ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0077/98 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Driftnets

During negotiations for the UN General Assembly late last year, the European Commission's representative would not approve of a motion calling for the confiscation and destruction of illegal driftnets. The representative claimed that the Commission had only agreed to seek a ban on driftnets, not their destruction.

Bearing in mind that the British Government has announced its intention to seek a ban on the use of driftnets during its EU Presidency, can the Commission give details of what recommendations it has, if any, to deal with these nets in the event of such a ban? In particular, how does it plan to ensure that driftnets will not be sold to other countries, causing serious depletion of their fish stocks and the fisheries dependent on them?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1998)

At the last session of the United Nations General Assembly in November 1997, there were two resolutions on fishery issues; the one on driftnets was adopted with the vote of the Community.

No proposal regarding the confiscation and destruction of illegal driftnets was tabled by any of the governments of states present at that session. The Commission representative was thus never, at any stage, in the situation of having to adopt a position on this issue.

Regarding the initiative announced by the UK Presidency to try to ban deep-sea driftnetting, the Commission welcomes it wholeheartedly. Of course there will have to be a guarantee that the ban will be complied with, and the Commission intends to be very vigilant on this point. Adequate procedures will have to be adopted in due course, but the Commission considers that the immediate priority is to secure agreement in the Council on the principle of ending deep-sea fishing using driftnets.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0315/98 by Maj Theorin (PSE) to the Council (9 February 1998)

Subject: The EU Code of Conduct

One priority of the British Presidency has been to present a Code of Conduct for the arms trade. Such a conduct ought to be legally binding.

Will the EU Code of Conduct apply to export and licensed production of a comprehensive list of goods and technologies including major conventional weaponry, all types of small and light weapons, police and paramilitary equipment and services, and dual-use technologies?

Answer (27 April 1998)

The proposal by France and the United Kingdom for a Code of Conduct for arms exports aims at setting high common standards for exports from all EU Member States of conventional arms and technologies for military use.

The proposal has been examined for the first time on 17 February 1998 by the competent Council Working Group. It is therefore not possible at this stage of the process to indicate what will be the extent and the degree of precision of the scope of application of the Code, as it is finally adopted by the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0004/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Waste batteries

On 19.12.1997, the Commission announced its decision to take action against Greece in the European Court of Justice for failure to implement Directive 91/157/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 38. )) on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances.

1. Does the Commission have information on how such waste is disposed of in Greece?

2. What are the legal arguments against Greece?

3. Given that the Member States were to submit their programmes by September 1992, why has the Commission initiated proceedings after five years?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (2 March 1998)

1. Ministerial Decision No 73537/1438 ((Official Journal of the Greek Republic No 781, Volume II, of 12.9.1995. )) transposing Council Directive 91/157/EEC of 18 March 1991 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. )) into Greek law contains information on the way in which dangerous substances in batteries and accumulators are to be eliminated. There may also be other information on this subject in the programmes provided for in Article 6 of the Directive.

2. Article 6 of the Directive lays down a series of objectives to be achieved. In order to attain them, Article 6 provides for Member States to draw up programmes to be communicated to the Commission by 17 September 1992 at the latest. As Greece had not forwarded its programmes by the deadline given in the Directive, the Commission decided to launch the procedure set out in Article 169 of the EC Treaty.

3. The time which has elapsed between the date on which the obligation to notify the Commission of the programmes would have been effective and the date on which the Commission decided to initiate proceedings against Greece in the Court of Justice is perfectly justified in the light of the procedures pursued under Article 169 of the EC Treaty and the Commission's internal procedures.

The first letter requesting information on this subject was addressed to the Greek authorities in December 1992. Following bilateral contacts and an exchange of correspondence, the Commission dispatched a letter of formal notice to the Greek Government on this subject in November 1995. As the replies to this letter were unsatisfactory, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion in May 1997. Finally, following an unsatisfactory reply to the reasoned opinion, the Commission decided to bring the matter before the Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0096/98 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Designation of nicotine as an addictive substance

At the December 1997 part-session the Commission said that various steps were under way with a view to the EU designating nicotine as an addictive substance.

