ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0493/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (2 March 1998)

Subject: Impact on countries outside the euro zone

In May 1998, the decision will be taken on which countries will be included in the 'euro zone'.There are a great many questions in the minds of the public regarding the implications for the countries which will not be taking part from the outset in this 'zone', which may be summarized as follows:

1. What will be the impact on the currencies of the countries not participating immediately in the 'euro zone'?

2. How will interest rates be affected within those countries?

3. Will it be compulsory for those countries' currencies to enter the new Exchange Rate Mechanism?

4. What will be the impact on their small and medium-sized businesses?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (27 March 1998)

It is important to underline that Member States wishing to join the euro area but being unable to do so at the outset will be, nonetheless, on the way to membership, with continuing convergence favouring their integration in the euro area in the near future. Therefore, markets will consider them as pre-in Member States and financial market implications should remain limited.

1. As long as the policies applied in the Member States initially remaining outside the euro area continue to promote stability and structural improvement, no unfavourable effect has to be expected on the currencies of these Member States. On the contrary, the creation of the euro will provide a currency of reference, that is likely to act as a pole of stability for the currencies of the 'pre-in' Member States. Indeed, all Member States have committed themselves to pursuing stability oriented policies, as outlined in the broad economic guidelines and in the convergence programmes of the respective Member States.

2. In line with the continuing convergence, interest rates in the 'pre-in' Member States can be expected to come nearer to the levels of the euro-area interest rates. A substantial narrowing has already taken place.

3. The Dublin European Council, in December 1996, agreed the structure of a new exchange rate mechanism (ERM), which would provide Member States having a derogation with a reference for their conduct of sound economic policies in general and monetary policy in particular. Subsequently, the Amsterdam European Council, in June 1997, adopted the relevant Resolution.

Although membership in the new ERM is voluntary, it will help participants to ensure that they orient their policies to stability, foster convergence and help them in their efforts to adopt the euro.

4. Enterprises in 'pre-in' Member States will not yet benefit from the increased transparency, elimination of exchange rate variations and availability of finance that will be provided by the introduction of the euro. However, the ongoing process of convergence, which will ultimately allow the pre-ins to adopt the euro, will improve the conditions in which the enterprises are working.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0010/98 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Theatrical exclusively windows - media chronologies

In the original drafts of the Television Without Frontiers Directive 97/36/EC ((OJ L 202, 30.7.1997, p. 60. )), provisions were envisaged to guarantee some protection for films released at the cinema before their transmission via television. In the final version of the text, Article 7 of the Directive enshrined the principle of contractual freedom, stating:

'Member States shall ensure that broadcasters under their jurisdiction do not broadcast cinematographic works outside periods agreed with the rights holders'.

1. What mechanisms does the Commission have in place to ensure that this provision is applied effectively throughout the Member States?

2. Does the Commission intend to stick to its policy of non-harmonization in this area and is the principle of contractual freedom guaranteed for the foreseeable future?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1998)

Article 7 of Parliament and Council Directive 97/36/EC of 30 June 1997 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities coordinates national rules on media chronology. This article provides that the Member States must ensure that broadcasters under their jurisdiction do not broadcast cinematographic works outside periods agreed with the rights holders. The Community rule is thus that of contractual freedom, the rights holders being able to conclude agreements with broadcasters on the time scale for broadcasting their works, either individual or collective (see recital No 32). The Member States must not impose obligatory time scales through national measures. There is, therefore, a certain harmonisation in this area. These provisions are not those initially proposed by the Commission, which had provided for compulsory time scales should the rights holders fail to come to an agreement. The change is the result of an amendment adopted by Parliament at second reading which was accepted by the Council and the Commission.

To ensure that this provision is adhered to, the Commission has at its disposal the usual measures conferred on it by the EC Treaty, notably Article 169.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0173/98 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Council (6 February 1998)

Subject: Children with learning difficulties

Could the Council please state why the UK Presidency has made no reference in its programme to providing for the needs of children with specific learning disabilities when the UK Presidency is focussed on a 'People's Europe'. Surely the child is at the very basis of a 'People's Europe'?

