ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0784/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 April 1996)

Subject: Coordination of research and technological development policies

A Commission communication was issued on 19 October 1994 entitled Research and Technological Development - Achieving Coordination through Cooperation (Com(94) 438 final).

In its communication, the Commission acknowledges the scarcity of funds allocated to the Union's research and technological development programmes and their fragmentation between the different levels of decision-making and recognises the need for increased coordination of the programmes in order to mitigate the harmful effects of this fragmentation and enhance the programmes' impact and effectiveness.

In view of the above, will the Commission move quickly to implement a system for the systematic exchange of information on the Union's research and technological innovation activities?

Such a system for the advance exchange of information between Member States would take the form of a network of open, easily accessed data bases recording national plans for research and innovation initiatives. Research and industry councils, partly comprising members of the CREST, would be responsible for defining the strategy, under a codecision procedure with Parliament, on the basis of the principles of efficiency and maximum openness of proceedings.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1996)

In the light of the Parliamentary Resolution of 15 June 1995 ((OJ C 166, 3.7.1995. ))on the coordination of research and technological development policies (RTD), the Commission has set up a system of information exchanges on the national RTD activities via ad hoc committees consisting of those responsible in the Member States. That system targets those areas of RTD in which more coordination would prove useful and also enable early information to be provided on the initiatives and activities launched in the Member States.

The various ad hoc committees will report annually to the scientific and technical research committee (CREST) which may, on that basis, deliver recommendations on the determination of the strategic priorities of Community RTD policy and the future directions to be taken by exchanges of information on national activities. Parliament will be kept informed of the progress made in this work.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1264/96 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Council (30 May 1996)

Subject: Summaries of meetings of the European Council (of Heads of State or of Government)

In its answer of 15 January 1996 to my Written Question E-2482/95 of 13 September 1995 ((OJ C 66, 4.3.1966, p. 14. )) on the existence or otherwise of summary records of European Council meetings, the Council stated that 'no record is drawn up of interventions made during meetings of the European Council', 'only handwritten notes are taken by officials of the General Secretariat of the Council who are present in the room', and 'the notes are used to help the Presidency of the European Council in drawing up its conclusions and are not typed up or kept'.

In the light of this response, could the Council now explain how it is possible for me to have in my possession a summary document of a European Council meeting, stretching to some seventy A4 typewritten pages detailing in French and English all the successive interventions of various Heads of State or of Government, as well as the Commission President, at this event?

Since it is most unlikely that any individual Head of State or of Government, or indeed Foreign Minister, would keep notes running to seventy pages in more than one language, would the Council please confirm that the text in question must have been drawn up by some central authority, either the Council Secretariat or the Presidency?

Would the Council like to clarify why summary documents of this kind are drawn up after each European Council meeting, as the evidence in my possession appears to confirm, only for them to be thrown away at the earliest opportunity, as its previous reply seems to suggest?

Could the Council state - as requested but not answered in my previous question - whether it would consider that the unauthorized publication of such a document by a third party, such as myself, would contravene any law, European or national, and, if so, which law?

Reply (14 October 1996)

The Council can confirm the reply which it gave the Honourable Member on 15 January 1996: no record is drawn up of what is said at meetings of the European Council, either on the Council's behalf or by its General Secretariat.

At European Council meetings, internal arrangements are made to keep national delegations and the Commission regularly informed of the progress of proceedings.

Should any documents have been drawn up from information obtained in this way, they could not be Council documents and it would not therefore be for the Council to comment on the terms or implications of their publication.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0556/96 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (11 March 1996)

Subject: Illegal imports into Italy of fighting dogs for illegal betting purposes

The police in Trieste and Udine are investigating dogfights organized in their respective provinces for betting purposes, which is a breach of Italian law. Some of the dogs, which can cost up to Lit 5 million each, apparently come from Slovenia and Croatia.

Is the Commission aware of this?

Will it make representations to the Italian authorities to put an end to imports from third countries, albeit provisional, of Rottweilers, pit bull terriers and other dogs commonly used by criminal organizations for dogfights?