Can the Commission say what specific initiatives are being taken and when it expects that it will be possible to designate nicotine as an addictive substance in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (6 March 1998)

The Parliament gave its opinion on the Commission's communication on the present and proposed Community role in combatting tobacco consumption ((COM(96) 609 final. )) in December 1997, and the Commission is now in the process of examining to what extent action can be undertaken on the various points in that communication and in what order such action shall be taken. In particular, priority is presently being given to revising Council Directive 90/239/EEC of 17 May 1990 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the maximum tar yield of cigarettes ((OJ L 137, 30.5.1990. )) and Council Directive 92/41/EEC of 15 May 1992 amending Directive 89/622/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the labelling of tobacco products ((OJ L 158, 11.6.1992. )) and to examining what are the possibilities for common action as regards additives to tobacco products.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0268/98 by Yiannis Roubatis (PSE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Tragic consequences of the sanctions policy for the population of Iraq

The sanctions policy imposed on the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq has had tragic consequences for the population of the country, and particularly children who suffer from malnutrition and a lack of drugs.

Given that it is questionable how much the sanctions policy has produced the desired results and the plight of the population is unbearable for any civilized state:

Will the Commission say:

1. What is its position on this matter?

2. Does it intend to take any measures to relieve the plight of the population and particularly the children suffering from malnutrition and a lack of drugs?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-4056/97 ((OJ C 187, 16.6.1998, p. 117. )).

The Commission adds that a proposal to increase Iraqi oil sales from 1.900 MECU to 4.500 MECU over a six months period was submitted on 2 February 1998 by the United Nations (UN) Secretary General to the UN Security Council for consideration.

Under its 10 MECU humanitarian aid plan for Iraq for the first semester of 1998 the Commission is funding a programme of supplementary feeding for malnourished children and their families, supplies of medicines to paediatric and maternity hospitals and providing better sanitary conditions for primary health centres and primary schools and assistance in the treatment of drinking water.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0191/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: Dual citizenship for Italians in Belgium

The Strasbourg Convention of 6 May 1963 regulates instances of dual citizenship and, in practice, provides for the reacquisition of citizenship even when it has been given up voluntarily, since it establishes that the various positions set out in international agreements remain unaffected.

Thus the Protocol to the Strasbourg Convention has, for example, made the agreements between Italy and France and Italy and the Netherlands, which allow dual citizenship, operational.

In order to remove the obstacles to freedom of movement and ensure the free movement of citizens, can the Commission introduce the appropriate measures to extend the Strasbourg Protocol to cover the European countries in which there are large numbers of Italians?

Can it also, in view of the sizeable Italian community in Belgium, extend the Strasbourg Protocol, as a matter of urgency, to relations between Belgium and Italy, so as to allow the Italians living in Belgium who want to complete the formalities for reacquisition of their original citizenship, to do so, whilst keeping the Belgian citizenship which they acquired by means of voluntary naturalization?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 April 1998)

As stipulated in Article 8 of the EC Treaty, every person holding the nationality of a Member State is a citizen of the Union.

In accordance with Declaration No 2 on nationality of a Member State, annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty on European Union, wherever in the Treaty reference is made to nationals of the Member States, the question whether an individual possesses the nationality of a Member State is to be settled solely by reference to the national law of the Member State concerned.

Consequently, it is the Member State concerned which is competent to define the conditions for acquiring and giving up its nationality. The Member States are also competent to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements on the conditions for acquiring and giving up nationality. The Commission is therefore not entitled to intervene in the way the Honourable Member would like.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0131/98 by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Waste

Can the Commission give an estimate of the quantities of waste and methods of disposal of CD-Roms and computer diskettes in the Member States?

Will it include the disposal of CD-Roms and diskettes in the directive on electronic scrap?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1998)

The Commission does not have available any estimates as to the quantities of waste consisting of CD-Roms and computer diskettes.

In view of the technical challenges linked to the recycling of compact discs, most are disposed of in landfills or incinerated.

A German company has recently developed a recycling method for compact discs which seems to be environmentally acceptable and is already available on a commercial scale. The main obstacle to large scale recycling operations in this field is the lack of sufficient supply of end-of-life CDs which are currently collected only in small quantities.

