ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1919/97 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: Concessions for the learning-disabled

Would the Commission indicate whether a special card exists which enables learning-disabled students to have access to facilities at reduced prices.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1997)

In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the provision of special cards giving disabled students access to 'facilities' at reduced prices * e.g. access to public services, transport, cultural establishments, museums, or the various services provided by the education systems * is a matter for the individual Member State.

At European level, however, in the field of education, disabled students wishing to study at a university or higher education establishment in another Member State are entitled to the maximum Erasmus mobility grants for higher education within the framework of the 'Socrates' Community action programme.

In addition, the Community action has led to harmonisation of the logo on the special parking permits for disabled persons, designed to facilitate access to and reservation of such parking spaces in all Member States. Disabled students receiving 'Erasmus' grants can thus receive them wherever they go within the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0902/97 by Maria Colombo Svevo (PPE) to the Commission (5 March 1997)

Subject: Participation of social economy organizations in Community projects

According to reports, it appears that the Commission does not intend to accept contributions 'in kind' made by some organizations in the cooperative, mutual and non-profit sector towards the cofinancing of Community initiatives and projects. As a result, all the final payments for projects carried out by a large number of organisations in the social economy have been blocked for over eighteen months.

Does the Commission not agree that this action is extremely discriminatory and damaging to these important and innovatory players in the economy for whom contributions in kind are an essential part of their activities? Above all, does the Commission not agree that refusing to accept these contributions will prevent the completion of a great many high-quality projects which are certain to have an impact locally and can only benefit the industrial sector?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (16 April 1997)

The Commission believes that the contribution in kind can be part of the base (total eligible cost) to which the rate of Community part-financing applies, this rate being determined either by a specific regulation or by the Commission. However, expenditure actually incurred (i.e. excluding contributions in kind) is a ceiling for the amount of the Community grant.

This position, which takes account of the contribution in kind, is consistent with the Commission's practice concerning the eligibility of part-financing in kind under the structural funds. It has also been agreed in partnership with the Member States in the context of the SEM 2000 programme. The Commission will consequently be adopting this approach when examining all projects involving a contribution in kind.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0995/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in France

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in France and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1378/97 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Commission (22 April 1997)

Subject: Human rights violations in Tunisia

Regarding the resolution on human rights violations in Tunisia adopted by Parliament in May 1996 (B4-0606/96 ((OJ C 166, 10.6.1996, p. 204. ))), referring to the ongoing and growing harassment by the Tunisian authorities of those who defend human rights and public liberties in their country, will the Commission ensure that the issue of human rights is addressed at EU/Tunisia meetings within the MEDA programme and that pressure is brought to bear on Tunisia - within that same programme - so that Tunisia respects its international human rights commitments, freedom of expression and democratic rights?

Answer given by Mr Marìn on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1997)

Under the implementation of the Association Agreement between the Community and Tunisia, human rights issues will form part of the political dialogue agenda as provided for in Article 3 of the Agreement signed on 17 July 1995 ((COM(95) 235 final. )).

This is a logical sequel to undertakings made by Tunisia and the Community, both in the political and cultural sections of the Barcelona Declaration and in the bilateral Agreement in which human rights are a key component.

It should be noted also that the Community, since 1996 and under the MEDA programme for democracy, has taken steps to promote human rights in Tunisia.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0909/97 by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Council (11 March 1997)

Subject: Worsening human rights violations in Mexico

In the run-up to the mid-1997 elections in Mexico, in which the ruling PRI is threatened with heavy losses, a disturbing upsurge is being recorded in grave violations of democratic principles and human rights, in particular the right of freedom of expression and trade-union rights, that poses a threat to society at every level.

- Journalists who file reports on government corruption, the complicity of government departments in drug-dealing or even on simple social injustices, have been threatened, persecuted, beaten up, tortured, abducted, and even shot. An recent extreme case is the murder of journalist Yolanda Figuerra, her husband F. Balderas and their children early in December (see Observer for 8.12.1996). As testimony to numerous other cases, I enclose the letter from Human Rights Watch to President Zedillo of 14.11.1996.

