ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3576/96 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (17 December 1996)

Subject: Complaint by Miss Teresa Rey Rey (and four other signatories) a pupil involved in the Socrates-Erasmus programme in Brussels, Belgium 1995-1996

I have recently received a complaint signed by two pupils (and their parents) who took part in the Socrates-Erasmus programme funded by the Commission in Brussels during the school year 1995-1996. Their complaint indicates a certain dissatisfaction with the work of the coordinator of this programme in Brussels.

As a Member of the European Parliament I should like to bring this complaint to the Commission's attention, so that, if you have any information in this connection, you can advise me as to what I can say to these individuals who have written to me seeking a solution to this problem.

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)

The Institut Supérieur Catholique Pédagogique (ICSP) in Brussels has participated in a number of student exchanges under the Socrates/Erasmus programme. The Commission has not received any other complaints about the programme coordinator.

According to the Commission's information, no negligence was found in this particular case. The case was investigated by the Director/President of the ICSP, who sent a written reply to the vice-rector for external relations at the University of Santiago on 17 September 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3606/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B5-323: Growth and employment

With reference to the financial year 1995 and budget heading B5-323: Growth and employment,

1. can the Commission say whether subsidies were granted to associations, trade unions or employers' bodies?

2. If they were, can the Commission provide a breakdown of the exact amount of the subsidy for each association, trade union, body and activity?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3623/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Item B3-4003: European Technical Trade Union Bureau

Can the Commission give a breakdown, on an activity-by-activity, trade union-by-trade union, association-by-association or works committee-by-works committee basis, of the amount of the subsidies granted in respect of the 1995 financial year from the following item:

B3-4003: European Technical Trade Union Bureau?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3635/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-4301: Combating cancer

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the figures, for each association and activity subsidised, for the subsidies granted in the financial year 1995, under budget heading B3-4301: Combating cancer?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3624/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-1006: Promotion and safeguard of regional and minority languages and cultures

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the figures, for each association and activity subsidised, for the subsidies granted in the financial year 1995, under budget heading B3-1006: Promotion and safeguard of regional and minority languages and cultures?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3451/96 by Christine Crawley (PSE) to the Commission (9 December 1996)

Subject: Racist border controls

Further to my question E-1595/96 ((OJ C 305, 15.10.1996, p. 113. )) regarding a group of students from East Birmingham College who were subject to racist border controls in France, I would like to supply further information of the incidents in question, the first of which took place at the Ostend/Dunkirk border on 27 April 1996 at approximately 5.00 p.m., and the second which took place when the group were boarding a ferry at Dunkirk (travelling to Dover) at approximately 20.00 hrs. In both incidents black students were the only members of the group to be removed from the bus for questioning, and subject to body and luggage searches in what were quite blatant acts of racism.

Having provided further details as requested, I would be grateful to know what action the Commission will take to ensure that no country carries out border controls of a racist nature?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (11 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 31 January 1997 ((OJ C 96, 24.3.1997. )), the Commission asked the French authorities for details concerning the incident referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission has not received a reply to date. A reminder has been sent to the French authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0562/97 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (24 February 1997)

Subject: Directory of interest groups

The Commission is to be congratulated on publishing the Directory of Interest Groups, which was issued on 30 September 1996 and of which I have recently received a copy.

The commendable efforts undertaken nevertheless prompt the question of why, according to the note attached to the directory, no fewer than nineteen headings have been deleted, many of them dealing with activities having a major influence on European life.

It would also be useful to know whether the committees and delegations of the European Parliament, as well as individual Members, were invited to provide the valuable information in their possession prior to publication. This would certainly have avoided, for example, the omission from the directory of non-profit making interest groups ('pan-European non-profit-making organizations' as they are described on p. XIII) such as the 'Fondation Européenne de l'Energie' and the European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources (EUFORES), which are both chaired by MEPs and work closely with the Commission.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1997)

The 19 codes or sectors which were deleted from the table on sectors of activity already appeared under other codes or sectors; the 'sugar' sector (code 707), for example, was already included under 'Other food industries' (code C57). Associations representing the deleted sectors are thus listed but under another heading.

Non-profit interest groups were entered in the directory on a voluntary basis following the call for the expression of interest published in the Official Journal ((OJ C 126, 7.5.1994. )) and on the basis of the information in the Commission's possession.

