ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2600/96 by Frédéric Striby (NI) to the Commission (24 September 1996)

Subject: Anti-dumping law

I have been informed that the Commision intends to introduce anti-dumping customs duties, exclusively in respect of raw materials (unbleached fibres and fabrics).

Does the Commission not consider that applying this decision to finished products would be sure to create more work for Community workers, whereas applying it solely to raw materials will raise the price of finished products manufactured in Europe. Are we not running the risk of no longer being competitive, which will only serve to boost imports of finished products?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (15 October 1996)

The Honourable Member's information is correct. The Commission has completed three anti-dumping investigations concerning polyester yarn and unbleached cotton fabric and expects to take a decision shortly on defensive action.

The Commission can assure the Honourable Member that it is well aware of the downstream problems that can be caused by the adoption of measures relating to semi-manufactures. Under the current Community regulations anti-dumping measures can only be adopted where they can be shown to be in the Community interest. Such a finding can only be made on the basis of a comprehensive examination of all the factors at stake, including the interests of users of the dumped products. The law allows those users, and other interested parties, to state their case, obtain a hearing from the Commission and comment on the submissions by other parties. In taking its decision the Commission is therefore aware of the sort of issues raised by the Honourable Member.

Regarding the application of anti-dumping measures to finished textile products, the Commission would point out that it is not allowed to initiate anti-dumping investigations, let alone adopt any defensive measures, except on the basis of a complaint submitted in writing by Community producers of the type of product concerned. To date the Commission has received only one such complaint, in respect of cotton bedlinen originating in Egypt, India and Pakistan. The complaint was lodged on 30 July this year and proceedings were initiated on 13 September.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2449/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (23 September 1996)

Subject: Sports check-ups

In view of the fact that the footballer Nwankwo Kanu, who played for the winning team in the Atlanta Olympics, had his life saved by a thorough medical check-up required by Inter Milan, an Italian sports club, for all its athletes before they undertake any sporting activity;

since Kanu's serious heart irregularity had never been diagnosed previously because the Dutch club Ajax had not carried out adequate checks;

given that there is no Community legislation to date which requires thorough and mandatory check-ups for all sports club members;

does the Commission not feel that it should intervene to make it obligatory throughout the European Union for all sports club members, whether professional or amateur, to undergo check-ups for the benefit of all European citizens who engage in sporting activity?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (25 October 1996)

The question of medical checks for sportsmen, whether professionals and or members of sports clubs, is for the Member States to address.

It should be noted, however, that health surveillance for workers, and medical surveillance for certain categories of workers, is the object of Community provisions, pursuant to Article 118 of the EC Treaty and Articles 31 and 32 of the Euratom Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2304/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: Health and safety implications of telecommunications masts erected by mobile phone operators

Is the Commission aware of the concerns of many people about the health and safety implications of increasing numbers of telecommunications masts erected by mobile phone operators?

Independent health reports indicate that exposure to microwaves is dangerous, mainly when high densities of microwave radiation are involved, and that the highest radiated power densities occur at distances of 100 to 800 feet from such masts. Levels then fall off to minimum levels beyond 8000 feet.

Due to deregulation of telecommunications by the UK Government, several companies plan to site masts within a one mile area in Taverham near the city of Norwich in Norfolk. Citizens are extremely concerned about possible health dangers of this concentration, yet local planning regulations can afford no protection and clearly this is a situation which may increasingly be faced across Europe.

What information does the Commission have on the health and safety implications of such masts and what action does it propose to take within its competence to protect the public?

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

The Commission is well aware of public concerns over possible health and safety effects due to radiofrequency emissions in the mobile telephony sector, including those from telecommunications masts. In 1995 the Commission decided to investigate the possible health and safety effects related to the use of mobile phones. The Commission therefore requested an eminent group of internationally recognised, independent experts from various institutes in the Community to identify those areas where research is already undertaken and prepare a proposal for comprehensive research in areas which may not yet be covered.