- Human Rights Watch has also established that the government tacitly, and indeed overtly, supports acts of violence by PRI groups, and fails to prosecute acts of terrorism against its critics.

- Lawful social movements are being suppressed and threatened, and workers' rights continuously violated under the corporatist political system, which seeks all the more ruthlessly to prevent independent trade unions from being formed.

- Human-rights defenders have received death threats, in particular the acknowledged PRODH Centre.

1. Is the Council informed of these developments and has it consulted on this situation (e.g. in the context of CFSP)?

2. Has the Council made representations to Mexico on the basis of the appropriate preamble to the existing Convention with Mexico and the Paris Solemn Declaration?

3. Is the Council prepared in these circumstances to issue a binding declaration stipulating that in any new Convention with Mexico, the human rights clause, as provided for by the Council for all conventions, will be an essential requirement?

Answer (14 July 1997)

The Council was unaware of the incidents raised by the Honourable Member and has therefore not had an opportunity to discuss them.

In its mandate to the Commission to negotiate a new agreement with Mexico, the Council included a clause on human rights. In that clause, respect for human rights is considered an essential element of the future agreement. In this respect the draft agreement with Mexico is being treated in the same way as all new agreements concluded with third countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1020/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (24 March 1997)

Subject: EU research funding for cloning experiments

1. (a) Has the Roshin Institute in Edinburgh received research funding from the European Union?

(b) If so, how much?

2. (a) Has EU funding been utilized directly or indirectly to finance cloning experiments with sheep cells by this institute?

(b) How much EU funding has been utilized directly and indirectly?

3. (a) Have any EU funds been used directly and indirectly for cloning experiments with sheep?

(b) Which institutes receive such funding?

(c) How much EU funding has each institute received?

Answer (14 July 1997)

It is for the Commission to provide an answer to this Question, in view of the Commission's competence to implement and monitor Community research programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1744/97 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (23 May 1997)

Subject: Transposition of the 'nitrates' directive

Which Member States have already transposed Directive 91/676/EEC ((OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1. )) on protecting water from nitrate pollution due to agricultural activity? What is the framework for application of this directive in the various Member States?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1566/97 and E-1744/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (19 June 1997)

The transposition of Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources into national laws has been completed by all Member States except Belgium, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Finland.

Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Austria, have designated the whole of their territory according to Article 3(5) of the Directive. Ireland considers that it does not have any areas of its territory that should be designated as vulnerable zones. Sweden and the United Kingdom have completed their designations of vulnerable zones. In the remaining Member States designations have not been completed.

Codes of good agricultural practice, or their equivalent, covering the whole of their territory have been received from all Member States except Belgium, Portugal and Spain. Action programmes have been received from Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg and Sweden. In Denmark, Germany and Luxembourg the measures cover the whole of the territory. Sweden's measures just apply in the vulnerable zones.

The Commission is highly dissatisfied with the present state of implementation in most Member States and is currently taking all measures available to it, including the use of proceedings under Article 169 EC Treaty in all cases where these are justified.

The Commission intends to fulfil its obligations under the Directive to produce two reports, one summarising the information supplied by Member States, and another on the implementation of the Directive. It is envisaged that these will be produced by the end of this year.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1619/97 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Open borders and child pornography

What is the Commission's reaction to the case in France, where a man accused of possession of child pornography is citing the single market as his defence?

Does the Commission agree that this case highlights the increased dangers that the single market has created for children, and that something must be done to fill the current vacuum?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1997)

The Commission appreciates the seriousness of the issues raised by the Honourable Member.

