ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0980/96 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Pension rights in EU delegations

How does the Commission propose to deal with the dissatisfaction felt in European Union delegations concerning the pension rights of local staff?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1996)

The framework rules state that 'The Commission shall set up supplementary or independent....pension schemes where there is no local scheme or where the local scheme is judged to be inadequate'.

To this end, the Commission envisaged creating a social providence fund to which both employer and employee would contribute. To date, 79 specific conditions of employment of local agents envisage the participation of local agents in this fund. On a provisional basis, the Commission began paying its contributions

on 1 January 1996 and started to collect the contributions of the local agents. Given the delays in starting up the fund, the Commission is negotiating the question of the payment of arrears starting from 1 July 1991.

The Commission already participates in the local state scheme on behalf of the local agents in each country where it is represented. In negotiations with the unions, the Commission has been obliged to point out that the agreed texts, quoted above, do not commit the Commission to establish a pension fund which would guarantee to each retired local agent a pension for life as proposed by the unions.

The Commission remains committed to implementing what was agreed in the framework rules. To the end, it is engaged in negotiations with the representative trade unions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0541/96 by Martina Gredler (ELDR) to the Commission (11 March 1996)

Subject: Helen Joseph Women's Development Centre

As part of a development programme to raise the standard of living of women in South Africa's Northern Cape region the Helen Joseph Women's Development Centre concentrates its activities on training courses for unemployed women. The centre is in Galeshewe township, Kimberley.

In 1995 the European Union refused to support the centre on the grounds that South Africa is not a developing country.

Is there any other possibility for providing funding for the Helen Joseph Women's Development Centre?

Is there an appropriate budget heading for such support?

If so, which budget heading is it?

What are the time limits for applying for funding for 1996 or 1997?

What conditions would be attached to such funding?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (10 May 1996)

From January 1st, 1996 South Africa is in the Organization for economic cooperation and development development assistance committee list of aid recipients as a low-middle income country, like Ivory Coast and Cameroon.

The small budget line B7-611 (women in development) is normally used to promote the mobilisation of mainstream funds rather than for funding direct interventions in the field. In fact, funding for development activities which include attention to gender issues or focus specifically on women is the responsibility of mainstream development funding, as stressed in the recent Council Resolution of 20 December 1995 on integrating gender issues in development cooperation.

The European programme for reconstruction and development (EPRD) in South Africa is financed through the Commission's budget line B7-3200, which funds programmes to improve the situation of the most disadvantaged groups of South African society. One of the projects approved by the Commission for the EPRD is a non governmental organization's (NGO) support programme, (Transitional national development trust) which should act as a clearing house for NGO projects.

Project proposals within agreed sectors (education, health, rural development, urban development, private sector support and good governance) are discussed and prepared in cooperation between the Commission and the South African government. For specific proposals, like Helen Joseph women's development centre, it is best to contact the Commission delegation in South Africa.

As a matter of fact, initial project appraisal is carried out in South Africa by the Commission delegation which assesses, in close collaboration with the NGOs involved, if a proposal reflects the priorities agreed upon by the Commission and the South African government and the way the proposal can be dealt with in the framework of the European Programme for reconstruction and development in South Africa.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0906/96 by Pieter Dankert (PSE) and Carlos Pimenta (ELDR) to the Commission (23 April 1996)

Subject: New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion Fund

In relation to the new Tagus bridge, partly financed from the Cohesion Fund, the Commission has repeatedly been informed since 1994, of the breaches of directives 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p.1. )) and 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7. )) and he measures listed in the relevant environmental impact assessment and Annex I of the Commission decision on project 94/10/65/005. Despite discussions between the Commission and the Portuguese authorities measures which should have been taken at the beginning of operations have still not been taken in 1996 and the infringements are continuing.

Does the Commission not consider that it should have undertaken an inquiry at an earlier stage, or should do so now, as referred to in Article 10 of its decision 94/10/65/005, under which the aid can be suspended, reduced or withdrawn?

