive results? It would appear that the Commission has received legal advice indicating that all projects under Axis 3 that support the processing of agricultural products are ineligible, irrespective of the measure under which funding is provided or whether the applicant is a farmer, a member of a farming family or a non-farmer. In the past the Leader programme has been used to develop the artisan food sector and expand the rural economy, whilst also promoting employment in rural areas. What action does the Commission intend to take in order to ensure that the artisan food sector in Ireland continues to receive support?". 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-003980/2011

Macroeconomics

Can the Commission please explain why the Leader programme is no longer allowed to support the artisan food sector, even though it has done so in the past with very positive results? It would appear that the Commission has received legal advice indicating that all projects under Axis 3 that support the processing of agricultural products are ineligible, irrespective of the measure under which funding is provided or whether the applicant is a farmer, a member of a farming family or a non-farmer. In the past the Leader programme has been used to develop the artisan food sector and expand the rural economy, whilst also promoting employment in rural areas. What action does the Commission intend to take in order to ensure that the artisan food sector in Ireland continues to receive support?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Private debt – the amount natural and legal persons owe the State and financial institutions – has reached disproportionate levels in Greece. As a result, individual citizens are being held hostage and businesses cannot operate or grow in a healthy environment. According to reports, private debt in other European countries is also increasing, albeit with less intensity. Rather than falling, the figures actually appear to be rising, with many claiming that if no immediate action is taken, Europe will experience an unprecedented debt crisis.In view of this, can the Commission say:1.What is the percentage of private debt for Greek households and businesses and what is the average in other Member States?2.Is the Commission planning to take measures in response to this increase in private debt in Europe and in Greece in particular?3.Is there a safety mechanism in place to prevent debt in the EU from reaching unmanageable proportions, as is the case 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] [1]. </s>

E-000194/2020

Macroeconomics

Private debt – the amount natural and legal persons owe the State and financial institutions – has reached disproportionate levels in Greece. As a result, individual citizens are being held hostage and businesses cannot operate or grow in a healthy environment. According to reports, private debt in other European countries is also increasing, albeit with less intensity. Rather than falling, the figures actually appear to be rising, with many claiming that if no immediate action is taken, Europe will experience an unprecedented debt crisis.In view of this, can the Commission say:1.What is the percentage of private debt for Greek households and businesses and what is the average in other Member States?2.Is the Commission planning to take measures in response to this increase in private debt in Europe and in Greece in particular?3.Is there a safety mechanism in place to prevent debt in the EU from reaching unmanageable proportions, as is the case in Greece?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "George Soros' Open Society European Policy Institute is registered as a think tank with the Commission in the European Transparency Register. Some of Open Society's subsidiaries, foundations based in Armenia, Poland and Serbia, received EUR3097680 from the EU in 2017. Another of its front organisations, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), reportedly received EUR900787 in 2019. In these extraordinary times, when the EU is already promising colossal financial efforts to ensure that our economies can overcome the crisis caused by the COVID‑19 pandemic, this funding seems more irrelevant than ever. All the more so, given that Mr Soros smugly announced in the media that he had bequeathed the staggering sum of USD 18 billion to his Open Society Foundations. He also acknowledged that his foundation had played an active role in the destabilisation of Ukraine through the International Renaissance Foundation.The Commission must not ignore this. Does the Commission intend to stop funding Mr Soros' outfits?". 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-002744/2020

Macroeconomics

George Soros' Open Society European Policy Institute is registered as a think tank with the Commission in the European Transparency Register. Some of Open Society's subsidiaries, foundations based in Armenia, Poland and Serbia, received EUR3097680 from the EU in 2017. Another of its front organisations, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), reportedly received EUR900787 in 2019. In these extraordinary times, when the EU is already promising colossal financial efforts to ensure that our economies can overcome the crisis caused by the COVID‑19 pandemic, this funding seems more irrelevant than ever. All the more so, given that Mr Soros smugly announced in the media that he had bequeathed the staggering sum of USD 18 billion to his Open Society Foundations. He also acknowledged that his foundation had played an active role in the destabilisation of Ukraine through the International Renaissance Foundation.The Commission must not ignore this. Does the Commission intend to stop funding Mr Soros' outfits?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "With reference to the payments totalling EUR2.6billion that have been deferred to 2013 following the negotiations concerning draft amending budget 6/2012 and the 2013 budget, and to which the Joint Declarations signed in December2012 refer: Can the Commission detail to which Member States, funding programmes and projects this EUR2.6billion in payment appropriations is due?". 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-004518-13

