Datasets:

siacus

/

cap_pe_v2

like 0

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Article4(2) of Regulation (EC) No1528/2007(1) states that ‘The rules of origin set out in AnnexII shall be superseded by those annexed to any agreement with the regions or states listed in AnnexI when that agreement is either provisionally applied or enters into force, whichever is the earlier’. This means that in the not too distant future, there could be incompatibilities with regard to applying regional cumulation between different ACP countries or regions. 1.How does the Commission intend to tackle the possible disparities which might arise between different arrangements for rules of origin in different ACP countries or regions? 2.How does the Commission assess the possible repercussion of these disparities on European investment in those countries, in view of the fact that possible difficulties in combining the rules of origin of the different ACP countries could act as a disincentive? 3.Does the Commission plan any specific measure to try to mitigate the possible prejudicial effects on trade and investment which could be caused by different arrangements on rules of origin between ACP regions or countries both during and after the negotiations on concluding provisional or definitive economic partnership agreements? (1)OJL348, 31.12.2007, p.1.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [18]. </s>

E-1620/08

Foreign trade

Article4(2) of Regulation (EC) No1528/2007(1) states that ‘The rules of origin set out in AnnexII shall be superseded by those annexed to any agreement with the regions or states listed in AnnexI when that agreement is either provisionally applied or enters into force, whichever is the earlier’. This means that in the not too distant future, there could be incompatibilities with regard to applying regional cumulation between different ACP countries or regions. 1.How does the Commission intend to tackle the possible disparities which might arise between different arrangements for rules of origin in different ACP countries or regions? 2.How does the Commission assess the possible repercussion of these disparities on European investment in those countries, in view of the fact that possible difficulties in combining the rules of origin of the different ACP countries could act as a disincentive? 3.Does the Commission plan any specific measure to try to mitigate the possible prejudicial effects on trade and investment which could be caused by different arrangements on rules of origin between ACP regions or countries both during and after the negotiations on concluding provisional or definitive economic partnership agreements? (1)OJL348, 31.12.2007, p.1.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "We refer to the notice published by the US Trade Representative on 26June reporting the possible imposition of new tariffs on EU products such as aircraft, olives, beer and gin, among many others(1). The Trump administration is imposing tariffs on around USD3.1 billion worth of imports from the EU, in particular from Italy, France, Germany and Spain;The new tariffs would affect both the EU and American economies, mining the recovery plans on both sides of the Atlantic;Some EU countries allegedly affected by the new tariffs are not directly involved in the World Trade Organization’s Airbus-Boeing dispute.1.Could the Commission clarify its position on the Trump administration’s new step backwards?2.Could it provide a strategy to avoid adopting of a retaliatory measure, which could trigger a trade war? (1)https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Review_of_Action_Enforcement_of_U.S._WTO_Rights_in_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Dispute_June_23_2020.pdf". 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] [18]. </s>

E-003835/2020

Foreign trade

We refer to the notice published by the US Trade Representative on 26June reporting the possible imposition of new tariffs on EU products such as aircraft, olives, beer and gin, among many others(1). The Trump administration is imposing tariffs on around USD3.1 billion worth of imports from the EU, in particular from Italy, France, Germany and Spain;The new tariffs would affect both the EU and American economies, mining the recovery plans on both sides of the Atlantic;Some EU countries allegedly affected by the new tariffs are not directly involved in the World Trade Organization’s Airbus-Boeing dispute.1.Could the Commission clarify its position on the Trump administration’s new step backwards?2.Could it provide a strategy to avoid adopting of a retaliatory measure, which could trigger a trade war? (1)https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Review_of_Action_Enforcement_of_U.S._WTO_Rights_in_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Dispute_June_23_2020.pdf

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The directives for the negotiations under way to conclude a transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and the United States of America state an aim of ‘reconciling theEU and US approaches to rules of origin.’ The CETA agreement was recently concluded with Canada, while the WTO multilateral negotiations remain deadlocked on the subject of geographical ascriptions. In the light of the above, can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. What progress have the negotiations with the USA made on the recognition of European geographical ascriptions? 2. What does the Commission intend to do to guarantee a high level of protection for European geographical ascriptions in these bilateral negotiations? What general strategies does it intend to implement to extend the list of EU geographical ascriptions for protection during the numerous bilateral negotiations in progress? 3. With special reference to the protection of geographical appellations of European wines, does the Commission believe it necessary to achieve quantitative and qualitative improvements in the levels of protection achieved by the 2005 Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-010113-14

Foreign trade

The directives for the negotiations under way to conclude a transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and the United States of America state an aim of ‘reconciling theEU and US approaches to rules of origin.’ The CETA agreement was recently concluded with Canada, while the WTO multilateral negotiations remain deadlocked on the subject of geographical ascriptions. In the light of the above, can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. What progress have the negotiations with the USA made on the recognition of European geographical ascriptions? 2. What does the Commission intend to do to guarantee a high level of protection for European geographical ascriptions in these bilateral negotiations? What general strategies does it intend to implement to extend the list of EU geographical ascriptions for protection during the numerous bilateral negotiations in progress? 3. With special reference to the protection of geographical appellations of European wines, does the Commission believe it necessary to achieve quantitative and qualitative improvements in the levels of protection achieved by the 2005 Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "China's accession to the WTO will provide a boost to the world economy. The Chinese Government recently launched a trade offensive for South-East Asia aimed at reaping the full benefits from its membership of the World Trade Organisation. Only a fortnight ago, China and India sought to establish closer ties and explore possibilities for cooperation through a free-trade agreement. Talks have also begun with Hong Kong with the same aim in mind. Has the Commission carried out, or will it carry out, a study on the consequences of China's accession to the WTO for European undertakings, with particular reference to the textile industry?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-0563/02