When the UK Government has just issued a Green Paper totally revolutionizing its policy on mainstreaming - is it not a very serious omission from the Presidency programme?

Some 18% of the European Union population experience specific learning difficulties. An estimated 40% of prison inmates are proven dyslexic. In order to enhance the social inclusion, welfare and employment prospects throughout the European Union of children and young adults with specific learning difficulties - does the Council not agree that preventative measures must be taken?

If so, what measures, short and long-term, does the Council, in general and the UK Presidency in particular, envisage?

Answer (27 April 1998)

The promotion of equality of opportunity in education as well as in training and at work is an essential part of the debate on employability which is at the core of the Presidency's education and social affairs agenda. Addressing the needs of children with specific learning difficulties is an implicit element of the principle of equality of opportunity in education.

Moreover, as part of the Presidency's programme a conference on Special Educational Needs in schools has been organized, taking place in Windsor on 7 May 1998. The aim of this conference, which is intended for experts in the field, is to explore comparisons between the provision in Member States and is linked with the work of the new European Agency for Special Educational Needs. Indeed, it is believed that there is much to be learned in general from the exchange of ideas and good practice in different school systems of the Member States, as, for example, within the context of the SOCRATES programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0005/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Protection of children from television programmes with sharp changes of light

700 children recently suffered epileptic fits in Japan while watching cartoons on TV with vivid colours and flashing pictures, causing concern among the public at large. Since the problem concerns most children who watch similar programmes, will the Commission subject such television programmes to restrictions?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (23 February 1998)

Article 22(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, as amended by European Parliament and Council Directive 97/36/EC of 30 June 1997 ((OJ L 202, 30.7.1997. )), provides: 'Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that television broadcasts by broadcasters under their jurisdiction do not include any programmes which might seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors ...'. If the programme to which the Honourable Member refers had been broadcast in one of the Member States of the European Economic Area, that may well have constituted a breach of Community law. The Commission has no information suggesting that such programmes have been broadcast in the European Union so far.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0223/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Experts and consultants employed by the Commission

Can the Commission provide information on experts and consultants employed by the Commission since 1 January 1997:

1. How many national experts are there?(a) What is the breakdown of national experts by Member State?(b) Can the Commission supply a list of names of German experts?

2. How many temporary agents are employed by the Commission as consultants or in category A?(a) What is the breakdown by Member State(b) Can the Commission supply a list of names of German temporary agents?(c) What period of contract has been agreed in each case?

3. How many consultants' contracts has the Commission concluded?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (24 March 1998)

1. At 15 January 1998 the number of national experts on secondment employed at the Commission totalled 647. The breakdown by nationality is given in the table sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.

2. and 3. On the same date a total of 17 temporary staff held posts as advisers. The breakdown by nationality is as follows:

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0144/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (2 February 1998)

Subject: Support for Greek citrus-fruit growers

Citrus-fruit growers in Greece are faced with severe problems in marketing this year's crop owing to overproduction in the EU, uncontrolled imports of very cheap orange juice from Brazil and the USA and the exceptionally harsh recent weather. Market prices have plummeted as a result of the considerable reductions in export subsidies deriving from the new rules applying to market-garden produce, their withdrawal from the market and pulping for juice and the manner in which the Commission has administered them. The entire situation is exacerbated by competition from third countries, particularly Mediterranean, which have preferential relations with the EU.

In the light of this situation, will the Commission say:

1. how it will respond to the considerable loss of income suffered by growers,

2. whether it will allow an increase in the withdrawal ceiling by way of exception (from the current 35% of marketable quantities) in order to absorb part of the crop, and

3. what other measures it will take to relieve the dire financial situation which has befallen citrus-fruit growers in Greece?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)

1. The Greek citrus-growing sector suffers from structural problems such as undiversified production, weak marketing structures and a processing industry not geared towards manufacturing competitive products.

The new common organisation of the market, which came into force last year, aims specifically to enable producers' organisations to improve their structural situation (by encouraging them to market their own products and to set up operational funds and operational programmes).

2. Withdrawals cannot be considered as a subtitute market outlet. The 35% limit, degressive over time, was fixed by the Council to prevent misuse of the measure, which should be applied only occasionally.