Macroeconomics

With reference to the payments totalling EUR2.6billion that have been deferred to 2013 following the negotiations concerning draft amending budget 6/2012 and the 2013 budget, and to which the Joint Declarations signed in December2012 refer: Can the Commission detail to which Member States, funding programmes and projects this EUR2.6billion in payment appropriations is due?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Does the Commission consider that the current authorisation periods for uses of chromium VI provide sufficient planning certainty for businesses or would longer authorisation periods be desirable? 2.What measures does the Commission propose in order to simplify the procedure for applying for authorisation and to help the applicant companies? 3.To what extent are SMEs involved in the revision of the REACH procedure?". 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-007148-17

Macroeconomics

1.Does the Commission consider that the current authorisation periods for uses of chromium VI provide sufficient planning certainty for businesses or would longer authorisation periods be desirable? 2.What measures does the Commission propose in order to simplify the procedure for applying for authorisation and to help the applicant companies? 3.To what extent are SMEs involved in the revision of the REACH procedure?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Can the Commission indicate what proportion of this subsidy is for interest on arrears of payments? The Member States were told that there would be a consultation before the Commission took a decision. The Commission however has not kept its promise and has taken a final decision without reference to the Member States. What were the reasons and does the Commission consider that this was a correct course of action in relation to the Member States concerned? Can the Commission provide clarification on the inquiry into the national tax benefits which the Spanish shipbuilding industry will receive from 1995-98. Are they compatible with the European rules on state aid? Did the subsidy of PTA 90 billion, supplementing the previous subsidy of 180 billion approved under the OECD agreement, not distort competition within the Union and can the Commission confirm the reports that in Spain subsidies of 50% are granted for the construction of fishing vessels?". 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-0568/96

Macroeconomics

Can the Commission indicate what proportion of this subsidy is for interest on arrears of payments? The Member States were told that there would be a consultation before the Commission took a decision. The Commission however has not kept its promise and has taken a final decision without reference to the Member States. What were the reasons and does the Commission consider that this was a correct course of action in relation to the Member States concerned? Can the Commission provide clarification on the inquiry into the national tax benefits which the Spanish shipbuilding industry will receive from 1995-98. Are they compatible with the European rules on state aid? Did the subsidy of PTA 90 billion, supplementing the previous subsidy of 180 billion approved under the OECD agreement, not distort competition within the Union and can the Commission confirm the reports that in Spain subsidies of 50% are granted for the construction of fishing vessels?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission, the Council and the European Central Bank are still using the Ecofin """"""""decision"""""""" banning the circulation of banknotes before 1 January 2002 as the pretext for their refusal to supply the public with euros in advance. Since the Ecofin in Versailles was an informal meeting of Economic and Finance Ministers and the Treaty does not grant any decision-making power to Councils meeting informally, how lawful is the decision which the Commission, the Council and the ECB are using as the basis for opposing the advance distribution of areasonable amount of small denominations to the general public before 1 January 2002?". 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-1638/01

Macroeconomics

The Commission, the Council and the European Central Bank are still using the Ecofin """"""""decision"""""""" banning the circulation of banknotes before 1 January 2002 as the pretext for their refusal to supply the public with euros in advance. Since the Ecofin in Versailles was an informal meeting of Economic and Finance Ministers and the Treaty does not grant any decision-making power to Councils meeting informally, how lawful is the decision which the Commission, the Council and the ECB are using as the basis for opposing the advance distribution of areasonable amount of small denominations to the general public before 1 January 2002?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Paragraph 12 of the Euro Summit statement of 26October2011 notes that: ‘Eurozone Member States would contribute to the PSI package up to 30 bn euro’. In view of the above, will the Commission say: Can it clarify how this measure will be implemented? What kind of ‘return’ will Member States which contribute to the PSI package receive?". 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-010711/2011

Macroeconomics

Paragraph 12 of the Euro Summit statement of 26October2011 notes that: ‘Eurozone Member States would contribute to the PSI package up to 30 bn euro’. In view of the above, will the Commission say: Can it clarify how this measure will be implemented? What kind of ‘return’ will Member States which contribute to the PSI package receive?