The internal market cannot have a negative impact on the protection of minors, given that the Treaty rules on the free movement of goods and services (Articles 30 and 59 et sequitur) allow the Member States to ban the production, distribution and possession of such material in order to protect minors, as long as such prohibitions do not constitute a means of discrimination or a disproportionate restriction on the free movement of goods or services between Member States. In such cases, internal market principles cannot be used to justify possession of such material.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1719/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (23 May 1997)

Subject: Competition rules in the market garden sector in the Attiki region

By letter of 11 February 1996 to Directorate-General IV - Competition - of the Commission of the European Union, an undertaking engaged in the packaging standardization and conservation of agricultural products complained that the statutory requirement for wholesale trade in horticultural products in the Attiki basin, to be conducted through the Athens Central Market Organization was a direct infringement of the second paragraph of Article 86(c) and (d), Article 85 and Article 90 of the Treaty on European Union. On 23 April 1996, the Commission's Directorate-General sent a reply (D/15231) containing a request for further information, which has now been forwarded by the undertaking concerned.

What is the Commission's position on this matter in the light of the more recent information received?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1997)

The Greek company to which the Honourable Member refers submitted new information to the Commission on 23 April 1997 concerning the difficulties in gaining access to the Athens Central Market encountered by new companies engaged in the conservation and packaging of agricultural products.

In the light of this new information, the company's request for the competition rules laid down in the EC Treaty to be applied is currently being further examined; the result of such examination will be communicated to the company direct.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1637/97 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission (14 May 1997)

Subject: Portugal's initiative on legalizing drugs

With regard to Portugal's initiative for an international convention to legalise the use of drugs,

1. Has the Commission taken note of this initiative?

2. What is the Commission's view of this proposal? Does the Commission share the view that there is a need for an international convention legalizing the use of drugs?

3. Can the Commission provide precise details of the proposals by President Sampaio of Portugal and the President of the Portuguese Parliament, Almeida Santos?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (30 June 1997)

1. The Commission is not aware of any such initiative.

2. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1112/96 ((OJ C 322, 28.10.1996. )) by Mr Fernandez Albor, which made it clear that the question of drugs legalisation is outside its competence.

3. It is Commission policy not to comment on public statements by politicians in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1525/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Preserving the architectural heritage

The majestic architecture of the Vercelli synagogue in Piedmont, evidence of former splendour, is gradually deteriorating as a result of neglect and the effects of age owing to the increasing problems of upkeep faced by holocaust survivors who were able and willing to return to their city. A restoration project was launched in 1994 but came to nothing as the Community funding on which it had been depending was refused. Despite the financial austerity measures, the Ministry for Cultural Assets has provided some assistance and this, together with a modest contribution from the regional authorities, will help to overcome the worst of the problem but not to solve it altogether.

1. Can the Commission explain why Community funding was refused?

2. Can it suggest other possible solutions involving the programmes and projects for safeguarding the Community's artistic and architectural heritage, a topic on which hundreds and hundreds of pages of report and analysis have been written?

Answer by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1997)

1. Given the budgetary constraints, the Commission can support only a few projects having a European dimension and exemplary nature in the context of its annual action to protect the European cultural heritage. In 1995, there were 2 216 applications to protect religious buildings from Member States and associated countries of central and eastern Europe, of which 123 were selected.

Despite its merits, the project for the restoration of the Vercelli synagogue could not be placed on the short list.

2. Protection of the European cultural heritage comes under the future Raphael programme, put forward by the Commission in March 1995, which is still awaiting a decision by Parliament and the Council.

The objectives of the programme are the conservation, restoration and rehabilitation of Europe's movable and non-movable cultural heritage, including raising the awareness of citizens and increasing public access. Pending adoption of this programme, in 1997 the Commission will launch preliminary measures in the area of protection of the architectural heritage, access to museum collections, the organization of events with a European dimension focusing on the cultural heritage and further training and mobility for professionals in the field.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1954/97 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: Commission response to petitions no 1138/95 and 1184/95 on Toxic Shock Syndrome

Would the Commission advise whether:

1. A deadline was set when asking Member States for information on TSS, and if so, what date was given?

2. How many and which Member States have replied to date?

3. Whether any information is available yet?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1997)

1. The letter of 18 September 1996 asking Member States for information did not specify a deadline.

2. To date, nine Member States have replied: Denmark, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden.

3. The Honourable Member is referred to the additional information provided in connection with petitions Nos 1138/95 from Mrs Paula Power and 1184/95 from Mr Peter Kilvert.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1486/97 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (30 April 1997)

Subject: Prices of medicinal products

What is the present situation as regards the database of prices for medicinal products referred to in Directive 89/105/EEC ((OJ L 40, 11.2.1989, p. 8. ))? When will we be able to have general access to the database, and what has prevented this so far?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (19 June 1997)

The constitution of a databank on the prices of pharmaceutical products is a particularly complex task for two reasons. Firstly, it is extremely difficult to obtain full, reliable and regularly updated data for all the Member States. Secondly, where such data are available it is difficult, and even dangerous, to compare them.

