ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2828/96 by Honor Funk (PPE) to the Commission (16 October 1996)

Subject: Trend in producer prices for milk and the trade in milk quota

The milk quota provisions apply until the year 2000. The Commissioner responsible has announced that proposals for the reform of the milk sector will be made at the beginning of 1997. In order to assess future measures it is necessary to assess the effects of the 1992 reform on the milk sector. The Commission is therefore asked:

1. What has been the trend in producer prices for milk in the Member States since the 1992 agricultural reform?

2. How much milk quota has been sold or leased each year since the marketing year 1992/1993 in the individual Member States and what percentage does it represent in terms of the total quota of the Member State concerned?

3. Since the 1992/1993 financial year, in the individual Member States, what has been the price trend for the sale or leasing of milk quota?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-2828/96 and P-2829/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 October 1996)

1. The producer price for milk with a 3.7% fat content paid in each Member State since 1992 (in national currency per 100 kg) is as follows:

>TABLE>

2. The Community rules state that, where a farm is sold or let, the reference quantity for that farm has to be transferred with the farm to the purchaser or tenant. Exceptionally, and subject to certain conditions, Member States may authorize reference quantities to be transferred without the corresponding land changing hands. Member States do not inform the Commission of such transfers, with or without land, and the Commission therefore does not have the figures requested by the Honourable Member. For temporary transfers the figures are as follows (in tonnes):

>TABLE>

Member States not shown in this list do not allow the temporary leasing of milk quotas.

3. As Member States do not pass this information on to the Commission, it cannot answer the Honourable Member's question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2959/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Abolition of the intervention price in the COM for olive oil

Has the Commission proposed abolishing the intervention price as part of the reform of the COM for olive oil?

Is the Commission aware that such a decision would have a serious direct impact on farmers' incomes?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2953/96, E-2954/96, E-2955/96, E-2956/96, E-2957/96, E-2958/96, E-2959/96, E-2960/96, E-2961/96, E-2962/96 and E-2964/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 November 1996)

The Commission will be discussing the different options for the reform of the olive oil common market organization (CMO) in the very near future. A document will then be transmitted speedily to the Parliament and the Council for discussion before any concrete proposals are finalised.

The Commission will certainly take into account the Honourable Members' remarks and questions concerning employment, intervention aid to real production, aid per tree, consumption aid, quality, impact on the environment and the specific problems of Spain and some of its producer regions.

It would not be correct to comment in detail at this stage on the various options for reforms except to repeat that the new common market organisation should be transparent, simple, easy to control and should target producers efficiently.

The Commission attaches great importance to quality and believes that, whatever option is chosen, there will be an important role for Member States and regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3000/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Illegal trade in antiquities in Fyrom

From statements made at the 'International Symposium on Ancient Macedonia' held in Thessoloniki in October 1996, it emerged that an enormous quantity of antiquities dating from the 13th to the 11th Centuries BC was housed in tombs from the Mycenaean period in two necropoleis situated near Skopje. In addition, thousands of objects unearthed by illegal diggings near Gevgelija and Skopje have been sold abroad.

Since this matter relates to the protection of the Greek and hence the European cultural heritage:

1. Can measures be taken by the EU to protect ancient monuments and archaeological findings in the Skopje area?

2. What steps will it take to apprehend and punish in an exemplary fashion those engaged in illegally selling off antiquities from the area of Skopje and the Axios Basin forming part of the Greek cultural heritage?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (9 January 1997)

It is primarily up to each non-member country to take the necessary measures to safeguard its cultural heritage. Additional protection can be provided through international cooperation. In this context, mention should be made of the Unidroit Convention of June 1995 on the international restitution of stolen or illegally exported cultural objects. This convention, which has already been signed by a number of Member States and third countries (we have no information as to the signing of this convention by the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), and it has not yet come into effect), will make an important contribution to the protection of the national treasures which together constitute the heritage of humanity.

In more general terms, the Commission, under the Phare operational programme for the FYROM in 1997, is planning a number of projects which should in the long term strengthen the FYROM authorities' capacity for managing the cultural heritage. These are: technical assistance and specialist advice to the Ministry for Cultural Affairs, creation of a joint fund with the FYROM for development of the arts, support for the establishment of a national centre for conservation of frescoes and icons, and technical assistance to the monuments conservation institute in Ohrid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3081/96 by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: State aids to broadcasting companies

Does the Commission's clearing of Radiotelevisão Portuguesa of accusations that it received inadmissible state aid between 1992 and 1995 establish a precedent which can be applied to all television and radio broadcasters?

