ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0761/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Operating appropriations of the European Institutions

With regard to heading B5-4023 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on:

- studies

- meetings of experts

- conferences and congresses

- information and publications.

Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/97, E-0699/97, E-0700/97, E-0701/97, E-0702/97, E-0703/97, E-0704/97, E-0705/97, E-0706/97, E-0707/97, E-0708/97, E-0709/97, E-0710/97, E-0711/97, E-0712/97, E-0713/97, E-0714/97, E-0715/97, E-0716/97, E-0717/97, E-0718/97, E-0719/97, E-0720/97, E-0721/97, E-0722/97, E-0723/97, E-0724/97, E-0725/97, E-0726/97, E-0727/97, E-0728/97, E-0729/97, E-0730/97, E-0731/97, E-0732/97, E-0733/97, E-0734/97, E-0735/97, E-0736/97, E-0737/97, E-0738/97, E-0739/97, E-0740/97, E-0741/97, E-0742/97, E-0743/97, E-0744/97, E-0745/97, E-0746/97, E-0747/97, E-0748/97, E-0749/97, E-0750/97, E-0751/97, E-0752/97, E-0753/97, E-0754/97, E-0755/97, E-0756/97, E-0757/97, E-0758/97, E-0759/97, E-0760/97, E-0761/97, E-0762/97, E-0763/97, E-0764/97, E-0765/97, E-0766/97, E-0767/97, E-0768/97, E-0769/97, E-0770/97, E-0771/97, E-0772/97, E-0773/97, E-0774/97, E-0775/97, E-0776/97, E-0777/97, E-0778/97, E-0779/97, E-0780/97, E-0781/97, E-0782/97, E-0783/97, E-0784/97, E-0785/97, E-0786/97, E-0787/97, E-0788/97, E-0789/97 and E-0790/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 5 May 1997 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 28. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0776/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Operating appropriations of the European Institutions

With regard to heading B7-500 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on:

- studies

- meetings of experts

- conferences and congresses

- information and publications.

Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/97, E-0699/97, E-0700/97, E-0701/97, E-0702/97, E-0703/97, E-0704/97, E-0705/97, E-0706/97, E-0707/97, E-0708/97, E-0709/97, E-0710/97, E-0711/97, E-0712/97, E-0713/97, E-0714/97, E-0715/97, E-0716/97, E-0717/97, E-0718/97, E-0719/97, E-0720/97, E-0721/97, E-0722/97, E-0723/97, E-0724/97, E-0725/97, E-0726/97, E-0727/97, E-0728/97, E-0729/97, E-0730/97, E-0731/97, E-0732/97, E-0733/97, E-0734/97, E-0735/97, E-0736/97, E-0737/97, E-0738/97, E-0739/97, E-0740/97, E-0741/97, E-0742/97, E-0743/97, E-0744/97, E-0745/97, E-0746/97, E-0747/97, E-0748/97, E-0749/97, E-0750/97, E-0751/97, E-0752/97, E-0753/97, E-0754/97, E-0755/97, E-0756/97, E-0757/97, E-0758/97, E-0759/97, E-0760/97, E-0761/97, E-0762/97, E-0763/97, E-0764/97, E-0765/97, E-0766/97, E-0767/97, E-0768/97, E-0769/97, E-0770/97, E-0771/97, E-0772/97, E-0773/97, E-0774/97, E-0775/97, E-0776/97, E-0777/97, E-0778/97, E-0779/97, E-0780/97, E-0781/97, E-0782/97, E-0783/97, E-0784/97, E-0785/97, E-0786/97, E-0787/97, E-0788/97, E-0789/97 and E-0790/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 5 May 1997 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 28. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2644/97 by Otto Bardong (PPE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Subsidy from PHARE funds for a book on the history of Slovakia and the Slovaks

The Commission has subsidized with PHARE funds publication of the book by M. S. Durica: 'History of Slovakia and the Slovaks' (DEJINY SLOVENSKA a SLOVAKOV), Bratislava, 2/1996 (Ministry of Education), which contains materials for teaching history in primary, secondary and upper secondary schools.

The Commission is asked to state:

1. What was the size of this subsidy and in which year was it granted?

2. Is it aware that this book seeks to create a national mythology out of Slovakian history since prehistoric times, constructs a hostile image towards neighbouring countries, particularly the Czechs, and emphasizes anti-Semitic tendencies?

