ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2272/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (2 July 1997)

Subject: Proposal for a Commission White Paper on arms trade

In May 1997 Parliament adopted a report by British Socialist MEP Gary Titley on the Commission communication on the challenges facing the European defence-related industry (A4-0076/97).

The report suggested that the Commission draft a White Paper on the arms trade and encourage the EU Council of Ministers to draft a legally binding code of conduct on EU arms exports to third countries.

What progress has the Commission made in implementing Parliament's suggestion? When is the White Paper likely to be published?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

During discussion of the Titley report the Commission gave its wholehearted support to the suggestion that it prepare a white paper on arms exports incorporating a legally binding code of conduct.

The report highlights the complexity and importance of arms exports in what is an area of national sovereignty controlled by national governments where Member States have very different interests and sensitivities.

Criteria governing arms exports have been adopted at European Union level but responsibility for their implementation lies solely with the Member States. The Commission will need more information about national controls of arms exports for progress to be made in simplifying controls on transfers of arms within the Community.

In its conclusions the Amsterdam European Council called for swift action to be taken within the European Union to develop a 'responsible and coherent arms export control policy'. The Commission will draw on the work undertaken within this framework to draft the white paper on arms exports which it has agreed to present to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2592/97 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (29 July 1997)

Subject: Youth employment in education programmes from the year 2000

The Leonardo and Socrates education programmes expire in 1999.

How will the Commission take account of employment issues - particularly the employment of young people - in its education policy, and how will this topic figure in the new education programmes as from the year 2000?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997)

The Commission has already started to give thought to the future of the education, training and youth programmes which expire in 1999. First of all, it has attempted to review the debates on the White Paper 'Teaching and learning: towards the learning society' ((COM(95) 590. )) in a recently adopted Communication ((COM(97) 256. )).

It has also announced its intention of presenting a Communication, in the autumn, concerning guidelines on the future of Community action programmes for discussion by the Council and Parliament.

Attention can already be drawn to the approaches adopted in connection with Agenda 2000. Giving priority to a policy of knowledge in respect of the Community's internal policies is a new and essential element. Education, training and youth policy * together with research and innovation * constitutes the cornerstone of this policy of knowledge. It is a question of a fundamental choice for Europe corresponding to a model of society.

The development of an 'Erasmus apprenticeship scheme', the development of educational software, and the networking of schools are new areas to be worked. Generally speaking, encouraging creativity and the skills needed to integrate into active life in a changing world is the focal point of concerns relating to the follow-up to education, training, youth and research programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2435/97 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL), Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL), María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) and Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (16 July 1997)

Subject: Recommendation on the legal equality of homosexuals in the EC

In 1994 the European Parliament adopted a report by its Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs on the legal equality of homosexuals within the EC. The rapporteur was Claudia Roth.

Her report proposed that a Recommendation be drawn up on this subject, which is of major interest to the public.

What stage has this recommendation now reached?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2307/97, E-2407/97 and E-2435/97 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1997)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Members that, at the time when the Roth report was adopted (February 1994), the Community Treaties did not bestow on the institutions any specific powers for tackling discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The draft Treaty of Amsterdam introduced a new legal basis (new Article 6a in the EC Treaty) for the adoption of Community measures needed to combat, among other things, discrimination based on sexual orientation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2196/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Assessing the effects of the consumption of novel food products

1. How, and by whom, is the monitoring system called for by the Scientific Committee for Food (opinion on the assessment of novel foods, III/5915/97) for gathering information on the short- and long-term effects of the consumption of novel foods to be carried out once it has been introduced?

2. What data are to be recorded and over what period?

3. Will the results of the monitoring programme be made available to the public?

Answer (28 October 1997)

As the Committee referred to by the Honourable Member comes under the Commission, she should apply to the latter for information on the programme in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2126/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (24 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - 'Substantial equivalence' in derived varieties

1. What guarantees will there be that the 'substantial equivalence' of all plants of the same tested and authorized line remain present, or that they can be tested?