This first edition of the directory is not, of course, exhaustive and it is already being up-dated. For that reason, a registration form is attached to the directory. Moreover, the directory has been distributed very widely so that the organizations not listed can put their names forward for the next edition due out at the end of 1997. The directory will shortly be placed onto the Europa server so that all interested associations can be included in it very quickly.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/97 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission (19 February 1997)

Subject: Definition, adoption and monitoring of Community RECHAR II initiative

Can the Commission provide information on the level of participation of local authorities and the two sides of industry in the definition, adoption and monitoring of the RECHAR II initiative in the various Member States?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0497/97, E-0498/97, E-0499/97 and E-0500/97 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (7 April 1997)

Participation of the various local authorities and other partners in the definition and monitoring of assistance under the Community Initiatives is governed, like any other operational programme, by Article 4 of the basic Regulation on the Structural Funds ((OJ L 193, 31.7.1993. )). Each Member State designates the authorities and other partners which are to participate in the partnership involved in structural assistance in accordance with current practice in each Member State.

In the interests of efficiency, consistency and optimization of the technical means available, the Community Initiatives are generally monitored by the same Monitoring Committees responsible for monitoringthe various operational programmes and single programming documents.

The wide range of situations and practices and the very complexity of the assistance procedures make it difficult to carry out a detailed quantitative analysis for each Member State of actual participation by local authorities and social partners in the definition and approval of each operational programme or Community Initiative or of their participation in the Monitoring Committees. The information on this subject available to the Commission is presented in the 6th and 7th annual reports, which Parliament has received.

The Commission believes that there has been real progress in the application of the principle of partnership for these Community Initiatives, as for all other structural assistance. It recognizes, however, that the quality of implementation varies from one Member State to another.

The report on economic and social cohesion recently adopted by the Commission stresses that partnership will have to be strengthened in the future, but it also proposes that the current assistance procedures be simplified so as to ensure that partnership is really made possible and effective.

The Commission is currently promoting territorial employment pacts as a means of trying out new forms of partnership, particularly at local level, involving the economic and social partners.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0603/97 by Alex Smith (PSE) to the Council (27 February 1997)

Subject: Planned Council meetings

Which meetings of the Council under the Netherlands Presidency are open to the public and the press?

What plans does the Council have to produce and distribute details of planned agendas for Council meetings more in advance than at present?

Answer (20 May 1997)

1. The Honourable Member will find below a list of the topics which have been or will be discussed in open debate at Council meetings in the first half of 1997.

Open debates already held

>TABLE>

Open debates planned (list subject to change)

>TABLE>

2. Under Article 2 of the Council's Rules of Procedure the President draws up the provisional agenda for each meeting. The agenda is sent to the other members of the Council and to the Commission at least 14 days before the beginning of the meeting. However, by mutual agreement, changes may be made to the agenda right up until the meeting itself. When the provisional agenda is sufficiently firm, it is issued in a press relase which is circulated by the General Secretariat's Press Office as soon as possible.

Apart from being circulated to the press, such press releases are also sent to the information departments of the other institutions, including the European Parliament. At the same time they are made available to the public electronically, notably via the interinstitutional database "Rapid¨, which is on the Internet.

The Council Secretariat's Press Office is in the process of developing its own Internet site and will thus also be able to ensure the direct circulation of its Press Releases by that means.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1530/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Information on EC assistance granted to the Rhineland-Palatinate from January to December 1994

In what amounts and for what measures did the Rhineland-Palatinate receive Community resources in 1994 from:

1. the European Social Fund,

2. the Fourth Framework Research Programme,

3. the European Regional Development Fund,

4. the Community environment and energy programmes,

5. the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guidance and Guarantee Sections,

6. other Community programmes?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1530/97, E-1531/97 and E-1532/97 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1248/97 by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) to the Commission (2 April 1997)

Subject: Denmark and the equal pay directive

According to an article in the Danish newspaper 'Politiken' on 10 March 1997, men earn on average DKR 60 000 more per year than women in Denmark and this applies to all age groups. In 1992 women earned on average DKR 120 000 per year whilst men had an average annual income of DKR 180 000. What action does the Commission intend to take in view of Denmark's failure to comply with the equal pay directive?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (14 May 1997)

The principle that men and women should receive equal pay for equal work has been enshrined in Community law since its origin (Article 119 of the EC Treaty). It was amplified by the equal pay directive ((Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women - OJ L 45, 19.2.1975. )), which introduced the concept of equal pay for work of equal value. All Member States, including Denmark, have fully implemented the above mentioned Community legislation. The Court of justice has, for its part, contributed considerably to the implementation and interpretation of these Community provisions in respect of equal pay.

However, the attainment of equal pay for women and men is not yet a reality due to factors such as horizontal and vertical segregation in the structure of female employment, undervaluing of female occupations, and variations in employment structures and reward systems.