3. In particular, is it aware that the Tiso Regime (1939-1945), a satellite state of national socialism, is described in altogether favourable terms?

4. Has it since received international reviews of this book?

5. Can subsidies for such publications intended for use in schools be scrutinized more thoroughly in future?

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

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-2469/97 by Mrs Van Bladel ((See page 14. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2598/97 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Availability of European Commission documents in braille and audiotape format

Further to the Commission's answer (dated 6 February 1997) to my Question E-4117/96 ((OJ C 138, 5.5.1997, p. 178. )) on the availability of the Helios II Guide to Good Practice, will it indicate what the estimated cost would be of specially adapted computer equipment so that people would have access to Helios II information by braille or audiotape?

Will the Commission indicate whether it plans to make all its documentation intended for giving guidance to the public available in CD-ROM format or other formats facilitating the use of braille or audiotape?

Will the Commission outline the steps taken to consult public bodies which serve the visually-impaired community so as to ascertain how the European Union's accessibility and service in this respect may be improved?

Can the Commission indicate whether any funding is earmarked for the translation of EU or other documents into braille or onto audiotape and whether the Commission is likely to issue any calls for tender for such work?

Will the Commission indicate whether Leonardo and ESF programme information is available in braille and audiovisual format?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (10 September 1997)

The Commission has no information concerning the estimated cost of adapting computer equipment to enable people to access Helios II information by braille or audio tape. However, given that this information is available on diskette, it should already be accessible to most existing personal computer (PC) users.

The demands already being made on the Commission's resources make it unlikely that all official documents will be made available in CD ROM format. However, it is the intention of the Commission to publish on CD ROM the conclusions of the Helios II programme so as to provide all interested parties with the results of that programme.

The Commission is in contact with representatives of the visually impaired community and is always ready to hear any representations they might like to make concerning the accessibility and service of the Community in this respect.

There is no specific funding for the translation of Community documents into braille or onto audio-tape. However, such translations have taken place in the past for specific documents. It should be borne in mind in this regard that technological advances, e.g. diskettes, mean that visually impaired people can access Community information either via their own PCs or those of their associations.

Information on Leonardo and the European social fund (ESF) is not available in braille format although certain information on both is available via the Internet.

Nevertheless, within the Leonardo da Vinci programme there has been financed a project for 'Training for teaching languages for vocational purposes for the visually impaired'. The detailed project description is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parlimaent's secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2828/97 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Building societies' share distribution schemes following conversion to plc status

In recent times a number of UK building societies have converted to plc status. Members of building societies under the age of 18 years are often precluded from enjoying the benefit of share distribution schemes; instead, they are entitled to a statutory cash bonus scheme. This means many 'Under-18s' shareholders receive a sum of money less than the value of shares allocated to an adult member in the same position.

Will the Commission investigate the criteria for such share distribution award schemes which appear to discriminate against members who are under 18 years old?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 October 1997)

The Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the question asked, which is a matter solely for the national authorities concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2381/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Conversion of a Christian church into a mosque in Trabzon (Turkey)

According to reports in the Trabzon local press, the Turkish Ministry of Culture has ordered the church of Santa Sofia to be cleared in order to turn it into a mosque. Since 1964, the church has been a museum housing archeological remains from the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman periods.

Is the Commission aware of this development and what steps will it take to oppose a move which has once again shown Turkey's disregard for the cultural treasures of other peoples and the religious symbols of Christianity?

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

The Commission has been informed that the Turkish authorities have revoked their decision to convert the church in question following the investiture of the new government led by Zehranur Yilmaz.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2481/97 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission (16 July 1997)

Subject: Safety of stations and railway-crossings in built-up areas

A large number of accidents caused by trains in built-up areas are escaping public attention. Many of the victims are children and adolescents who ignore warning notices and take short cuts rather than using pedestrian footbridges and underpasses to cross sections of the track which have no protective barriers or fences, even though railway companies are under an obligation to ensure safety in the majority of Member States.

Bearing in mind Article 75(c) of the Treaty on European Union (measures to improve transport safety), can the Commission say what type of action has been taken to prevent accidents caused by the lack of safety measures along railways in built-up areas?

In view of the vast stretches of track which are generally unprotected, what Community provisions in relation to the rail sector might make it possible to improve the safety of passengers and the public as a whole (Article 75(c))?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1997)

Measures to restrict unauthorised access to railway tracks are entirely within the legal responsibility of different bodies in the different Member States.