Foreign trade

China's accession to the WTO will provide a boost to the world economy. The Chinese Government recently launched a trade offensive for South-East Asia aimed at reaping the full benefits from its membership of the World Trade Organisation. Only a fortnight ago, China and India sought to establish closer ties and explore possibilities for cooperation through a free-trade agreement. Talks have also begun with Hong Kong with the same aim in mind. Has the Commission carried out, or will it carry out, a study on the consequences of China's accession to the WTO for European undertakings, with particular reference to the textile industry?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In spring 1998, plans for a new trade agreement between the European Union and the USA were put on ice, partly owing to protests by France. Is the Commission currently taking soundings with a view to drawing up a new trade agreement, or have the negotiations on a new trade agreement stopped completely?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-3711/01

Foreign trade

In spring 1998, plans for a new trade agreement between the European Union and the USA were put on ice, partly owing to protests by France. Is the Commission currently taking soundings with a view to drawing up a new trade agreement, or have the negotiations on a new trade agreement stopped completely?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In the International Trade Committee's hearing with Commissioner Ashton on 20October and in her subsequent remarks to the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 10-11November, the Commissioner has made very welcome comments regarding the need for flexibility in the Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations. Can the Commission outline what flexibility it intends to offer to ACP countries in practice? As well as the efforts to take into account concerns of ACP countries when moving from interim to full EPAs, does the Commission intend to take a flexible approach in its implementation of the EPAs and, in particular, of the Cariforum EPA?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-6570/08

Foreign trade

In the International Trade Committee's hearing with Commissioner Ashton on 20October and in her subsequent remarks to the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 10-11November, the Commissioner has made very welcome comments regarding the need for flexibility in the Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations. Can the Commission outline what flexibility it intends to offer to ACP countries in practice? As well as the efforts to take into account concerns of ACP countries when moving from interim to full EPAs, does the Commission intend to take a flexible approach in its implementation of the EPAs and, in particular, of the Cariforum EPA?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A request for a safeguard measure on the basis of Article16 of the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between South Africa and the European Union, signed in 2004, has been submitted by the South African Poultry Association (SAPA). It seems the request was made as a result of an increase in the amount imported from theEU, which poses a threat to local companies. The measure would result in the introduction of an anti-dumping tax of 37% on European chicken meat. The request follows the signing of a bilateral agreement between South Africa and theUS which introduces a duty-free quota of 65000 tonnes of American chicken and will lead to renegotiation of the hygiene conditions governing American chicken meat. This agreement would place European poultry exporters in a very difficult position, as they would face increased competition and hygiene requirements which favoured their American competitors. What action will the Commission take to fight the imposition of this safeguard measure, which would penalise European exports to South Africa in the long term and constitute a further blow to a sector which is already in difficulty?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-003390-16

Foreign trade

A request for a safeguard measure on the basis of Article16 of the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between South Africa and the European Union, signed in 2004, has been submitted by the South African Poultry Association (SAPA). It seems the request was made as a result of an increase in the amount imported from theEU, which poses a threat to local companies. The measure would result in the introduction of an anti-dumping tax of 37% on European chicken meat. The request follows the signing of a bilateral agreement between South Africa and theUS which introduces a duty-free quota of 65000 tonnes of American chicken and will lead to renegotiation of the hygiene conditions governing American chicken meat. This agreement would place European poultry exporters in a very difficult position, as they would face increased competition and hygiene requirements which favoured their American competitors. What action will the Commission take to fight the imposition of this safeguard measure, which would penalise European exports to South Africa in the long term and constitute a further blow to a sector which is already in difficulty?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "What stage has been reached in the negotiations on the new EU-Morocco agreement?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-602/95

Foreign trade

What stage has been reached in the negotiations on the new EU-Morocco agreement?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Does the Commission agree with the analysis by DrGus van Harten(1) that the establishment commitments in the Caribbean EPA will effectively give investors the right to seek observance of the EPA provisions through Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) arbitration? Does the Commission agree that this may expose the Caribbean countries to major liabilities arising from the prospect of direct claims by investors and damages against the state? Does the Commission agree that this may act as a ‘chill factor’ against new pro-development policies that may have adverse consequences to foreign investors? (1)DrGus van Harten ‘Investment Provisions in EPAs’ Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, Toronto, March 2008 available via http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=12111". 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] [18]. </s>

E-4822/08

Foreign trade

Does the Commission agree with the analysis by DrGus van Harten(1) that the establishment commitments in the Caribbean EPA will effectively give investors the right to seek observance of the EPA provisions through Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) arbitration? Does the Commission agree that this may expose the Caribbean countries to major liabilities arising from the prospect of direct claims by investors and damages against the state? Does the Commission agree that this may act as a ‘chill factor’ against new pro-development policies that may have adverse consequences to foreign investors? (1)DrGus van Harten ‘Investment Provisions in EPAs’ Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, Toronto, March 2008 available via http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=12111

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Will the Commission please provide a complete schedule of all the countries with which it has concluded some form of free-trade agreement and the date on which each agreement came 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] [18]. </s>