In order to help lessen the differences in pay between women and men, the Commission adopted, in July 1996, a code of practice in this field ((COM(96) 336. )). The code aims to provide concrete advice for employers, partners in wage negotiation and individuals to ensure that the principle of equality between women and men performing work of equal value is applied to all aspects of pay. The code was conceived in close co-operation with its intended users and its adoption was welcomed by the Parliament. As for its implementation in practice, the Commission is already financing two projects concerning its dissemination and the evaluation of its impact at both national and Community levels.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0072/97 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Council (24 January 1997)

Subject: Aims of the structural funds

In the speech she gave in Montpellier on 19 September 1996, Commissioner Wulf-Mathies stated that she had concentrated resources on political priorities such as combating unemployment, strengthening competitiveness, especially in the case small and medium-sized undertakings through support for research, development and professional training, improved environmental protection and equal opportunities for men and women.

However, there was no mention of economic and social cohesion, including the aim of reducing socio-economic disparities between Member States, between regions and between social categories.

It must be pointed out that the structural funds are defined in the Treaty and in secondary legislation, and do not correspond to the Commissioner's 'political priorities'.

How does the Council view this definition of 'priorities' in the light of Community law in this field?

Answer (30 May 1997)

As the Honourable Member points out, the aims of the Structural Funds are defined in the Treaty and in secondary legislation, with the Commission being responsbile for implementing them.

It may be noted here that, in its 1996 Joint Report on Employment , the Council stated, in keeping with the conclusions of the Florence European Council meeting, that it was possible to focus structural policies more on job creation, without jeopardizing the basic principles, the existing legal framework and the amounts of the Structural Funds. In line with this European Council conclusion, the new programmes for the regions in industrial decline (Objective 2, 1997-1999) should take into account the multi-annual programmes so as to ensure that the Funds support the implementation of the employment strategy, in conformity with economic and social cohesion principles.

The Council would point out lastly that the procedures for any steps to revise or adapt the Community support frameworks are laid down in the existing legislation. In any event, they have to be conducted in full compliance with the principle of partnership.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0442/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (19 February 1997)

Subject: Chinese medicine and endangered species

What action has the Commission considered to support the Chinese Government in changing their traditional medicine from the use of animals, especially endangered species such as tiger bones, and shifting to herbal cures?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1997)

The use of rhinoceros horn, tiger bone and bear gall bladders, but also of certain endangered plant species in traditional East Asian medicine continues to be an issue of concern. It has been on the agenda of the conference of the parties to the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (Cites) for a number of meetings now. In 1995, specific resolutions on the issues of rhinoceros and tiger conservation were adopted. At its next meeting (Harare, 9-20 June 1997), the Cites conference of the parties will consider a discussion document on the issue submitted by the United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom proposes a series of concrete actions and initiatives the parties to Cites could take to assist in tackling the many aspects of this trade (biological, social, cultural as well as procedural). One of these proposals concerns the issue addressed by the Honourable Member, namely encouraging research and use of substitutes and alternatives (not necessarily herbal).

The Commission supports the proposals made by the United Kingdom and will, in the light of the outcome of the June meeting, consider ways to assist in the implementation of agreed recommendations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0851/97 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Article 10 of the ERDF - regional innovation and strategies for the information society

According to information obtained, three Portuguese institutions submitted projects under this heading of Article 10. Which of them were approved?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0848/97 and E-0851/97 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (17 April 1997)

The list is being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

Regarding the number of projects submitted, the Honourable Member is referred to the reply to his question E-0849/97 ((See page 178. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1197/97 by MaLou Lindholm (V) to the Commission (3 April 1997)

Subject: Employment policy in the Canary Islands

Considering that:

- one of the main activities of the European Union, as stated in the Treaties, is the promotion of an internal market characterized by the abolition of obstacles to the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital (Treaty establishing the European Community, Art. 3), including the abolition of any discrimination against the workers of Member States (Art. 48);

- the Regional Government of the Canary Islands has recently urged the business people working in the Canary Islands to hire local residents, so that all new employment generated in the region is taken up by people from the Canaries only, and in so doing the local unemployment rate would be reduced (local press, 5 January 1997);

- the Canary Archipelago represents one of the Spanish Objective 1 regions receiving European structural assistance, which is funded by all European Union taxpayers;

What is the stance of the Commission on the above mentioned initiative of the Canary Regional Government? Is not that initiative in contradiction with the principle of the free movement of workers within the European Union?

Does the Commission intend to take action against this proposed discrimination towards other European workers? Can the Commission give details on any action it will take?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1997)

The Commission has become aware, through stories in the press, of statements by certain members of the Canary Islands Government encouraging businesses there to recruit workers from the Canaries on a preferential basis.

In the light of analysis of the press stories which have reached the Commission, it would appear that no binding regulatory or legislative measure has been adopted by the Canary Islands Government to promote employment of the Islands' residents to the detriment of Community workers.

The Commission will keep a watchful eye on the matter, in order to satisfy itself that the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality is fully respected on the territory of the Canary Islands.