The Commission would also refer the Honourable member to its answer to written question E-737/96 from Mrs Malone ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2351/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (8 August 1996)

Subject: Implementation of Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds and Directive 92/43/EEC on habitats in the canalization of the Danube between Straubing and Vilshofen

1. Is the Commission aware that the Federal Republic of Germany, in contravention of Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p.1. )) on the conservation of wild birds, has not designated the Danube valley between Regensburg and Vilshofen or the area at the mouth of the Isar as protection areas within the meaning of the directive?

2. What will it do to have protection area status applied immediately?

3. Is it aware that the Federal Republic of Germany (Ministry of Transport) and the Free State of Bavaria, in contravention of Article 4(4) of the EC directive on the conservation of wild birds and Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7. )) on habitats, want to convert the last free-flowing section of the Bavarian Danube between Straubing and Vilshofen into a chain of locks?

4. What will the Commission do to prevent the building of the Osterhofen and Waltendorf locks?

5. Will it instigate proceedings against the Federal Republic under Article 169 for violation of the Treaty?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (30 September 1996)

1. The Commission is aware that the areas 'Donau-Tal: Regensburg - Vilshofen' and 'Isartal: Gottfried - Plattling einschließlich Isar-Mündungsbereich', both situated in Bavaria, qualify according to scientific literature as important bird areas, but are not yet designated as special protection areas pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 79/409/EEC.

2 and 5. In general the designation of special protection areas in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 79/409/EEC by Germany is subject of an infringement procedure because in the view of the ornithological scientists, which the Commission shares, Germany and inter alia Bavaria has not yet designated the most suitable bird areas as special protection areas.

3. The Commission was made aware of the project in question by a recent complaint. The Commission will ask the German authorities for further information concerning the project and its potential implications with regard to the birds Directive and the habitats Directive, being aware that major impacts on free flowing sections of the Danube might cause considerable problems for alluvial forests, which are partly considered as priority habitats under the habitats Directive.

4. The further actions will depend on the answer given by the German authorities to question 3 above.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2206/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)

Subject: European Union contribution to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia

The European Union has contributed indirectly to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia by subsidizing associations assisting it from Chapter B7-52 of the budget, 'European initiative for democracy and the protection of human rights', and in particular, Article B7-527, 'support for rehabilitation centres for torture victims and organizations offering concrete help to victims of human rights abuses'.

Can the Commission indicate:

1. The amount earmarked for, and paid to, associations for the setting up and operation of the Tribunal?

2. The control mechanisms established to ensure the proper use of the funds for their intended purpose?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (30 September 1996)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that, since 1994, 2 MECU has been made available under the Community budget for projects in support of the International criminal tribunal on former Yugoslavia, under budget lines B7-5240 and B7-527 (now budget lines B7-7040 and B7-7070).

As regards the control mechanisms for ensuring the correct use of funds, each beneficiary signs an undertaking, prior to receipt of the advance payment (normally 80%) which obliges it to submit detailed financial and narrative reports on completion of the project. Further to this, beneficiaries also accept to be inspected by the Commission's financial control department or the Court of auditors should it be deemed necessary. In the event of irregularities being detected, part or all of the grant may be reimbursed.

Mention should also be made of evaluation undertaken prior to funding decisions by the Commission which takes into account the reliability of the potential beneficiary, the quality of projects previously carried out and specific expertise in relation to the International criminal tribunal.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2423/96 by Clive Needle (PSE) to the Commission (4 September 1996)

Subject: Taxation in Germany of foreign artists' earnings

What view does the Commission take of the revised law which came into force in Germany on 1 January to increase the rate of taxation of foreign artists' earnings to 29% for groups and 32% for individuals, and is it aware of the potential damaging effect on international performing artists and the single market?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (12 November 1996)

The Commission is aware that, as of 1 January 1996, Germany aligned deductions at source on non-resident artists' gross earnings with those applicable to the income of non-residents generally. The amount deducted therefore increased from 15% to 25%. On the other hand, a resident artist is subject to tax assessed on the basis of his net income, with a maximum marginal rate of 53%.

The fact that the deduction at source is applied to gross income without any allowance for professional expenses, as would be the case for resident artists, may give rise to a higher level of taxation for non-resident artists where the deduction is greater than the tax which would be payable if it had been calculated on the basis of real income (with deduction of professional expenses). This is always the case if these expenses are greater than 52.9% of gross earnings.