More precisely, is it now definitely regarded as permissible for Member States to make payments to broadcasters in respect of any legal or customary public service obligations?

Could these obligations include, for example, the broadcast of cultural programmes (e.g. serious drama, certain types of music, coverage of minority interests or programmes in minority languages) which might be expected to attract smaller audiences than output chosen purely for its commercial viability?

Would privately-owned companies be eligible for such aid?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (13 December 1996)

The decision on financing for Radiotelevisão Portuguesa to which the Honourable Member refers has to be regarded as an individual decision taken in a specific case and cannot apply to stations in other Member States which are financed differently from Radiotelevisão Portuguesa and whose terms of reference are not comparable.

Whenever it deems necessary, the Commission will examine on a case-by-case basis to what extent the various systems for financing public television might give rise to state aid and will check whether any such aid is compatible with the common market.

The Commission does not rule out the possibility that the obligations as to programme content referred to by the Honourable Member may constitute public service obligations that could give rise to a specific cost or shortfall compensation for which would not rank as aid.

It is up to the Member States to determine who is to benefit from such financing and how it is to be administered. The Commission's role is confined to examining, subject to verification by the Court of Justice, to what extent such financing constitutes state aid (something that can also be determined by national courts) and, where appropriate, whether it is compatible with the common market. The fact that the beneficiary of such financing is a public or private enterprise is unlikely to influence the Commission's assessment.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2993/96 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Planning of measures in ACP countries under the 8th European Development Fund

The 8th European Development Fund will cover development projets in the ACP countries over the period 1995-1999.

Has work already started on defining projects for this period with the ACP countries concerned?

Can the Commission provide some indication of the deadlines proposed?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1996)

Programming under the eighth European Development Fund is already relatively advanced. The object is for the Commission to agree, jointly with each African, Caribbean or Pacific (ACP) country, an indicative programme

representing the framework for cooperation with that country during the period covered by the second Financial Protocol to the Lomé Convention. Similar programmes are agreed with each ACP region.

The programmes lay down, inter alia, which focal sectors are to receive Community aid, what measures the government has to take regarding sectoral policies and, at national level, what criteria are to be used in the mid-term review. ((Under the new system of allocating resources in two instalments (Article 282 of the revised Convention), the Community undertakes, in the indicative programme, to make available to the ACP State 70% of the indicative package agreed for the programme. The remaining 30% will be released in the light of the outcome of the mid-term review of each indicative programme. )) The criteria are established in dialogue between the Commission and the appropriate authorities for each country or region. Before embarking on the dialogue, the Commission consulted the Member States - first in the ACP countries and then within the EDF Committee - about the guidelines it should follow for each national and regional programme. This new procedure had been agreed with the Member States earlier with a view to ensuring greater complementarity between Community and bilateral aid.

Numerous indicative programmes have already been signed, or are due for signing in the next few weeks. The Commission therefore considers that programming is proceeding satisfactorily and on schedule. It would, however, remind the Honourable Member that implementation of the programmes depends on the ratification process laid down in Article 360 of the revised Lomé IV Convention being completed. Concerning this part of the process, the Commission has repeatedly drawn attention to its concern about probable delays in some Member States. It therefore again calls on the Member States to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that implementation of the financial commitments made under the revised Convention may begin at the earliest possible date.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3262/96 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (5 December 1996)

Subject: Interim RPI

It is increasingly clear from the media that there are real difficulties in finding universally accepted statistical measurements.

The Commission evaluates the convergence of prices on the basis of the interim retail price index. Does this index coincide with or diverge from the retail price index used by Belgium?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3259/96, E-3260/96, E-3261/96, E-3262/96, E-3263/96, E-3264/96, E-3265/96, E-3266/96, E-3267/96, E-3268/96, E-3269/96, E-3270/96, E-3271/96, E-3272/96, E-3273/96 and E-3274/96 given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (21 January 1997)

Under Protocol No 6 on the convergence criteria referred to in Article 109j of the EC Treaty 'Inflation shall be measured by means of the consumer price index on a comparable basis, taking into account national differences.' This requirement is currently met through a process of harmonization based on the national consumer price indices (CPIs).

