ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3439/97 by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission (31 October 1997)

Subject: Parental leave for officials of the institutions

On 3 June 1996 the Council adopted Directive 96/34/EC ((OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 4. )) on parental leave. Member States must comply with this directive within two years. It is obvious that the institutions will adhere to the legislation which they themselves have drawn up. The time is approaching when a proposal for amendment of the Staff Regulations applicable to officials of the institutions of the European Union must be submitted. When can Parliament expect such a proposal?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1997)

The Staff Regulations of officials already contain provisions on leave for family reasons. Under Article 40 of the Staff Regulations, officials may, in exceptional circumstances and at their own request, be granted unpaid leave on personal grounds for a period of one year, which may be extended twice. If this leave is granted in order to bring up small children, it may be extended four times. Commission officials do take advantage of this possibility. Currently, out of 335 cases of leave on personal grounds, 89 have been granted to allow a parent to bring up one or more small children.

How the right to parental leave could be included in the Staff Regulations is currently being looked at, and the Commission may make a proposal on it within the more general framework of proposed improvements to the Staff Regulations which the Commission intends to submit before the end of its term of office.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3225/97 by Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission (9 October 1997)

Subject: Fisheries agreement with Morocco and surveillance

In its answer to Written Question P-2712/97 the Commission forgot to state its views on the monitoring and detection system used by Moroccan surveillance vessels, and to say whether it offers technical guarantees and conforms to approved international standards. What can the Commission say on the subject?

The Commission says that in general the Moroccan authorities inform it, within the deadline of 48 hours laid down in the fisheries agreement, about the boarding of vessels.

How many incidents have the Moroccan authorities reported to the Commission within this deadline and in how many cases did they not respect the deadline?

Finally, what results were achieved as regards the boarding of vessels at the meeting of the EU-Morocco joint committee referred to in the answer to the above-mentioned question?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (5 November 1997)

Under international law, the Moroccan authorities have exclusive competence for policing in their waters. It is therefore not the Commission's place to pronounce on the technical surveillance facilities installed on board vessels of a third country.

Since the beginning of the agreement in 1995, 39 Community vessels have been boarded. Of these 39 boardings, 14 were not notified within 48 hours as provided for in the agreement.

However, three of the 14 delays in notification were due to public holidays in Morocco, and the Moroccan authorities notified the boardings on the first working day following. For the rest, nine of the delayed notifications occurred during the first eight months of implementation of the agreement (between December 1995 and August 1996).

Following the Commission's intervention, therefore, there has been a noticeable improvement in the situation, since only two of the delays since August 1996 can be regarded as unjustified.

This matter will be raised with the Moroccan authorities again at the next meeting of the Joint Committee provided for under the fisheries agreement. That meeting will be preceded by a meeting of the EC-Morocco working party, which last met in July 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3204/97 by Jean Querbes (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (9 October 1997)

Subject: Production of durum wheat

The European Community, which was once an exporter of durum wheat, has become a net importer and the shortfall is increasing. Does the Commission not think that this reversal in the trend is due to the change in the system of payments to producers of durum wheat according to the production areas?

Would the Commission be prepared to propose improving this system so that the European Community could increase its production to reduce its shortfall?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (22 October 1997)

The Commission considers the present shortfall in Community durum wheat production to be the result of exceptional weather conditions affecting both the quantity and quality of production.

In July 1996 the Commission presented a proposal for adjustment of the specific aid arrangements for durum wheat ((COM(96) 361 final. )). This has been approved by Parliament and is now before the Council. The Commission considers that the adjusted provisions, which set a maximum guaranteed area in each Member State, will barring unusual weather guarantee supply of the European industry. In Agenda 2000 ((COM(97) 2000 final. )) the Commission stated that it intended no change in the present supplements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3173/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (13 October 1997)

Subject: Dutch participation in the Comenius programme

Can the Commission say which Dutch schools are taking part in the Comenius programme and with which partner schools in other countries they are working?

Does the Commission know the effect of reduction in the budget for participation by Dutch schools in the Comenius programme?

Can the Commission say how much money is available per Member State for the Comenius programme, which Member States have had their budgets reduced and how great the reduction per Member State is?