2. What will be the approach towards derived varieties?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2126/97, E-2128/97 and E-2130/97 (20 October 1997)

Article 3 (4) of Regulation No 258/97 on novel foods and novel food ingredients provides for a derogation form the authorization procedure laid down in that Regulation, where foods or food ingredients, on the basis of the scientific evidence available and generally recognized or on the basis of an opinion delivered by one of the competent bodies, are substantially equivalent to existing foods and food ingredients as regards their composition, nutritional value, etc.

Where necessary, it may be determined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13 of the Regulation whether a type of food or food ingredient falls under the derogation in question. The arrangements for notification of these products are laid down in Article 5 of the Regulation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2158/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Unintentional inclusion in traditional foods of substances for which labelling is obligatory

1. What procedure is to be adopted towards products which, while not consisting of genetically modified products, may (unintentionally) contain elements of such products?

2. Is there any provision, in these cases, for monitoring and, where appropriate, labelling (e.g. honey and honey products with pollen from transgenic plants)?

3. Are products containing pollen to be tested to ensure that consumption poses no health risk?

Answer (20 October 1997)

The Regulation referred to by the Honourable Member was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189b of the EC Treaty.

Article 1 of the Regulation defines its scope and, subject to the implementation of paragraph 3 thereof, does not cover cases where foods or ingredients unintentionally fall within the categories laid down in that Article.

In any event, the general provisions of Community legislation on the control of foodstuffs (Directives 89/397/EEC ((OJ L 186, 30.06.1989. )) and 93/99/EEC ((OJ L 290, 24.11.1993. ))) still apply.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2691/97 by James Provan (PPE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Use of European Regional Development Funds in Sobral, Portugal

It has been drawn to my attention that EU grants are being made twice to people in Sobral, Porches, Portugal; once for orange-growing subsidies on land recently cleared, and once for the destruction of those new orange trees to make way for infrastructure development in the form of the new autoroute, the Via Infante de Sagres.

What controls does the Commission employ to ensure that the projects qualifying for ERDF funds are not being used by the national authorities to pay compensation for land which has already been in receipt of EU subsidy for other purposes?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997)

The project in question is managed by the authorities of the Member State. The Commission has taken up with them the matter raised by the Honourable Member and will provide a substantive reply as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2594/97 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission (17 July 1997)

Subject: State aids for research and development and competition rules

Reports recently appearing in the Dutch press and elsewhere concerning aid granted by certain Member States for research and development regularly suggest that such aid might not be in accordance with the EC Treaty, in particular Articles 92 to 94. On page 75 of the XXVIth Report on Competition Policy (1996), four cases are mentioned where the Commission has expressed serious doubts, including SGS Thomson and Philips.

1. Under Community law, do the SGS Thomson and Philips cases fall into the same category?

2. Why should these two cases fall outside the new framework regarding State aids for research and development of 17 February 1996?

3. What is the annual amount of government support for research and development in the EU granted by the Member States? How does this compare with the amount of aid granted by Japan and the United States?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997)

1. The SGS-Thomson and Philips cases where investigations have been opened by the Commission both concern individual aid to companies in the semiconductor sector. In the SGS-Thomson case, the work concerns technologies for semiconductor integrated circuits in application areas like computer and power supply, telecommunications, automotive, audio and radio, and other applications. The Philips case concerns technologies for semiconductor integrated circuits for personal digital assistants (PDAs) or personal intelligent communicators (PICs).

2. The assessment of the cases for the opening of the investigations has been carried out using criteria given in the guidelines for research and development adopted by the Commission in December 1995 ((OJ C 45, 17.2.1996. )). The cases fall within the scope of Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty since the aid favours (on an individual basis) the companies concerned, each operating in highly competitive semiconductor market segments for which there is trade between Member States. When opening the investigations in both cases, the Commission expressed doubts regarding the proposed aid in relation to the necessity for the aid, the 'incentive' effect - an inducement for the company to pursue research it would not otherwise have pursued - as well as the nature of the work proposed. It is these concerns which are being addressed in the current investigation. A full description explaining why the investigations were opened in each case has been published in the Official journal (SGS-Thomson ((OJ C 358, 27.11.1996. )), Philips ((OJ C 393, 31.12.1996. ))). A final Commission decision on both cases is still pending.