A proposal for a directive on waste from electrical and electronic equipment is at present under preparation. At this stage, it is not possible to say whether compact discs will be included in that proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0279/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Safety standards for workplaces in Greece

Through Presidential Decree 305 of 29 August 1997 Greece adopted stringent safety standards for workplaces employing technical equipment, in compliance with Directive 92/57/EEC ((OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p. 6. )). However, it is reported that the Greek administration is interpreting the provisions of this directive in such a way that the directive will be circumvented and not implemented in the sensitive area of hospitals.

Will the Commission give its official views on this matter, and say whether the provisions of the directive in question apply fully in the case of private and public projects?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (13 March 1998)

The Commission does not have any knowledge of improper application of Directive 92/57/EEC on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites in the hospital sector in Greece.

As stated in Article 2(1) of the framework Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work ((OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. )), the Directive 'shall apply to all sectors of activity, both public and private (industrial, agricultural, commercial, administrative, service, educational, cultural, leisure, etc.)'.

Directive 92/57/EEC, to which the Honourable Member refers, is the eighth individual Directive pursuant to the framework Directive. It is confirmed, in Article 1(3) of Directive 92/57/EEC, that the provisions of the framework Directive are fully applicable to temporary or mobile construction sites.

There is, therefore, no doubt that Directive 92/57/EEC applies to temporary or mobile construction sites in both the private and public sectors, particularly as regards building or civil engineering works of the type referred to in Annex I of Directive 92/57/EEC which are carried out at hospitals.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0401/98 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (24 February 1998)

Subject: Consorzio Venezia Nuovo (New Venice Consortium)

Under Article 3 of Italian law No. 798/84, in the case of expenditure, projects and measures to safeguard Venice and its lagoon, the Ministry of Public Works is authorized to award a global contract covering both the planning and works to companies and/or consortia by negotiated tender, even in derogation from the regulations in force. The concession for the planning and execution of all the works provided for by the law in question has been awarded to the Consorzio Nuovo Venezia (New Venice Consortium). This global concession has, over the years, partly as a result for further laws and decrees, become a de facto monopoly for works of all kinds including regional, environmental and urban maintenance work, which could be and in fact was carried out for years by companies under normal tender procedures. This monopoly concession has been maintained even since adoption of the specific Italian law on Venice (206/95) which prohibits the global concession except in the case of legal obligations deriving from previous legislation and its effects, and since the adoption of a number of Community directives on public procurement procedures and even after the enactment of Italian legislation transposing the relevant Community directives until 1997. So as not to apply or circumvent these Community provisions, the agreements and riders to the original agreements have probably been construed as being part of the earlier agreements and hence the new agreements have been regarded as enforceable and deriving from the initial agreements or other subsequent agreements preceding the entry into force of the Community legislation (for example the 9th and 10th concessions of 1996 and the 11th, 12th and 13th concessions of 1997).

Does the Commission consider that this procedure involving concessions and subsequent agreements containing no time limits, and which might thus be manipulated so that they continue indefinitely, is compatible with the letter and the spirit of the Community directives, as set out, for instance, in the Green paper on public procurement of 27 November 1996?

Is it also lawful to give the same consortium responsibility for both the planning and execution of the works?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (27 April 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0252/98 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: Agriculture

Can the Commission confirm if it has conducted its review on the quarantine situation in the Member States, as required under Article 10 of Directive 92/65/EEC ((OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p.54. )), and if it will publish its results?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1998)

The rabies quarantine situation was reviewed and updated by the scientific veterinary committee and a report was issued in September 1997. A copy is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

It was concluded in this report that an alternative system to quarantine for rabies, for dogs and cats, was a viable option which offered an equivalent guarantee of safety. In brief, the alternative suggested system involves vaccination, microchips and blood testing. The Commission will make suitable proposals at an appropriate time.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0391/98 by Leoluca Orlando (V) to the Commission (16 February 1998)

Subject: Failure of the Italian authorities to incorporate Directive 93/42/EEC

Five years after the adoption of Directive 93/42/EEC ((OJ L 169, 12.7.1993, p. 1. )) which lays down the professional profile and ways of practising as a dental technician, Italy has still not incorporated it, thus creating a legislative void that condemns Italian dental technicians to a situation of serious hardship by maintaining in force provisions that are now obsolete and lacking in terms of health protection, technological and business organization standards.