What can the Community Veterinary Inspectorate do?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1996)

The Commission is not aware of police investigations into dog fights organised for clandestine betting purposes in Italy. Questions concerning the general welfare of dogs as opposed to their welfare during transport remain the responsibility of Member States.

The Commission deplores all forms of cruelty to animals and, in particular, organised dog fights. The Commission has, however, no plans to introduce proposals to ban the import of any particular breed of dog.

The Commission can only repeat its earlier call upon Member States to eliminate these disgraceful practices (see its answer to Written Question n° 2995/92 ((OJ C 86, 26.3.1993. )) by Mrs Muscardini).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1652/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms

1. Which products have so far been put into circulation under the above directive, 90/220/EEC? ((OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15. ))

2. What applications are pending at present?

3. How many approvals for release and circulation have been given in the Member States, when and where?

4. Which releases and products are involved, broken down by Member State?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 August 1996)

1. The products authorized to date for placing on the market under Directive 90/220/EEC by the responsible authorities of the Member States are shown below:

>TABLE>

(1) C (92) 3215 final, approved by the Competent Authority (CA) of the Federal Republic of Germany on 31.3.1993 (2) OJ L 276, 9.11.1993, approved by the CA of Belgium on 22.11.1993 (3) OJ L 176, 9.7.1994, approved by the CA of France on 27.7.1994 (4) OJ L 203, 6.8.1994, approved by the CA of the Federal Republic of Germany on 17.11.1994 (5) OJ L 37, 15.2.1996, approved by the CA of the United Kingdom on 28.2.1996 (6) OJ L 107, 30.4.1996, approved by the CA of the United Kingdom on 7.5.1996

2. Eight applications are pending. They have been forwarded with a favourable opinion by the relevant Member States:

>TABLE>

(1) Decision adopted by the Commission on 20.5.1996 but not published yet

3. & 4. On 30 June 1996, 713 notifications for experimental releases have been circulated according to Article 9 of Directive 90/220/EEC. The genetically modified organisms concerned and the main traits tested for as well as the notification numbers which give the indication of the year circulated are listed in a table, broken down by Member State, which is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat. Taking into account the possibility of summarizing several releases under one notification according to the simplified procedures, the number of detailed sites within the Member States is considerably higher than the number of notifications. That information, however, has to be requested from the national authorities.

As far as the placing on the market of products is concerned, the information is included in tables 1 and 2 above.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1551/96 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (17 June 1996)

Subject: Cost of beef storage

How much was paid between 1990 and 1995 in producer subsidies for beef production, broken down by year and Member State?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1550/96, E-1551/96, E-1552/96 and E-1553/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (12 July 1996)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat. The answers to written questions E-1550/96, E-1551/96 and E-1553/96 are taken from the financial report of the EAGGF - guarantee section, submitted each year to the budgetary authority.

The answer to written question E-1552/96 is simply that there is no aid for processing under the common organization of the beef and veal market.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2003/96 by Eolo Parodi (UPE) to the Commission (12 July 1996)

Subject: Legal recognition of professional, school and university exchanges

The information available on opportunities for exchanges at European level, including trans-frontier professional training courses, twinning arrangements and study grants for European students, is inadequate and limited, while the absence of proper legal recognition of such exchanges reduces their value considerably.

Will the Commission therefore say:

1. What measures it plans to take to ensure that trans-frontier exchanges of mother-tongue teachers are recognized for the purposes of career development in their country of origin?

2. What legal recognition is accorded to individual trainees or scholarship holders in the professions to ensure that account is taken of the work or study they have accomplished at schools or establishments in other countries, notably with regard to the educational course they are following?

3. What criteria apply in this respect to university students?

4. What plans it has to improve the information available in the Member States on the possibilities for professional exchanges so as to ensure that all young people, who have a leading role to play in the Europe of the future, enjoy equal opportunities for taking part in such exchanges?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)

One of the conditions for mobility in the framework of the Community's training and education programmes * Socrates and Leonardo * is full recognition of the results of the visit to the other Member State. The information is provided jointly and by the national agencies in all the Member States in accordance with the provisions of the decisions adopting the programmes.