E-3887/05

Foreign trade

Will the Commission please provide a complete schedule of all the countries with which it has concluded some form of free-trade agreement and the date on which each agreement came into force?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In March2018, US President Donald Trump announced the introduction of tariffs on imported steel and aluminium. The EU, Canada and Mexico were granted temporary exemptions, which lasted until 1June. Since that date, additional tariffs apply — of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium — to imports from theEU. 1.Given that theEU is the second biggest exporter of steel to theUS, does the Commission have any reliable data on the possible effects of US tariffs on theEU economy, also broken down by Member State? 2.As impact assessments are a valuable tool for evaluating the impact of policy actions, can the Commission state whether it has conducted an impact assessment of the possible effects of US tariffs on the European steel and aluminium sector and the European economy as a whole? If not, does it plan to do so? 3.Recalling that theEU launched legal proceedings against theUS at the WTO on 1June2018, while the Commission also presented rebalancing duties on US products corresponding to the damage caused by US measures, can the Commission explain the likely effects, if they are applied, of these rebalancing duties on European consumers and 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] [18]. </s>

E-004008-18

Foreign trade

In March2018, US President Donald Trump announced the introduction of tariffs on imported steel and aluminium. The EU, Canada and Mexico were granted temporary exemptions, which lasted until 1June. Since that date, additional tariffs apply — of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium — to imports from theEU. 1.Given that theEU is the second biggest exporter of steel to theUS, does the Commission have any reliable data on the possible effects of US tariffs on theEU economy, also broken down by Member State? 2.As impact assessments are a valuable tool for evaluating the impact of policy actions, can the Commission state whether it has conducted an impact assessment of the possible effects of US tariffs on the European steel and aluminium sector and the European economy as a whole? If not, does it plan to do so? 3.Recalling that theEU launched legal proceedings against theUS at the WTO on 1June2018, while the Commission also presented rebalancing duties on US products corresponding to the damage caused by US measures, can the Commission explain the likely effects, if they are applied, of these rebalancing duties on European consumers and businesses?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Luxembourg and Brazil?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-3732/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Luxembourg and Brazil?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "As a result of the disagreement between the United States and the European Union caused by differences of opinion over the banana trade, a series of European products have been subject to tariffs of 100 %. Will the Commission say how it intends to tackle this latest crisis? What measures will it take to protect European exports to the United States' market? In view of the export difficulties facing some of the sectors and products concerned, caused also by the crisis in Russia, what steps will the Commission take to prevent the unemployment likely to arise as a result of reduced production?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-0231/99

Foreign trade

As a result of the disagreement between the United States and the European Union caused by differences of opinion over the banana trade, a series of European products have been subject to tariffs of 100 %. Will the Commission say how it intends to tackle this latest crisis? What measures will it take to protect European exports to the United States' market? In view of the export difficulties facing some of the sectors and products concerned, caused also by the crisis in Russia, what steps will the Commission take to prevent the unemployment likely to arise as a result of reduced production?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The basic points of the trade agreements to be established between the EU and India and Pakistan, which were approved by the Council on 26 February 1996, will inevitably lead to a considerable worsening of the already difficult situation faced by the Portuguese textile industry. This will happen not only as a result of the sharp increase in unequal competition in this sector but also because the proposals for access to the markets of these countries and the requirement that this should be on the basis of average Community prices will, objectively, exclude Portuguese exports. As a result of these trade agreements, the already stringent conditions laid down by the GATT agreements are now being challenged, the adverse effects of the agreements are increasing and the limited scope of the Community measures adopted at the time to mitigate them is being further diminished. How does the Commission reconcile the terms of these agreements with the references in the Council statement of 15 December 1993 to a lengthy transition period and the need for reciprocity by third countries in opening up markets? Does the Commission plan to update the amount of ECU 400 m for the Portuguese textile industry in the light of these agreements? Does the Commission intend to continue this strategy of speeding up the liberalisation of trade with third countries without carrying out advance impact studies?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-0654/96

Foreign trade

The basic points of the trade agreements to be established between the EU and India and Pakistan, which were approved by the Council on 26 February 1996, will inevitably lead to a considerable worsening of the already difficult situation faced by the Portuguese textile industry. This will happen not only as a result of the sharp increase in unequal competition in this sector but also because the proposals for access to the markets of these countries and the requirement that this should be on the basis of average Community prices will, objectively, exclude Portuguese exports. As a result of these trade agreements, the already stringent conditions laid down by the GATT agreements are now being challenged, the adverse effects of the agreements are increasing and the limited scope of the Community measures adopted at the time to mitigate them is being further diminished. How does the Commission reconcile the terms of these agreements with the references in the Council statement of 15 December 1993 to a lengthy transition period and the need for reciprocity by third countries in opening up markets? Does the Commission plan to update the amount of ECU 400 m for the Portuguese textile industry in the light of these agreements? Does the Commission intend to continue this strategy of speeding up the liberalisation of trade with third countries without carrying out advance impact studies?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The Commission has spoken about a ‘fresh start’ on the TTIP and aims to ensure greater access to trade documents to the general public. What further action has the Commission undertaken to engage with EU citizens and inform them of the progress, aims and objects of the TTIP negotiations? What assurances can the Commission give to citizens concerned about the harmonisation or lowering of standards in theEU across a wide range of sectors, from food safety to car emissions?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-001795-15

Foreign trade

The Commission has spoken about a ‘fresh start’ on the TTIP and aims to ensure greater access to trade documents to the general public. What further action has the Commission undertaken to engage with EU citizens and inform them of the progress, aims and objects of the TTIP negotiations? What assurances can the Commission give to citizens concerned about the harmonisation or lowering of standards in theEU across a wide range of sectors, from food safety to car emissions?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 26January2013, during the EU-Mercosur Ministerial Meeting held in Santiago de Chile, both parties agreed on the last quarter of 2013 as the final deadline for completion of the next stage in the negotiations concerning the Association Agreement between both blocs (the exchange of specific offers). As this exchange has still not taken place, and in view of the fact that the term of the current Commission ends on 31October2014: Does the Commission believe that it will be possible to bring these negotiations to a successful conclusion by this date? If not, what stage does the Commission feel that the negotiations will have reached by this date? What level of priority does the Commission attach to the negotiations relating to this Agreement?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-000303-14