Furthermore, as the Honourable Member herself notes, many tragic accidents occur when people wilfully ignore warning signs and notices.

Given this, the Commission would encourage Member States to publicise the dangers of crossing railway tracks by unauthorised means and there is clearly a special need to reinforce the education of children about the dangers of playing near railways. The Commission does not, however, currently have the legal authority to propose any legislation on the matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2140/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (24 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Labelling requirements

In accordance with the novel food regulation ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1. )), will labelling of a genetically modified food be required only id there is both a difference in its nutritional characteristics, as compared with a product which has not been genetically modified, and if proof of the genetic modification is possible?

Answer (20 October 1997)

In addition to the general requirements of Community legislation on labelling of foodstuffs, Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 258/97 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1.)) lays down additional specific labelling requirements to inform the final consumer.

Labels must inform the consumer, as appropriate of:

- any characteristic or food property which renders a novel food or food ingredient no longer equivalent to an existing food or food ingredient.

A novel food or food ingredient shall be deemed to be no longer equivalent if scientific assessment, based upon an appropriate analysis of existing data, can demonstrate that the characteristics assessed are different in comparison with a conventional food or food ingredient, having regard to the accepted limits of natural variations for such characteristics.

- the presence in the novel food or food ingredient of material which is not present in an existing equivalent foodstuff and which may have implications for the health of certain sections of the population or give rise to ethical concerns;

- the presence of an organism genetically modofied by techniques of genetic modification, the non-exhaustive list of which is laid down in Annex IA, Part 1 of Directive 90/220/EEC.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2080/97 by Raphaël Chanterie (PPE) to the Council (18 June 1997)

Subject: Delay in publishing European Union conventions and protocols in the Official Journal

Why is there often a long delay between the signing of third-pillar Conventions and Protocols, and their publication in the Official Journal?

For example, the Europol Convention was signed on 26 July 1995 but was not published until 27 November 1995, while protocols on the Court of Justice relating to two other Conventions were signed on 29 November 1996 but not published until 20 May 1997.

Answer (16 October 1997)

The texts adopted by the Council are always published in the Official Journal of the European Communities as soon as possible. However, in certain circumstances their publication may sometimes be delayed.

The act drawing up the Europol Convention was adopted on 26 July 1995, at the same time as two other acts: those drawing up the Convention on the use of information technology for customs purposes and the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests. On the same day, a Conference of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States adopted an Agreement on provisional application between certain Member States of the Convention on the use of information technology for customs purposes. For the sake of consistency it was of course arranged for the three Conventions and the Agreement on the provisional application of the second Convention to be published in the same edition of the Official Journal. While publication of Conventions drawn up by the Council in accordance with Article K.3 (2) of the Treaty is provided for in the Council's Rules of Procedure (Article 18 (4)), the Council has to take a decision to publish an Agreement adopted by the Conference of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States. The decision to publish in this case was taken by the Council on 26 October 1995 and the three Conventions and the Agreement in question were published on 27 November 1995 in OJ C 316.

The acts drawing up the Protocols on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings, by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on protection of financial interests and the Convention on the use of information technology for customs purposes were adopted on 29 November 1996. So that the list of declarations provided for in article 2 of the Protocols should be as exhaustive as possible, Member States were given some time to make such declarations and the Protocols were published in OJ C 151 of 20 May 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1861/97 by Carlos Pimenta (PPE) to the Council (30 May 1997)

Subject: Entrance to medical specializations in the European Union

What administrative formalities are required for a graduate in medicine to embark on a medical specialization (e.g. in surgery) in each of the EU Member States, with particular regard to the entrance examinations and the existence or otherwise of a requirement to take a test in the language of the Member State concerned?

Answer (16 October 1997)

Directives 93/16/EEC lays down that:

- Member States shall recognize diplomas in medecine (listed in Article 3) awarded to nationals of the other Member States which have been obtained in the due manner (in accordance with Article 23 of the Directive) by giving such persons the right to pursue the activities of a doctor on the same terms as apply to their own nationals to whom they have awarded a diploma in medecine (Article 2).

- nationals of Member States wishing to acquire a specialist qualification which is not awarded in their State of origin must fulfil the conditions of training applied to nationals of the host Member State (Article 8).