In the case of exchanges organised outside the Community programmes at the initiative of Member States, associations, regions or training institutions, the Commission cannot intervene because the organisation of training and education systems, as well as the curriculum itself, is a matter for the Member States, in consonance with the subsidiarity principle. However the Commission promotes transparency in the information field by publishing guides and directories.

Barriers to the mobility of persons involved in training - pupils, students, apprentices, teachers, researchers - are the subject of a Green Paper which the Commission is about to adopt and whose objective is to trigger a genuine discussion between all the interested players and the authorities concerned in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1878/96 by Luigi Caligaris (UPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)

Subject: Aid to the areas affected by flooding in Friuli

On the night of 21 June 1995 the Italian region of Friuli was hit by exceptionally severe flooding, resulting in three deaths and serious damage to houses and infrastructures.

As these floods have particularly affected a number of mountain communities in areas eligible under Objective 5b, does the Commission consider it desirable to allocate extra funding to that objective, so as to ensure the swift rehabilitation of the environment and infrastructures in the areas affected?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)

The Commission has always treated natural disasters in the Member States with great sensitivity. It regrets that heading B4-3400 covering emergency aid for victims of disasters in the Community was relegated to a token budget entry in 1996 and so left unfunded when Parliament adopted this year's budget. However, although the Commission pays close attention to these matters, the allocation of Objective 5b funding is fixed for the period 1994-99 and no extra money for particular programmes has been earmarked.

The single programming document (SPD) allocated ECU 44 million between 1994 and 1999 to those parts of the Friuli-Venezia-Giulia region covered by Objective 5b. The only additional funding available for these areas comes from indexation of SPD allocations, currently amounting to ECU 0.92 million.

In order to tackle the flood damage caused in the 5b areas of Friuli on 21 June, the Commission is willing to work together with the SPD monitoring group and others in examining proposals from national and regional authorities to rebuild disaster-hit farming and forestry businesses, protect the environment and rural areas, and improve rural infrastructure by allocating all or part of the extra money resulting from indexation or changes to the SPD which would result in the transfer of funds from the total allocated to existing measures.

It should also be noted that, for the period 1994-99, the SPD has earmarked ECU 11.38 million of public funds (ECU 2.84 million of it from the guidance section of the EAGGF) for measures to protect the soil and prevent hydrogeological damage and flooding. The Commission would, in conjunction with its partners, support any proposal from national or regional authorities to bring forward the annual forecasts on the use of these funds.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1495/96 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: 'Euroline'

A telephone information line on the European Union is being advertised in the various media in Flanders. It provides a free telephone number on which anyone can ask questions about the European Union.

Can the Commission inform me if this facility is also available in other Member States?

Can the Commission inform me how much it costs to provide this facility? Can I also be informed as to how many calls have been made to these telephone numbers? What questions were asked time and again?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (25 July 1996)

The telephone information line to which the Honourable Member refers in his question is not available in all Member States, although there are systems providing easy access to information (Minitel, Kiosks, relays, etc.).

The information service, which was open from 2 to 10 May, received 499 calls (compared with 251 in 1995). The total cost, including radio and press advertising, was ECU 78 300.

A fairly wide range of questions were asked, though a significant number concerned major European issues such as the Intergovernmental Conference and Economic and Monetary Union.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1163/96 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Glasshouse horticulture

Does the Commission intend to grant demolition premiums to glasshouse horticultural businesses facing financial difficulties? If so, what sum is involved and what proportion will go to businesses in Flanders?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1996)

At present the pulling down of glasshouses is not subsidized by the Community. The Commission is currently preparing a report on the situation in the tomato sector. In this framework, the present difficulties in the sector will be analysed and possible solutions will be considered.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/96 by Martina Gredler (ELDR) to the Commission (23 May 1996)

Subject: Transmission of BSE

In London it was recently established that in antelopes BSE can be transmitted from the mother to the next generation.

Can the Commission state categorically that the transmission of BSE to the next generation can be ruled out in the case of cattle?

If not, is it possible for milk to transmit this disease?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)

In a London zoo several greater kudu have been affected with a form of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE). The disease has been diagnosed in 5 out of 8 animals in the zoo and the high incidence indicates that the species is highly susceptible. The pattern of incidence suggests that maternal transmission may have taken place, although later data suggests this may not in fact be the case. No further conclusions can, however, be drawn from these cases in relation to other spongiform encephalopathies.