Foreign trade

On 26January2013, during the EU-Mercosur Ministerial Meeting held in Santiago de Chile, both parties agreed on the last quarter of 2013 as the final deadline for completion of the next stage in the negotiations concerning the Association Agreement between both blocs (the exchange of specific offers). As this exchange has still not taken place, and in view of the fact that the term of the current Commission ends on 31October2014: Does the Commission believe that it will be possible to bring these negotiations to a successful conclusion by this date? If not, what stage does the Commission feel that the negotiations will have reached by this date? What level of priority does the Commission attach to the negotiations relating to this Agreement?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A future trade deal between the European Union and Mercosur could double Europe’s exports to the South American bloc within five years, according to EU sources close to the negotiations. Does the Commission have any data on the potential outcomes of this trade agreement? What are the possible negative effects of the agreement for 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] [18]. </s>

E-002954-17

Foreign trade

A future trade deal between the European Union and Mercosur could double Europe’s exports to the South American bloc within five years, according to EU sources close to the negotiations. Does the Commission have any data on the potential outcomes of this trade agreement? What are the possible negative effects of the agreement for the European Union?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "What classifications on interpretations are required to current GATT/WTO agreements to ensure that, where appropriate, and with particular regard to measures to protect people, animals or the environment: 1. distinctions can be made with regard to the processes used to develop """"""""like"""""""" products, 2. measures are in place which may discriminate against third parties if they are appropriate to achieving the stated objective. 3. measures are in place which require conformity by third parties where they are appropriate to protecting the integrity of EU measures?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-2585/94

Foreign trade

What classifications on interpretations are required to current GATT/WTO agreements to ensure that, where appropriate, and with particular regard to measures to protect people, animals or the environment: 1. distinctions can be made with regard to the processes used to develop """"""""like"""""""" products, 2. measures are in place which may discriminate against third parties if they are appropriate to achieving the stated objective. 3. measures are in place which require conformity by third parties where they are appropriate to protecting the integrity of EU measures?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In February2013, the Council of the European Union agreed to the opening of negotiations for a free trade agreement between theEU and Thailand, the latest round of which was held in December2013. What progess has been made by talks between the Commission and its Thai partners and what are the most sensitive issues? Has the Commision decided on a target date for the finalisation of negotiations or agreed on such a date with its Thai partners?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-002430-14

Foreign trade

In February2013, the Council of the European Union agreed to the opening of negotiations for a free trade agreement between theEU and Thailand, the latest round of which was held in December2013. What progess has been made by talks between the Commission and its Thai partners and what are the most sensitive issues? Has the Commision decided on a target date for the finalisation of negotiations or agreed on such a date with its Thai partners?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The United States has free trade agreements with 20 countries. In the view of the Commission, which clause (or clauses) in theUS trade agreement with Costa Rica makes a similar agreement unacceptable for the European Union? Which clause or clauses in the USA FTA with Costa Rica does the Commission consider should be improved or otherwise modified?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-002742-14

Foreign trade

The United States has free trade agreements with 20 countries. In the view of the Commission, which clause (or clauses) in theUS trade agreement with Costa Rica makes a similar agreement unacceptable for the European Union? Which clause or clauses in the USA FTA with Costa Rica does the Commission consider should be improved or otherwise modified?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "On 24February 2000 the WTO's body of appeal published its report on the tax treatment of foreign sales corporations (FSCs) in the USA. This report upholds the condemnation of the tax arrangements under which some 50 % of American exports benefit from a tax refund which is tantamount to an export subsidy totalling some $ US 4 billion annually. Although European companies are not the only ones affected, they are among those hardest hit. Will the Commission say why, having condemned these practices, the WTO has not fixed the amount of compensation due to the European Union and why the Commission itself which is responsible for protecting the Union's commercial interests has failed to take any action vis-à-vis the United States to obtain compensation, bearing in mind that the latter is continuing to take retaliatory measures against the European Union over bananas and beef treated with hormones and the WTO itself has acknowledged that the commercial losses incurred by the EU are far higher?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-0809/00

Foreign trade

On 24February 2000 the WTO's body of appeal published its report on the tax treatment of foreign sales corporations (FSCs) in the USA. This report upholds the condemnation of the tax arrangements under which some 50 % of American exports benefit from a tax refund which is tantamount to an export subsidy totalling some $ US 4 billion annually. Although European companies are not the only ones affected, they are among those hardest hit. Will the Commission say why, having condemned these practices, the WTO has not fixed the amount of compensation due to the European Union and why the Commission itself which is responsible for protecting the Union's commercial interests has failed to take any action vis-à-vis the United States to obtain compensation, bearing in mind that the latter is continuing to take retaliatory measures against the European Union over bananas and beef treated with hormones and the WTO itself has acknowledged that the commercial losses incurred by the EU are far higher?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Austria and each country of the Andean Community?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [18]. </s>

E-3685/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Austria and each country of the Andean Community?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A few days ago an agreement was signed in Quebec for the purpose of setting up ahuge free-trade areaencompassing all the countries of the American continent. Could the Commission say what effect the agreement may have on the political and trade relations between the European Union and America?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-1445/01