Does the Commission intend to make representations to the Italian authorities so that they become aware of the delay in incorporating Directive 93/42/EEC and of the stage reached in drafting legislation to incorporate it?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)

Italy transposed Directive 93/42/EEC on medical devices by means of the 'decreto legislativo' of 24 February 1997 two and a half years after the deadline set for transposing that directive.

The Commission is examining the conformity of that Italian transposition.

Any matters connected with any hardship suffered as a result of that delay in transposition should be addressed to the national authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0790/98 by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Council (16 March 1998)

Subject: High-activity radioactive waste at the Dounreay plant in Caithness, Scotland

In the light of the revelation in 'The Guardian' newspaper on 2 February 1998 that there is a second secret disposal shaft containing more than 700 000 kilogrammes of high-activity radioactive waste at the Dounreay plant in Caithness, Scotland, will the UK Presidency take up the commitment of the Irish presidency to Parliament on 13 November 1996 that there should be an environmental audit conducted at the plant by the European Union authorities?

Answer (28 May 1998)

Since the accession of the United Kingdom to the European Atomic Energy Community all plants such as that referred to by the Honourable Member are covered by current Community law and in particular the provisions of Chapters 3 (Health and safety) and 7 (Safeguards) of the EAEC Treaty.

The Council would point out that the Commission is responsible for ensuring compliance with that law and in this context has access in particular, under Article 35 of the EAEC Treaty, to all the facilities necessary to carry out continuous monitoring of the level of radioactivity in the air, water and soil and to ensure compliance with the basic standards laid down in Directive 96/29/Euratom ((OJ L 159, 29.06.96, p. 1. )). Moreover, under Article 81 of the EAEC Treaty, the Commission may send inspectors into the territories of the Member States to monitor safeguards.

The Council considers that the current legal provisions enable the Commission, in conjunction with the Member State concerned, to guarantee optimum conditions for protecting public health.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1098/98 by Olivier Dupuis (ARE) to the Council (31 March 1998)

Subject: The case of Mr Ukshin Hoti

Mr Ukshin Hoti, a lecturer in political science at the University of Pristina (Kosovo), has been in prison since 1994 following a trial in what were, to say the least, dubious circumstances and at the end of which he was found guilty of 'having threatened the constitutional order' and of 'undermining the territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia'. Mr Hoti had previously been arrested in 1981 for 'counter-revolutionary crimes' and again in 1993. He has already spent eight years of his life in prison for his beliefs, linked to his activism in favour of a non-violent, negotiated solution to the problem of Kosovo.

What action has the Council taken and what steps does it intend to take to secure Mr Hoti's release by the Serbian authorities, and what steps does it intend to take to secure the support of the Kosovar authorities for his release?

Answer (4 June 1998)

The Council deeply regrets the sentence imposed on Mr Ukshin Hoti and the circumstances of his condemnation.

The Council points out that freedom of expression is a universal fundamental right that every democratic country has the duty to guarantee, as is the right to a free and fair trial. Respect for human rights and democratic principles are basic elements of the Union's regional approach and pillars of the conditionality policy towards the Federal Republic of Yougoslavia (FRY). It is precisely because of dissatisfaction on the issue of Kosovo and on the FRY's record on human rights that the Union withdrew, at the end of 1997, the Autonomous Trade Measures granted to the FRY on 29 April 1997. A lasting solution to the Kosovo issue and a full respect of human rights and democratic principles remain in the forefront of EU requests in dealing with the FRY, and a condition for improving bilateral relations.

Action in favour of the release of Mr Hoti must be seen within the overall EU action in favour of respect of human rights and democratic standards in the FRY. In this framework, the EU will continue to press the Serb authorities on all cases similar to that raised by the Honourable Member.