If the Commission does not share this view, can it indicate when it will have reached the limits of its tolerance, given that two children have already drowned because the protective fencing required under the environmental impact assessment has still not been erected and that, according to newspaper reports the Portuguese government has now finally recognized that there are contraventions of the rules and has imposed a fine on Lusoponte for illegal dredging activities and dumping?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0904/96, E-0905/96, E-0906/96, E-0907/96 and E-0908/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Members and will inform them of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1330/96 by Ana Miranda de Lage (PSE) and Josep Pons Grau (PSE) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: NGOs - conditions for receiving Community funding

Community cooperation with developing countries is now partly channelled through NGOs. Although initially, action involving NGOs began under the heading of co-funding via the Directorate-General for Development, there are now a large number of budgetary headings available to NGOs in the EU budget.

This situation is causing confusion with regard to funding percentages, conditions governing NGOs working with the Commission's services, and contractual relations, all of which means that the NGOs are unclear as to procedures and opportunities.

Does the Commission intend to harmonize the conditions which the NGOs must meet in order to receive Community funds?

Could the contractual conditions for the budgetary headings open to NGOs in DG I, DG IA, DG IB, DG VIII and ECHO be harmonized?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1996)

In the area of cooperation policy, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) administer an important and growing portion of Community funding and their fields of activity are increasingly diverse. Consequently they depend on numerous budget headings and have a complex relationship with the Commission.

This larger and more diverse role reflects the value of the NGOs' work. It has however led to certain new problems regarding the correct definition of genuine NGOs, the principles that govern their relations with the Commission, and the consistency of procedures to be applied as regards the budget headings available to them.

For these reasons, the Commission, by mutual agreement with the NGO liaison committee, has begun a review of these matters in order to ensure a minimum degree of administrative consistency, while taking into account the inevitable diversity of the nature and objectives of the various fields of activity. This is being done in consultation and collaboration with the NGO liaison committee.

The Commission produces an annual publication, the 'Digest of Community resources available to NGOs', which contains the information necessary to help NGOs identify the objectives, conditions of eligibility, procedures and departments to contact for the various budget headings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1034/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Development policy and disabilities

In the light of the recent amendment to budget line B7/600 (Community contribution towards schemes concerning developing countries carried out by non-governmental organizations), and in the light of the

UN standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Disabled Persons, and given that disabled people represent 10% of the population and are often among the most marginalized groups in society, what steps is DG VIII taking to ensure that disabled people and representative disability organizations are taken into account and receive appropriate funding in all relevant development programmes?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)

The Commission's aim in the matter of health and rehabilitation is to help non-member countries draw up and implement policies designed to satisfy fundamental needs and the needs of the most vulnerable groups of the population. Most of the measures taken have been targeted on strengthening health services and making them more effective. A lot has been done to step up prevention of diseases that can cause disability.

Regional programmes accord particular attention to the needs of the disabled. Some offer technical and material assistance for national programmes for disabled people, fostering operational research, exchanges of experience and the training of specialized staff.

Rehabilitation schemes for countries emerging from crisis and conflict always make special provision for the disabled (care, artificial limbs, reintegration).

Last but not least, non-governmental organizations specializing in the needs of the disabled have always received substantial support in the form of cofinancing for their schemes under budget heading B7-600. Such support will continue.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0981/96 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Definitive VAT system in the European Community

Will the definitive legislation on VAT contain provisions that take account of the special characteristics of non-profit making organizations and allow exemption from VAT from which tax already paid is not deductible?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)

The Commission is currently reviewing all aspects of the existing Community VAT system with a view to the introduction of a regime which is better suited to the needs of a truly integrated internal market. The Commission can not anticipate the outcome of this study. However, it can assure the Honourable Member that the preparatory work includes consideration of the way in which charities and welfare organisations are to be treated.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1055/96 by Stephen Hughes (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Freedom of movement for pets between Sweden, the UK and Ireland

A letter I received from Commissioner Fishler dated 8 July 1995 stated, 'Sweden has recently changed its laws and has provided for a similar regime for entry of all dogs and cats from continental Europe as described above. Additionally the Treaty of accession with Sweden provides for similar arrangements to be applied for movement of dogs and cats between Sweden, the UK and Ireland as is applied to movement between Ireland and the UK. The precise arrangements for such movement is currently under discussion between Sweden, Ireland, the UK and the Commission'.