The administrative formalities required for embarking on a medical specialization vary from country to country and depend in particular on the medical centre where the practice will be conducted. In the case of language tests, Member States may, in accordance with Article 20 (3), take steps to see that applicants have the linguistic knowledge necessary to the exercise of their profession.

For details, the Honourable Member should consult the Commission, which is responsible for following up the application of Directives.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1955/97 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (5 June 1997)

Subject: Visit to the EU by Yugoslav opposition leader Zoran Djindjic

In the past the European Union has said that it would support the development of democracy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

1. Can the Presidency explain why on 22 April an important opposition leader such as Zoran Djindjic, the present Mayor of Belgrade, was not given a top-level reception by the Netherlands when he stopped off on the way from Sweden?

2. Can the Presidency say why this opportunity was not seized to find out about the latest political and democratic developments in Belgrade?

3. Can the Presidency say why it passed over this opportunity to discuss effective support for the democratic process with one of the main leaders of the Yugoslav opposition?

4. Can the Presidency say why the opposition leader did not receive appropriate diplomatic support during his brief stay in the Netherlands, despite the fact that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was aware of his visit, and why there was no official welcome on his arrival at Schiphol airport where a NOS camera team eventually offered him transport and booked a hotel room for him?

5. Does the Presidency feel that this attitude accords with the line to be pursued by the European Union, given the fact that other European Member States such as Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Austria, Sweden and Denmark, as well as the United States, have received Zoran Djindjic at the appropriate level?

Answer (16 October 1997)

As the Honourable Member knows, on numerous occasions the European Union has expressed its support for the process of democratisation in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and for the democratic opposition in that country.

With the respect to the visit of Mr Djindjic, the Presidency was notified only 12 days in advance that Mr Djindjic was planning to make a stopover in Amsterdam on 2 April 1997 on his way to the United States. And only 7 days in advance, the Presidency was informed that Mr Djindjic would arrive in the early evening of 2 April and leave in the early morning of 3 April.

As the Minister, the Political Director, his deputy and the coordinator for Yugoslavia were all out of the country on 2 Arpil for obligations related to the Presidency, Mr Djindjic was informed on 27 March that it would not be possible to arrange for a meeting as he had requested.

The Presidency would have been happy to receive Mr Djindjic at the appropriate level, if a meeting had been suitably arranged in advanced in mutual consultation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1922/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: Delays in the granting of legal aid in Spain

Is the Commission aware of delays affecting British nationals seeking legal aid in Spain in order to allow an inquest to be carried out? These delays are obviously causing a great deal of distress to the family involved.

What action is the Commission taking to ensure that such delays are eliminated and that nationals from all EU countries are treated equally and as quickly as possible?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to written questions E-2388/96 ((OJ C 60, 26.2.1997. )) and E-2866/96 ((OJ C 72, 7.3.1997. )), where it stated it has no direct competence under the EC Treaty to intervene regarding national rules on awarding legal aid in the Member States, unless there are issues of discrimination on grounds of nationality or other infringements of Community law or obstacles to its enforcement. Seen as matters pertaining to judicial cooperation between Member States, general legal aid matters are, however, included in the list of initiatives attached to the Commission's work programme for 1997 in relation to Title VI of the Treaty on European union, and the Commission is therefore already looking into the matter.

The delays inherent in the procedure of granting legal aid may vary from one Member State to another. According to the Court of justice, disparities in treatment which may result from divergences between the laws of the various Member States, are not to be regarded as discrimination on grounds of nationality in the meaning of Article 6 of the EC Treaty, so long as they affect all persons subject to them in accordance with objective criteria and without regard to their nationality ((Judgment of 28 June 1978 in Case 1/78, Kenny. )).

However, in situations falling within the field of application of the EC Treaty, national provisions or practices of Member States' administrations resulting, for example, in more cumbersome procedures or longer delays being applied to nationals from other Member States solely on grounds of nationality would constitute a discrimination prohibited by the Treaty.

The Commission is not aware of any specific problem encountered by British nationals trying to obtain legal aid in Spain. According to the Spanish legislation concerning legal aid (statute n:o 1/96 of 10 January 1996 and decree RD 2103/96 of 20 September 1996) nationals from other Member States are placed on an equal footing with Spanish nationals. The Commission is also not aware that delays encountered by British nationals for obtaining legal aid in Spain would be longer than those for Spanish nationals.