According to Council Regulation No 2494/95 on harmonized indices of consumer prices (HICPs) ((OJ L 257, 27.10.1995. )), harmonization should be considered as a stepwise approach in two stages. Stage I established in February 1996 a set of interim indices of consumer prices (IICPs). The IICPs are in fact the national CPIs with the coverage of goods and services adjusted to reduce non-comparability, particularly by excluding certain non-market services, such as health, education and owner occupied housing.

National CPIs can thus be seen as coincident with the corresponding IICPs regarding methods, concepts and definitions, apart from the coverage of goods and services. Numerically, the indices differ as a result of these differences in the coverage ((COM(96) 560. )). For most of the Member States, the differences in the inflation rates measured as a twelve month change, whether on an annual or monthly basis, are small, ranging from 0,0 to ±0,2 percentage points. For some Member States (Ireland, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom) the differences are bigger, mainly because of housing costs, particularly where interest payments are used in the national CPIs.

Though not strictly comparable, IICPs provide for the time being the most comparable basis for the assessment of inflation convergence among Member States. The Commission will, however, assess inflation convergence during the period before the start of stage three of economic and monetary union, as required by the Treaty, on the basis of comparable HICPs. These will be launched with Stage II of the harmonization of CPIs in February 1997 and will be based on appropriately designed definitions, concepts and methods.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3037/96 by Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)

Subject: Protecting the health of UK consumers against bovine spongiform encephalopathy

Using its powers relating to the protection of consumers' health, pursuant to Article 129a of the Treaty, the EU has adopted prophylactic measures to prevent irreparable damage caused by the marketing of products derived from UK cattle. However, these measures - basically, a ban on exports of such products to third countries - protect all EU consumers but not UK ones.

Why is the Commission not providing equivalent protection for UK consumers?

Does the Commission consider that the measures adopted by the UK Government are enough to protect UK consumers from the risks of consuming meat from UK cattle?

Does the Commission know what the measures adopted by the UK authorities are?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (13 January 1997)

As regards British consumers, the United Kingdom, by way of precaution, took measures at a very early stage to protect the public against the possible risks of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). These measures were progressively tightened up. Thus in 1989 the UK banned the use of specified bovine offals in human food. In 1995 it extended the list of specified offals to include the whole skull. Moreover, in order to reduce the risks of contamination of meat via the spinal cord, it banned the mechanical recovery of meat from the vertebral column. Finally, in 1996 it banned the marketing of meat from cattle aged over 30 months slaughtered in the United Kingdom and its use in food or for cosmetic or pharmaceutical purposes. At the same time the United Kingdom took measures to combat BSE with the objective of eradicating it completely, this being the best way of protecting the British consumer.

The Commission has closely monitored the measures taken by the United Kingdom and has encouraged the efforts that have been made. Moreover, in the field of research the Commission has been promoting cooperation between Community institutes and financed a programme for monitoring Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (CJD), which led to the identification of a new variant of this disease that has been linked to BSE. The new dialogue between the Commission and the consumer organisations, the measures taken to improve information, the research programmes adopted and the proposals currently being drafted or under discussion to ban the inclusion of specified offals from bovine, ovine and caprine animals in human and animal food and in the manufacture of cosmetic products, and to make provision for detailed and genuinely informative labelling concerning the source of meat and derived products, also concern British consumers and will help to restore their confidence in bovine products.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3188/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (22 November 1996)

Subject: Allegations against an ambassador to the EU from a third country

What precedents exist for the Commission, or from the Commission's experience for the other European institutions, to act in a situation where serious allegations arise about financial impropriety, criminal or anti-democratic activities of an Ambassador of a third country to the European Union?

What procedures exist which would allow the EU to consider its response in such a situation, where the allegations arise in the third country concerned?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (8 January 1997)

The Commission has not so far had to act in any situation of the type described by the Honourable Member.

If, however, such a need did arise and if the accusations were justified, the Commission would examine the case of the Ambassador in question with the Member States and perhaps the authorities of other countries to which the Ambassador was accredited, and would take the necessary measures.