Foreign trade

A few days ago an agreement was signed in Quebec for the purpose of setting up ahuge free-trade areaencompassing all the countries of the American continent. Could the Commission say what effect the agreement may have on the political and trade relations between the European Union and America?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In the light of the food supply crisis in 2007-08, does the Commission consider the World Trade Organisation rules and the EU's negotiating strategy on the relaunching of the Doha Round negotiations with the aim of preventing future food supply crises to be appropriate? Food price volatility on both the world and the European market is creating insecurity among commodity producers and uncertainty among participants in the corresponding markets. Given that the World Trade Organisation's regulatory framework and the negotiating positions upheld to date by contributing parties in relation to the ‘farm package’ make no provision for the essential parameter of ‘food security’ and other ‘non-trade aspects’, will the Commission place this parameter on the table at the multilateral trade talks? Does the Commission share the view that the further opening-up of the European market in agricultural goods through a reduction in import duties will lead to the erosion of the preferences enjoyed by LDCs and other developing countries, benefiting large rival exporting countries at the expense of European producers?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-6526/09

Foreign trade

In the light of the food supply crisis in 2007-08, does the Commission consider the World Trade Organisation rules and the EU's negotiating strategy on the relaunching of the Doha Round negotiations with the aim of preventing future food supply crises to be appropriate? Food price volatility on both the world and the European market is creating insecurity among commodity producers and uncertainty among participants in the corresponding markets. Given that the World Trade Organisation's regulatory framework and the negotiating positions upheld to date by contributing parties in relation to the ‘farm package’ make no provision for the essential parameter of ‘food security’ and other ‘non-trade aspects’, will the Commission place this parameter on the table at the multilateral trade talks? Does the Commission share the view that the further opening-up of the European market in agricultural goods through a reduction in import duties will lead to the erosion of the preferences enjoyed by LDCs and other developing countries, benefiting large rival exporting countries at the expense of European producers?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "South Korea has long been distorting competition on the shipbuilding market by pricing its vessels below their real cost. The European Union and South Korea have held talks with a view to bringing about healthy competition on the shipbuilding market, but to no avail. Disagreements over international competition issues are dealt with in the appropriate dispute settlement bodies of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Both the Union Member States and South Korea belong to the WTO. Because the above negotiations ended in summer 2000 without levelling the playing field, the Member States meeting within the Council in December 2000 unanimously agreed that the EU should complain to the WTO because South Korea was breaching its obligations regarding support for ship exports. Parliament also supported that view in its report on the second report from the Commission to the Council on the situation in world shipbuilding (A5-0371/2000), in which it """"""""[called] on the Commission to initiate a dispute settlement procedure with the Republic of Korea before the World Trade Organisation (WTO)"""""""". In spite of these facts, the Commission has still not referred the matter to the WTO dispute settlement body. Instead it has, totally artificially and with no solid legal justification, linked the start of a proper WTO dispute settlement procedure to its proposal for a regulation which stipulates that limited production aid to individual European shipyards could be temporarily allowed, while the WTO procedure was taking place, so as to counterbalance South Korea's action. Differences of opinion among the Member States as to the legitimacy and rationality of production aid have made it impossible to bring the proposal for a regulation into force. The South Korean Government has said that South Korea is aiming to build even bigger ships, especially cruise liners, and still does not consider its aid policy to have been in any way wrong or contrary to international agreements. From the point of view of the European shipbuilding industry the situation is completely intolerable. When will the Commission abandon its inaction and ensure that the matter can at last be dealt with by the WTO?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-1181/02

Foreign trade

South Korea has long been distorting competition on the shipbuilding market by pricing its vessels below their real cost. The European Union and South Korea have held talks with a view to bringing about healthy competition on the shipbuilding market, but to no avail. Disagreements over international competition issues are dealt with in the appropriate dispute settlement bodies of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Both the Union Member States and South Korea belong to the WTO. Because the above negotiations ended in summer 2000 without levelling the playing field, the Member States meeting within the Council in December 2000 unanimously agreed that the EU should complain to the WTO because South Korea was breaching its obligations regarding support for ship exports. Parliament also supported that view in its report on the second report from the Commission to the Council on the situation in world shipbuilding (A5-0371/2000), in which it """"""""[called] on the Commission to initiate a dispute settlement procedure with the Republic of Korea before the World Trade Organisation (WTO)"""""""". In spite of these facts, the Commission has still not referred the matter to the WTO dispute settlement body. Instead it has, totally artificially and with no solid legal justification, linked the start of a proper WTO dispute settlement procedure to its proposal for a regulation which stipulates that limited production aid to individual European shipyards could be temporarily allowed, while the WTO procedure was taking place, so as to counterbalance South Korea's action. Differences of opinion among the Member States as to the legitimacy and rationality of production aid have made it impossible to bring the proposal for a regulation into force. The South Korean Government has said that South Korea is aiming to build even bigger ships, especially cruise liners, and still does not consider its aid policy to have been in any way wrong or contrary to international agreements. From the point of view of the European shipbuilding industry the situation is completely intolerable. When will the Commission abandon its inaction and ensure that the matter can at last be dealt with by the WTO?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Negotiations on an EU-Canada free trade agreement (CETA) were concluded in August2014. By facilitating imports and exports of Canadian products into the European Union and vice versa, this agreement should considerably strengthen the economies on both sides of the Atlantic. European Commissioner Cecilia Malmström has announced that the agreement should be ratified before the end of 2016 after approval by the Council and adoption by Parliament. However, we do not know if the text will also have to be ratified by the 28 national parliaments to enter into force. Under European law, ‘mixed’ agreements, including provisions falling under both the Union’s exclusive competences and shared competences must be validated by the 28Member States by parliamentary vote or referendum. 1.How does the European Commission intend to ensure that the text is a ‘non-mixed’ agreement and that approval by the European Union Council and adoption by a majority in the European Parliament are enough for it to be ratified? 2.Does the Commission confirm that the CETA cannot be applied provisionally, as was previously announced by Commissioner Cecilia Malmström in April2015?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-002449-16