What is the current state of play of these discussions and the likely date when free movement could be expected for pets between the UK and Sweden?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1996)

The United Kingdom authorities state that discussions are still continuing on this subject. They are unable to indicate a final date for their conclusion. Consequently the Commission is unable to give a likely date when free movement of dogs and cats can be expected between the United Kingdom and Sweden.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1192/96 by Leen van der Waal (EDN) to the Commission (10 May 1996)

Subject: Palliative care

Because of the increasing life expectancy of the population of the Union and the growth in the number of older people there is a considerable need for palliative care and hospices for seriously ill patients in a terminal condition. In some Member States - for example, Britain, France and Belgium - a knowledge and experience of this form of care are actively encouraged, while other Member States are still in the initial stages.

Given the importance of this matter, is the Commission prepared to include in the preliminary draft budget for 1997 appropriations for promoting an exchange of knowledge in this area between the Member States and to support specific European research projects?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)

On 29 March 1996 the Parliament and Council adopted Decision No 646/96/EEC ((OJ L 95, 16.4.1996 )) on an action plan to combat cancer within the framework for action in the field of public health (1996 to 2000). This Community action plan, which is being implemented by the Commission in close cooperation with the Member States, includes actions designed, inter alia, to promote the quality of patients' life by improving the general health situation.

The action plan also includes promotion of initiatives and support for European studies and dissemination of their conclusions, particularly in the context of European-level meetings and exchanges of experience, in order to gain a better understanding of the quality control methods for measures aimed at correct early detection of the disease and prevention of its development, risks of relapse and associated syndromes and improving the effectiveness of those methods, taking into account the psychological and social aspects, in particular the quality of life of patients, including palliative methods. This action plan has been allocated 64 million ecus for the period under consideration (1996-2000). The annual appropriations to support the priority actions will be authorised by the budgetary authority subject to the availability of resources.

As regards research, the research programme on biomedicine and health for 1994-1998 (Biomed 2), in the domain 'Cancer research', already provides for a research topic concerning the evaluation of factors contributing to an optimum quality of life, including rehabilitation and terminal care.

A call for proposals, which will be published in September 1996, will enable researchers to submit proposals notably concerning the quality of life and terminal care, the role of the palliative centres and centres for the treatment of pain associated with incurable diseases, as well as various other aspects of care in the final phase of life. This will allow the Commission to fund projects in this area, selected on the basis of their scientific excellence, in the framework of the research budget for the biomedicine and health programme in 1997 and 1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0760/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Operational programme for the environment

According to Mr Laliotis, the Greek minister responsible, 130 projects amounting to Drs. 110 billion which cover all the measures of the programme have been entered in the operational programme for the environment adopted by Decision E(94) 1834/3 of the Commission on 29.7.1994 with a total budget of drachmas 150 billion. The relevant Greek ministry states that for 1995 Drs. 26 billion had been approved for this purpose.

In respect of the very sensitive regions of the Delta of the River Axios and Lakes Koronia and Volvi, the scheduled funding so far amounts to Drs. 700 million.

Will the Commission say:

1. Whether this information is correct;

2. Whether the funds for 1995 have been disbursed (Drs. 26 billion);

3. Whether it is monitoring the implementation of the programme;

4. Why no funds have so far been made available for the Delta of the River Axios (an outstanding biotope) and Lakes Koronia and Volvi?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1996)

The Commission has no knowledge of the Greek ministry statements to which the Honourable Member refers.

