ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1572/96 by Jessica Larive (ELDR) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Working language in Commissioner Edith Cresson's office

According to the letter of March 1996 from Commissioner Edith Cresson's office, signed by Jean-François Marchipont and addressed to Directors-General J. Routti (DG XII), J.P. Contzen (CCR), R. Verrue (DG XIII) and T. O'Dwyer (DG XXII), instructions were given that all letters, including answers to letters written in English, from Mrs Cresson to correspondents in Eastern European countries were to be drawn up in French.

1. Does the Commission not think that these instructions conflict with all rules on openness and transparency?

2. Does it really think that French is spoken fluently in all European countries?

3. Does it actually think that these instructions will encourage cooperation and access to the Union for Eastern European countries?

4. Are these instructions yet another indication from the French that they are afraid of losing their language?

5. What steps does the Commission intend to take to reverse these instructions from Mrs Cresson?

Answer given by Mr Jacques Santer on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1996)

In her correspondence with citizens and the Community's political leaders, Mrs Cresson, in accordance with the rule in use at the Commission, generally replies in the correspondent's language.

For her correspondence with nationals of non-member countries, Mrs Cresson makes the perfectly defensible choice to use her mother tongue. The only obligation on the Members of the Commission with regard to this correspondence is that they must use one of the Union's languages, the variety of which makes for the richness of Europe.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2080/96 by Bernie Malone (PSE) to the Commission (26 July 1996)

Subject: Use of child labour in Burma

Is the Commission aware of the use of child labour in the laying of a pipeline in Burma by the French oil company Total and if so what action does it intend to take up with the company concerned and with the Burmese authorities to rectify this matter?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1996)

Information from a variety of sources suggests that the Myanmar authorities are indeed resorting to forced labour practices, which include the use of children, to build infrastructure and facilities for tourists. Firms from EU Member States are among the foreign investors active in Myanmar and some of them have recently decided to pull out because of human rights infringements perpetrated by the authorities there. As for the oil company referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not aware that it is using child labour.

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that is has already taken steps along the lines he advocates. In January 1996, pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 3281/94, ((OJ L 348, 31 December 1994. )) it published a notice concerning initiation of an investigation of forced labour practices in Myanmar with a view to temporary withdrawal of benefits under the Community's generalized scheme of preferences. ((OJ C 15, 20 January 1996. )) The Commission is currently appraising the matter and the Myanmar authorities have been informed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1610/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Coordination between EU and Member State aid in Latin America

What are the results so far of the pilot project on aid coordination in Peru and Costa Rica, and which documents are available to the European Parliament in this respect?

How have the lessons learnt been applied in other EU aid programmes to Latin America?

Does the Commission plan any new initiatives in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (10 July 1996)

The resolution of the Council on the procedures for co-ordination between the Community and its Member States at policy and operational level of 2 December 1993, completed by the Council's conclusions of May 1994, selected Costa Rica and Peru among six developing countries to develop a pilot coordination exercise during 1995.

To implement this resolution, specific guidelines were formulated in the framework of the Council's development co-operation group. Following these guidelines in these two Latin American countries, this pilot exercise has strengthened the operational co-ordination in the areas identified by the Council (poverty alleviation, health, food security, education).

In Peru during the first coordination meeting the sector 'micro and small-sized enterprises' has been added to these areas. The leadership in each area in Peru has been assumed by Germany (education and training), France (health), Spain (micro and small-sized enterprises), and the Commission (fight against poverty). In Costa Rica the leadership has been assumed by France (education), Spain (health), and the Commission (rural development).

The measures been taken during 1995 to improve operational on-the-spot co-ordination included the exchange of information.

Scheduled specific meetings to develop a common database of aid programmes (Member States-Commission) were held in each country. Regular meetings between representatives of Member States and the Commission Delegation were held once a month at the invitation of the 'chef de file' sectorial co-ordinator. Specific meetings have taken place in order to co-ordinate the identification of a number of co-operation programmes in Peru, namely in the sectors of education and training and the fight against poverty, and in Costa Rica in the environmental sector. Joint studies have been prepared in areas chosen in the sectoral 'working group', for example diagnosis of the sectors 'poverty alleviation' and the 'health sector' in Peru. These documents have been planned and carried out with the aim of achieving a common approach on a sectoral basis, by the Community and Member States.