Foreign trade

Negotiations on an EU-Canada free trade agreement (CETA) were concluded in August2014. By facilitating imports and exports of Canadian products into the European Union and vice versa, this agreement should considerably strengthen the economies on both sides of the Atlantic. European Commissioner Cecilia Malmström has announced that the agreement should be ratified before the end of 2016 after approval by the Council and adoption by Parliament. However, we do not know if the text will also have to be ratified by the 28 national parliaments to enter into force. Under European law, ‘mixed’ agreements, including provisions falling under both the Union’s exclusive competences and shared competences must be validated by the 28Member States by parliamentary vote or referendum. 1.How does the European Commission intend to ensure that the text is a ‘non-mixed’ agreement and that approval by the European Union Council and adoption by a majority in the European Parliament are enough for it to be ratified? 2.Does the Commission confirm that the CETA cannot be applied provisionally, as was previously announced by Commissioner Cecilia Malmström in April2015?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 points out that between 1990 and 1995 the United States replaced Europe as the main source of investment in Latin America. The flow of direct foreign investment (DFI), which has been clearly recovering since 1993, exceeded US$ 10 000 million in the first five years of this decade. Nevertheless, Europe accounted for less than one quarter of the total. This is in marked contrast to the situation at the end of the eighties, when Europe was clearly the largest investor (54%), followed by the US (40%) and Japan (6%), although total DFI was only one quarter the level of that in the nineties. Can the Commission say how much Italy invests in each country in the Andean Community?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [18]. </s>

E-3818/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 points out that between 1990 and 1995 the United States replaced Europe as the main source of investment in Latin America. The flow of direct foreign investment (DFI), which has been clearly recovering since 1993, exceeded US$ 10 000 million in the first five years of this decade. Nevertheless, Europe accounted for less than one quarter of the total. This is in marked contrast to the situation at the end of the eighties, when Europe was clearly the largest investor (54%), followed by the US (40%) and Japan (6%), although total DFI was only one quarter the level of that in the nineties. Can the Commission say how much Italy invests in each country in the Andean Community?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Finland and each Mercosur country?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-3703/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Finland and each Mercosur country?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Given the evidence that foreign exchange rates at some UK airports could be disproportionately costing British holidaymakers over GBP10 in every GBP100, can the Commission comment on whether the higher exchange rates that are found in airport bureaux de change could be considered unfair practice?". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [18]. </s>

P-4933/08

Foreign trade

Given the evidence that foreign exchange rates at some UK airports could be disproportionately costing British holidaymakers over GBP10 in every GBP100, can the Commission comment on whether the higher exchange rates that are found in airport bureaux de change could be considered unfair practice?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Are there any plans or proposals, or is it under consideration, to revise, modify or otherwise alter the existing trade agreements between Japan and theEU?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-2316/10

Foreign trade

Are there any plans or proposals, or is it under consideration, to revise, modify or otherwise alter the existing trade agreements between Japan and theEU?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In October 1996 the South Africa Board on Tariffs and Trade launched an investigation into possible dumping concerning Italian ceramic tile exports to South Africa. This investigation, which seems to be based on mistaken, protectionist assumptions, threatens to lead to discriminatory measures against these Italian exports and, potentially, exports from other Community countries to South Africa. What steps does the Commission intend to take to protect Community ceramic tile exports to South Africa, bearing in mind the fact that it receives substantial Community aid and that a free trade agreement is currently under negotiation with it?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-3220/96

Foreign trade

In October 1996 the South Africa Board on Tariffs and Trade launched an investigation into possible dumping concerning Italian ceramic tile exports to South Africa. This investigation, which seems to be based on mistaken, protectionist assumptions, threatens to lead to discriminatory measures against these Italian exports and, potentially, exports from other Community countries to South Africa. What steps does the Commission intend to take to protect Community ceramic tile exports to South Africa, bearing in mind the fact that it receives substantial Community aid and that a free trade agreement is currently under negotiation with it?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The G20 Trade Ministers’ Meeting of 9-10July2016 in Shanghai endorsed the ‘G20 Guiding Principles for Global Investment Policymaking’. In the aftermath of the summit, theEU Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström, stated that ‘this shows that there is potential for more work to improve the coherence and legitimacy of global investment policy’ and reiterated theEU objective of setting up an international (multilateral) investment court. 1.What is the anticipated impact of these principles on EU trade and investment policy? 2.How does the Commission plan to pursue work on investment within the framework of the G20, and what further role is envisaged for the newly established G20 Trade and Investment Group? 3.Does the Commission intend to pursue further work towards establishing an international (multilateral) investment court within the framework of the G20?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-005825-16