3. European research investment in 1995 amounted to 1.9% of gross domestic product (GDP), compared with 2.45% in the United States and 2.95% in Japan.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2755/97 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Follow-up to European Year Against Racism

With reference to the final declaration of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ/IFJ), the European Newspaper Publishers Association and the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) that they would work together to combat racism, what are the Commission's present thoughts on how to follow up European Year Against Racism in order to strengthen joint campaigns in the media and other areas?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (27 September 1997)

As with other areas, the Commission intends to continue its work with the media on anti-racism issues well beyond 1997.

The Commission welcomes the declaration made by the International federation of journalists (IFJ), the European newspaper publishers association (ENPA) and the European broadcasting union (EBU), all of which are playing an active part in the year against racism. The IFJ in particular is running several projects supported by the Commission, notably the international prize for young journalists and the conferences on 'prime time for tolerance' and 'media and the challenge of intolerance'. The Commission is also supporting a project entitled 'saga cities', which is an exchange of television programmes on the subject of ethnic minorities in cities throughout Europe, and involves members of the European broadcasting union's multicultural exchange group.

For the European year, the Commission is working with key media such as MTV, TV 5 and Eurosport and discussions will be held with them concerning future projects.

Several other pan-European media projects are being supported under the European year against racism budget, but a great deal of the funding for media actions comes from budget lines B3-4110 and B3-4114 which may continue after the European year.

The experts group for the European year against racism, of which the chairman of the IFJ is a member, will be consulted on future action. A representative of the Commission is a member of the board of the IMRAX group, a Europe-wide coalition of journalists, editors, publishers, broadcasters and media experts dedicated to promoting high standards of journalism concerned with reporting on matters of race, tolerance and multiculturalism.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2229/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (2 July 1997)

Subject: Progress of health education in Greek schools

Health eduction is a first step towards prevention and thus helps to promote the physical and mental health of young people. Its methodology includes education, upbringing and finally the adoption of a healthy life style. However, it can also tackle issues facing school communities, e.g. drugs.

Greece's Education and Initial Vocational Training programme has a sub-programme 1, General and Technical Education, measure 1 of which concerns actions on upbringing?

Bearing in mind that a time-table exists for the above health sub-programme:

1. What steps have been taken to implement the measure and what has been the take-up?

2. Are there delays, and what is the reason for them?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (2 October 1997)

What the Honourable Member is referring to is a sub-measure of measure 1.1.f [Environmental education - education in certain health-related questions (drug prevention, AIDS, alcohol; diet) - consumer education] under measure 1.1 ('Reinforcement of secondary education programmes') of sub-programme 1 (General and technical education) of the Greek programme in question.

The activities covered by the sub-measure 'Introduction of hygiene lessons at secondary level' were defined by the Ministry of Education and adopted officially by the programme's monitoring committee in May 1996; projects relate to the development of programmes and teaching material, the creation of a network for those in positions of responsibility in this field, teacher training, the implementation of certain programmes in schools and the evaluation and dissemination of the results.

The total budget for the sub-measure is approximately 8.23 MECU: 0.32 MECU in 1996, 3.21 MECU in 1997, 2.44 MECU in 1998 and 2.21 MECU in 1989.

34% of the budget is to be used to develop programmes and teaching materials, 25% for teacher training, 17% for network development, 17% for implementation in schools and 6% for the evaluation and dissemination of the results.

The delay in the start-up of activities was due to the same factors which held up the other measures under this programme (inadequate preparation in 1994, 1995 and the beginning of 1996, inadequate structures for defining, preparing, managing and implementing the programme, lack of experience on the part of the ministerial departments in programmes financed by the Structural Funds, together with the delay in recruiting the programme manager and frequent changes in the project leaders).

Since April 1996, the situation has improved markedly, leading to renewed optimism as to the success of the operation, which is already in progress.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1997/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (10 June 1997)

Subject: Fattening hormones

1. What fattening hormones are permitted in the USA for what animals (cows, oxen, bullocks, young cattle, female and male calves)?

2. How, in what form, how often, in what doses and at what age are these individual hormones administered to these animals?