3. During recent marketing years, more than three quarters of Greek production benefitted from Community financial support (export refunds, processing aid, market withdrawals). In addition, at the request of the Greek authorities, on 5 February 1998 the Commission approved the free distribution of 11 600 tonnes of oranges to Greece's non-Community neighbours.

Lastly, when the export refunds were last fixed, the share of quantities earmarked for B licences was increased, in accordance with exporters' wishes, while remaining within the limits laid down in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0303/98 by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Winding up of the Aids Task Force and the future of EU programmes in the field of reproductive health care

In the light of the winding up of the Aids Task Force and the tender procedure under way for the award of a contract for the setting up of a network of experts to provide technical assistance to the Commission in the field of reproductive health care in the future, can the Commission answer the following questions?

1. What structure does the Commission have in mind for the future centralized network of experts to assist the Commission in the field of reproductive health care, which covers HIV/AIDS, sexually transmissible diseases and demographic trends?

2. What will be the tasks and the responsibilities of the various people involved in the network which is still to be set up?

3. How many staff will the Commission be assigning in the future in order to be in a position to implement the various EU programmes on reproductive health care?

4. Now that the Aids Task Force is to be wound up, can the Commission indicate how it intends to honour the commitment it gave in Cairo to spend ECU 300 million per year on reproductive health care, bearing in mind the fact that, to date, the Aids Task Force was the major instrument for giving technical support in the honouring of that commitment?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (24 March 1998)

The Community's programmes on reproductive health and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) in developing countries have been reorganised and after a tender procedure, a consortium was selected to assist in this task. This consortium has a small office in Brussels and also has experts in several institutions in Europe and in developing countries.

The purpose of the change is to improve and increase the financing of policies and activities in HIV/AIDS and reproductive health in the different regions of the developing world.

This also complements the reorganisation which was started already in 1993 by the establishment of a Health, AIDS and family planning unit in the Directorate general for development. The strengthening of the Commission in relation to those issues continues.

Thus, it will be also possible for the Commission to keep its promise to commit 300 MECU for reproductive health.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0280/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Exclusion of apple producers from Kastoria form aid

Scores of apple producers in the Prefecture of Kastoria in Greece (whose production of 700 tonnes was completely destroyed by the frost in April 1997) have been excluded from any compensation or aid on the grounds that their 'family income' exceeds 50% of their agricultural income, as the relevant circular by the Greek Ministry of Agriculture states.

Will the Commission say whether this view is in keeping with Community legislation on this matter, and more specifically, with Regulation 950/97 ((OJ L 142, 2.6.1997, p. 1. )) of 20 May 1997, since a decision not to provide aid to the apple growers of this region will mean total financial ruin for them?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question No 3890/97 by Mr Alavanos ((OJ C 196, 22.6.1998, p. 31. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0008/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Construction of hydroelectric plants in Arcadia

The Ministries of Agriculture and Development have decided to give over an area of 1.8 hectares along the River Lousio in Arcadia for the construction of two hydroelectric plants. Both the authorities and inhabitants of Arcadia fear for the imminent destruction of an environment of exceptional beauty, for the survival of a rare species of trout that lives in the waters of the river, the numerous monuments from the Byzantine and post-Byzantine eras in the region, the ruins of two sanctuaries from the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. and hydroelectric installations of the pre-industrial period. A recent decision by the Ministry of Culture designated the area an 'integral archaeological site' while the EU has provided funds for an open-air water-power museum.

Have environmental studies been carried out for this specific hydroelectric project which take account of the special historical and environmental significance of the area?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 February 1998)

Member States are not required to provide the Commission with any information on the environmental impact assessments that they carry out under Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )).

Therefore the Commission is currently not up to date as regards any assessments relating to the two hydroelectric stations mentioned by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0044/98 by Klaus Rehder (PSE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Subsidies for Italian road haulage undertakings

The Republic of Italy has granted Italian road haulage undertakings subsidies of approx. ECU 110 million for 1997 (a 50 million discount on road tax, an additional 16 million in tax relief, a 29 million reduction in road tolls and 15 million as a social insurance bonus). Italian road haulage undertakings have now demanded similar subsidies from the Italian Government for 1998.