Foreign trade

The G20 Trade Ministers’ Meeting of 9-10July2016 in Shanghai endorsed the ‘G20 Guiding Principles for Global Investment Policymaking’. In the aftermath of the summit, theEU Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström, stated that ‘this shows that there is potential for more work to improve the coherence and legitimacy of global investment policy’ and reiterated theEU objective of setting up an international (multilateral) investment court. 1.What is the anticipated impact of these principles on EU trade and investment policy? 2.How does the Commission plan to pursue work on investment within the framework of the G20, and what further role is envisaged for the newly established G20 Trade and Investment Group? 3.Does the Commission intend to pursue further work towards establishing an international (multilateral) investment court within the framework of the G20?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 points out that between 1990 and 1995 the United States replaced Europe as the main source of investment in Latin America. The flow of direct foreign investment (DFI), which has been clearly recovering since 1993, exceeded US$ 10 000 million in the first five years of this decade. Nevertheless, Europe accounted for less than one quarter of the total. This is in marked contrast to the situation at the end of the eighties, when Europe was clearly the largest investor (54%), followed by the US (40%) and Japan (6%), although total DFI was only one quarter the level of that in the nineties. Can the Commission say how much the United Kingdom invests in Mexico?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-3835/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 points out that between 1990 and 1995 the United States replaced Europe as the main source of investment in Latin America. The flow of direct foreign investment (DFI), which has been clearly recovering since 1993, exceeded US$ 10 000 million in the first five years of this decade. Nevertheless, Europe accounted for less than one quarter of the total. This is in marked contrast to the situation at the end of the eighties, when Europe was clearly the largest investor (54%), followed by the US (40%) and Japan (6%), although total DFI was only one quarter the level of that in the nineties. Can the Commission say how much the United Kingdom invests in Mexico?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "1.Is the OPEC oil cartel compatible with the WTO rules? 2.If so, what positions will the EU adopt at the WTO Millennium Round in opposing the market-distorting measures taken by the OPEC countries? 3.What view should be taken of the impact that government export organisations in New Zealand, Australia and Canada to which or through which products must be sold (dairy boards, wheat boards, etc.) have on world trade, and how are they compatible with the WTO? 4.What view should be taken of the impact on world trade of such measures as export credits, internal transport subsidies and the fact that US states have different licensing procedures, and how are they compatible with the WTO?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-2073/99

Foreign trade

1.Is the OPEC oil cartel compatible with the WTO rules? 2.If so, what positions will the EU adopt at the WTO Millennium Round in opposing the market-distorting measures taken by the OPEC countries? 3.What view should be taken of the impact that government export organisations in New Zealand, Australia and Canada to which or through which products must be sold (dairy boards, wheat boards, etc.) have on world trade, and how are they compatible with the WTO? 4.What view should be taken of the impact on world trade of such measures as export credits, internal transport subsidies and the fact that US states have different licensing procedures, and how are they compatible with the WTO?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Article58(5) of Directive2004/17/EC(1) requires the Commission to submit an annual report to the Council on progress made in unilateral or bilateral negotiations regarding access for Community undertakings to the markets of third countries in the fields covered by that directive, on any result which such negotiations may have achieved, and on the implementation in practice of all the agreements which have been concluded. The European Commission has never issued these progress reports and, according to some statements, is only expected to start issuing them in 2009. 1.When does the European Commission intend to submit such reports to the Council? 2.Which countries will be concerned for 2009? (1)OJL134, 30.4.2004, p.1.". And this are major political agenda topics: ['1 = Macroeconomics','2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties','3 = Health','4 = Agriculture and Fisheries','5 = Labour, employment and pensions','6 = Education','7 = Environment','8 = Energy','9 = Immigration','10 = Transportation','12 = Law and Crime','13 = Social welfare','14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning','15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues','16 = Defence','17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues','18 = Foreign trade','19 = International affairs and foreign aid','20 = Governance and government','21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues','23 = Culture and media','99 = none of the above']. Please return only a json list of at most 3 elements corresponding to the text labels:[/INST] [18]. </s>

E-1150/09

Foreign trade

Article58(5) of Directive2004/17/EC(1) requires the Commission to submit an annual report to the Council on progress made in unilateral or bilateral negotiations regarding access for Community undertakings to the markets of third countries in the fields covered by that directive, on any result which such negotiations may have achieved, and on the implementation in practice of all the agreements which have been concluded. The European Commission has never issued these progress reports and, according to some statements, is only expected to start issuing them in 2009. 1.When does the European Commission intend to submit such reports to the Council? 2.Which countries will be concerned for 2009? (1)OJL134, 30.4.2004, p.1.

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Following the EU-US Summit of 24November2011, it was decided to launch a high-level working group for growth and jobs, tasked with exploring different ways of deepening the transatlantic trade relationship, with a view to addressing existing barriers to trade prior to the possible opening of formal negotiations. 1.Does the Commission plan to address, within the remit of its negotiating mandate, the use of the ‘nexus provision’ which unfairly insists that, for example, UK exporters of software goods must register for sales tax and income tax in some parts of the United States, even without having a physical presence in the territory itself? 2.To what extent does the Commission consider this blatant extension of fiscal reach beyond the boundaries of its jurisdiction a barrier to EU exports? 3.To what extent does the Commission foresee a willingness by theUS to address this nexus, which exists in 25 states, considering the fact that the states are not themselves bound by US double taxation agreements and the Federal Government has no power to enforce them?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-010614-12

Foreign trade

Following the EU-US Summit of 24November2011, it was decided to launch a high-level working group for growth and jobs, tasked with exploring different ways of deepening the transatlantic trade relationship, with a view to addressing existing barriers to trade prior to the possible opening of formal negotiations. 1.Does the Commission plan to address, within the remit of its negotiating mandate, the use of the ‘nexus provision’ which unfairly insists that, for example, UK exporters of software goods must register for sales tax and income tax in some parts of the United States, even without having a physical presence in the territory itself? 2.To what extent does the Commission consider this blatant extension of fiscal reach beyond the boundaries of its jurisdiction a barrier to EU exports? 3.To what extent does the Commission foresee a willingness by theUS to address this nexus, which exists in 25 states, considering the fact that the states are not themselves bound by US double taxation agreements and the Federal Government has no power to enforce them?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "The EU-Mercosur agreement is another mega trade agreement following the approach of liberalising the market to benefit the interests of major European powers and multinationals and the oligarchies of the counterparties, to the detriment of workers, farmers and small and medium-sized enterprises from both sides of the Atlantic. The negotiations on this agreement have been marked by a number of political moves, including Venezuela’s illegal cession of the Mercosur presidency and Brazil’s coup against its legitimate president, Dilma Rousseff. The far-right candidate elected as President of Brazil has expressed a clear intention to promote ruthless attacks on the fundamental rights of Brazilian workers and citizens, and on freedom and democracy, with his offensive extending into other countries in the region such as Argentina, Chile and Paraguay. The EU has always included, albeit hypocritically, the defence of human rights and other fundamental rights as a conditionality of signing trade agreements. Practice has shown, however, that the defence of such rights is little more than propaganda, and that the rights become undermined by economic and financial interests. In view of the above, is the Council considering withdrawing from the EU‐Mercosur agreement negotiations?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-005878-18