Given the impossibility of carrying out this task within the framework of administrative cooperation with the Member States, the Commission eventually opted to obtain the requisite information on the market. The first edition of the databank should be available in the form of a CD-ROM during the final quarter of 1997. It will be a limited edition, several copies of which will be sent to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1789/97 by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission (27 May 1997)

Subject: Joule programme: the Osprey project

Can the Commission state what is the projected cost per kilowatt hour for energy derived from the Osprey project which was funded from the Joule programme in 1995 and 1996?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (16 June 1997)

The Osprey project combines a wind power generator with a wave energy device functioning according to the oscillating water column principle. The wave energy device thus provides a platform practically free of charge for an off-shore wind generator.

The aim of the project is to provide experimental evidence for the cost reduction potential of this combined wave and wind power device as compared to wave power alone or off-shore wind power. It is neither a commercial power plant nor even a demonstration project, but a prototype built for experimentation and further development of the technology.

The wave power device was badly damaged by a strong gale during the positioning operation off the coast. It should be mentioned that this gale came all of a sudden, whereas the weather forecast predicted calm weather. The insurers are convinced that neither the engineers nor the operators are to be blamed for this accident and have agreed to pay for the damage.

The project had, however, to be halted at least temporarily. For all these reasons it would be absolutely premature to quote any power generation costs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1593/97 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (6 May 1997)

Subject: Telecommunications base stations - risk to public health

There is growing public concern about the possible health risk implications of the proliferating number of telecommunications base station antennae that are being erected across Europe by mobile phone operators.

Is the Commission aware of such concerns, and can it provide any factual scientific evidence on such possible health risks?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (19 June 1997)

The Commission is well aware of the public concern about possible health risks related to the use of mobile telephony. To that end, the Commission requested in October 1995 a multi-disciplinary group of independent experts to investigate whether the use of mobile telephony (mobile phones and base stations) causes any health risk and to make appropriate proposals for further research in this area.

In September 1996, the group reported that the currently available studies and existing literature give no evidence of any increased health risk. But the expert group also concluded that data are sparse and insufficient to draw firm conclusions and that further research is necessary. The group recommended a framework for research on this project that would run over five years.

The Commission is currently considering the possibilities for future research in this area, in the light of its proposals for a fifth framework programme. The possibilities for collaboration with other countries outside Europe are also being explored as is the possible role of the World health organisation for health risk assessment.

The Honourable Member is also referred to the recent answer to question E-653/97 ((See page 23. )) by M. Camison Asensio.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1918/97 by Lis Jensen (I-EDN) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: Financial aid to US firms

Has the US company Solectron received any form of financial aid from the EU to set itself up and/or operate in Scotland?

Has the US company SCI Systems received any form of financial aid from the EU to set itself up and/or operate in Scotland?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-1679/97 by Mrs Eriksson ((See page 119. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0634/97 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission (4 March 1997)

Subject: Community grants to the media

Can the Commission provide a list of the media which received a Community subsidy in the financial years 1995 and 1996, specifying the amount and the budget line to which it was charged?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1997)

The Commission does not give subsidies to the media in the Community. However, on rare occasions and under strict conditions, the Commission may sometimes provide small amounts of seed finance for particular projects on an ad hoc basis. The list of projects receiving such finance in 1995 and 1996 is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament. All the projects listed were financed from line B3-3300. It is the firm conviction of the Commission that such finance in the Community, for which it has the intention of establishing objective criteria, should be kept to a very strict minimum.