The Commission has reported on a regular basis to the Council on the progress of operational co-ordination. In general terms, the exercise has been quite satisfactory, an overall result of this pilot exercise being the improvement of dissemination of information and exchange of expertise between Member States and the Commission activities and aid programmes.

The Commission will follow the initiatives launched in the framework of the Council's development cooperation group.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1880/96 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)

Subject: EU relations with Burma

What is the reaction of the EU to the inclusion of Burma in the ASEAN Regional Forum with which the EU will be meeting on 22 July? Will the EU delegation take this opportunity to renew the aborted 'critical dialogue' with the delegation from Burma? If not, by what other means does the EU intend to carry out a 'critical dialogue' with Burma?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)

The Association of South-East Asian Nations (Asean) has adopted a policy of 'constructive engagement' with Burma. With the prospect of a future ten-member Association comprising the seven current members plus Cambodia, Laos and Burma, all three future members have signed the treaty of friendship and cooperation in South-East Asia, which constitutes the first step towards future membership. The three countries, including Burma, which will be granted observer status at the forthcoming Asean ministerial meeting, have also been invited to attend the Association's regional forum (ARF), which deals with regional stability. As one of the dialogue partners in the ARF the Union has responded to this invitation on the general understanding that a 'critical dialogue' will take place on the fringes of the forum, which the Council Presidency conducted in a very clear manner at the ARF and PMC meetings in Jakarta on 23 and 24 July and on 25 July.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1675/96 by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Framework research programme - basic socio-economic research (TSER) - research on social exclusion and social integration

In response to the first call for the submission of proposals in June 1995 the Commission received more than 500 project proposals. These were assessed by outside experts; in the end, 11 projects were approved, at least six of which are concerned with the development of databases.

Does the Commission really believe that the development of databases should be the main purpose of basic socio-economic research?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1996)

In response to the first call for the submission of proposals, the Commission received 242 project proposals in area 3 (research on social exclusion and social integration in Europe), 11 of which were selected. None of the 11 selected proposals focus primarily on the development of new databases; on the contrary, the majority of the selected proposals will exploit existing databases in the framework of their research.

With regard to the main purpose of the programme implemented by the Commission, the Honourable Member is asked to refer to Annex I of the Decision adopting the programme (94/915/EC ((OJ L 361 of 31 December 1994. ))) which states that the research in the three areas of the programme will require high priority for conceptual and methodological work on constructing and integrating data and indicator systems as a common effort of the European social science research community with the aim of becoming comparable Europe-wide and establishing a common research infrastructure (Annex I(1), paragraph 3). Consequently, the development of databases, although not the principal objective, is nevertheless an important aspect of the programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1921/96 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (16 July 1996)

Subject: Animal consignments - Bavaria: haulage undertakings carrying consignments of animals for slaughter

Have complaints already been lodged or proceedings brought for violations of the animal transport Directive?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)

The Commission has received a considerable number of complaints concerning alleged breaches of Council Directive 91/628/EEC ((OJ L 340, 11.12.1991 as last amended by Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995, OJ L 148, 30.6.1995. )) on the protection of animals during transport.

The Commission intervenes with the authorities of the Member States when such complaints are received. The complaints are also taken into account in connection with the organization of inspection missions by the Commission. In appropriate cases recommendations have been made to the authorities of the Member States where problems of correct implementation of the Directive have occurred. A number of files are still open pending further examination or visits. The Commission will not fail to initiate further appropriate action including, where necessary, the opening of the infringement procedure under Article 169 EC Treaty where welfare standards for transported animals within any Member State consistently fall below the levels required by the Directive.

The Commission has already opened infringement procedures against some Member States for failure adequately to transpose the Directive into their national law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2645/96 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (15 October 1996)

Subject: The Leonardo programme

The Leonardo programme offers new opportunities in Europe.

How is the programme running?

How many States are participating?