What is the reason for these reductions?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 November 1997)

Since the launch of the Socrates programme in 1995, a total of 308 schools in the Netherlands have taken part in Comenius partnerships (127 as coordinators and 181 as partners). In 1997, partnerships coordinated by Dutch schools have included schools from all the participating countries, especially Germany, France, Italy, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The reduction in the overall budget allocation for Action 1 of Comenius in 1997 has obviously affected all Member States, according to the method of calculation set out in Decision 819/95/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 14 March 1995 establishing the Community action programme 'Socrates' ((OJ L 87, 20.4.1995. )). For the Netherlands, the budget for Action 1 has thus fallen from ECU 1 059 486 in 1996 to ECU 814 262 in 1997.

The Commission is fully aware of the difficulties caused by the reduction in the Comenius budget for schools in the participating countries. To limit the impact of this reduced budget on the schools, the Commission decided to allocate the 5% reserve provided for in the Decision setting up the Socrates programme to those Member States that were likely to have to cope with a high level of unsatisfied demand. The Netherlands thus received in 1997 an additional sum of ECU 51 535 (included in the ECU 814 262), which was drawn from the ECU 1 million reserve for Action 1 of Comenius.

The drop in the budget allocation for Action 1 of Comenius is a result of the reduced budget available for the Socrates programme in 1997 (ECU 174 million for 1997 as opposed to ECU 198 million for 1996). The Commission has therefore requested an increase in the budget allocation for the Socrates programme so that it can meet the expectations of the education sector. This request is currently being examined by the Parliament and the Council under the codecision procedure.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3317/97 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Disposal of used catalytic converters

Some years have elapsed since Greece decided to promote the use of vehicles fitted with catalytic converters, and hundreds of thousands of such vehicles are already on the roads. The time has now come for many of these vehicles to change this equipment. In its reply to a previous question (1808/96) ((OJ C 385, 19.12.1996, p. 41. )), the Commission stated that 'a proposal is being prepared on end of life vehicles, (but) the preparatory work in relation to this proposal has not been completed'.

Will the Commission state, one year after providing the above answer, whether the preparatory work in relation to the proposal on end of life vehicles has been completed, whether the converters which are being removed from end of life vehicles pose a threat to the environment and public health and whether it has any information regarding the disposal of used catalytic converters in Greece?

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

The preparatory work mentioned by the Commission in its answer to written question 1808/96 by Mr Papayannakis has been completed and a proposal for a directive on end of life vehicles was adopted by the Commission on 9 July 1997 ((COM(97) 358 final. )). This contains measures in the field of prevention of waste from end of life vehicles, collection of end of life vehicles, their treatment, recycling, and recovery, as well as monitoring and information. In particular, it lays down quantified targets for the re-use, recycling and recovery of end of life vehicles.

In the light of the potential threat posed by used catalytic converters to the environment and public health, the proposal requires Member States to ensure that vehicles are stripped before any further treatment. This includes the environmentally safe removal and storage of catalytic converters with a view to their recycling. The proposal does not contain a specific recycling obligation for catalytic converters but lays down recovery and recycling requirements for the entire vehicle. In particular, it requires Member States to ensure that, by 2005, 85% of the vehicle's weight is reused or recovered (95% by 2015) and 80% is reused or recycled (85% by 2015).

At present the Commission does not have any information concerning the disposal of used catalytic converters in Greece.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2844/97 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE) to the Commission (11 September 1997)

Subject: Bank charges in connection with introduction of the euro

'Europe without Frontiers', a newssheet published as a monthly letter by the Commission's Directorate-General for Information, Communications, Culture and Audiovisual Media (ISSN 1021-2345) states on page 2 of its June 1997 edition (time of going to press 20 May 1997) under the heading 'Practical Questions for the Euro and Answers in Spring 1998?' that:

Exchanging national currency for the euro after 1 January 1999 should not cost users any more than the actual technical expenses incurred by the banks.

1. What expenses are involved in this respect?

2. Does the Commission think it right that, in making the necessary exchange of legal tender, the costs of the changeover should be passed on to the consumer?

3. Is it consistent with the law to charge the individual consumer for an exchange of legal tender which is required by the government authorities?

4. Given that exchange of legal tender is essentially a government measure, should these costs not be borne by the public budget?

5. What does the Commission intend to do to avoid any additional costs of the changeover intensifying the misgivings in the minds of a large section of the population about the euro?

6. Is it not possible to require the banks under the transitional regulations to effect the changeover free of charge to the consumer?