However, it should be pointed out that, on grounds of equity ('Billigkeitsmaßnahme' under Section 163 of the Tax Code [Abgabenordnung]), the German authorities grant, on request, a reduction in taxation where it is deemed excessive in relation to real earnings. According to the information in the Commission's possession, the German Government has, for reasons of legal certainty, introduced a draft law which sets out to anchor this possibility in a legal provision so as to ensure that the artists in question are taxed on their real earnings where taxation in Germany would otherwise be higher than the level of tax to which the same amount earned by a resident artist would be subject.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2336/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: Beef and other parts of cattle carcases used as a raw material in the foodstuffs industry

1. The question is repeatedly raised as to the safety of milk and gelatine from BSE infected cattle. What findings are there on this subject?

2. How safe are BALM-regulated tinned products (Bundesanstalt für landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung) which take some time to reach the market? What is the basis for its assessment?

3. What risks exist in the case of rennet and ox gall?

4. According to guidelines beef may be used for many types of sausage. Which types are particularly affected?

5. The Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Forestry has developed a method to indicate whether meat and bone meal has been heated adequately. Can this method already be used routinely?

6. What findings are there on the use of which raw materials derived from cattle in finished products? Which raw materials are used?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1996)

1. The scientific evidence presently available suggests that milk does not transmit spongiform encephalopathies. There is wide scientific consensus on the safety of gelatin if produced by manufacturing processes utilizing production conditions which have been demonstrated to inactivate any residual infectivity that may have been present in source tissues.

The Commission has asked the scientific veterinary committee for its advice on milk and gelatin in the light of recent information on maternal transmission and on the efficacy of gelatin production methods for the inactivation of the agents of spongiform encephalopathies.

2. The Commission has no information about the safety considerations of Bundesanstalt für landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung (Balm) and the Balm-registered tinned products.

3. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) infectivity has only been detected in clinical cases in cattle in the central nervous and lymphoreticular systems and the retina. The Commission has no scientific information on BSE infectivity of rennet or ox bile.

4. There are no Community rules specifying which sausages may contain beef.

5. The Commission is not aware of the details of the German method referred to which could be used routinely to check on compliance with Community standards for the processing of meat-and-bone meal, but would be pleased to receive data for evaluation.

6. Any raw materials from cattle which have been passed fit for human consumption following ante-and post-mortem inspection in accordance with Community rules may be used as ingredients in foodstuffs. The Commission does not have a list of such raw materials or finished products.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2916/96 by Paul Lannoye (V) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Data and explanations regarding the growth of transportation in the plutonium sector

The development of the plutonium sector - a fuel used in Europe which involves both plutonium, in the form of the oxide PuO2, which is the product of reprocessing plants (La Hague and Sellafield) and new MOX fuel from production plants (Dessel in Belgium, Marcoule and Cadarache in France) - involves a marked increase in the transportation of hazardous materials, which must be properly assessed in order to verify that the practices in question (reprocessing and the use of MOX fuel) are still justified (see Article 6(2) of Directive 96/29/Euratom ((OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1. )) in view of the radiological consequences.

Besides the exposure risks linked to the industrial processes themselves, transportation can contribute significantly to the exposure of workers and members of the public.

Will the Commission furnish the data (number of consignments, quantities transported per vehicle) relating to the transport of plutonium oxide, MOX and spent fuels for the years 1985, 1990 and 1995 and forecasts for the year 2000:

by mode of transport (road, rail, air, sea); broken down according to whether shipments took place within the European Union or are the result of contracts with non-member countries?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (17 December 1996)

The research undertaken by the Commission to answer the Honourable Member's question has revealed that this is a very extensive and complex matter. More detailed investigations are necessary, involving a number of departments. The Commission will inform the Honourable Member of the outcome of these investigations once they are completed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2987/96 by Jan Andersson (PSE) and Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Drugs policy

In a newspaper article, Mrs Bonino, the Commissioner responsible for consumer policy, advocated legalizing drugs. Does the Commission share her views? If not, does its President consider it proper for a member of the Commission to make such comments?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (3 December 1996)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question E-2555/96 by Mrs Laurila ((See page 86. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3043/96 by Mireille Elmalan (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: European Blood Donation Day

In its resolution on blood safety and self-sufficiency in the European Community (Doc. A4-0094/96 ((OJ C 141, 13.5.1996, p. 131. ))), adopted on 17 April 1996, the European Parliament called for 'the holding of a European blood donation day'.