How many projects are being supported?

Is there a risk of too many applications leading to projects being under-funded?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (6 November 1996)

Following the first call for proposals launched in 1995, a total of 4 656 proposals from promoters in the 18 countries participating in the programme were submitted. All types of promoter (businesses, training bodies and establishments, universities, social partners, public authorities, research centres or institutes) submitted transnational proposals involving more than 30 000 participating partners. The second call for proposals launched in 1996 brought 3 107 proposals involving almost 25 000 partners. The five Community priorities set out by the Commission for the purposes of this action enabled the proposals submitted to be better targeted and focused.

18 countries are participating in the programme, namely the 15 Member States plus Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. Pending their full integration into the programme, the 1996 call for proposals was open to partners from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltic States, as well as Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta in their capacity as 'associated partners', i.e. associated with the projects submitted by partners from the 18 countries mentioned above while funding their participation in the project themselves and without there being any financial or legal obligations on the Commission.

Of the proposals submitted in response to the 1995 call for proposals, 749 have been selected and are receiving Community cofinancing. These consist of 581 transnational pilot projects, 121 transnational placement and exchange programmes and 47 surveys and analyses. To these 749 selected proposals should be added 1 403 mobility schemes benefiting 18 500 people, which are run by the national coordinating bodies of the countries themselves on the basis of operational plans approved by the Commission. In 1996, it is planned that 19 500 people, mainly young persons, should benefit from these mobility schemes.

The main criterion applied when assessing and selecting proposals is quality. The number of proposals submitted does not determine the number approved. Nevertheless, in order to ensure that the programme has a real impact as regards vocational training schemes in the Member States, the Commission is aware of the need to involve a sufficiently large number of promoters and partners in each Member State in order to achieve a critical mass and establish project networks. Accordingly, the Commission, in consultation with the Member States, applies a financing rate for the approved projects which enables this critical mass to be achieved without thereby having any adverse effect on the setting-up and running of a project, the partnerships involved or the quality of a project and its intended results or outcome.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1946/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (16 July 1996)

Subject: BSE and breast milk

1. Is the Commission aware that studies have shown that a pregnant woman infected with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease by the BSE pathogen was also found to have the pathogen in her breast milk?

2. How does the Commission rate the danger of the transmission of the BSE pathogen by breast milk?

3. What view does the Commission take of the fact that the tissue of the uterus also contained pathogens although the incubation period in the uterus is normally longer?

4. Can the Commission rule out the possibility of the BSE pathogen being transmitted by breast milk?

5. Can the Commission guarantee that vertical infection is impossible?

6. What studies and research findings are available to the Commission?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (15 October 1996)

1. The Commission is not aware of any case in which bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has been transmitted to a pregnant woman. A paper in the New England journal of medicine reported that in one case it had been possible to transmit Creutzfeld Jacob disease (CJD) to mice from some tissues and fluids from a pregnant woman who died of CJD. The fluids included colostrum. Other epidemiological evidence from pregnant cases of CJD and Kuru does not suggest that milk transmits the agent.

2 - 4. A risk assessment of possible events after any uptake of BSE in humans is not possible, since there is as yet no confirmed transmission of BSE to humans.

5. Vertical transmission of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) is known to take place in sheep (scrapie). There is recent statistical evidence that vertical transmission of BSE may occur although there is no biological explanation for the mode of transmission at present. If vertical transmission from mother to calf does occur it will probably be at relatively low levels.

Transmission of TSEs to humans is as yet unconfirmed, and there are no studies with a bearing on vertical transmission in humans. The Commission is therefore not in a position to say whether such transmission is possible.

6. At Community level, six research networks have been established which address the issues of the surveillance of CJD, the harmonization of neuropathologic diagnostic criteria, the identification of the agent, the efficacity of the inter-species barrier and the development of harmonized procedures for the identification and characterization of the disease.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1498/96 by Alan Donnelly (PSE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Duty-free sales and their effect on the public sector deficit

Has the Commission conducted any study into the total loss to national taxation revenues of the Member States arising from the continued existence of duty-free sales for consumers travelling by air or by sea from one Member State to another?