7. What is the Commission's view, in the light of questions 1-6, of the decision of the Federal Supreme Court of 15 July 1997 in cases XI ZR 269/96 and 279/96 concerning the exemption from charges for the performance of government-ordered tasks by banks? (The relevant articles from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung are attached).

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (31 October 1997)

The Commission has been examining the questions raised by the Honourable Member. These questions were discussed at a round table organised on 15 May 1997 involving various associations concerned, and comments have been received by the Commission from financial institutions and consumer organisations.

The Commission will, with the help of an expert group, continue to examine these questions in full detail in the coming months. This work will be finalised by the end of 1997. The Commission will provide the Honourable Member with a supplementary answer as soon as possible.

As stated in its communication on the practical aspects of the introduction of the euro, the Commission is planning to decide before the end of 1997 whether a common approach to conversion charges is necessary among the participating Member States, whether such a common approach should be enforced by legislation at national or European level, whether its market forces can be left to operate or whether voluntary agreements or codes of practice are needed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3042/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: White Paper on railways

The Economic and Social Committee has issued an opinion on the White Paper: a strategy for revitalizing the Community's railways (COM(96) 0421 final) ((OJ C 206, 7.7.1997, p. 23. )). As regards old debts, improving the financial position and infrastructure, a key strategic element in the White Paper's push for liberalization of the railways is independent commercial management.

An essential precondition for this and hence for compliance with Directive 91/440/EEC ((OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 25. )) on the development of the Community's railways is the elimination of old debts.

Will the Commission say whether progress on this has been incomplete and has varied from one Member State to another and whether it now intends to take prompt action?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (31 October 1997)

The Commission believes that relief from past debt to create sound finances is an essential part of any strategy to revitalise the Community's railways. Directive 91/440/EEC on the development of the Community's railways already obliges Member States to help reduce debts to a level that does not impede sound financial management. The Commission has launched a study of progress made in reducing debts and will present the results in a general communication on the implementation and results of Directive 91/440/EEC, that it intends to present to the Council and the Parliament early next year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2991/97 by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: Ban on hunting and legal protection of the Marjal del Moro (Valencia)

The Marjal del Moro, in the Valencia region, has been classified as a 'Zepa zone' under the Community directive on the protection of wild birds (79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1. ))) and it is home to many different bird species.Two of these species are on the verge of extinction: in the case of the marbled duck only 5 pairs with 28 chicks have been counted and in the case of ferruginous ducks, 4 males and 2 females. There are also other threatened species in Europe which seek refuge in the Marjal del Moro during the migration season.

The Marjal is a restricted hunting area with a licence which expires during the 1997/98 season but which could be extended. Hunting represents a major risk to these and other protected species.

In a question by María Sornosa and Pedro Marset (E-2682/97) the Commission was asked to take all possible action with a view to having the Marjal del Moro classified as a nature reserve (as requested by the Sagunto Town Council in 1994).

1. Since the Marjal del Moro is a 'Zepa zone' and, therefore, part of Nature 2000, does the situation described above not constitute a failure to comply with Directive 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. )) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora?

2. What action could the Commission take to convince the central and regional governments concerned that the Marjal del Moro needs to be legally protected?

3. Could some emergency measure not be introduced to ban hunting next season and thus save some of the species concerned from extinction?

Answer given by Mrs. Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (10 November 1997)

1. Hunting within a special protection area (SPA) does not as such constitute a breach of Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. However, the hunting of all the species mentioned, which are protected by national and regional legislation, is prohibited and the presence and breeding of these species, in larger numbers than when the SPA was designated (for instance 5 marmaronetta angustirostris pairs instead of 1/2; and 6 examples of aythya nyroca, instead of none), seems to indicate that the area's carrying capacity is satisfactory.

2. Under national and regional Spanish law, only the authorities in this Member State can designate protected areas.

3. The regional authorities in Valencia announced, during a recent visit to the area by Commission staff, that hunting will no longer be permitted once the current hunting concession, which lasts ten years, comes to an end in February 1998.

The Commission will check that this measure comes into force from that date.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3183/97 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (16 October 1997)

Subject: Differential pricing of newspapers

While one recognizes the need for a small additional charge for newspapers transported across Member State boundaries, would the Commission care to comment about the fact that the 'Independent' dated 16 September 1997 was priced at 20 pence in the United Kingdom, while in Strasbourg, the same newspaper was priced at 14 French Francs, the equivalent to £1.40 at that day's exchange rate. This represents a mark up of 750 per cent.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (26 November 1997)

Unilateral decisions concerning the fixing of the price of newspapers, including price differences between Member States, are basically a matter for the free commercial choice of each publisher and are not, as a rule, prohibited under Community law.