1. Does the Commission consider that these subsidies are unobjectionable from the point of view of competition law?

2. If it has reached the conclusion that these subsidies are incompatible with EU competition law, what steps has it taken so far to address this problem?

3. Is the Commission considering initiating proceedings against the Republic of Italy for violating the rules of competition?

4. Is this type of subsidy compatible with the European Union's objective of diverting traffic to the railways?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (24 March 1998)

The Commission has assessed whether state aids to the Italian road transport sector have conformed with the relevant Community legislation on various occasions and those assessments have resulted in a number of Commission decisions, three of which were referred to the Court of Justice or to the Court of first instance in 1997.

The Commission was, however, only recently made aware of the specific financial benefits, granted to the Italian road haulage sector mentioned by the Honourable Member. These benefits are now being examined by the Commission under the provisions of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty.

Since the procedure is pending, the Commission is unable to comment on the case and, in particular, can offer no public view on whether these measures conform with Community competition rules. When decisions are made they will be announced in the usual way.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0244/98 by Karla Peijs (PPE) to the Council (17 February 1998)

Subject: Closure of European Business Information Centres

1. What are the reasons behind the Council's decision to close the European Business Information Centres (EBICs) in South and South-East Asia despite their success?

2. Is the Council aware of the consequences that this decision will have for:

a) participation of Asian SMEs in future Europartnerships,

b) the local Asian economies,

c) Asia-Invest, Asia Interprise and Asia Partnership,

or does it believe that they will be unaffected by the closures?

3. How does the Council reconcile closure of the EBICs with promotion of the European Union's joint trading interests in Asia, as endorsed by the Member States in Essen in December 1994?

Answer (28 May 1998)

The European Commission has made proposals to continue financing of the three European Business Information Centres (EBICs) operating in Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Bombay for five years. These proposals are under consideration in the Asia/Latin America Committee (composed of Member States under the chairmanship of the Commission) according to the procedures set out in Council Regulation No 443/92.

The Council has not therefore been required to take a decision on the proposals.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0373/98 by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Council (19 February 1998)

Subject: Proposed action on threats posed by the Sellafield plant

What steps is the British Presidency planning to take to respond positively to the concerns raised in the debate, following the statement by the President-in-Office ro Parliament on 14 January 1998, about the environmental, health and safety and other threats posed by the Sellafield plant? What consultations does the Presidency plan with the Irish Government over Sellafield during its term of office?

Answer (18 May 1998)

1. The Council is fully aware of the importance of environmental, health and safety issues concerning nuclear plants.

2. In this respect, the Council would like to remind the Honourable Member of Parliament that Chapter III of the Euratom Treaty provides the legal framework for the protection of health and safety throughout the Community. In this context, Article 37 deals specifically with relations with other Member States.

3. A Council directive, which takes into account the latest scientific and technological data, was also adopted in 1996, namely Directive 96/29/Euratom, of 13 May 1996, laying down the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation ((OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1. )).

4. Nuclear plants situated in the territory of Member States, including the specific nuclear plant referred to in the question, are therefore subject to Community legislation aiming at ensuring their operation at the lowest risk possible. The implementation of these provisions is of the competence of the Member State concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0288/98 by Blaise Aldo (UPE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Court of Auditors' report

In its Special Report No. 5/97 (OJ C 159, 26 May 1997) the Court of Auditors pointed out that it was important to reevaluate the aid for the supply of cereals to remote regions by amending the method of calculation: 'A remedy for the supply disadvantages of the POSEI regions might be an annual subsidy calculated to compensate for the additional transport costs between the regions and the mainland Union territory'.

Could the Commission say which guidelines and decisions it has adopted in this matter, given that for two years it has been receiving demands for a review of the method used to calculate this aid?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0288/98, E-0289/98, E-0324/98 and E-0400/98 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1998)

The Honourable Members are requested to refer to the Commission's answer to written question P-327/98 from Mr Souchet ((See page 78. )).