Foreign trade

The EU-Mercosur agreement is another mega trade agreement following the approach of liberalising the market to benefit the interests of major European powers and multinationals and the oligarchies of the counterparties, to the detriment of workers, farmers and small and medium-sized enterprises from both sides of the Atlantic. The negotiations on this agreement have been marked by a number of political moves, including Venezuela’s illegal cession of the Mercosur presidency and Brazil’s coup against its legitimate president, Dilma Rousseff. The far-right candidate elected as President of Brazil has expressed a clear intention to promote ruthless attacks on the fundamental rights of Brazilian workers and citizens, and on freedom and democracy, with his offensive extending into other countries in the region such as Argentina, Chile and Paraguay. The EU has always included, albeit hypocritically, the defence of human rights and other fundamental rights as a conditionality of signing trade agreements. Practice has shown, however, that the defence of such rights is little more than propaganda, and that the rights become undermined by economic and financial interests. In view of the above, is the Council considering withdrawing from the EU‐Mercosur agreement negotiations?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "What is the Commission doing to contribute to the essential work to be done on the root and branch reform of the WTO? Will the Commission set a deadline of one year in order to ensure that urgent attention is given to the need to build credibility for the organisation?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-0342/00

Foreign trade

What is the Commission doing to contribute to the essential work to be done on the root and branch reform of the WTO? Will the Commission set a deadline of one year in order to ensure that urgent attention is given to the need to build credibility for the organisation?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "Reform by Congress of the US legislation on Foreign Sales Corporations is imminent. Under this reform, taxation of income from sales generated abroad would be abolished. According to USDeputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat, the WTO Appellate Body found that it was entirely a matter for member countries to decide whether or not the income was taxed. The Commissioner takes the view that the new arrangements also violate WTO rules. Against this background: 1. In the event of the new US export rules actually entering into force, does the Commission intend to initiate retaliatory trade measures in accordance with Article 133 of the ECTreaty within the 30-day period laid down under the WTO procedure? 2. If so, by what means does the Commission propose to defend the EU's interests? 3. What goods, or firms, would be affected by these measures? 4. What alternatives to measures to protect trade within the meaning of Article 133 of the ECTreaty would the Commission consider implementing? 5. Does the Commission take the view that individual EU Member States are empowered to regulate taxation of the income themselves? 6. If not, how, in legal terms, does the Commission justify its view?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-3113/00

Foreign trade

Reform by Congress of the US legislation on Foreign Sales Corporations is imminent. Under this reform, taxation of income from sales generated abroad would be abolished. According to USDeputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat, the WTO Appellate Body found that it was entirely a matter for member countries to decide whether or not the income was taxed. The Commissioner takes the view that the new arrangements also violate WTO rules. Against this background: 1. In the event of the new US export rules actually entering into force, does the Commission intend to initiate retaliatory trade measures in accordance with Article 133 of the ECTreaty within the 30-day period laid down under the WTO procedure? 2. If so, by what means does the Commission propose to defend the EU's interests? 3. What goods, or firms, would be affected by these measures? 4. What alternatives to measures to protect trade within the meaning of Article 133 of the ECTreaty would the Commission consider implementing? 5. Does the Commission take the view that individual EU Member States are empowered to regulate taxation of the income themselves? 6. If not, how, in legal terms, does the Commission justify its view?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Germany and each country of Central America?". 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] [18]. </s>

E-3681/96

Foreign trade

A report by the Institute for European-Latin American Relations (IRELA) of 15 November 1996 shows that although the European Union has increased its trade with Latin America in the last five years, it still lags far behind countries such as the United States and Japan. Whilst trade between the EU and Latin America increased by 49% between 1990 and 1995, the increase for the United States was 136% and for Japan 98%. What is the volume of trade between Germany and each country of Central America?

<s>[INST] Here is a question of a member of the European parliament. Question: "In the light of its communication COM(2016)690 of 18October2016, and given that Section15(a)(II) of China's Protocol of Accession to the WTO expires on 11December2016, can the Commission say how it will check whether state subsidies granted in non-Member States are having an effect on the price of manufactured exports to Europe? What type of calculation method will be used in new cases recorded between 11December2016 and the date on which the new legislation is adopted? How will ongoing anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases be dealt with? How will the WTO Appellate Body’s decision in the Argentina v EU anti-dumping measures on biodiesel case limit the use of this calculation method?". 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] [18]. </s>

P-008158-16

Foreign trade

In the light of its communication COM(2016)690 of 18October2016, and given that Section15(a)(II) of China's Protocol of Accession to the WTO expires on 11December2016, can the Commission say how it will check whether state subsidies granted in non-Member States are having an effect on the price of manufactured exports to Europe? What type of calculation method will be used in new cases recorded between 11December2016 and the date on which the new legislation is adopted? How will ongoing anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases be dealt with? How will the WTO Appellate Body’s decision in the Argentina v EU anti-dumping measures on biodiesel case limit the use of this calculation method?