In the context of its proposals aimed at encouraging voluntary blood donation, is the Commission prepared to propose the holding of a 'European blood donation day' which might be held in all Member States on the same day every year?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 December 1996)

In response to the Commission's communication on blood safety and self-sufficiency in the Community ((COM(94) 652 final. )), the Council adopted a Resolution ((OJ C 164, 30.6.1995. )) inviting the Commission to define a strategy for reinforcing trust in the safety of the blood-transfusion chain and for promoting self-sufficiency in the Community through voluntary unpaid donations. This Resolution identified as one of the main activities that could be undertaken, the dissemination to the public of information on blood and blood products and on collection, processing and transfusion procedures, taking into account socio-cultural differences.

Public awareness about blood and blood products was the theme for a meeting of experts in Rome in April 1996, and was one of the topics addressed at a colloquium on blood safety and self-sufficiency in Adare, Ireland in September 1996.

Following these meetings, both of which were supported by the Commission, the Council adopted on 12 November 1996 a Resolution on a strategy towards blood safety and self-sufficiency in the Community and invited the Commission to submit proposals as a matter of urgency in support of the actions of the Member States using the conclusions and recommendations of the colloquium as a basis for its work.

In line with this invitation from the Council and following consultation with the Member States, the Commission will ascertain whether a Community blood donor day is the most suitable approach for increasing public awareness about voluntary non-remunerated blood donations and promoting Community self-sufficiency.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2555/96 by Ritva Laurila (PPE) to the Commission (8 October 1996)

Subject: The European Union's drugs policy; statement by Commissioner Emma Bonino

Commissioner Emma Bonino recently visited Finland. While she was there she said in a public interview on television that she was in favour of complete liberalization of the sale of at least the softer drugs. This statement caused great astonishment in Finland. Is this really the position of the European Union with regard to drugs policy, does the Commission really take this view, and where and when was such a drugs policy adopted?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1996)

The Commission has no legal power in relation to penal legislation. Criminal sanctions for drug related offences are therefore a matter for Member States' policy.

The Member States are responsible for the treatment of drug addicts. The Community can, however, lend its support to Member States' action aiming to contributing to a high level of human health protection.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2536/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (8 October 1996)

Subject: Public procurement

Full completion of the internal market is of vital importance to economic and social progress in the EU. It must be said that the hopes raised when the Single Act was adopted have failed to materialize. A resolute programme of measures must therefore be adopted with a view to removing the remaining barriers.

Would the Commission agree that it should persuade the Member States to give priority to completing the drafting of the national legislation required to implement the public procurement directives, and to bringing national law into line with the general spirit of Community law in cases where transposition presents a problem?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (18 November 1996)

The Commission has always been at pains to ensure that Member States incorporate the public procurement Directives fully and correctly into national law.

Firstly, it seeks to ensure that appropriate national measures are adopted and notified. Following action taken by the Commission, the Court of Justice recently censured several Member States for major delays in transposing the Directives.

Secondly, the Commission constantly monitors the content of national public-procurement rules (both those adopted specifically in order to implement the Directives and existing or related rules that have a bearing on the Directives' incorporation into national law).

This monitoring activity has resulted in the Commission instituting infringement proceedings for non-compliance (29 such cases are pending). This figure does not take into account the three new Member States, for which a separate monitoring exercise relating to all Community legislation is currently being undertaken.

This monitoring of compliance is carried out at specific bilateral meetings with Member States and as part of infringement proceedings. It is based on exchanges of information designed to ensure that both parties fully understand the provisions in question and that these are properly incorporated into national law in a manner that reflects both the letter and the spirit of the Directives.