If the total abolition of duty-free allowances between Member States of the European Union were to take effect as of now, what would be the impact of such a decision on the ability of the Member States to meet the public deficit criterion of the EMU convergence criteria?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1996)

The Commission has conducted no study into the total loss to national taxation revenues of the Member States arising from the continued existence of duty-free sales for consumers travelling by air or by sea from one Member State to another.

However, in preparing a report on the vendor control system applied by the Member States, the Commission has asked Member States (except Austria, Finland and Sweden which, at the time, were not Member States) for global figures relating to tax-free sales. To the extent that such information was available, Member States have provided the Commission with figures on total tax-free sales in 1993. The figures which have been obtained by the Commission seem to indicate that total tax-free sales amount only to a very small proportion of Member States' GDP (gross domestic product).

Given the small size of total duty-free sales relative to GDP, and the different mutually and partially offsetting direct and indirect effects on tax revenues and expenditures to be expected from a total abolition of duty-free allowances between Member States, the total abolition of duty-free allowances between Member States would not influence the ability of Member States to meet the public deficit criteron of the Economic and monetary union convergence criteria.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1665/96 by Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) and Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Monitoring of bovine spongiform encephalitis

With the data available to it, could the Commission please confirm, correct or deny certain European media reports of the United Kingdom's failure to carry out measures announced by the British Government to monitor cattle affected by bovine spongiform encephalitis?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (16 July 1996)

The Commission and Member States have been informed by the United Kingdom about the measures taken since the disease was discovered in 1986. The United Kingdom made bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) notifiable on 21 June 1988 and a slaughter policy was implemented whereby all BSE suspects are destroyed and the brain is submitted to a post-mortem examination. The farmer receives compensation for the destruction of bovine animals suspected of having BSE.

In addition the most important element in the eradication of BSE, the ban on feeding ruminant protein meat meal to ruminants, was introduced on 18 July 1988.

The Commission has received no information concerning breaches of the slaughter and destruction policy and has no reason to believe that the destruction of BSE cases has not been properly implemented.

The feed ban, however, has not been fully implemented and this has been confirmed by the British authorities. This incomplete enforcement of the feed ban can also be seen in the number of BSE cases in animals born after 18 July 1988. The United Kingdom has now taken further legal measures to remedy this by banning the feeding of mammalian protein to all animals destined for human consumption and by making illegal the possession of animal feed containing mammalian protein.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2201/96 by Alexander Falconer (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)

Subject: Suspension of the starch refund

In reply to my letter, DG VI stated that the starch production refund was fixed at zero from 12 April 1996 as the current high price on the world market for the raw materials which are used to make starch no longer allow the granting of a refund to benefit the European starch industries.

Many paper companies purchase large quantities of starch from the EU each year. As a result of last year's severe weather conditions, European starch prices have risen by up to 30%, greatly increasing costs to the industry. To alleviate this situation, companies wish to import starch from outside the EU, for instance from the Far East. It has been drawn to my attention that some 20 000 tonnes of tapioca starch has already been imported duty-free into the EU by a European starch producer and sold as European starch.

Would the Commission confirm that other shipments of this produce into the EU will be given similar duty-free status?

If not, will the Commission confirm that the starch refund will be restored?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)

The Commission is very surprised to learn that a European starch producer has imported duty-free some 20.000 tonnes of tapioca starch into the Community and would welcome any further information the Honourable Member may be in a position to provide.

The current import duty for tapioca starch (CN Code 11081400) is 228.7 ECU per tonne. Under a tariff quota of 17,875 tonnes (of which 7,500 tonnes are reserved for imports from Thailand), there is indeed a possibility to import, in the current year, tapioca starch at a duty of 128.7 ECU per tonne (that is 100 ECU per tonne less than the current duty). Imports outside these duties or tariff quotas are not allowed.

The Commission does not intend to grant any duty free status for shipments of this produce into the Community and continues to respect the GATT commitments which foresee a gradual reduction of the import duties.

As regards the refunds, starch is currently benefiting from an export refund. Production refunds may be restored as soon as the prevailing market conditions allow.