The 'Environment' operational programme was approved by the Commission with a total budget of ECU 512 million; the inclusion subsequently of measures aimed at the private sector raised the total budget to ECU 515 million. In March 1996, 131 projects were in principal judged by the Greek authorities to qualify for part-financing under the programme. The total budget for these projects was estimated at ECU 330 million. In March 1996, the actual take-up of funds by the programme as a whole amounted to approximately ECU 10 million. Notwithstanding this modest sum, the take-up could improve considerably in the coming months.

The Commission is keeping a close watch on work connected with the programme in view of its initial problems. These problems were due primarily to the complicated arrangements required to activate its sub-programme, the most important of which involving the national land register. In order to speed up proceedings and following suggestions by the Commission, a programme manager was recently recruited, and a specialist project manager will be taken on in order to expedite the national land register sub-programme.

As regards the protection of Greek biotopes, the Commission considers that the Greek authorities themselves are primarily responsible for setting priorities. It would point out however that, apart from the programme in question, other Community programmes and initiatives such as Life, Leader II, Interreg II and the regional multifund operational programmes can provide part-financing biotope protection measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0908/96 by Pieter Dankert (PSE) and Carlos Pimenta (ELDR) to the Commission (23 April 1996)

Subject: New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion Fund

The Commission has been informed about the construction of new roads in the vicinity of the Tagus bridge and the special protected area. These roads already run partly through the protected area and/or stop at its edge although the land inside this area has already been levelled with a view to construction.

Were these roads partly financed from the Structural and/or Cohesion Funds?

If so, is the intention that these roads should run through the protected area, which would mean that once again a project has been financed which conflicts with Community environmental policy?

If not, what action does the Commission intend to take against the infringement of directives 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p.1. )) and 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7. ))?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0904/96, E-0905/96, E-0906/96, E-0907/96 and E-0908/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Members and will inform them of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 274/96 by Peter CRAMPTON to the Council. Mordechai Vanunu



Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0006



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0274/96 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Council (27 February 1996) Subject: Mordechai Vanunu Considering the recent acknowledgement by the Government of Israel that Israel possesses nuclear weapons and might be prepared to give them up as part of a peace deal with its Arab neighbours, and in the light of the continued imprisonment in solitary confinement of Mordechai Vanunu, have any representations been made to the Government of Israel concerning the release of Mr Vanunu? If not, are there any plans for such representations? If not, why not? Joint reply to Written Questions E-0274/96 and E-0594/96 (2 August 1996) Mr Vanunu's case has not been raised in the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1619/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Evaluation studies on development aid

Has the Commission responded to the suggestion that a library of evaluation studies be established in relation to EU development aid and that of the Member States.

If not, can the Commission comment on the most practical way of implementing this proposal and the most relevant budget line and approximate cost, should the European Parliament propose this for 1997?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (12 July 1996)

The Commission already keeps a stock of evaluation reports commissioned by it and carried out by independent, outside consultants. All final evaluation reports are made available to the public on request.

Not all Member States publish evaluation reports. In some cases summaries only are published, and in other cases there may not be a firm rule or clear practice. Member States would be reticent at changing this policy, and to giving the Commission the key role in managing a new one.

A useful, if partial, alternative lies in the Organization for economic cooperation and development Development assistance committee (DAC) database of evaluation summaries, to which all DAC members, including the Commission, contribute. This database, which is currently being made more user-friendly, is managed by the Canadian international development agency (CIDA) and will be the subject of a detailed review by the DAC evaluation group later this year, with a view to improving its quality and widening its use and accessibility.

With the growth of information technologies, it can also be hoped that publication of summaries and evaluation reports can be developed significantly within the next 2-3 years.

In the light of the ready availability of the Commission's own evaluation reports, the existence of the DAC database and the rapid evolution of information technologies it does not appear that the Honourable Member's suggestion would justify special allocation of funds and staff resources, which are already needed to produce quality evaluation work and ensure findings are acted on.