If the Commission were to establish the existence of restrictions or improper practices incompatible with the rules on competition and the operation of the single market, it would take all appropriate steps under the Treaty and would inform Parliament accordingly.

The Commission in fact recently launched a survey to look at press distribution systems in all the Member States, how they interact across borders and how they affect price structures. It has now received the results of this survey and is in the process of analysing them.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3263/97 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Petroleum coke

What are the properties of petroleum coke, especially as regards:

- the sulphur percentage content

- the parts per million of: chlorine, fluorine, lead, zinc, copper, chromium, nickel, cadmium, vanadium, others

- and its calorific value?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (14 November 1997)

Petroleum coke has a sulphur content of between 2 and 6.5%, a heavy metal content of less than 1 000 parts per million (ppm) (in these heavy metals, the vanadium content varies between 200 and 400 ppm), and a gross calorific value of approximately 7 780 kilocalories per kilogram.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3321/97 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Television and the deaf in Europe

Television is becoming increasingly important as a means of communication and source of entertainment for the deaf. There are no real technical problems preventing its adaptation to the needs of those with hearing problems, although there are great differences in the way and the extent to which this is being done in the various Member States of the Union.

Can the Commission say whether any kind of aid is allocated to ensure that European television companies can broadcast more programmes suitable for the deaf population?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1997)

Subtitling of television programmes, in some Member States, is the standard method for translating foreign language programmes to the domestic language. Subtitling also serves as the principal means to adapt programmes for the deaf.

Among the incentives established by the MEDIA II programme is a support scheme in the form of loans for the transnational distribution of audiovisual programmes including television programmes. As a general rule, however the costs of dubbing and subtitling are not repayable. Thus, although Council Decision 95/563/EC of 10 July 1995 on the implementation of a programme encouraging the development and distribution of European audiovisual works (MEDIA II - Development and distribution) (1996-2000) ((OJ L 321, 30.12.1995. )) does not provide expressly any objectives towards supporting adaptation of programmes for the deaf, the programme does, through its incentives for increasing transnational distribution of television programmes, contribute indirectly to an increase in programmes adapted for this group.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3095/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (2 October 1997)

Subject: Danube expansion, Phase 2

As the Commission will know (see letter of 21 March 1997 from the Bavarian State Chancellor's office to Bürgerforum Umwelt; Federal Government reply No 11/86, 11/87 of 23 January 1997), neither the Free State of Bavaria nor the Federal Republic are prepared to fulfil their obligations under the EC bird protection directive and the flora and fauna directive and declare the water meadows eco-system between Straubin and Vilshofen a protected area. In their replies the Free State and the Republic note that declaration of the protected area has been deferred in favour of the current Danube expansion scheme, 'because a decision on the nature of the second expansion phase for this part of the Danube is not due to be taken before the year 2000'.

This is illegal practice. Under ECJ jurisprudence it is not admissible to include economic considerations in decisions to declare special protected areas or determine their boundaries.

The fact that official assessments by the regional office for environmental protection are not yet available is a matter which the Bavarian State Government must answer for. The assessments have not been commissioned because the Free State of Bavaria and the Federal Government are trying to circumvent the protected area declaration.

1. Will the Commission require the Federal Republic, in accordance with Article 169 of the EC Treaty, to take the necessary measures within a time-limit laid down by the Commission?

2. Will it apply for fines to be levied against the Federal Republic of Germany, in accordance with Article 171 of the EC Treaty, since both the Federal and the Land authorities are quite clearly disregarding their obligations under Articles 3 and 4 of the bird protection directive and in breach of the requirement to put forward proposals under the flora and fauna directive?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (11 November 1997)

The Commission, as the Honourable Member states, is informed about this matter. This area, as well as other areas along the river Danube, is expressly highlighted in the context of infringement proceedings (92/4575) opened in 1994 concerning the insufficient designation in Germany of special protected areas according to Directive 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. )) on the conservation of wild birds.

1. According to the procedure provided by Article 169 of the EC Treaty, the Commission gave Germany the opportunity to submit its observations.

2. A sanction according to Article 171 of the EC Treaty is foreseen only in a situation when a Member State has failed to comply with a judgement of the Court of justice. Such a judgement does not exist in this case at present.