These could even include recourse to Article 9 of the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations, under which the Ambassador would be declared 'persona non grata'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2775/96 by Georges Berthu (I-EDN) to the Council (17 October 1996)

Subject: IGC: a 'political umbrella' for monetary union

During the statement which he made to the European Parliament's Committee on Institutional Affairs on 25 September 1996 Mr Gay Mitchell, Irish Foreign Minister and President-in-Office of the Council, failed to mention the single currency, adhering to the firmly-held position of all parties to the IGC that the matter has already been settled and anyway has no bearing on the conference, which is to deal solely with institutional matters.

Since the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty, however, several European and national leaders have stated that the form of monetary union agreed upon could not function without accompanying institutional changes. For example, speaking before the Council of Europe on 28 September 1995, Chancellor Kohl maintained that monetary union could not work without a 'political umbrella' and that it was unrealistic to think otherwise.

Does the Presidency intend to propose that the IGC consider the implications of such statements?

Joint answer to Written Questions 2765/96, 2766/96, 2767/96, 2769/96, 2770/96, 2771/96, 2772/96, 2773/96, 2774/96, 2775/96 and 2776/96 (30 January 1997)

The Council cannot comment on the various proposals under discussion in the Intergovernmental Conference.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3161/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (22 November 1996)

Subject: UK candidates for Leonardo programme

Has the Commission any plans to change the financial arrangements for placements and exchanges under the Leonardo programme to permit unemployed young people from the UK to participate? These young people currently have no means of financial support during any period of time spent abroad or if their project involvement in the UK is for more than 16 hours per week.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (20 December 1996)

Training placements and exhanges under the Leonardo da Vinci programme are already open to young unemployed workers who participate in an organised scheme. Financial assistance is provided to beneficiaries through each Member State's national coordination unit to contribute to the costs of their training period abroad such as travel, accommodation, language and cultural preparation.

The Commission is currently examining the arrangements for placements and exchanges under the Leonardo da Vinci programme and highlighted the problem of how to reconcile training periods spent abroad with the social security regulations currently in force in the Member States in its recently published green paper 'Education, training, research: The obstacles to transnational mobility' ((COM(96) 462 final. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3077/96 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: Beef

1. How many tonnes of beef have been taken off the Community market in the context of intervention since 1990, per year and per Member State?

2. How many tonnes of intervention beef, per year and per Member State, are stored in

(a) public storage

(b) private storage?

3. What is the beef storage capacity in tonnes in each EU Member State, broken down by public and private storage?

4. How many cattle per year have been slaughtered in the UK since 1990?

How many of these as a result of

(a) BSE infection,

(b) suspected BSE infection?

5. How many tonnes of beef result from the slaughter referred to in Question 4?

6. How many cattle have been slaughtered to date in the UK as part of the BSE slaughter programme?

7. How many storehouses are there in the UK, broken down by public and private storage? What storage capacity does this amount to respectively, in tonnes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 January 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3152/96 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (22 November 1996)

Subject: Outbreak of pneumonia in Alcalá de Henares (Spain)

The outbreak of pneumonia caused by legionella bacteria in Alcalá de Henares last August has so far claimed 16 lives and infected over 240 people, most of them elderly and suffering from lung problems.

Given the panic arising from lack of information as to the real cause of the illness, and the fact that Alcalá de Henares was one of the towns most affected in the 1980s by the 'colza syndrome', with many cases of 'atypical pneumonia', is the Commission planning to ask the Spanish health authorities to study the origin, transmission mechanisms and effects on the population of this outbreak?

What steps does the Commission intend to take to provide the town with all the requisite human and technical means required to eradicate the underlying cause of this illness?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (14 January 1997)

The Commission has specific information concerning an epidemic of Legionnaire's disease that has been affecting the town of Alcalá de Henares since the end of September 1996. By 18 October a total of 260 suspected cases had been recorded, including 197 hospitalisations and 11 deaths. Serological confirmations have been obtained from 49 patients, with the sero-group 1 of Legionella pneumophila (Pontiac) being isolated in six cases. In the environment, the same sero-group has been found in cooling towers and water tanks located at the places of residence. An epidemiological investigation is under way, with the support of the Instituto Carlos III in Madrid.

The health authorities for the Madrid region have already set in place preventive measures, namely the shutdown of the cooling systems in the region affected by this epidemic and chlorination of the entire water supply system and cleaning and disinfection of the cooling towers and water tanks in this zone.

The Commission has not received any request from the Spanish health authorities to reinforce the technical means and human resources already deployed in controlling this epidemic.