3. How can farmers obtain these hormones?

4. Who supplies them?

5. What are the duties of veterinary surgeons in connection with hormone fattening?

6. Who monitors the correct use of the fattening hormones permitted in the USA?

7. How is their incorrect use prevented?

8. What measures has the USA taken to prevent the use of illegal fattening hormones?

9. What morphological and physiological effects does treatment with the respective fattening hormones have on the organism of the above-mentioned animals (please give details)? Special reference should be made to the endocrine glands.

10. By means of what scientific documentation can the USA prove that treatment with the individual fattening hormones does not adversely affect any of the numerous constituents of meat?

Answer (16 October 1997)

As the Council stated to the European Parliament on many occasions, the EC Treaty lays down that the Council acts on a proposal from the Commission. Before submitting proposals, the Commission takes advice from the experts whom it deems necessary to consult. The Commission has available to it, inter alia, a number of scientific advisory committees able to provide the very information required by the Honourable Member.

In addition to these customary activities, the Commission convened a scientific conference precisely in the area of fattening hormones which was held in November/December 1995 and which was attended by Members of the European Parliament, among others. That conference was able to provide information on the effect of the various substances administred to animals in order to promote their growth.

The Honourable Member is requested to address herself to the Commission for scientific answers to the questions raised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2439/97 by Friedhelm Frischenschlager (ELDR) to the Commission (16 July 1997)

Subject: SOCRATES action programme

In the past two years it has become evident that the Socrates action programme has made an important contribution in the field of European education.

With Socrates so well known and so popular and with the new Member States having joined this programme, the financial resources with which it is endowed seem very modest.

- Will cooperation with the new Central and Eastern European countries result in a decline in the quality of the Socrates programme?

- How does the Commission intend further to increase transparency in the allocation of financial resources with a view to curbing misuse?

- What amount in ECU has Austria received under this programme in the past two years? What percentage was utilized in the two new Member States Finland and Sweden, compared to Austria?

- How many mobility scholarships and teaching contracts abroad were used for professors, lecturers and students? What percentage of the resources was used by people in Austria, compared to France and Germany?

- How many people participated in education and exchange projects, and how many foreign language teachers took advantage of opportunities for training abroad? What percentage of the resources was used by people in Austria, compared to Italy and the United Kingdom?

- On what will the Commission place the emphasis in the educational sphere in the next two years?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1997)

The Commission would point out that this question is exactly the same as the Honourable Member's Written Question E-2347/97.

The Commission would therefore refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has already given to that question ((See page 61. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2547/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (24 July 1997)

Subject: Preparations for the extraordinary European Council on employment

What preparations is the Commission making for the extraordinary European Council on employment so that agreements can be reached and pledges made on pursuing active employment policies?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2547/97, E-2548/97 and E-2549/97 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (3 October 1997)

The inclusion of an employment title in the Treaty of Amsterdam places employment as a priority issue for the Union on an equal footing with monetary and fiscal objectives. While primary responsibility for employment policy remains with each Member State, employment is now considered as an issue of common concern, which requires a coordination of policies at European level.

The new Treaty also requires that employment be taken into account in all Community policies. This means that there will be an explicit assessment of the employment impact in the design and implementation of all policy actions.

The convening of an extraordinary meeting of the European Council in November 1997 indicates the degree of commitment of the Member States to immediate implementation of the provisions of the new Treaty. The meeting is expected to focus on three issues: first an assessment of the employment situation and progress made in the implementation of the European employment strategy, second, an examination of the manner in which each Member State intends to implement the provisions of the Treaty, and identification of national best practice in combatting unemployment and marginalization, and third, the definition of operational targets for national employment policies of the initial guidelines on employment which the Commission will propose to Member States.

Once ratified by all the Member States article 5 of the employment title will allow the Council to adopt incentive measures to encourage cooperation between Member States, and support their action through initiatives aimed at developing exchanges of experience and best practice.

The conclusions of the Presidency as well as the resolution on growth and employment adopted at Amsterdam contain a political commitment for an early implementation of these provisions. The Commission will do everything that is necessary to make this possible.