Extensive epidemiological studies have been performed in order to investigate the possibility of maternal transmission of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in bovine animals. There is no evidence of BSE transmission from cow to calf.

Furthermore, transmission studies have shown no evidence that milk is likely to transmit BSE. This is in line with data on other TSEs such as kuru in man, where detailed study of the disease in the Fore tribe in Papua New Guinea also failed to show transmission by milk. This is also confirmed by the World health organisation which stated during a meeting on 2-3 April 1996 on Creutzfeld-Jacob disease (CJD) and BSE:

'Milk and milk products, even in countries with a high incidence of BSE, are considered safe. There is evidence from other animal and human spongiform encephalopathies to suggest that milk does not transmit these diseases'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1621/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Future of the Structural Funds after 1999

What studies, reports or other research are currently available to the Commission - either internally or externally prepared - concerning the future of the structural funds post 1999?

Which of these are available to the European Parliament?

Is the Commission aware of or is it planning studies on this subject in the course of the next two years?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)

The Commission presented an interim report on the impact of enlargement, which contains a few preliminary thoughts on the future of the structural funds, to the Madrid European Council. This communication was also forwarded to Parliament. In the light of the Madrid conclusions the Commission is continuing its assessment of the effects on cohesion of the Community's enlargement to encompass Central and Eastern Europe.

The Commission is also preparing the first report on progress towards economic and social cohesion mapping out future structural policy. The report is expected to be adopted in the autumn and will then be forwarded to Parliament and the other institutions.

Once the Intergovernmental Conference has been concluded, the Commission will be presenting the financial perspective for 1999 onwards, including the financing of structural policy. It will also be forwarded to Parliament once it has been adopted by the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1327/96 by Josu Imaz San Miguel (PPE) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Aid for French trawlers

French press reports indicate that the French Subdirectory for Fisheries has granted direct aid to shipowners using pelagic nets as compensation for the compulsory freeze on anchovy fishing until 31 May as the result of the Franco-Spanish fisheries agreement. This development could be the result of the threat made by the vessels to continue blockading the port of Bayonne.

I personally handed a copy of these reports to the Commission representative attending a meeting of Parliament's Committee on Fisheries on 24 April.

The existence of such aids would mean that subsidies are being given to a fleet which currently has the option of fishing for other species such as hake, and could involve unfair competition vis-à-vis other fishing fleets, in so far as fishermen working in the same fishing grounds, selling in the same markets and carrying a similar burden of costs would be facing an unfair situation in which their competitors were in receipt of unjustifiable public aid.

Does the Commission intend to initiate the necessary inquiry to ascertain whether these aids exist?

If their existence is confirmed, will the Commission take action against these aids and the apparent offender, namely the French Government?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (16 July 1996)

Upon receiving this information, the Commission contacted the French authorities, who confirmed that this aid is to be provided to promote the diversification of fishing techniques used by trawlers from the Basque country within the framework of a programme linked to the Community PESCA initiative. Short-time allowances will also be given to the crews of boats affected by the cessation of fishing.

The Commission has asked the French authorities to notify them of aid programmes before they are implemented and in sufficient time for them to verify their compliance with the relevant regulations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1625/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Internal co-ordination in the Commission on development policy

Given that responsibility for external relations is shared between five Commissioners, how many meetings have been held between Commissioners and Commission officials during the past year to ensure co-ordination on development policy and what is the total attendance at these meetings?

What is the cost of these meetings in terms of time and finance?

What would be the saving in terms of numbers of meetings, time and cost if development policy were to be grouped with one Commissioner and Directorate-General?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (1 August 1996)

The role of the group of Members with responsibility for external relations, whose remit includes development matters, is to coordinate activities in the field of external relations and ensure consistency in horizontal questions which could influence the Commission's actions in the various parts of the world for which the individual Members are responsible.

The group has met fifteen times since it was formed at the beginning of 1995. The preparatory work for these meetings is carried out by the Directors-General for external relations, who meet regularly.

The organization of all these meetings is part of the day-to-day running of the institution.